Biological and cognitive underpinnings of religious fundamentalism Zhong https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5500821/
A neural network for religious fundamentalism derived from patients with brain lesions https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2322399121
The neural underpinning of religious beliefs: Evidence from brain lesions https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9583670/
DrierCycle•58m ago
elmerfud•52m ago
If you have decades of peer-reviewed research then you might have something but that is not what you have here. Just because something's published doesn't make it correct.
Even just reading the abstract of this paper shows it is highly suspect. Because they went looking for something and then they found it. This is a well-known cognitive bias. What they should have been looking for is ways to disprove it not ways to find some correlation.
DrierCycle•38m ago
Mike Meager is a preeminent neurologist at Grossman/NYU, Jay Van Bavel is high-level academia. They didn't go looking for something to fit it into an argument, they used hard science to test the results.
The previous flagged posts are not "medical problems" it's hard science at Northwestern's brain lab, one of the premiere labs in the country.
This is fundamental, peer-reviewed research about how ideologies are developed. How fundamentalism and extremism as biases against flexible thinking are becoming epidemic now. The research is empirical, and it's built first in a theoretical approach (theory is evidence mapped in deeper hypothesis) and then developed through empirical results.
These are both decades of peer-reviewed approaches culminating in these papers, read the citations, check the academics, they are the highest caliber.
elmerfud•23m ago
You only need to look through lots of medical research that has shown all kinds of things that have been routinely debunked. Many of which were done by prominent people in their day. This is simply an excuse to find a medical reason for ideologies you disagree with. That always ends badly for everyone.
DrierCycle•18m ago
I'd get a degree in science instead of pretending to understand neuroscientific testing.