According to Dr. Hammer, "The best interpretation 
is that the monoamines are affecting higher 
consciousness. By higher consciousness, I mean 
the way that we perceive the world around us 
and our connection to it."
"Affecting higher consciousness" is not the same 
thing as causing higher consciousness. One can, 
if one wishes, permit VMAT2 to have a modulating 
role without, in any way, supposing that it plays 
a central or causal role with respect to spirituality.
Eating too much, or sleeping too much, or being with 
people too much, or being too self-involved can all 
affect higher consciousness. This is why there is 
something called "suluk" (spiritual journeying) 
which encompasses, among other things, a discipline 
for trying to suppress the problematic modulating 
effects on higher consciousness which such activities 
have. However, trying to reduce this all down to 
the activities of the VMAT2 gene seems ultra-
reductionistic and with limited heuristic value as 
far as coming to understand the essential nature of 
spirituality is concerned.
According to Dr. Hammer, a second component of the 
'self-transcendence" index is suppose to involve a 
psychic element known as "transpersonal identification." 
This is said to refer to having a sense of unity with 
the rest of the universe.
Leaving aside, for the moment, the question of why 
one should refer to this sense of oneness with the 
universe as a psychic element - thereby confusing 
the occult with the mystical - let us assume that 
I have such a feeling. Or, let us suppose that I 
answer all the items on the 'self- transcendence' 
index which suggests that I have a sense of being 
one with the rest of the universe.
Let's ask a question about this. What is the reality 
of my sense of things?
By this, I am not asking whether, or not, we are at 
one with the rest of the universe because the basic 
truth is that there is only Divinity and, therefore, 
it is impossible to be other than one with the universe. 
Instead, the aforementioned question is about whether 
or not I have realized the spiritual station of oneness 
with the rest of the universe and, as a result, I am 
in a position to draw upon the knowledge, insights, 
wisdom, discipline, stations, and behaviors which 
are made possible by such a realization.
I am willing to wager that if one were to have a 
billion people undergo the self-transcendence index 
talked about by Dr. Hammer, then, at best, not more 
than a very few might actually be able to walk the 
walk and not just talk the talk. Furthermore, it 
strikes me that someone who was actually realized 
would not be much interested in taking such a test 
in the first place.
People tend to be very poor judges of where they 
are - in reality - spiritually speaking. This is 
one of the reasons why authentic guides are necessary 
since, among other reasons, as Hazrat 'Ali (may Allah 
be pleased with him) has indicated, the one who would 
step onto the mystical path without an authentic guide 
has Iblis for a guide - and, undoubtedly, Iblis counsels 
many people to interpret the results of an index like 
the self-transcendence to mean that when they feel or 
believe they are one with the universe, then, they 
should assume that they have actually realized this 
condition.
Dr. Hammer also speaks about a third sub-scale of 
the self-transcendence index which is known as 
“mysticism” or “spiritual acceptance”. According 
to Dr. Hammer, this sub-scale touches upon such 
things as one’s belief about whether, or not, 
everything can be explained by science, or whether 
one is open to the idea of phenomena such as ESP, 
or whether one feels that one’s life has been 
changed by mysticism.
Again, one might ask the question of what, if 
anything, such a sub-scale has to do with either 
spirituality or mysticism - as a reality and not 
just a belief system.
One doesn’t even have to touch upon the issue 
of mysticism in order to be able to agree that 
there are all kinds of things which science 
cannot explain. For instance, science can’t 
explain consciousness, or intelligence, or 
creativity. In fact, science can’t explain 
the very processes which are used by human 
beings to do science ... how do ideas come 
into being? From where do insights come? 
What is the source of logic? What makes 
talents such as art, music, writing, and 
invention possible? How is langauge 
possible?
Science is often very good with setting 
up linear systems of mathematical description 
which are capable of reflecting some of the 
facets of experience to an extent where certain 
kinds of limited problems can be solved. 
Unfortunately, most of the physical universe 
is non-linear in nature, not linear, and, as 
a result, much of science - despite all of 
its accomplishments - is, for the most part 
looking at reality from the outside, in a 
rather limited fashion.
Once one throws spirituality and mystical issues 
into the fray, things get really confusing and 
problematic ... Very quickly. Science can’t 
proceed unless one accepts its assumptions that 
spirituality is a physical phenomenon and that 
material instruments (whether physical or 
mathematical) can be devised which are capable 
of accurately probing the realm of spirituality.
If spirituality is not a physical phenomenon, 
then, what good is a discipline which demands 
that everything be reducible to physical 
phenomena before one proceeds. One cannot 
assume one’s conclusions, and if spirituality 
is a non-material set of phenomena, then, 
there is absolutely nothing which modern 
science, as presently conceived, has anything 
of value to say about such matters - and, of 
course, this explains why so many scientists 
are so insistent on either reducing spirituality 
down to material/physical phenomena, or 
dismissing all things spiritual as being 
unscientific.
This sort of dismissal of spirituality is 
supposed to have import. After all, if something 
is not scientific, then, it’s reality is not 
worth pursuing, and the ‘substantive’ nature of 
such phenomena does not belong in the realm of 
the important discourse of the sciences.
How self-serving of scientists - they discover a 
phenomenon which is entirely beyond their capacity 
to understand or even study with their methods and 
instruments, and, so, they relegate such phenomena 
to the dust bin of the trivial, uninteresting, 
unreal, and/or unimportant.
Or, they do a condescending two-step dance in which 
they say that although spirituality is not unimportant 
but just not scientific, and, therefore, not of much 
value when it comes to trying to understand fundamental 
things about real issues. Many scientists are like the 
drunk who was seen crawling around beneath a street 
lamp looking for his keys and when asked if that is 
where he lost them, he replies: “No, but this is the 
only place where there is light.”
Dr. Hammer indicates that scientists rounded up a 
bunch of people and had them take the self-transcendence 
measure. These researchers, then, scoured the genes of 
such individuals looking for differences, and they found 
that the gene VMAT2 was correlated with people who also 
scored high on the aforementioned self-transcendence 
index. The monoamines which are synthesized through the 
activation of this gene have, according to Dr. Hammer 
“a lot to do with emotional sensitivity.”
Now, apparently, spirituality is to be defined as 
being a function of “emotional sensitivity.”In fact, 
the neurotransmitters which are synthesized through 
the activation of the VMAT2 gene (and, remember, 
nothing has been said about what causes a VMAT2 gene 
to become synthesized in the first place, and, so, at, 
best, VMAT2 activation is a result of something else, 
and not a cause of anything in and of itself) are 
implicated in a lot of different functions - not 
just emotional sensitivity.
For example, dopamine is involved in the regulation 
of muscle movement. That is, in order for muscles 
to be used in a controlled fashion, there must be 
adequate supplies of dopamine available.
Tardive dyskinesia is an affliction which is 
caused by the way in which certain drugs - for 
example, chlorpromazine, a 1st-generation 
neuroleptic given to schizophrenics - depletes 
the supply of dopamine in the brain. So, while 
the depletion of dopamine does seem to help 
reduce certain symptoms of schizophrenia (such 
as auditory hallucinations), unfortunately, in 
the process it also may interfere with normal 
muscle functioning, and, consequently, in some 
patients who are given such dopamine-depleting 
drugs, they develop uncontrollable tics and 
tremors.
This is an irreversible process. Once the damage 
is done, its results remain even if the person 
discontinues taking the drug.
To oversimplify mysticism and spirituality as 
merely variations on a condition of emotional 
sensitivity - as Dr. Hammer does - is one problem 
- a huge one. To oversimplify neurochemistry and 
to say that monoamines only function as mood 
tabilizers - as Dr. Hammer does - is another big 
problem. To fail to say anything about whether the 
group of people who were rounded up for the 
self-transcendence/VMAT2 gene correlational study 
was a randomly selected group and, therefore, 
capable of, possibly, reflecting something about 
populations in general is a third problem. To 
fail to note - as Dr. Hammer failed to do in 
the article - that correlation is not necessarily 
an index of causation is a forth problem. And, 
to try to claim that the self-transcendence 
index is an accurate measure of spirituality 
or mysticism is a fifth problem - also very 
huge.
Toward the end of the interview with Dr. 
Hammer, the person conducting the interview 
asks why the doctor does not wish to use the 
VMAT2/self-transcendence study as a basis for 
saying anything about the existence of God. 
Dr. Hammer replies that he feels that such 
research is really agnostic with respect to 
the question of whether spirituality is all 
in the mind or due to the presence of some 
higher power. He goes on to point out that 
the research concerning the so-called God 
gene is really only about the way in which 
the mind operates and, as a result, perceives 
things.
I remember when I was going through an oral 
defense of my honors thesis when I was 
undergraduate. One of my examiners was Robert 
Rosenthall known for, among other things, the 
Pygmalion Effect phenomenon (roughly, and 
over-simplistically, the expectations of 
teachers concerning students influences both 
student performance as well as the evaluation 
of such performance) who, at one point, in 
response to something I said in conjunction 
with the issue of proving God’s existence, 
said words to the effect of: “To prove the 
existence of God, all one has to do is take 
a group of people and ask them whether they 
believe in God.” I replied that this didn’t 
prove the existence of God, it only 
proved what people believed about the 
idea of the existence of God.
Similarly, the whole idea of the ‘God-gene’ 
really has not much to do with anything. At 
best, it reflects the beliefs of some researchers, 
such as Dr. Hammer, about their interpretation 
of that research concerning the correlation of 
the VMAT2 gene and how people score on a 
self-transcendence scale.
The short version of their understanding 
is this: there is a gene (VMAT2) which, when 
called upon to do so by some other dimension 
of the human being, synthesizes monoamines that, 
under some circumstances, have been implicated in 
affecting mood, and, possibly, emotional reactivity. 
In addition, there are certain people who score 
highly on one, or more, of the sub-scales of a 
self-transcendence index and that, statistically, 
these two pieces of data (the presence of VMAT2 
and scores on the test) have been shown to be 
correlated (and no indication was given in the 
interview of just what the strength of this 
correlation was, so we have no way of knowing 
where that correlation fits in between 0 and +1) 
with people who also have the VMAT2 gene.
It is only the worst kind of loose use of 
language, scientific methodology, and extrapolation 
which results in calling VMAT2, the ‘God gene’. 
The gene really has not been shown to have anything 
to do with spirituality, mysticism, transcendence, 
or anything similar unless one accepts the 
assumptions underlying the self-transcendence scale 
as being accurately reflective of what spirituality, 
mysticism, and transcendence involve - and that scale 
is just not a good, reliable, reflective instrument 
in any of these respects.
What is the meaning of the correlation between 
the presence of the VMAT2 gene and spirituality/ 
mysticism/transcendence? The truth of the matter 
is we don’t know.
Bad science leads to problematic conclusions, 
and that is precisely where Dr. Hammer has brought 
us with his talk of a ‘God-gene’. Furthermore, 
contrary to his contention that all his research 
shows is the way the mind perceives things, the 
fact of the matter is, he really hasn’t even 
demonstrated this.
He has shown, possibly, that there may be some 
connection between the synthesizing activity of 
VMAT2 and some of the beliefs, ideas, and emotions 
which are entangled in the self-transcendence 
scale. Given that VMAT2 is responsible for the 
production of neurotransmitters which have the 
potential to modulate mood and lend (when directed 
to do so by an unknown prior element within the 
etiological picture) a certain kind of color to 
emotional experiences, really, this is not saying 
very much except that, now, Dr. Hammer, if he wishes, 
can add the interview in Belief.net, as well as the 
publication of his book on the God gene to his CV 
and enjoy whatever perks may ensue from this - but 
what he says in either instance seems to have limited 
relevance to issues of spirituality, mysticism, 
transcendence, or realizations thereof.
Anab Whitehouse
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment