Skip to main content

GOD IN THE LAB event

Centre For Inquiry London
and South Place Ethical Society present


GOD IN THE LAB


Organized by CFI London Provost: Stephen Law

Saturday, 21st March, 10.30am-4pm.

A day with leading scientific researchers into faith - looking at hearing voices, possession, the effect of faith on pain perception, etc. What goes on the brain of someone hearing voices? Come and see the fMRI scans. Is a disposition to religious belief hard-wired into us? Yes, says one of our speakers, and provides empirical evidence.


Venue: Conway Hall, 25 Red Lion Square
London WC1R 4RL

£10 (£5 for students)
BOOK NOW: send a cheque payable to "Centre for Inquiry London” to: Executive Director Suresh Lalvani, Centre for Inquiry London, at the above address (include names of all those coming). Alternatively pay by PAYPAL. Use the “Support CFI UK” link at www.cfilondon.org and follow the instructions.

11-12am. EMMA COHEN (UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD)

Do ghosts get itchy? Mind, body, and afterlife in cross-cultural perspective


Dr Emma Cohen is an anthropologist at the Institute of Cogntive and Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Oxford. She has researched and written on a range of widespread cultural phenomena, including spirit possession, witchcraft and sorcery, divination, mind-body dualism, afterlife beliefs, and Harry Potter. Her research addresses the question of why these phenomena are cross-culturally widespread, drawing from and developing our scientific understanding of how human minds work. In The Mind Possessed (OUP, 2007), Cohen develops a radical new approach to explaining the transmission of spirit possession ideas and practices, based on recent discoveries in the cognitive sciences and on long-term fieldwork with a group of Afro-Brazilian spirit mediums in Brazil. Her most recent work focuses on the regularities in the ways in which children and adults across different cultural contexts intuitively reason about the relationship between bodies and minds. This research further explores how the same sorts of intuitions that guide mind-body thinking also influence the form, appeal, and spread of a huge range of cultural phenomena, from Hollywood comedies about mind swaps to mind-over-matter magical displays to common ideas about illnesses and their treatments.

12-1pm. MIKE JACKSON

Mike Jackson will be presenting some interesting recent fMRI scan results on people hearing benign spiritual voices, and has a lot of relevant clinical case material and a general theory of these phenomena, and their relationship with psychopathology, which he’ll be sharing with us.

2-3pm JUSTIN BARRETT (UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD)

Born Believers: The Naturalness of Childhood Theism


“Recent best-selling books may give the impression that children only believe in gods because of a combination of possessing a tragically gullible mental tabula rasa and abusive indoctrination practices. Nonsense. Recent scientific study of children’s conceptual structures reveals that children’s minds are naturally receptive to god concepts... In this presentation, relevant scientific evidence is presented. Children are ‘born believers’ in the sense that under normal developmental conditions they almost inevitably entertain beliefs in gods.”

Justin Barrett is Senior Researcher, Acting Director, Centre for Anthropology & Mind and Lecturer, Institute of Cognitive & Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Oxford.

3-4pm MIGUEL FARIAS (UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD)

The Strength of Belief: Neuroimaging of religious-based analgesia


“Religious lore is full of stories of physical pain withstood and vanquished through the power of religious belief. However, until recently there was very little scientific evidence of religion helping in the alleviation of pain, and what could be the neural and psychological processes involved. In my talk, I will describe an experiment where we showed for the first time how religious belief may have an analgesic effect and help people deal better with pain.”

Miguel Farias is a researcher at the Ian Ramsey Centre and assistant director of the MSc in Psychological Research, at Oxford University. For his doctorate, he studied the psychological characteristics of people engaged in New Age spirituality. After that, he joined forces with neuroscientists and philosophers at the Oxford Centre for Science of the Mind to unravel what happens in the minds and brains of religious believers when they are subjected to pain.

Legal stuff: CFI reserves the right to change or cancel events without notice.

Comments

Unknown said…
Do year 13 students hoping to go to university next year count as students?

Do any of these authors have any relevant articles available (free) online?

Thanks :)
Stephen Law said…
I would say so, yes. £5 for them.

Not sure about online articles. I do know that this event has already interested New Scientist, however, who are planning to run a piece on two of the speakers shortly before the event (and will plug the event).

It's worth booking in advance as this is likely to generate interest....
Paul P. Mealing said…
Makes me wish I lived there.

As a New Scientist subscriber, I will look out for it.

Regards, Paul.
Paul said…
That's great Mike Jackson is talking - he's written some great stuff on spirituality, psychosis and values.

Just wish I lived in London :-(
Psiomniac said…
Any chance of a webcast or podcast?

Ok, I'm partial to long shots, what can I say?

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen

Aquinas on homosexuality

Thought I would try a bit of a draft out on the blog, for feedback. All comments gratefully received. No doubt I've got at least some details wrong re the Catholic Church's position... AQUINAS AND SEXUAL ETHICS Aquinas’s thinking remains hugely influential within the Catholic Church. In particular, his ideas concerning sexual ethics still heavily shape Church teaching. It is on these ideas that we focus here. In particular, I will look at Aquinas’s justification for morally condemning homosexual acts. When homosexuality is judged to be morally wrong, the justification offered is often that homosexuality is, in some sense, “unnatural”. Aquinas develops a sophisticated version of this sort of argument. The roots of the argument lie in thinking of Aristotle, whom Aquinas believes to be scientifically authoritative. Indeed, one of Aquinas’s over-arching aims was to show how Aristotle’s philosophical system is broadly compatible with Christian thought. I begin with a sketch of Arist

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se