The Science & Neuroscience of Good vs Evil: Einstein, Jung, Damasio, Hume, Iconic Trolley Dilemma Experiments by Greene; Preface: Durkheim + “Social – Moral Order” Research in Unconscious Symbolism and mental categories; Genetic Research on Spirituality.
Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers! - Voltaire
The good man is free, even if he is a slave. The evil man is a slave, even if he is a king. — Saint Augustine, 354-430, Christian theologian & philosopher
There is so much good in the worst of us, and so much bad in the best of us, it doesn't behoove any of us to speak evil of the rest of us. — Edgar Cayce, 1877-1945, American mystic & prophet
Hume put the heads of preceding moral philosophers in his proverbial guillotine
in Book III, Part I, Section I of his A Treatise of Human Nature. He wrote that every work of moral philosophy he had encountered proceeded from factual, non-moral observations about the world to moral conclusions – those that express what we ought or ought not do. The shift is imperceptible, but it is a significant blunder. “For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, it is necessary that it should be observed and explained; and at the same time that a reason should be given, for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others, which are entirely different from it.”
The blunder, according to Hume, is one of logic. Factual statements are logically different from moral statements, so no factual statements can, by themselves, entail what people morally ought to do. The “ought” statement expresses a new relation, to use Hume’s phrase, that isn’t supported by its purely factual premises. So, a moral judgment that is arrived at by way of facts alone is suspect. (David Hume and Deriving an “Ought” from an “Is” https://provisionalsignificancecom.wordpress.com/2017/07/10/david-hume-and-deriving-an-ought-from-an-is/
Preface: Unconscious Research Primer
The Unconscious Processes 11 million bits of data per second
The unconscious processing abilities of the human brain are estimated at roughly 11 million pieces of information per second. Compare that to the estimate for conscious processing: about 40 pieces per second. Our conscious processing capacity isn’t insignificant, but clearly it’s just a retention pond compared to the ocean of the unconscious. And more and more research is uncovering abilities of the unconscious that defy reason. (From: Forbes: Your Brain Sees Even When You Don’t June 24, 2013)
The Unconscious is the Work Horse of the Human Mind
The consensus of unconscious researchers is that the unconscious is the work horse of the human mind. “Based on the accumulated evidence, the authors conclude that these various non-conscious mental systems shoulder the lion's share of the self-regulatory burden, thereby keeping the individual grounded in their current environment.”
Social perception is a largely automated psychological phenomenon
This is a pivotal concept in understanding human consciousness: “The idea that social perception is a largely automated psychological phenomenon is now widely accepted.” If you think of how much information of social interactions is available that makes sense. Even in basic exchanges between two people involve a lot of information such as tone of voice, body language, hand gestures, and facial features which studies show convey a lot of information. Then there is social context and circumstances. Plus, there are theory of mind processes which process information about the intentions of another person.
The physical complexity of the human brain, taken alone, is astounding – without even considering the myriad meanings and social interconnections in life and the world. With roughly 100 billion neurons and the almost astronomical number of neuron interconnections that number in the range of several hundred trillion synaptic connections, the human brain can process huge amounts of information – all this in the matter of milliseconds since electric signals are transmitted at speeds over 200MPH. Neuroscience has identified 360 distinct regions of the brain.
Moral Neuroscience, Hume’s Guillotine, Einstein’s Purpose and Imagination
Complexity of Interconnections within the Human Brain
Funk and Gazzanigna observe that: “Moral neuroscience is an intricate and expanding field. This review summarizes the main scientific findings obtained to date. Morality is a set of complex emotional and cognitive processes that is reflected across many brain domains. Some of them are recurrently found to be indispensable in order to emit a moral judgment, but none of them is uniquely related to morality…………Some of the emotions processed are more central to morality than others, but all emotions contribute to moral judgment given specific contextual situations. (Brain Architecture of human morality, Funk and Gazzaniga…The neural circuits of brain regions implicated in morality overlap with those that regulate other behavioral processes, suggesting that there is probably no undiscovered neural substrate that uniquely supports moral cognition.” Brain Architecture of human morality, Funk and Gazzanigna Current opinion in Neurobiology 2009 19:678-681)
Hume’s Guillotine
What is referred to as Hume's Guillotine states the premise that: “Factual statements do not necessarily lead to evaluative or statements of what “should be.” Scotty Jenkins, in his essay-blog, David Hume and Deriving an “Ought” from an “Is”, observes that “The blunder, according to Hume, is one of logic. Factual statements are logically different from moral statements, so no factual statements can, by themselves, entail what people morally ought to do.” Jenkins goes on to say that Hume “thought they [value judgments and morals] come from sentiments or feelings rather than logical deductions.”
Einstein: limits of rational analysis and knowledge
Nowhere could that be more apparent than when it comes to the question of "purpose" as well as in the dimension of right or wrong. At an Address to the Princeton Theological Seminary on May 19, 1939, Einstein stated unequivocally, as noted in the book, Ideas and Opinions (1954, 1982): that it is “equally clear that knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be. One can have the clearest and most complete knowledge of what is, and yet not be able to deduct from that what should be the goal of our human aspirations.”
Sixty-one years after Einstein made that speech, the neuroscientist and doctor, Antonio Damasio, in his book The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness (2000), stated unequivocally that “Inevitably emotions are inseparable from the idea of good and evil.” (p. 55) – which is in line with the analysis-summary of Funk and Gazzanigna.
Einstein observed, “Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible laws and connections, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration of this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in fact, religious.” (p. 384-5 E) Many scientists, such as Jung and the physicist Wolfgang Pauli, agreed with Einstein that there are indeed some definite limits to science and rational analysis.
Of course, there is also Iain McGilChrist who stated unequivocally, “An increasingly mechanistic, fragmented, decontextualised world… has come about, reflecting, I believe, the unopposed action of a dysfunctional left hemisphere.” That dovetails into Christina Maimone who observes in her assessment of Mannheim’s Paradox that “Ideology is a mode of thought that obscures the real condition of society… [groups – including academia - exclude facts] that would undermine their conception of the world.” It is my argument that “purposelessness And an absence of pro-social norms-values” is exactly what academia conveys – primarily through “academic” norms and stereotypes like any other teaching or ideology.
It is important to highlight that Einstein stressed that "imagination" is more important and valuable than knowledge because imagination includes not only “what is” (knowledge) but also includes all the hypothetical possibilities and potential realities. In a similar sense, Alfred North Whitehead stated, “Our minds are finite, and yet even in these circumstances of finitude we are surrounded by possibilities that are infinite, and the purpose of life is to grasp as much as we can out of that infinitude.” Einstein's discovery of the theory of relativity would seem to be rooted in his "imaginative" thought experiments, such as his "elevator" thought experiment which is important enough to merit a quick review.
The Windowless Elevator
“In his thought experiments, Einstein’s genius was in realizing which aspects of experience were essential and which could be discarded. Consider his most famous one: the elevator thought experiment, which he began devising in 1907. Einstein argued that inside a windowless elevator, a person cannot tell whether the elevator is at rest in a gravitational field or is instead being hauled up with constant acceleration. He then conjectured that the laws of physics themselves must be identical in both situations. According to this “principle of equivalence,” locally (in the elevator), the effects of gravitation are the same as those of acceleration in the absence of gravity. Converted into mathematical equations, this principle became the basis for general relativity. In other words, the elevator thought experiment motivated Einstein to make the daring intellectual leap that ultimately led to his greatest achievement, his geometric description of gravity.” (Scientific American: Lost in Thought—How Important to Physics Were Einstein’s Imaginings?, September 1, 2015 Sabine Hossenfelder)
Tolstoy’s Fallacy, Baumeister’s Paradigm, Imagination and the Synthesis Function
Lev Tolstoy was a fascinating person – a brilliant novelist, as well as a radical Christian and vigorous critic of the Russian Orthodox church. Yet the fundamental mistake he made - in my view - was to assume that one had to discover the ultimate meaning of the universe if there was to be meaning in his own life. I come across students who still take that assumption - that there is no meaning to life because one can't define the ultimate meaning of the universe scientifically. When you think about it - Believing the meaning of one's personal life is intimately and inextricably connected to the Ultimate Purpose of the universe is not a very reasonable proposition.
My niece is a biology PhD. I asked her what the meaning of life is to her. She answered, "There is no meaning. Science has demonstrated that there is no purpose to the universe!” That is Tolstoy's fallacy-mistake
Tolstoy (whose approach mirrored the "Proof of Islam" Al Ghazali) was over the top in his rational-logical approach. He came to the conclusion - as my niece did - that rationally-logically there is no ultimate purpose to the universe - so there is no meaning to life.
Baumeister’s Paradigm, Imagination and Synthesis
That is a fallacy - people have all sorts and types of meaning - tons and tons. In fact, the human world is a world created of meanings! Of course, long before Tolstoy, St Augustine, St Gregory of Nyssa and many other early Christian spiritual leaders stated that God (and the ultimate purpose of the universe) are beyond comprehension.
Roy Baumeister, author and social psychologist, states that: There is no ultimate meaning to life! Baumeister emphasizes that a person’s meaning is a holistic synthesis of many diverse meanings – the meaning of parents, family, friends, ethnicity, education, religiosity, spirituality, earth-nature, ...and so on.
This holistic synthesis is clearly beyond strict rational analysis or propositional statements – not to mention unquantifiable. A synthesis function must necessarily “exist” and what is interesting is that Kant argued that “imagination” is pivotal in synthesizing functions. Symbolism is not compatible with materialist fixation with “rigid quantification.” Kant, Nietzsche, Ortega Gasset, the majority of philosophers, as well as most of the social scientists agree that symbolism is pivotal in understanding not to mention the mainstay in the social sciences Kant’s symbolic knowledge. Yet, the dilemma is that there is a consensus that symbols and symbolism are outside the realm of the cognitive processes and rational analysis.
Introduction: “Social and Moral Order”
In The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, first published in 1912, Emile Durkheim, a founding father of sociology, stated that "A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, i.e., things set apart and forbidden—beliefs and practices which unite in one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them. (The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life)
Durkheim argued that religion was the most fundamental social institution of humankind, and further, that religion gave birth to social-religious beliefs that later became integrated into the social structure. Durkheim felt that social interaction was the pivotal factor of forming society and that religious beliefs are a major influence on social interactions - and thus essential to the formation of 'society.' The fact that religions have consistently advocated ideals such as compassion, justice, righteousness, as well as truth, would seem to lend strong support to Durkheim's arguments. That is, the synergies between social factors and religious influences, which emerged simultaneously in primitive societies, produced a collective consciousness - a social-religious community as it were.
Emile Durkheim's concept of the collective consciousness predated Jung's concept of a collective unconscious by several decades, and Durkheim forcefully argued that it was an essential characteristic of society, without which society could not properly function. Durkheim argued that the norms, beliefs, and values of the group - and of society - effectively formed a collective consciousness - a system mutually agreed to values which would seem to have a minimal autonomous functioning - which then produced the "social integration" that is a prerequisite of any social integrity.
Social-Moral Order
Ramon Reyes, a Filipino scholar, mirrors Durkheim’s views that spiritual and religious beliefs create(s) society when he points out that precolonial religions in the Philippines were a “social and moral order”: “In sum, one social and moral order encompasses the living, the dead, the deities and the spirits, and the total environment.” (Religious Experience in the Philippines: From Mythos Through Logos to Kairos RAMON C. REYES)
Correlation between spirituality and compassion - and morals “Compassion for others and social support have survival value and health benefits….(p. 171)
Compassion for others and social support have survival value and health benefits….(p. 171) The powerful consequences of the presence or absence of others are seen as shaping forces in the evolution. Social interactions and within species interdependence are universal components of life on earth. Even bacteria are more reproductively successful in the presence of others of their own species. The sophisticated expression of or full expression of compassion depends on cognitive processes and cortical capacities that are unique to humans…..(p.174) The desire to help others can be elicited by stimuli such as witnessing pain in others. For some, but not all, individuals, these kinds of stimuli have an inherent capacity to induce an autonomic and sense of distress…(p. 184) (Oxford Handbook of Compassion Science – edited by Emma M. Seppala, Emiliana Simon-Thomas, Stephanie L. Brown, Monica C Worline, C. Daryl Cameron, James R. Dory)
The Social Significance of Compassion
“Several lines of evidence suggest that more religious individuals are more prosocial, tend to feel more compassion, and, therefore, should behave more altruistically. In her survey of different religious traditions, historian Karen Armstrong (2006) contends that empathy and compassion are cornerstones of the world’s religions. Central to the Judeo-Christian tradition is the teaching to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18) and to “do to others what you would have them do to you” (Matthew 7:12). The Jewish value of tikkun olam (repairing the world) is often interpreted to encompass the repairing of social bonds and the building of community. Mohammed is quoted as saying, “None of you really has faith unless he desires for his neighbor what he desires for himself” (Lutfiyya & Churchill, 1970, p. 58).” (p. 202, Saslow et al The Social Significance of Spirituality: New Perspectives on the Compassion–Altruism Relationship)
Susan Sprecher & Beverly Fehr: Compassionate love for close others and humanity
Excerpts from Sprecher and Fehr article: “Those who were more religious or spiritual experienced more compassionate love than those who were less religious or spiritual. Evidence was found that compassionate love is distinct from empathy” (p.629)
As hypothesized, religiosity and spirituality were associated positively with compassionate love both for close others (friends, family) and for humanity (strangers). However, religiosity and spirituality were uncorrelated with compassionate love for a specific close other (Study 3). Thus, although we can conclude that those who are more religious and spiritual report experiencing greater compassionate love, our data point to a more finely grained conclusion. To the extent that spirituality motivates compassionate love (and we recognize that the causal direction may be otherwise), it is strangers and humanity who are likely to be the recipients. (p.646)”
(Compassionate love for close others and humanity Susan Sprecher Illinois State University Beverley Fehr University of Winnipeg Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 22(5))
Religion and morals
School shootings in the USA “The US has had 57 times as many school shootings as the other major industrialized nations combined” While my emphasis is on academic anti-social teachings which I argue “prime the pump”, it is self-evident that a “president” and high-profile Republican and Christian leaders modeling antisocial behaviors would be a very significant underlying cause as well. No other country in the world has the magnitude of anti-social behaviors that the USA has.
Besides school shootings, there are six more Major Anti-Social Behaviors Emerged (very) roughly at the same time – the year 2000
1. CDC: Suicide rates increased approximately 36% between 2000–2021.
2. All time high in mass shootings 2023 - 559 Mass shootings in 2023 so far
3. according to the Washington Post, hate crimes are at an all-time high in 2021 with 826 Filipinos reporting themselves as victims of hate crimes.
4. Assaults on teachers dramatically increased - not only in the US but worldwide.
5. Assaults on healthcare workers increased exponentially - also world-wide
6. epidemic (25% increase) in narcissism in western countries (Twenge, etc).
Most studies of spirituality reveal a distinct difference in attitude and action between spirituality and religiosity. For the record, I am a follower of Jesus Christ and my guiding lights are “spirit and truth” (John 4:23-24 – and for that precise reason I vigorously oppose the politicization of Christ which produced the right wing Christian support of Trump who, besides being a racist and pathological liar, is just stupid as s**t. Trump – with the right wing Christian support of several Evangelical leaders has divided America like never before – as in the January 6th assault on the Unites States Capital. Trump’s official policy on immigration - which he pursued while in office - was to separate children as young as 5 or 6 from their mothers to punish them for immigrating. As a result of Trump modeling racist views hate crimes - according to the Washington Post – hate crimes reached an all-time high in 2021. 896 Filipinos filed complaints about being victims of hate crimes in the USA.
Neuroscience: The Trolley and Footbridge Dilemma Experiments by Joshua Greene et al
The neuroscientist Joshua Greene and his colleagues performed some fascinating experiments that focused on how the brain processes moral dilemmas and situations. While subjects were asked questions relating to moral dilemmas, the subjects were undergoing MRI scanning to see which parts of the brain were active. The dilemmas presented were similar to the trolley dilemma
Trolley Dilemma.
“A runaway trolley is headed for five people who will be killed if it proceeds on its present course. The only way to save these people is to hit a switch that will turn the trolley onto a side track where it will run over and kill one person instead of five. Is it okay to turn the trolley in order to save five people at the expense of one?” (p. 58 neuro and moral)
That definitely is an interesting question. I posed the dilemma to my friends and family. My son, Teddy, said he wouldn’t because he didn’t have the right to since he didn’t have enough information and facts about the people involved. My son, Stephen asked if he liked any of the five people. My sister, Perry, found the question disturbing and simply didn’t answer at all. In reading the dilemma my reaction was that it was okay to switch the trolley and kill the one person. It was only later that the question occurred to me, What if the one person was my mother? In the end I agreed with Teddy. In order to act appropriately one needs adequate information and facts. The consensus of philosophers and people tested experimentally is “that it is morally acceptable to save five lives at the expense of one in this case.” (p. 58) A corollary of the trolley dilemma is the footbridge dilemma.
Footbridge dilemma
“As before, a runaway trolley threatens to kill five people, but this time you are standing next to a large stranger on a footbridge spanning the tracks, in between the oncoming trolley and the five people. The only way to save the five people is to push this stranger off the bridge and onto the tracks below. He will die as a result, but his body will stop the trolley from reaching the others. Is it okay to save the five people by pushing the stranger to his death?
Even though, rationally, there is no objective difference between the two dilemmas in that in both cases only one person dies if you intervene, the consensus was that it is not okay to push the stranger onto the tracks. In explaining the difference Greene argued that innate prohibitions against interpersonal violence would account for the difference. The footbridge dilemma involved a situation which is “up close and personal” and people naturally shy away from overt violence.
Before the experiments were run, Greene hypothesized that the footbridge dilemma would show more activity “in the brain regions associated with emotional response and social cognition” (p 59) while the more impersonal trolley dilemma would involve systems related to “higher cognition.” (p 59) That was precisely what they found. “Contemplation of personal moral dilemmas produced relatively greater activity in three emotion related area.” (p.59) (posterior cingulate cortex, the medial prefrontal cortex, amygdala) In the more impersonal trolley dilemma there was “relatively greater neural activity in two classically ‘cognitive’ brain areas.” (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and inferior inferior parietal lobe). (p 60) They also found that those people who did answer yes to the footbridge dilemma took much longer in coming to an answer, which makes sense. It naturally would take the brain more time for the “higher cognition” processes to over-ride instinctual impulses.
The human brain is incredibly complex. Obviously, there isn’t a specific ‘moral’ region of the brain that processes information relative to all situations that involve morals. Different situations produce different means for processing information. Different regions of the brain perform different functions and more than one region of the brain actively works on the same problem. It is noteworthy that the amygdala was involved in the footbridge dilemma. While the amygdala does process information about potential rewards, it primary function, so to speak, is that of a town watchman who sounds the alarm. The amygdala is in a region of the brain which is one of the most primitive regions. Decision making, in this case, involved not only emotional content but also involved instinctual processes.
The well-known “subjective” characteristic of emotions is very salient in understanding emotions – and thus morals. In that much of human consciousness, which would be the capacities of human beings to experience, feel, and think about the world and the All, psychology, as such would appear definitely Not to be a hard science such as chemistry or physics, since precise direct measurement and quantification of subjective emotions would appear at the moment to be beyond the capabilities of the “science” of psychology.
I find it interesting that it appears that carl Jung had an intuitive grasp of how the human brain functioned. In general Carl Jung viewed "the psyche" not as "an indivisible unity but a divisible and more or less divided whole. Although the separate parts are connected with one another, they are relatively independent...... I have called these psychic fragments “autonomous complexes,” (CW8 582) The bottom line is that in moral decision-making numerous processes are involved. From reading various neuroscience studies, it appears apparent hat different situation trigger different regions of the brain into action and several regions of the brain work in tandem.
Morals and Limits of Knowledge: Jung, and Newberg
Robert Juliano, a scholar, brought up the fact that, "One of Jung's latest writings on good and evil was in 1959 in his essay titled "Good and Evil in Analytical Psychology" in CW 10. There, he speaks of good and evil as unknowable in themselves. Furthermore, he characterizes them in paragraph 859 as "principles," which he states have existed "long before us and extends far beyond us."... The word "principle," as Jung writes in paragraph 864, comes from the Latin "prius," which means "first" or "in the beginning." Carl Jung, goes even a little further than just the issue of right versus wrong in stating that there are some aspects of human consciousness that are beyond the ordinary scope of ‘science.”
In Volume 8 of the Collected Works, paragraph 120, when Jung states: “Since nobody can penetrate to the heart of nature, you will not expect psychology to do the impossible and offer a valid explanation of the secret of creativity.” Now, Jung was talking specifically about “creativity.” In that context, however, surely ideals such as freedom liberty, compassion, justice, and equality would also need to be included in the same category of ‘expecting psychology to do the impossible. Ideals generally involve principles, values, and ethics, categories which, ordinarily, do not readily lend themselves to quantification, measurement and rational analysis. These ideals rely on incredibly abstract ideas and highly emotionally charged concepts. In any case, Damasio’s statement about emotions and the unconscious being the ultimate source in decision-making in questions of good and evil is very relevant.
In fact, Andrew Newberg, the famous medical doctor and neurologist, goes even further and states in his book, Why We Believe What We Believe: Uncovering Our Biological Need for Meaning, Spirituality, and Truth (2006), “If a concept or experience elicits no emotional response, it probably will not reach the level of consciousness.” (p. 95) This echoes what the iconic psychoanalyst Carl Jung stated decades earlier, when, in Volume 8 of the Collected Works paragraph 642, Jung stated “that an idea which lacks emotional force can never become a life-ruling factor…... [that is] an idea must evoke a response from the emotions, I meant an unconscious readiness which, because of its affective nature, springs from deeper levels that are quite inaccessible to consciousness.”
Limits of materialistic quantification
Kay Deaux, a prominent social psychologist, highlights the fact that social psychology has historically had an “emphasis on experimenter-created social groups” which “precluded most affective displays.” Experiments conducted in a laboratory would necessarily have a contrived and arbitrary aspect to them, and cognitive concepts, structures and paradigms tend to be nice, neat, and precise constructs that are measurable in some sense. As the philosopher Solomon and others frequently emphasize, emotions tend to have a "subjective" characteristic and are difficult to quantify and measure. Deaux, in her critical analysis of social psychology, goes on to say, “In contrast, natural groups, whether family, fraternity, or nation, are often the arena for intense displays of emotion and strong affective ties.” (p. 794 Handbook)
It should be noted that the almost universally accepted theory of group related behavior is entirely cognitive, originating largely in Tajfel and Turners' "minimal group paradigm, so named because "minimal" refers to the fact that a trigger to group related behavior, in their theory is entirely cognitive. The final result, however, as Kay Deaux emphasizes is that the social identity as a model or theory of group-related behavior utterly fails to explain the group related behaviors for instance of Trump rallies during which Trump followers chant about the quad, four minority Congresswomen, vilified and demonized by Trump, "Send them Back." So, the "Science of Psychology" has limits.
Conclusions:
As the Trolley-Footbridge MRI experiment showed, different situations engage or trigger different regions of the brain, and that different regions of the brain work in tandem with other regions of the brain. That would be very relevant to any correct understanding of how the brain processes information or social signals not only about moral issues, but where spirituality or religious beliefs are concerned. I have come across many people who reject spirituality because of how religions behave or act. In the case of Evangelical leaders who support Trump, it would seem readily apparent that processes involved with group related ideological behaviors would be involved, while the brain processes involved in the spiritual-religious ideal of compassion would most likely be the anterior cingulate (which the psychologist Tania Singer has shown are implicated in empathy).
In the footbridge dilemma, the conclusions of Joshua Green and his colleagues was that the more emotional (and 'primitive') processes were a major influence in the decision of many people in the experiment to avoid up close interpersonal conflict. So the conclusion is that some of the more 'primitive' and emotional processes are involved - positively, in fact - in making moral decisions. Of course, this contradicts many peoples' views including the philosopher Spinoza, who believe that morals are entirely a rational or cognitive activity.
Link to website: https://www.spirittruthandmeaning.com/
Addendum I: Counterpoint to the materialist maxim “All spirituality is unreal” – spirituality with real world context (Muzafer Sherif) and Practical Use (William James) versus the materialist "rigid adherence to arbitrary quantification" (McGilChrist)
1. Spirituality of Compassion: “Compassion for others and social support have survival value and health benefits…. (The Oxford Handbook on Compassion: p. 171) "Our findings argue that spirituality—above and beyond religiosity—is uniquely associated with greater compassion and enhanced altruism toward strangers." (The Social Significance of Spirituality Laura R. Saslow et al), "religiosity and spirituality were associated positively with compassionate love both for close others (friends, family) and for humanity (strangers)." (Compassionate love......, S. Sprecher
2. Musical Spirituality Shulkin and Raglan "Our evolution is tightly bound to music and to the body as an instrument (e.g., clapping). Music, amongst other things, helps to facilitate social cooperative and coordinated behaviors." "Music is a fundamental part of our evolution – and functional because it facilitates “human contact” and out “social self” "Cross-culturally, at a first approximation, 'musical' behaviours involve not just patterned sound, but also overt action; 'musicality' is a property of communities rather than of individuals; and music is mutable in its specific significances or meanings (p.1) (Ian Cross)
3. Poetic Spirituality & Prophecy-Creativity & Transcendence: "The prophet is a poet. His experience is one known to poets. What poets know as poetic inspiration; the prophets call divine revelation" - Heschel
4. Kapwa-loob pro-social norms/spirituality Kapwa & Relational Spirituality: K Lagdameo-Santillan “Kapwa is a recognition of a shared identity, an inner self, shared with others (i.e. Reynaldo Ileto, Jeremiah Reyes, Mercado, etc) + Ubuntu (African - Anglican Tutu) Anam Cara - soul friend (Celtic - soul friend, O'Donohue - Irish theologian)
5. Children’s Spirituality Donna Thomas: “anomalous experiences can catalyze self- healing for children and young people.”
6. Artistic Spirituality: Robert K. Johnston - 20 percent of Americans turn to “media, arts and culture” as their primary means of spiritual experience and expression...."
7. Healing Spiritual-Psychic Experiences in Grieving “Conversely, experience has shown pastoral caregivers that individuals do seem to cope better if they can "actualize" their spiritual experiences in times of crisis.
8. T’boli Dream Weaving/T’nalak – Dreams as a source of divine inspiration – i.e. Be Lang Dulay, a national artist, popularized T’nalak weaving with her over 100 different T’nalak designs."
9. Arctic Hunter Gatherer beliefs in animal spirits as "Human relationships with the natural world..." in context of William James Practical Use Principle
10. Dr. Ingela Visuri: Spirituality and "The Case of High functioning Autism"
11. Medical studies-research & meta-analyses - That is important because as J. E Kennedy points out - "very little research has been done" [about people]
Synthesis-Consensus of William James, Viktor Frankl, & Carl Jung - “to be or not to be” - a life & death question
1), Spiritual experiences & spirituality shape peoples’ "sense of reality” & helps (for better or worse) people "make sense of the world"
2) Tolerance - different experiences (+ culture, upbringing) create different and diverse worldviews - particularly in spiritual experiences.
Addendum II: Death is a Figment of Imagination
Major Methodology Flaw - Narrative Explanation of the Definist fallacy–Maladaptive Stereotype that “All spirituality is unreal”
The Maladaptive Stereotype that “All spirituality is unreal” is A Major Methodology problem that causes widespread “crooked thinking – to use Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist’s terminology.
I have some fairly well documented transcendental spiritual experiences and I encounter the maladaptive stereotype that “Spiritual psychic experiences are automatically and necessarily mental illness” That is false! In fact, J.E Kennedy observes that “Very little research has been aimed at investigating the overall effects of paranormal experiences.” - J. E. Kennedy (An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Paranormal and Spiritual Experiences on Peoples' Lives and Well-Being J.E. Kennedy and H. Kanthamani [Original publication and copyright: The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 1995, Volume 89, pp.249-265.]) From my research I would have to agree with that statement 100%. In my research on people who have spiritual-psychic experiences, “people” are conspicuously absent.
Death is a figment of your imagination: A Narrative Explanation
Not long ago, I happened to be talking to a Filipina college graduate. I explained the materialist argument as explained by Miller & Thompson in the NIH article – that spirituality is unreal and nonexistent because you can’t measure it. I was a bit surprised when she emphatically agreed with the argument that spirituality is unreal and nonexistent because you can’t measure it. So, I asked her to consider the concept of “death” for a minute. Death is far beyond measurement or quantification – so then…, following the logic of the materialist argument then “Death would then be a figment of her imagination and “superstitious nonsense.” She did concede that a fallacy had indeed skewed her thinking – which is a major success for me. Bargh observes that most people just really don’t want to believe that any unconscious factors could influence their thinking - without their knowledge.
The psychologists, William R. Miller and Carl E. Thoresen, state in their article, “Spirituality, religion and health: an emerging field of research”: “A philosophical basis for this perspective is materialism, the belief that there is nothing to study because spirituality is intangible and beyond the senses.” One source cited an example of a Definist fallacy would be the statement that the contender’s arguments are “crackpot theories” – leaving no room for intelligent discussion. A version of the materialist fallacy that I encounter often is that one need to “Prove God” before one can have valid spiritual beliefs. When I first encountered that argument (and it is not that uncommon, in my experience), I was like – “Prove God???Are you crazy?”
Peer Reviewed Critique of Materialism Endorsed by Four Very Prominent Psychologists and Medical Researchers
The critique – dating from 2017-2018 has had well over 10,000 views and zero criticisms (between academia.edu, LinkedIn and FB science groups (before I stopped posting on FB) is peer reviewed - and then some
1. Dr. Paul Wong, Professor Emeritus of Trent University edited two large volumes of The Human Quest for Meaning
2. Dr. Harold Koenig, a medical doctor-psychiatrist, a well published and very well-known author and researcher stated about this article: "Charlie – makes perfect sense to me,
3. Dr. Stephen Farra: Columbia International University Emeritus "Definist Fallacy (leading to a closed Materialism) is spiritual poison, and has hurt us all
4. Stefan Schindler, an award-winning author, and retired psychology-philosophy professor
The U.S. Department of Justice accepted my complaints submitted in 2021
The U.S. Department of Justice has accepted my complaint # 83404-WLP, 83404; 95500, 91650, 91569, 90778 – They explained in detail how the Definist Fallacy causes serious misunderstandings and cause prejudices, misunderstandings, and outright ignorance at times. The complaint was filed against Kaiser Permanente – who had basically told me – to take my beliefs and go screw myself. I filed 5 or internal complaints with KP stating how offensive I find their acceptance and approval of a fallacy which is a destructive maladaptive stereotype if there ever was one. In retrospect it appears likely that the DOJ accepted my complaints because my critique of materialism is endorsed by four prominent psychologists: the world known medical researcher Dr Harold Koenig from Duke, Dr Paul Wong, and Dr Stephen Farra, and religious scholar Stefan Schindler. That was back in 2021, so it seems nothing will be done. That being said, the DOJ would not accept complaints unless there was a valid question.
For the record, email I received from the DOJ:
"Dear Charles Peck Jr, You contacted the Department of Justice on July 1, 2021. Your report number is 83404-WLP. The Civil Rights Division relies on information from community members to identify potential civil rights violations. The Federal Bureau of Investigation and other law enforcement agencies are investigating for the Division. Therefore, you can contact your local FBI office or visit………
Assault by Kaiser Permanente staff
Assault: “Reasonable apprehension” in the context of assault, refers to the victim’s reasonable belief that the act will lead to imminent harmful or offensive contact.” (Cornell legal)
Reply from Kaiser Permanente: My endorsed critique of psychology/psychiatry/ materialist ideology, is “abusive.” – by registered mail.
Sr Director Evans suspended my rights to KP services for abusive conduct. The number 1 abusive message listed by Director Evans - literally: “December 8, 2022 I felt that the acceptance of the Definist fallacy and your refusal to acknowledge my rights and beliefs as extremely offensive” I even filed a complaint with the DOJ [which I sent them but they never read apparently] which was accepted. My position is endorsed by Dr. Koenig, Dr Wong, and Dr Farra, and Stefan Schindler"
That is the whole story right there – Materialists, who dominate much of academia and medical fields – simply do not have any respect at all for spiritual people. In 40 years not even the slightest shred of decency - NONE It is the Definist Fallacy – Maladaptive Stereotype that “All spirituality is unreal” that produces that reaction. What is scary is that these “materialist psychos” actually believe that their ignorance is fully backed by “science” – totally.
Academic-Materialist Analyses are “severely restricted and limited!”
Another Methodology Issue – I would highlight the quantification question which is questioned by several other prominent scholars. As Claudia Nielsen pointed out, the psychiatrist McGilChrist astutely observed that “The scope of inquiry and understanding of the Materialist Doctrine with its rigid adherence to the actually arbitrary principle of quantification and over-emphasis on physiological characteristics is severely restricted and limited in the analyses that can be performed.”
It is mindboggling, that a “rigid adherence to quantification” – which is appropriate to physics or chemistry got applied to human consciousness is mindboggling. Half of human conscious is not quantifiable: hope, art, music, poetry, dreaming. true love, awe-wonder, freedom, ideals, justice, - not to mention death.
Psychiatry has no training or education in people who have spiritual or spiritual-psychic experiences as Dr Stacey Neal (Johns Hopkins – explained – have no education or training in people who have spiritual experiences. While, there are some schools of thought – such as Existential – Positive Psychology – logotherapy and pastoral schools of thought as well as Jungian school of thought - which are receptive – but mainstream psychologists – for the larger part - are not objective even though they swear they are. As Viktor Frankl and Muzafer Sherif pointed out – the schools of thought and disciplines of science are separate and disconnected.
To be blunt, in my forty years of experience, I would say psychiatrists – that I personally have encountered - are Know Nothing Close-Minded Bigots.
The Bottom of the Barrel.
At the bottom of the barrel: It appears readily apparent when You review the series of events especially since 2019 that I was effectively singled out and targeted. In 40 years – while I brought up these fairly well documented experiences with every “therapist” - in forty years not one said a single word – which is conditioning – and a form of ostracism. From the blatantly hateful letter from Kaiser Permanente that makes clear the totally intolerant view of the (Maryland) psychiatrists I dealt with: Dr Philip Perez, Dr Ray De Paulo (JHU), DR Joseph Schwartz, Lisa Wuyek (JHU), Dr Stacey Neal (JHU & KP), Dr Davis (KP), and Evans of KP
Ignoring is a well-known technique for conditioning: Ignoring can be a very powerful discipline technique, but it must be used correctly and consistently because if it is not, it can actually serve to increase the behavior you are trying to eliminate. In general, ignoring works best where the child's primary motive is to have attention focused on him or herself, even if that means resorting to disturbing, annoying, or otherwise negative behavior.
Whether the conditioning was intentional or not is irrelevant. A study was done on the effects of ostracism - which have now proved to have very detrimental psychological and even physical effects. Subjects of the experiment played a computerized video 'tennis" game. There were two computer generated players in the video game. At first during the game the subject was included in the game of batting a tennis ball between the subject and the two computer generated players. Then the two computer generated players batted the ball just between them and excluded the "live" subject involved in the experiment. Even though the live subject knew that the other players were computer generated, the subjects reported being angry and depressed.
Lastly, what psychologists all overlook is that psychological studies and the consensus of Frankl, James, and Jung state is that different experiences generate different worldviews and their opinions are irrelevant. As Pargament notes psychologoists and psychiatrists are into control. – not understanding or truth.
A. Highlights of dreams, some documented by emails, all with consistent and reasonable interpretations: (1) Precognitive Dream about 'Pakistan and 'Nuclear War' – from email - 1-18-2019 – a month later India launched an attack against Islamic Jihadists in (2) A Hybrid Dream-Perception: Precognitive "Tag" (a central action with one or two details) of the "incel" terrorist in Canada in late April, 2018. (3) Dream about Libya (2-26-2019), A month later the U.S. forces left Libya (4) Synchronicity with Muslim lone terrorist attack in Strasburg, France attack - dream (9-19-20) (5) Dudayev (Chechen leader) Dream – dream had several details matching the death of Dudayev the Chechen leader (6) Fredericksburg bomb (civilian) Several details of a dream matched the death of a woman by a bomb
B. Highlights from forty years of conscious perceptions (1) my recent 10-30-20 email to FBI agent McElwee warned of a "domestic terrorist" threat referring to a "bomb" as the weapon. which is related - of course - to the Nashville bombing on Christmas day 2020 (2) My very detailed, specific, and notarized warning to the FBI on October 18, 1981 of an impending attack by the then active Weathermen terrorist group. Some [accurate] details are: group, fabricating bombs, money, women, 22 put together, New York, death, as well as the terrorist weathermen's manifesto. (3) A very brief (phoned in) warning to the FBI before the assassination attempt on president Reagan (4) I called – warned the CIA before 9/11.
Analysis
As Jean MacPhail, author and scholar, states that my spiritual-psychic experiences are unique – in part because they are correlated with external political events, in part because they have both “consistent” and “reasonable” interpretations as “perceptions of threats to the group” – which dovetails into Daryl Bem’s repeated successful experiments (involving over 10,000 subjects) which demonstrate instincts are a significant factor in precognition.
From forty years of (limited) experiences, it would appear readily apparent that a good analogy for my experiences would be to the engine of a jet fighter - in which the “psychic” aspect only “turns on” occasionally, depending on circumstances, and that most of my “perceptions” result from a synthesis of senses - a good historical-political situation sense seems very salient. My personal spiritual-psychic experiences have been invaluable in my writing and research – since I knew what I was looking for.
Point of order: “spirit and truth” (John 4: 23-24) and the Holy Spirit are my guiding lights. Actually, it is for that reason – like many other Americans - I vigorously oppose the politicization of Christ in America which has produced an abomination – a racist American president that has destabilized America. Political and religious leaders modeling anti-social behaviors are a significant Underlying cause in the exponential increase in the USA of serious anti-social behaviors. For instance, school shootings in the USA that are 57 times the entire total of school shootings in Europe, and other serious anti-social behaviors (huge increase in assaults on health worker and teachers, 25% increase in narcissism, and 36% increase in suicide.
The focus of my writing and research has been social consciousness and spirituality – particularly “relational spirituality” (which appears to be a new emerging “school of thought” in psychology) and transcendental spirituality – or spiritual-psychic experiences. I argue that recent research into music – in which there is a consensus that music is pivotal in the development of society (connectivity) and a “social self” – is a game changer because it counters the materialist view still ongoing in social psychology for instance in Allport’s maxim – “There is no psychology of groups.” I argue the materialist ideology – is a self-fulfilling prophecy (Self-fulfilling prophecies are a well-documented phenomenon
Content Copyrighted Charles E Peck Jr. Copyright ©
References and Footnotes