New Stuff

Book Reviews (by Kim Gentes)

In the past, I would post only book reviews pertinent to worship, music in the local church, or general Christian leadership and discipleship. Recently, I've been studying many more general topics as well, such as history, economics and scientific thought, some of which end up as reviews here as well.

Entries in spiritual (2)

The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist's Case for the Existence of the Soul - Mario Beauregard & Denyse O'Leary (2007)

“The Spiritual Brain” by Mario Beauregard, Denyse O'Leary is subtitled “A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul”, but it represents as much a philosophical examination of modernity and materialism as it does a thoughtful examination of the brain and its abilities/limits explored by scientific methodological rigor.
 
Before the authors enter deeply into tests, hypothesis and results, they delve deeply into the conundrum of how the current scientific community predisposes itself to the modernist and materialist worldview, even (at times) in the face of scientific evidence that points elsewhere. The authors seek to expose some of these philosophical foundations to allow them to confront some of the underlying worldview issues.
 
But before going deep into reviewing “The Spiritual Brain” and its premise, let me examine the context of thought that is being dealt with here. How can we question and evaluate a framework (IE. modernity and materialism) that has served mankind for the last few hundred years with increasing absolution from critique? In this, post-modernity does us a service in opening the door for questioning long established assumptions. The most essential assumptions to be confronted are modernity and materialism (in the classic philosophical sense).

Modernity and materialism (both scientific and cultural) have played key roles in western thought for the last 300-400 years. The impact of these ideologies has been felt not only in secular life but the Christian community as well. The deep impact of modernity in the church, and even in its pastoral leadership, is echoed well by Thomas Oden, who says:

Modern chauvinism has assumed that all recent modes of knowing the truth are vastly superior to all older ways, a view that has recently presided over the precipitous deterioration of social structures and processes in the third quarter of the twentieth century. My frank goal has been to help free persons from feeling intimidated by modernity, which while it often seems awesome is rapidly losing its moral power, and to grasp the emerging vision of a postmodern classical Christianity.[1]

Oden’s statement scratches the surface of a festering boil within our faith community - we have lost our foundational trust in the classic wisdom of our tradition. We have replaced it with an underlying trust in society’s secular pillars of modernity and materialism, and those have influenced almost every pastoral and leadership discipline in Christianity. We have tried to nuance our statements and practices with faith language, but our underlying assumptions were still founded on the principles within modernity and materialist reductionism.

Challenges to the materialist worldview have not only come from pastoral and theological leaders such as Oden (above), but also from scientific experts themselves, such as Dr. Mario Beauregard. He and Denyse O’Leary are the authors of the recent book “The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul.” Hence, we get to our promised review of this book.

In this work, Beauregard appropriately confronts the philosophical constructs of materialism before getting to the scientific theories, experiments and studies. He does this to explain how the scientific findings are being interpreted through the materialist mindset, and bent to reinforce the same. The following extensive quote gives an example of one such point where Beauregard deconstructs the materialist arrogance that has been injected into the scientific work of neuroscience.

American culture critic Tom Wolfe put the matter succinctly in an elegant little essay he published in 1996, “Sorry, but Your Soul Just Died,” which expounds the “neuroscientific view of life.” He wrote about the new imaging techniques that enable neuroscientists to see what is happening in your brain when you experience a thought or an emotion. The outcome, according to Wolfe, is:

Since consciousness and thought are entirely physical products of your brain and nervous system—and since your brain arrived fully imprinted at birth—what makes you think you have free will? Where is it going to come from? What “ghost,” what “mind,” what “self,” what “soul,” what anything that will not be immediately grabbed by those scornful quotation marks, is going to bubble up your brain stem to give it to you? I have heard neuroscientists theorize that, given computers of sufficient power and sophistication, it would be possible to predict the course of any human being’s life moment by moment, including the fact that the poor devil was about to shake his head over the very idea.

Wolfe doubts that any sixteenth-century Calvinist believed so completely in predestination as these hot young scientists. The whole materialist creed that Wolfe outlines hangs off one little word, “Since”—“Since consciousness and thought are entirely physical products of your brain and nervous system…” In other words, neuroscientists have not discovered that there is no you in you; they start their work with that assumption. Anything they find is interpreted on the basis of that view. The science does not require that. Rather, it is an obligation that materialists impose on themselves. But what if scientific evidence points in a different direction? As we will see, it does. But before we get to the neuroscience, it may be worthwhile to look at some other reasons for thinking that the twentieth-century materialist consensus isn’t true. Neuroscience is, after all, a rather new discipline, and it would be best to first establish that there are also good reasons for doubting materialism that arise from older disciplines.[2]

We don’t have to be neuroscientists to understand the implications of the materialist reductionism being presented by Wolfe and his contemporaries. Beauregard works with careful tension between scientific and philosophical arguments to bring his thesis to the forefront - that we have built both our worldview and our scientific methodologies on a foundation that has begun to crack. We cannot move forward with true exploration (scientific or otherwise) without resetting those foundations in a system that incorporates the possibility of something non-materialist. Like the labels of modernity and post-modernity, Beauregard has no nomenclature for the new worldview, other than calling it the antithesis of its predecessor- “non-materialist”.

Without giving a essay length review of Beauregard’s excellent book, we can summarize his efforts to

 

  1. articulating the presumptions of materialist reductionism within scientific thought
  2. presenting an alternative non-materialist philosophical viewpoint
  3. detailing scientific studies and findings that support the non-materialist viewpoint
  4. presenting the specific details and summary findings proving the existence of the mind outside of the brain.

 


This work has some excellent power points made along the way. Each one confronting a remnant of materialist thinking that is answered with thoughtful nuance. One such example is this:

A teleologically oriented (i.e., purposeful rather than random) biological evolution has enabled humans to consciously and voluntarily shape the functioning of our brains. As a result of this powerful capacity, we are not biological robots totally governed by “selfish” genes and neurons.[3]

This is in direct response to scientific claims that genes force not only our structure and biology, but our actions and choices. Beauregard's response here is supported with much detail, but I wanted to highlight just such a conclusion that he comes to so you can understand the scope of the work he is attempting to do- to provide both a scientific and philosophical reset on the materialist/reductionist worldview which he says is wrongly assumed and embedded in the modern scientific community and work.

The book ultimately provides extensive study and data related to Beauregard’s thesis, along with summation of the reasons that he attributes the human soul with existence beyond the brain. But you cannot get to that conclusion without first travelling long (and sometimes hard) through the depths of his philosophical deconstruction and reconstruction.  That said, it is a worthwhile journey and I highly encourage you to make it if you are interested in the topics brought up here.

 

Amazon Book Link:  http://amzn.to/OCjQhg

 

Review by Kim Gentes

 



[1]Thomas C. Oden, “Care of Souls in the Classic Tradition” (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1984), Pg 24
[2]Mario Beauregard, Denyse O'Leary, “The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul”. (New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 2007), Pg 4
[3] Ibid., Pg 45

 

Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel (Theodore G. Tappert- translated & edited)

Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel  is a collection of Martin Luther’s pastoral letters sent to a variety of people, reflecting on as wide a variety of topics as life has to offer. What one notes most poignantly about the letters is their constant pastoral voice, intense compassion for grief-stricken people, and his wisdom and wit in any situation.

The book is arranged in categorized chapters based on the  main theme of the letter. A reader from the present day will be immediately affronted by the dim nature of the topics, which range from comfort, consolation, counsel and instruction for the sick, dying, bereaved, anxious, despondent, doubting, needy, troubled and more. This is not light reading. The weight of the pastoral office of the 16th century European church is pressed into the pages of these letters. This provides us not only with wise counsel for our current churches, but a harrowing picture of the people and time in which Martin Luther’s reforms were birthed.

I must admit, I approached this book initially ready for a barrage of theological treatise, each one restated in particular application for a life situation. I expected the theologian that demarcated the single biggest change in the history of the Christian church to be heady, angry and oozing with profundity. To my surprise, I came away realizing that Martin Luther was a man who cared first for the flock to which had entrusted him to care.  He wasn’t applying theology to an ugly, rude world, in which his meanderings meant nothing to the real people.  He was caring deeply, loving deeply, and hurting deeply with the literal scores of people around him which were broken, dying or in unfathomable pangs of grief.

Yes, he writes letters to princes and elites, administrators and bureaucrats. He tackles government, policies and the profound failures of a power rotted church structure. But at his core, he is a pastor, and these letters don’t let you stop seeing that, over and over again.  All around Luther, family, students, friends, children are all dying or becoming sick of a myriad of diseases from deadly tuberculosis to the dreaded black plague. There is not just sickness and death, there is a permeating sense of fear and a gnawing hopelessness that he seems to be trying to combat with each letter.

 
On of Luther’s prime methods of facing such daunting pain and weakened humanity is to speak boldly of the pain, sickness and death.

When, therefor, I learned most illustrious prince, that Your Lordship has been afflicted with a grave illness...I cannot pretend that I do not hear the voice of Christ crying out to me from Your Lordship’s body and flesh saying, “Behold,  I am sick.” This is so because such evils as illness and the like are not borne by us who are Christians but by Christ himself...1


Luther didn’t see ministry to people as doing something for the ill, poor or broken. He saw it as ministry to the Lord directly, and he used this as his foundation for a theology of suffering. In such a society filled with pain, Luther saw Christ’s suffering as the necessary fellowship to which we are engaged in while on earth.  But Luther brought with his stark vision of pain a transcendent enraptured vision of Christ, when he said, “God is immeasurably better than all his gifts.”Such a picture of God is not only beautiful, but necessary, when “his gifts” seemed to come few and far between for the beleaguered parishioners Luther was guiding.

The letters of Luther are not just wise rebukes to a dismal world. His fiery spirit and even humor rise to the top occasionally, giving us a glimpse of wisdom that is embedded in reality. He says of a friend whom he was counselling against being drawn into the falseness of spiritual pride:

Whenever the devil pesters you with these thoughts, at once seek out the company of men, drink more, joke and jest, or engage in some other form of merriment. Sometimes it is necessary to drink a little more, play, jest, and even commit some sin in defiance and contempt of the devil in order not to give him an opportunity to make us scrupulous about trifles. We shall be overcome if we worry too much about falling into some sin.3


As you can see, Martin Luther had an unquenchable belief in the power of the community. This so guided him, it is doubtless that one of the driving currents of his reformation doctrine.

The papists and Anabaptists teach that if you wish to know Christ, you must seek solitude, avoid association with men...This is manifestly diabolical advice...[rather] God wishes that His name be proclaimed and praised before men and spoken of among men rather than that one should flee into a corner... [and] teaches us to do good to our neighbors, and hence we must not be segregated from them. This advice [papists and Anabaptists] is also destructive to the family, economic life, and the state, and it is at odds with the life of Christ, who did not like to be alone and whose career was one of constant turmoil because people were always crowding around him. He was never alone, except when he prayed. Have nothing to do, therefor, with those who say, “Seek solitude and your heart will become pure.”4


Martin Luther had such a strong value of community and companionship that he prescribed it for almost every condition of the body and soul. He was constantly reminding husbands and wives to encourage one another, for people to not be alone when struggling with temptation, depression or illness. Above, he even recognizes that not only is it a teaching against Christ and his body to avoid the community, but it actually destroys families, harms economic viability of individuals and communities and even threatens the state stability. What a brilliant understanding of the power of community.

 

Product Link on Amazon: Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel

 

Review by
Kim Gentes

 


[1]Martin Luther, “Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel”, translated Theodore G. Tappert (Louisville, KY:Westminster John Knox Press, 1955), Pg 22

[2]Ibid., Pg 54

[3]Ibid., Pg 86

[4]Ibid., Pg 120