One of the major purported benefits of religion is that it helps us to behave morally and to understand the difference between right and wrong. However, what if morality is simply an inborn human trait, produced because it had an advantage in the evolution of man? In Chapter 38, The Genetics of Good Behavior, I discussed altruism as one form of inborn moral behavior. Altruism consists of performing good acts that put the individual at risk for the benefit of the group. Altruism is common in many animals other than humans, is controlled in part by our genes, and imparts a selective advantage during evolution.
    Scientists are becoming increasingly interested in the biological basis of morality (1). John Mikail of Georgetown University is investigating the question or whether there is a ‘universal moral grammar’ that is present in a broad range of humans independent of gender, age, education level,  cultural background, and religion. He administered a moral dilemma test to a wide range of people, including children and individuals from non-western cultures. His preliminary results suggest that such a universal morality does exist. Hauser and colleagues have administered an online Moral Sense Test (http://moral.wjh.harvard.edu) to over 200,000 individuals from 120 countries. You should log on and take the test; I suspect you will enjoy it. Again the results indicate much similarity in moral principles across cultures. These studies are consistent with humans having an inborn moral code independent of religious or cultural upbringing.
Studies in primates have also found evidence for inborn moral fairness. Monkeys will forgo food for days to prevent a neighbor from receiving a shock. Human morality may be an elaboration of a primate behavior that evolved because it helped to promote cohesiveness in early groups of humans.
  These studies increasingly suggest that morality is an inborn rather than a God dictated trait. This make it likely that man’s inborn sense of right and wrong led the human authors of the Bible and other sacred books to incorporate moral laws into their verses. Then, to add greater authority they proclaimed these laws had to be followed because the verses were dictated by God.


(1) Miller, G: The Roots of Morality. Science 32); 734-737, 2008

        

    As I stated in my first entry, the purpose of this blog is to update new facts and discoveries that are relevant to the book, “Did Man Create God?”  This is based on a constant perusal of a number of my favorite science journals including Nature, Science and many others. A second purpose, of course, is also to provide readers with a source of feedback and you are encouraged to input contributions of your own.
     One problem. While the blog is primarily about science and religion, the title does not portray that. The solution – a title change to “Did Man Create God? The Blog for Science and Religion.”
    This is not an anti-faith or anti-religion site. It is in part devoted to understanding why humans are such a spiritual species and what can people do to allow their spiritual brain to be at peace with their rational, thinking, critical brain.
This blog will examine the same wide range of subjects covered in the book including:

    New findings showing the wonders of evolution
    Rebuttals to Intelligent Design
    How natural selection works
    New discoveries of missing links
    Evolution of man
    The origin of life
    Cosmology
    What came before the Big Bang?
    Neuroscience of behavior
    Updates on the spiritual and rational brain
    Genetics and evolution of spirituality, reason, good and bad behavior
    Origins of religion
    Benefits of religion
    The science of the placebo effect
    Evils of religion
    Role of psychedelic drugs in spirituality
    And many other related and relevant subjects

    As stated previously, for now I will only contribute about once a week. Since your contributions will need my approval before they are posted, their appearance may be delayed by a week. I will accept any thoughtful comments, pro or con. The only thing rejected will be material that is “off the wall.” 

    Your input is important. Let me hear from you.

Download | Duration: 00:04:21

        

    One of major themes of the “Did Man Create God?” book is that much of what we are, including our capacity for spirituality, is determined by our genes and by our biological make up. Thus, in addition to discussing new relevant findings about evolution, in this blog I will also be reviewing new findings on the biology and genetics of human behavior, especially good versus evil – the control of which is generally believed to be within the domain of religious instruction.
    Over the many years I spent taking care of children with Tourette Syndrome and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), one of the major presenting problems was the presence of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) - in short, constant talking back and nerdy acting out. Ever since the advent of Freud, such behavior was blamed on poor parenting. The stress of the resultant finger pointing often led to divorce. One of the exciting aspects of working with Tourette syndrome, a disorder universally recognized as being primarily genetic, was the finding that it was a spectrum disorder, meaning that in addition to the tics, ADHD, obsessive compulsive behavior (OCD), ODD, conduct disorder, depression, and many other behavioral problems were present. These were commonly assumed to be due to problems with early childhood environment and laid at the feet of the parents. Being associated with a genetic disorder, Tourette syndrome, indicated that in reality they all had a strong genetic component.
    I was intrigued by a recent report 1 that examined the neurobiology of angry teens. Sara Whittle and her colleagues had 137 teenagers and their parents participate in interactive sessions to evaluate levels of angry, aggressive, belligerent, and argumentative conflict. The teens were then examined with a MRI to examine different aspects of brain structure. As described in Chapters 28 and 30, the amygdala is part of the temporal lobe and the limbic system and regulates emotion, especially anger. The authors found that the children who exhibited the most prolonged aggressive and angry  responses to conflict had larger amygdala volumes. Variations in the size and symmetry of two other structures, the anterior cingulate and the orbital frontal cortex (see chapters 26 and 28) were also involved.
     Since twin studies have shown that the behaviors in question have a strong genetic component the changes observed in brain structure were likely to have been caused by a variant set of genes. These behaviors are common in children with conduct disorder, fifty percent of whom develop antisocial personality as adults. These studies provide one more piece of evidence showing that parents usually are not to blame for oppositional defiant behavior of their children – genes and neurobiology are. Skillful parenting, good environment and strong religious beliefs can help to moderate it, but  the absence of these things is not its cause.

1 Prefrontal and amygdala volumes are related to adolescent’s affective behaviors during parent-adolescent interactions. Whittle, S. et al. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sciences 105:3652-7, 2008

        

    One of the issues that creationists seem to have the most difficulty with is the concept of natural selection. Weather is one of the strongest selective forces in evolution  – especially long-term changes of either too dry or too wet. Since humans have not lived through such meteorological extremes, those skeptical of evolution doubt its power. Perhaps a more convincing example is needed. Speaking of power, how would you feel if you lived in an environment were a single misstep meant instant death - unless you had a minor inherited variation in your body form that saved you? 
    In the tropical forests of Southwest Asia, there are more gliding animals (frogs, snakes, lizards, geckos) than anywhere else on earth, over 45 species in all. As described in Science 1 anthropologist Nathaniel Dominy of the University of California, Santa Cruz asked - why? He concluded the answer was “rougosity” or the vertical distance to the ground between treetops of different heights. In this setting rougosity is highest when the distance straight to the ground is the greatest. In these forests, most of the plant and animal life occurs in the sun rich canopy at the tops of the trees. Imagine two geckos (like the cute little ones in the Geico insurance ads) sitting on a branch hundreds on feet off the ground. One had a genetic mutation that led him to be born with an excess of floppy skin, the other had no excess skin. They both get distracted and step off the branch and both instinctively spread their legs wide. The excess skin of one allows him to glide safely to a branch 30 feet below. The other plunges to his death.  All of the offspring of the one with excess skin also have excess skin and are protected from sudden death by missteps. All the other geckos without excess skin remain at risk of sudden death. It should surprise no one that after a few dozen generations, all the geckos in this part of the forest were gliding geckos.
    This is an unusually beautiful example of the power of strong selective forces to drive the rapid evolution of new species, in this case 45 new species in one area of the forest. In a later blog I will provide some examples of strong selection for certain genes in humans.


1 Snapshots from the Meeting – Evolution of Gliding  Science 320: 609 (2 May), 2008

        

     Today is the official release date of the book and the date I have started this blog. The purpose of this blog is two-fold.
    The first purpose is to update new facts, discoveries and ideas that are relevant to the book, as I find them. I subscribe to about 12 different magazines and journals on science, biology, nature, medicine, neuroscience and other subjects. Anything that I find relevant to the subjects covered in the “Did Man Create God?” book will be covered. If readers come across items they think are relevant to the subject let me know and I will be happy to include them.
    The second purpose is to provide answers to reader’s questions, complaints, or other issues. I realize the subject matter of this book may be controversial and even disturbing to some readers. I will welcome and be respectful of all opinions and thoughts. All I ask is that you do the same. No profanity or other inappropriate comments. The purpose of the book is to allow people have their thinking brain and their spiritual brain be at peace. The purpose of the blog is the same.
    I will attempt to make entries at lest once a week. Since I have many things on my plate I cannot respond daily.
   
    The first issue involves a very nice email I received from Dr. Michael Persinger. Dr. Persinger, Ph.D. is a faculty member in the Departments of Psychology and Biology, Behavioral Neuroscience, and Biomolecular Sciences at Laurentian University, Subbury, Ontario, Canada. He is the author of Neuropsychological Bases of God Beliefs.
       He kindly commented that “Did Man Create God?”  was “One of the most integrative, innovative and revolutionary books I have read in decades.” 
       I covered his book and other studies extensively in The Spiritual Brain chapter (p390-394). One of the many research items he published involved studies showing that placing magnets (Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation) over the temporal lobes elicited feelings of spirituality and transcendence in many subjects. I also reviewed (p376-378) a report by Granqvist and colleagues from Sweden. They carried out a blinded study and stated they could not reproduce this finding. Dr. Persinger, in turn, faulted different aspects of their study.
        Dr. Persinger sent me the following note: “ Did you ever read the actual correspondence between this group and us? If you are interested my comments and the actual emails can be found on our website.  Access www.laurentian.ca (main page), then go to the yellow tool bar and access Academic Matters. This will take you to programs. Access Behavioural Neuroscience Program. Once there, click "news" and the entire history is there, including the email exchanges. We logged it at that time (2005) because we thought it might have historical significance and we thought anyone should be able to see the total correspondence.”
    I was not aware of this link and readers of this blog who are interested in this intriguing piece of neuroscience will find the above interesting reading. As I stated in the book (p378) this interchange represents what science is all about – a lively interaction between scientists with varying views.

        

We are running a bit late with the book's publication. However, the book will be officially out on May 5, 2008.

        

The blog is for updates and comments by the author and for readers who
would like to leave comments. If you have specific questions for the author
he will make every effort to make a timely reply.