(12/31/00)

.

.

.

p. 48: “Part of the purpose of this chapter is to lead to the concept of the mystical mind. First, however, we must define what we mean by the concept of a mystical mind. In the context of our discussion, the notion of the mystical mind and the mystical brain is twofold. In the first place, the idea that the brain and the mind are mystical suggests that the function of the brain and mind can lead to mystical experiences…. The implication is that the brain and the mind either generate mystical states or allow us to experience mystical states.”

RESPONSE: The authors take the position that it is simplistic, and overly reductionist to say that the experience of the mystical is merely an example of something the brain does under certain conditions. Since they claim the universe of the mystic deserves equal consideration with the universe of science and the average citizen, obviously their focus on “The Mystical Mind” is calculated to support their post-modernist position.

p. 48: “One cannot be certain whether or not mystical phenomena, or any other phenomena, are generated by the brain and mind, or experienced by them.”

RESPONSE: It’s true that certainty is a rare commodity in this universe. (In spite of the large number of people who think they have it.) However, when one considers all the issues I think the certainty that the brain generates mystical experiences (rather than merely experiencing them) is as high as one is likely to get for any similar kind of activity.

p. 49: “We have indicated that part of the reason for considering the brain and mind as mystical derives from their ability to generate or experience mystical phenomena. We also mentioned that there is a second reason for considering the brain and mind as mystical. In mystical states, there is usually a diminution, or even a complete lack, of differentiation between objects. In this way, there is a breakdown of opposites such as good and evil, justice and injustice, and God and humanity. All things tend toward a unified undifferentiated oneness.”

RESPONSE: I guess I would have to ask whether a complete lack of differentiation is a “higher” state, or a “lower” state. I personally feel it is the latter. Although, in Science of Ethics it is recognized that dichotomies are something the brain imposes on perceptions since almost nothing in the real world is either one thing or the other, but varying degrees of both, nevertheless there is value in most cases in knowing how much of each there is in the thing under consideration if one is to make choices that move them toward Enlightenment.

A “unified undifferentiated oneness” would also not be considered a desirable state in Science of Ethics. In fact it would be considered very undesirable.

p. 50: “Prior to considering the global functioning of the mind, we must consider the primary functional components of the mind, which we have referred to as cognitive operators. These operators are specific functions that specific parts of the brain perform as part of the mind.”

RESPONSE: I think this model of the brain is very helpful. It provides useful way to look at how an individual organizes their perceptions and better see the biases that are built into our brains. The insights this provides should help us to avoid being led astray by these biases.

p. 51: “In considering the cognitive operators, it is helpful to break them down into their basic functions. This allows for an easier understanding of the operators. It appears that these cognitive operators function in a similar manner in the minds of all people. This is an important point. It has been remarked that virtually all brains, at least on a gross anatomical level, look very similar…. Furthermore, we suggest that these facts imply that the basic functions or operators are likely to be pre-programmed into the brain…. The concept of cognitive operators in another area in which we encounter the genetic basis of human behavior.”

RESPONSE: All this fits very nicely into the Science of Ethics approach and understanding of people.

p. 51: “We will describe seven primary cognitive operators that comprise the most basic functions of the mind. These functions allow the mind to think, feel, experience, order, and interpret the universe. It should be noted that there may be other operators that function within the mind. The following seven operators, however, appear to be the most fundamental in the function of the mind:”

COGNITIVE OPERATORS:

1. The holistic operator
2. The reductionist operator
3. The causal operator
4. The abstractive operator
5. The binary operator
6. The quantitative operator
7. The emotional value operator”

RESPONSE: Pondering this way of interpreting how the brain works should produce some clarifying insights. I look forward to putting these ideas on the mantle where they can be kept in view and let the questions and answers grow over time.

p. 52. “In its basic form, the holistic operator allows us to view reality as a whole or as a gestalt…. we have proposed that the holistic operator likely resides in the parietal lobe in the nondominant hemisphere.”

p. 52: “The reductionist operators allow us to look at the whole picture and break it down into an analysis of individual parts…. The reductionist operator probably resides primarily in the left parietal lobe and is connected to the sensory modalities of sight, hearing, touch, and so forth, as well as to our language center. This operator is probably the one that gives us our scientific, logical, and mathematical approach to study the universe.”

p. 53-54: “The causal operator permits reality to be viewed in terms of causal sequences. This particular operator seems to have played a significant role in the development of human science, philosophy, and particularly religion. The causal operator is believed to result from the connection between the left frontal lobe and the left orientation association area…. we might call this the causal imperative…. This causal imperative has often led to the development of myth formation and, in particular, religious beliefs…. We might suggest that the causal operator is crucial to our understanding of the concept of God. For if we search hard enough for causes, we eventually work our way back to some first cause that appears not to be caused by anything else…. This conclusion alleviates our urge generated by the causal imperative.”

RESPONSE: Well, that may be a first order approximation. But obviously some folks are able to dispense with God as the uncaused cause, and just say whatever the first cause was postulating God doesn’t provide an answer so we’ll just have to keep an open mind on the issue. If some of us can succeed with that model it appears everyone could do so under the proper circumstances.

p. 54: “The abstractive operator permits the formation of general concepts from the perception of individual facts…. all general concepts or ideas underlying much of language are derived from the abstractive operator.”

p. 54: “The reason that the abstractive operator can perform these functions [generating most of our higher-level ideas] is that it receives input from the association areas of the various sensory modalities. Thus, the abstractive operator is derived from an associative area of associative areas and it can therefore generate classes of objects that are vastly more inclusive than any classification system that is possible within a given sensory modality.”

p. 54: “The abstractive operator likely resides in the inferior portion of the parietal lobe in the left hemisphere.

p. 55: “The binary operator [as well as the abstractive operator is located in the inferior portion of the parietal lobe in the left hemisphere] allows us to extract meaning from the external world by ordering abstract elements into dyads. A dyad is a group of two elements that are opposed to each other in their meaning. Therefore, dyads include good and evil, right and wrong, justice and injustice, happy and sad, and heaven and hell…. each opposite, in some ways, derives its meaning from its contrast with the other opposite… and require each other in order to define themselves individually. This is particularly true since opposites are verbal descriptions of objects.”

RESPONSE: And of course this has the effect of imposing the human way of understanding on the universe. The universe does not exist as a collection of opposites. It exists as a continuum in most cases. When we attempt to impose our idiosyncratic way of understanding we can create problems that can be very difficult to overcome. This is especially true in the realm of values where good and evil, right and wrong, friend or foe, selfish or altruistic, etc. have made it very difficult to find ways to assist individuals in making choices that help themselves while helping everyone else.

p. 55: “The binary operator is particularly important in the generation of myth…. The goal of meditative philosphies is to break down opposites and arrive at a place where there are no opposites….”

RESPONSE: This is great in so far as it doesn’t leave out things critical to understanding whatever is being unified.

p. 55-56: “The quantitative operator permits the abstraction of quantity from the perception of various elements. The part of the brain that functions as the quantitative operator is in the general area of the inferior parietal lobe and is situated near the anatomical areas underlying the binary and the abstractive operators… this operation is what has allowed human beings to develop the concept of mathematics…. Even in past civilizations, the studies of mathematics, measurement, and time were often focal points of their cultures and religions.”

p. 56: “ The emotional value operator permits us to assign a particular emotional value to various elements of perception and cognition. This is highly significant in terms of the development of culture, society, and belief systems. The other operators previously mentioned give us specific ways of ordering the external world. They allow us to infer cause, quantity, or unity of the elements that comprise the universe or else to order them in oppositional dyads. These are merely ways of interpreting what we experience, however. None of the other operators allow us to respond and evaluate our perceptions. This is the role of the emotional value operator: it works on all of our perceptions and thoughts to generate feelings about them. Thus, the emotional value operator tells us how we feel about all the information obtained by the holistic, reductionist, causal, abstractive, binary, and quantitative operators. Then, based on this feeling, we can use the other operators to act upon our feelings.”

RESPONSE: For a Science of Ethics this cognitive operator is of fundamental interest. Since our beliefs generate our feelings which guide our behaviors the emotional value operator is tied into translating those beliefs into feelings.

p. 56: “The emotional value operator may require the most complex brain function of any of the operators. Because it has to place emotional value on the responses of all the operators, the emotional value operator must somehow be tied into all of them. Neuroscientists have clearly shown that the limbic system is the seat of our emotions and our emotional drives.”

p. 57: “We have described how the emotions arise from the limbic system, but we have also indicated that these emotions must be ascribed to all of our higher brain functioning. Studies have suggested that the hippocampus and the amygdala serve to modulate emotions, but they also connect to the higher cortical areas where the cognitive operators exercise their function.”

p. 57: “The cognitive operators represent the way that the mind functions on all input into the brain. This input includes sensory input, thoughts, and emotions. The mind can analyze and interpret this input and, based on that understanding, generate a response. It is within the brain that all of these operators originate, but as we mentioned previously, the brain must be as a whole, and certainly, each of the cognitive operators requires the entire brain in order to be fully expressed. For example, we have already referred to the right parietal lobe as the part of the brain that is primarily responsible for generating the function of the holistic operator, whereas it is our left parietal lobe that is responsible for generating the function of the reductionist operator. But both operators require many other parts of the brain in order to create thoughts, cognitions, emotions, and eventually behaviors. With the genesis of behaviors as output from the mind and brain there completes a loop of interaction in which the external world impacts upon the brain, the brain interprets this input, and then produces a behavior in response to the original input.”

RESPONSE: And since almost every behavior has an ethical component this process becomes crucial in helping to understand how to help individuals make choices that will move them toward achieving a sustainable feeling that one’s life has meaning.

p. 58: “The Empiric Modification Cycle: “We call the cycle of experiencing new inputs, understanding the meaning of these inputs, developing a response to these inputs, and generating new behaviors to these inputs the empiric modification cycle (EMC). And this process ultimately modifies or changes the internalized worldview of the organism.”

RESPONSE: And this whole cycle is crucial to Science of Ethics. From studying ourselves, our friends, and knowledge of the world in general there is no question that individuals, sometimes even in vast numbers to change their worldviews. At the same time it is clear that this is not a trivial issue. My guess is that it is almost never instantaneous. When it appears to be, I think, a lot of the change has already happened and the precipitating event merely was the nudge that produced the visible result.

However, this cycle needs to be studied in great detail in order to use our energy most efficiently to pass on the ideas of Science of Ethics. It seems to me that therapeutic processes are a necessary part of most efforts to help persons change their worldview in a positive direction.

This is an area that needs much more thought. It is interesting to me that the authors in spite of all their work to clarify “the mystical mind” in the end appeared to come out of it with the same world view they went into it with which I take to be, God is a valuable and useful symbol for understanding and living in the world

p. 58: “The EMC is a crucial characteristic of the mind/brain function: it is what allow us to adapt our behaviors and ourselves to the world around us.”

p. 59: “The EMC must be comprised of the parts of the brain responsible for receiving input from the external world, processing that input into meaningful concepts, determining an emotional response to these inputs, and then formulating a behavior to those inputs. If the EMC functions properly, the behaviors that are generated should help the animal in its survival and reproduction. This would require that the interpretation of input be as accurate a representation of the external world as possible or that the behaviors correlate highly with improved adaptability in the external world.”

RESPONSE: I guess we could interpret that to mean that throughout human evolution belief in magic and the power of wishing has had strong survival value so discarding it is very difficult. Presumably this would mean that the individual would need special assistance to take this step and constant vigilance to keep them from backsliding.

p. 60: “In terms of the actual parts of the brain involved in the EMC, we have already described that the primary sensory areas receive input from the external world. The input then goes to the secondary and tertiary association areas (particularly the cognitive operators) for the input to be processed. This implies that all of these sensory areas, as well as the tertiary association areas that help to process the input, are involved in the function of the EMC. The limbic system and the autonomic nervous system are also involved in the EMC since these parts of the brain allow the emotional value operator to evaluate various inputs. Once this is done, the parts of the brain that initiate action and thought take over to generate a behavioral response to that input. These areas are undoubtedly located in the frontal lobe, which includes both the attention association areas (which directs action) and the motor cortex (which are involved in controlling muscle movement). There are also areas in the inferior parietal lobe involved in the function of the abstractive operator that contribute to formulating concepts and ideas about input from the external world. This may help us respond with verbalizations as well as active behaviors. Thus, it appears that many parts of the brain are necessary for the overall functioning of the EMC.”

RESPONSE: And this might help explain why certain kinds of changes – those related to “the mystical mind” – are so difficult to make.

p. 60-61: “All of the cognitive operators likely correspond fairly well to what is actually in the external world. The objects and functions of the external environment have particular characteristics that must be identified, interpreted, and responded to. Over time, some behaviors that are developed become programmed into the gene pool of the species. This leads to the notion of prepared learning and prepared behavior.”

RESPONSE: By and large I would tend to agree with the foregoing. The point where this breaks down for me is those things relative to “the mystical mind.” However, evolution didn’t put this much work into building the belief in magic and the power of wishing propensity for nothing. So as indicated in other places I’m convinced it has had survival value for the species because it has led persons to behave in ways that have promoted passing on the relevant genes. But times have changed and now we have to work to overcome this propensity and use it in all the ways appropriate to our “wisdom” potential; i.e., literature, the arts, plays, movies, etc.

p. 61: “Prepared learning implies that there are some behaviors that we are genetically prepared to learn easily because they are particularly adaptive to the environment…. A specific example of such prepared learning in human beings is phobias, from which many persons suffer.”

p. 62: The Primary Circuit: “We suggest that the mind/brain is set up in such a way that there is one primary working circuit. We will call this the primary circuit, or, when incorporated into a psychological perspective, the primary ego circuit. This circuit comprises our sensory input areas, our input analysis areas, and our output processing areas.”

p. 63: “We believe that it is also the primary circuit that is involved in the development of consciousness.”

p. 64: “ This primary circuit is most likely preprogrammed so that some semblance of it exists almost as soon as the mind/brain is working.”

p. 64: “Of course, the mind/brain does not contain only the primary circuits. It contains many, perhaps, millions, of other circuits of varying complexity and content.” These other circuits may be the cause of schizophrenia and make up the subconscious.

RESPONSE: It seems to me that these models can be very useful in understanding how the brain works and studying it in a unified and helpful way.

p. 66: “The split-brain experiments show that…. only the circuit connected to the language center… seems to result in conscious awareness.”

p. 66: “Another interesting example of secondary circuits not easily joining the primary circuit can be found in people with something called blindsight… They have the ability to walk through a room without bumping into any furniture.” But they are not conscious of being able to see these things.

p. 67: “There is another important aspect of the maintenance of the primary circuit. While the primary circuit is being positively reinforced, the secondary systems often need to be suppressed. There is clear evidence of inhibitory neurons and fibers throughout the brain. [And these would be necessary to produce]…deafferentation…. [And] the decrease in a person’s ability to suppress secondary circuits might result in psychotic states in which visions, voices, and bizarre thoughts readily enter consciousness.”

RESPONSE: Sounds like hypotheses deserving serious attention.

p. 67: “The final part of this chapter will go beyond our theoretical discourse about how consciousness occurs and try to arrive at an understanding of the actual parts of the brain involved in the generation of consciousness. We feel that this is best done by remembering the theoretical requirements for consciousness and then apply them to what we know about the various brain structures that we have considered before. Clearly, the most important thing is to try to determine the parts of the brain that make up our primary consciousness circuit. It is important to note that not all of these parts of the brain may make up the primary circuit in all individuals. However, we are proposing an overview of the most likely structural organization that results in consciousness. Also, the primary circuit is just that – a circuit. As such it does not have a specific beginning and end. For simplicity, we will begin with the parts of the brain involved in projecting ourselves outward, then consider the parts involved in receiving input, and conclude with the parts involved in analyzing that input in order to determine that we are ourselves.”

p. 68: “Several brain structures are involved in projecting ourselves outward. These include the areas of the brain involved in directing motor function so that we may move ourselves through the outside world. Movement of our legs and arms, movement of our head, and the creation of gestures such as facial expressions and body position that reflect what we arc thinking and feeling are all part of our projection. The other primary part of our brain’s ability to project itself outward is the language center. We have mentioned that language may be the most efficient way of projecting ourselves outward. Language clearly has become our most commonly used method of expressing our ideas and emotions. Therefore, the motor part of the brain and the language center are very important components in the development of consciousness.”

p. 68: “The second component of consciousness is sensory input from the outside world, which includes the body. And for consciousness, this is necessary to perceive the self that we have projected outward. This would imply the need for all of the primary and secondary sensory areas. Thus, the areas in the brain responsible for taste, smell, hearing, touch, and sight should be a part of the primary circuit. There are also body sensors that determine the position of parts of the body that also make up the input part of consciousness. All of these sensory areas in the brain are connected to the outside world and allow the mind/brain and consciousness to create a loop between the internal and external worlds. These areas eventually tie into the tertiary association areas that are responsible for the analysis of the input.”

p. 68: “The tertiary association areas form the part of the primary circuit involved in the analysis of the input since these areas involve connections with the limbic system, which helps determine emotional responses to various stimuli. Thus, the limbic system as well as its connections to the arousal and quiescent systems are part of the primary circuit. The parts of the brain that house the functions of the cognitive operators also must be tied into the primary circuit so that appropriate quantitative and qualitative analysis of input can occur. Also, the amygdala and hippocampus are essential parts of the primary circuit because they are involved in memory and hence help in referencing new experiences. These two areas also are connected with almost every other part of the brain, including other parts of the limbic system, and therefore help in much of the higher-level analysis of input. Perhaps at the top of this analysis hierarchy is the part of the brain within the orientation association area that distinguishes self from nonself. This part of the brain can take all of the input and determine what correlates with the part of the mind/brain that was originally projected outward. It is through this area that the loop of consciousness is completed.”

p. 68-69: “Finally, the analytic areas of the brain are tied into the outward-projecting parts such as the motor area and the language center so that new behaviors can be generated based on all of the previous experiences and emotions. Because the attention association area is part of the motor system and also has connections to the language center, this area is probably important to the primary circuit. Therefore, the attention association area helps tie analyzed input into the outward-projecting parts and hence derive new behaviors from prior experience. All in all, this area plays a significant role in completing and maintaining the primary circuit of consciousness.”

p. 69: “One final part of the entire circuit of consciousness is the area of the brain responsible for suppressing the secondary pathways and thus maintaining the primary circuit. This area is most likely the attention association area (which we have already included in the generation of consciousness) since it is the area that helps us focus attention. To that end, this area suppresses other intruding thoughts and feelings so that we may focus on current activity. We already have evidence that the attention association area can inhibit many other fibers through its connections with the thalamus, the amygdala, and the hippocampus, and it therefore seems to be connected with many of the other structural elements of the primary circuit. By being connected to many other parts of the primary circuit, in addition to having the ability to inhibit neuronal activity from other parts of the brain, the attention association area may be the most important part of the brain that helps maintain the integrity of function of the primary circuit by suppressing secondary circuits.”

RESPONSE: The idea of the primary circuit and the parts necessary to make it work seems like a very valuable model. With this image in mind it is possible to get a feel for how the whole things works.

p. 69: “There is another aspect of the mind/brain that deserves inspection before considering how theology and eventually neurotheology arise. This is the notion of intelligence. Intelligence is a difficult concept to define, although we often use the term to refer to someone’s mental abilities. But what exactly do we mean when we say that someone is intelligent?”

p. 70: “We will define intelligence as the ability to learn, to solve problems, and to deal with new or unanticipated situations.”

p. 75: “In our model, the mind and the brain are essentially two different ways of looking at the same thing, the brain representing the structural aspects of the mind, and the mind representing the functional aspects of the brain…. Further, we can see how the mind and brain can generate intelligence, including abstract intelligence, intuitive or creative intelligence, and social intelligence.”

p. 79: “In developing the background of the concept of mystical mind we can now use our understanding of mind/brain functioning to explore the structuring and transformation of myth. Specifically, we propose that the generation of myth can be traced to the functioning of the cognitive operators…. Human ceremonial ritual, as well, will be considered as the culmination of a long phylogenetic evolutionary process. Finally, the mechanism by which ritual is used to resolve the antinomies of myth structure will be explored in this chapter.”

p. 79: “ We would suggest that the generation of myth, its structure and transformations, as well as the resolution of the myth problem through ceremonial ritual are derived from the functioning of neural structures…. These structures evolved and became progressively elaborated because of the adaptive advantage they conferred on their bearers…. Finally, we will present a model based on recent neurophysiological research that explains the resolution of mythic antinomies by the integration of ritual behavior into myths.”

p. 79: “The purpose of exploring myth formation and transformations is that myths form the basis of religion. Myths are stories that purport to explain ultimate aspects of reality either in terms of efficient causality (creation or foundational myths) [the effecting, mobile operating force that produces changes] or in terms of final causality (salvation or apocalyptic myths) [a goal, the end sate toward which a thing is drawn] or in terms of both. Therefore, to understand the neuropsychological basis of myth formation is to begin to understand the basis of religion and ultimately of theology.”

RESPONSE: And this is an area that Science of Ethics needs to provide a new model for. It would not fall back on Aristotle’s four causes (material cause, efficient cause, formal cause, and final cause). Rather, it would formulate science’s two causes (mater [material cause] and motion [efficient cause]) in an expanded way. In this approach meaning is part of efficient cause (matter-in-motion) since this is where the ability to formulate and pursue goals comes from. They do not come from outside the human brain.

In this context the basis of religion lies deeper than the mystical and the meaning is related to our existence as members of the human species. So the meaning ties to matter-in-motion.

p. 80: “More important, we will see later that the neuropsychological model that helps describe myth formation is compatible with models of higher forms of religious experiences such as those that occur during meditation and other mystical states. In this way, we begin to observe the functioning of the mystical mind.”

RESPONSE: This model and the neurological foundation upon which it rests provide a great resource for understanding key issues relative to the functioning of the human mind. These are things Science of Ethics must take into account as it attempts to help humanity move from behavior driven by our “tribal” propensities to behavior guided by our “wisdom” potential.

And we need to keep in mind that almost everything about metatheology and megatheology is restricted to our “tribal” propensities.

p. 80: “The cognitive operators allow us to propose that the most sophisticated mathematical, logical, or grammatical operation can ultimately be reduced to the simplest spatial and spaciotemporal analysis.”

RESPONSE: And this is not a trivial tool for understanding human behavior.

p. 80: We would also argue that the apparent multiplicity of relationships between elements of a cognitive structure such as a myth theme can be reduced to a relatively small list of ultimately basic analytic relationships, including inside-outside, above-below, left-right, in front-behind, all-nothing, before-after, and simultaneous-sequential.”

RESPONSE: This sounds important, but I don’t know what it means.

p. 81: “Simply put, that which provides either immediate or delayed gratifications is good; that which the organism experiences as unpleasurable or not conducive to survival is bad. As with the spatiotemporal relationships, the affective relationships can be elaborated into a number of subtle feeling states and can be related to perception and cognition in various ways. The neurophysiological substrate for these affective-cognitive-perceptual linkages is the connections between various limbic structures and the secondary sensory association areas (in the case of perception) or tertiary association areas, especially the inferior parietal lobule (in the case of cognitions).”

RESPONSE: This sounds like an important issue that needs some extended attention.

p. 82: “There is a significant amount of anthropological evidence that the various myths, worldwide, that underlie religions and religious behavior can be grouped into thematic classes. Some anthropologists… maintain that the virus myths within a class are transformations of each other and represent various surface structures of one deep structure.”

p. 82: “The neuropsychological basis of transformations within a structural system is one that has received little or no attention by structuralists… or even developmental psychologists… developmental psychology is viewed as the progressive elaboration of a series of nesting structures of increasing complexity.”

p. 82: “The relationship of the more complex to the less complex structures involves several rules of transformation. These rules include:

1. a possible alteration or substitution of one element for another;
2. the addition of new elements of content which were not previously present in the simpler structures; and
3. specific rules or reorganization of all the elements of content such as is conveyed in the Levi-Straussian understanding of transformations.”

p. 83. “New evidence… seems to indicate that the inferior frontal area in the dominant hemisphere may be generally responsible for the organization of thought into hierarchical structures (not just for linguistic organization).”

p. 85. “It is a testimony to the stability of cognitive structures that only the most severe stresses, the most intense states of limbic arousal, are able to facilitate the transformation of such important superordinate structures as the self.”

RESPONSE: This is of critical importance to Science of Ethics since transformation of the self lies at the core of what Science of Ethics needs to help persons achieve if they are to achieve a sustainable feeling that one’s life has meaning.

p. 85: “We have previously described a myth as performing two distinct but related functions. First, a myth presents a problem of ultimate concern to a society. This problem is always presented in antinomous form in the surface structure, that is, in terms of juxtaposed opposites such as life-death, good-evil, or heaven-hell. Second, once the existential problem is presented in the myth, it is solved by some resolution or unification of the seemingly irreconcilable opposites that constitute the problem. Usually the myth problem is resolved cognitively within the myth itself by a unitary symbol. But the problem presented in the myth is generally not just a cognitive one but a deeply felt existential problem of the society that generates the myth. Thus, a deeply felt, experienced resolution usually occurs only when the myth is enacted in ritual form. In Chapter 5 we will consider the effects of ritual in detail. For the moment, it is sufficient to state that, properly performed ritual, in and of itself, produces a powerful unitary sense. When the ritual is enacting or ‘incarnating’ the myth, this sense of union or oneness is applied by the mind to the major antinomies of the myth. When the ritual enactment works, the sense of resolution of the myth problem is vividly experienced by the participants, of the ritual, and the resolution of otherwise irreconcilable opposites becomes an experienced fact. ‘The symbolic resolution by way of a unifying symbol is usually far less satisfying then the existential solution to the myth problem when the myth is enacted in ritual behavior.”

RESPONSE: This presents some very interesting issues that Science of Ethics needs to seriously consider. Especially it seems important to consider what the issues are here that need to be addressed by Science of Ethics and how. My experience tells me that this issue is more critical for women than men. But addressing it in ways that keep persons from moving toward the mystical is to me the primary challenge.

p. 86: “ We would suggest that the most efficient and powerful method of resolving myths occurs during ritual, but in order to understand why this is the case, we need to consider the development of the mythic problem and the mythic resolution in more detail.”

p. 86: “Human beings have no choice but to construct myths to explain their world. The reason for this necessity is that as long as there remain unanswerable questions, the cognitive operators necessarily perform their functions even if they must generate gods, demons, or other ‘power sources’ to do so: we must develop myths in order to find at least temporary solutions. Both explanatory and motivational stories (myths) are thus necessarily generated by the brain. Myths may be social in nature, or they may be individual in the form of dreams, daydreams, and other fantasy aspects of the individual person. Even science and the scientific method are a special type of myth that helps human beings explain the universe…. Because it is highly unlikely that human beings will ever know the first cause of every strip of reality observed, it seems that we will always generate gods, powers, and other entities as first causes to explain what we observe. Indeed, we cannot do otherwise.”

RESPONSE: To the degree that the authors are correct in their above assertion, Science of Ethics must confront this issue. We would have to start with the assumption that when supernatural agencies are utilized to explain what we observe to that degree are individuals cut off from achieving a sustainable feeling that their life has meaning. So I am hopeful that Science of Ethics can find ways to satisfy this characteristic of humans within the realm of the scientific approach.

For me the critical issue is that science even when seen as providing a special kind of myths, is a clean break from the way this propensity has been used throughout history. Myths in many cultures were not taken as stories, or as hypotheses about what might have happened. They were taken as Truth, to be accepted and not to be questioned. I present current Muslim countries as a powerful example of this phenomenon. Specifically, Pakistan where on 4 October 2000 Dr. Yunus Shaikh was arrested by Islamabad police and booked under Section 295-C (Blasphemy) of the Pakistan Penal Code. And this charge resulted from factual statements he had made. He pointed out that the Prophet (Mohammed) did not become a Muslim till the age of 40 when he received his first message from God, and that the Prophet’s parents were not Muslims because they died before Islam was proposed by the Prophet. Blasphemy in Pakistan is punishable by a mandatory death penalty.

So being able to update our myths to keep them congruent with our current understand is essential. Any culture that can’t do that is a force for evil in the world.

p. 89: “Ritual Behavior: We define ritual behavior as a sequence of behavior that:

1. is structured or patterned;
2. is rhythmic and repetitive (to some degree at least), that is, tends to recur in the same form or nearly the same form with some regularity;
3. acts to synchronize affective, perceptual – cognitive, and motor processes within the central nervous system of individual participants; and most particularly, synchronizes these processes among the various individual participants”

RESPONSE: And ritual behavior is something Science of Ethics cannot ignore. Exactly how to approach it is unclear. But the issue certainly must be addressed.

p. 89: “The last component refers only to rituals performed in groups and not to individual ritual such as that often associated with meditation…. Individual ritual helps synchronize the participants with some higher form of being, whether that be the rest of the world, the universe, or God.”

RESPONSE: For Science of Ethics the higher issue would be the human species and the individual’s involvement with it in such a way as to perpetuate and advance its existence. Everything else would be valued in relation to that. Exactly how this might be promoted is still an open question.

p. 89: “Repetitive auditory and visual stimuli can drive neuronal rhythms in the brain and eventually produce an intensely pleasurable, ineffable experience in humans…. such repetitive stimuli can bring about simultaneous intense discharge from both the human arousal and quisant systems.”

p. 90: “In the special case of prolonged rhythmic stimuli, it appears that the simultaneous strong discharge of both parts of the autonomic nervous system creates a state that consists not only of a pleasurable sensation but, also, under proper conditions, a sense of union with conspecifics and a blurring of cognitive boundaries. We suggest that such driving of the autonomic nervous system by rhythmic stimuli powerfully activates the holistic operator, allowing various degrees of gestalt perception. This occurs through deafferentation of the orientation association area with concomitant functioning of the holistic operator.”

p. 90: “In fact, the oneness of all participants is the theme running through the myth of most human rituals. It is probably also the sense of oneness and the vagueness of boundaries, which… allow for a given symbol (i.e., a religious symbol) to be experienced as that for which it stands.”

p. 91: “Meditation is what we have called a top-down mechanism and ritual is a bottom-up mechanism…. For now, suffice it to say that meditation, as well as effective ritual, can, and usually does, produce the powerful subjective experience of the integration of opposites.”

p. 92: “During intense meditative experiences, the experience of the union of opposites is expanded to the experience of the total union of self and other.”

RESPONSE: And how all this might apply within the understanding of Science of Ethics remains to be explored.

p. 92: “Like all other animals, human beings must cope with any give environmental situation by means of a motor behavior. This motor behavior goes back far into our evolutionary past. It is usually a repetitive motor activity with visual, auditory, and other sensory feedback. This rhythmic stimulation strongly drives the arousal system. With prayers and chanting, the arousal system may be driven in two ways. The myth’s meaning may be presented within the ritual prayer, thereby exciting the cognitive arousal functions of the left or analytic hemisphere. The rhythmicity of the prayer or chant drives the ergotropic [arousal] system independent of the meaning of words. If the ritual is effective, the arousal system becomes highly activated, resulting in the previously mentioned spillover phenomenon. This causes excitation of the quiescent system and activation of the holistic operator.”

RESPONSE: And now it seems clear that religious rituals must have been part of human history long before the evolution of the Homo line. It’s relevance to Modern Humans is still an open question. However, considering its existence in every human group, it obviously cannot be ignored by Science of Ethics.

p. 92: “This unusual physiological state [related to repetitive motion activity] produces other aesthetic-cognitive effects besides a sense of the union of opposites. Many religious traditions indicate that such states yield not only a feeling of union with a greater force or power but also an intense awareness that death is not to be feared and a sense of harmony of the individual with the universe. This sense of harmony with the universe may be the human cognitive extrapolation from the more primitive sense of union with other conspecifics that ritual behaviors generates in prehuman animals. Thus, we can see how ritual has evolved from the behaviors of primitive animals to the most complex human religious rituals.”

RESPONSE: Well, certainly an absence of fear about dying, and sense of harmony with the universe are states essential to the Enlightened Person. I would expect them to be a natural part of one’s growth and development as they grow toward that state.

p. 95: “Ritual and liturgy help bring mysticism and spirituality to the masses in a manner impossible by meditation…. Meditation is designed to bring the individual toward some more exalted state of reality even if practiced in a group. Ritual, on the other hand, is usually practiced within a group and, to that end, helps to bring the members of that group into a sense of corporate unity.”

RESPONSE: Sad, it seems to me, that in achieving that exalted state one thereby loses everything of value!

p. 95: “We have mentioned that an analysis of both ritual and meditation reveals that the two practices are similar in kind, if not in intensity, along two dimensions: (1) intermittent emotional discharges involving the subjective sensation of awe, peace, tranquility, or ecstasy, and (2) varying degrees of unitary experience or feelings of oneness, correlating with the emotional discharges just described. Further, this second dimension often generates a decreased awareness of the boundaries between the subject and other individuals (generating a sense of community), between the subject and external inanimate objects, between the subject and any putative supernatural beings, and indeed, at the extreme, the abolition of all boundaries of discrete being leading to brief states of absolute unitary being (AUB).”

RESPONSE: For Science of Ethics, to abolish all boundaries is not a goal compatible with good mental health. One’s existence as a fully functioning individual, connected to the species and its survival is a measure of that good mental health.

p. 95: “Human ceremonial ritual is best understood as a morally neutral technology that, depending on the myth in which it is embedded, can either promote or minimize particular aspects of society and promote or minimize overall aggressive behavior.”

RESPONSE: It sounds to me like this behavior would set the boundaries for the “us vs. them” feelings. Beyond that for a Science of Ethics such ritual is not morally neutral. If it nurtures any aspect of the mystical in thought or deed it would be seen as leading away from moral behavior. If it helps an individual feel their connection to the species and to maintaining and developing it, in that regard it would be seen as leading toward moral behavior.

p. 96: “Over the past several decades, we and others have gradually been working toward the development of a neuropsychological model of unitary experience that would encompass ritual, meditation, and contemplation within one theoretical framework. In order to accomplish this, we must consider that ritual and meditation both can generate a number of states along a continuum of unitary states. We call this the unitary continuum, and the concept refers to all states of human experience as they relate to a sense of unification or connection with other things.

RESPONSE: The authors have performed a Herculean task and provided models, data, and theories of great value to Science of ethics in understanding this mysterious element of human behavior. They remove most of the mystery in spite of their goal of making mysticism a respectable term among thinking people.

.