Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

New Questions for Neuroscientific Inquiry: Commentary on “Spirituality: The Legacy of Parapsychology”

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Archive for the Psychology of Religion

This paper inspires new questions, possibilities, and challenges for the scientific study of spirituality, and other experiential phenomena. First, the authors offer a refreshing conceptualization of spirituality, one that is similar to that proposed for, and supported by recent neuroscientific study of, religious experience. To what extent are spirituality and religious experience similar at the neural descriptive level? How might they be different? Second, the authors draw creatively upon Weak Quantum Theory to suggest a potentially useful and powerful theoretical model—generalized entanglement—to account for/describe spirituality, parapsychology, and possibly other experiential phenomena. This framework has potential not only to legitimize the study of such phenomena within 'mainstream science' (without compromising valuable holistic understandings), but also guide new scientific inquiry on spirituality and other experiential phenomena. To what extent, though, must 'scientific' paradigms and assumptions be re-imagined to pursue such studies? Ultimately, this paper raises challenging questions regarding the identity of 'science' today, the answers to which (or, at least, serious reflection upon) are needed to forward meaningful inquiry of spirituality (or any other topic). What is the 'job' (and, thus, interpretive limits) of 'science' today (e.g., explanation, description, proving 'reality-existence' of 'objects' of study)? Do all 'sciences' hold the same set of assumptions/have the same interpretive limits? To what extent is 'mainstream science' monolithic?

Affiliations: 1: Ridgeview Classical Schools, 1800 South Lemay, Fort Collins, CO 80525, USA;, Email: ninaazari1@comcast.net

10.1163/008467209X12499946199443
/content/journals/10.1163/008467209x12499946199443
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/008467209x12499946199443
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/008467209x12499946199443
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/008467209x12499946199443
2009-10-01
2016-12-09

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Archive for the Psychology of Religion — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation