Interestingly, the researchers noted that the brain regions identified in this study are part of a broader network connected to cognitive functions like reasoning, belief formation, and moral decision-making. These areas are also associated with conditions like pathological confabulation—a disorder where individuals create false memories or beliefs without the intent to deceive. Confabulation is often linked to cognitive rigidity and difficulty in revising beliefs, characteristics that are also found in individuals with high levels of religious fundamentalism.
The researchers also found a spatial overlap between brain lesions associated with criminal behavior and this fundamentalism network, which aligns with previous research suggesting that extreme religious beliefs may be linked to hostility and aggression toward outgroups.
Is that Republicanism in a nutshell, or what?
Finally, proof that religion is (socially accepted) mental illness?
We’ve know that religious fundamentalist is a mental illness for e very long time already. Being religious in and of itself isn’t the problem. It’s when you insist everyone else has to do what you want.
I believe the key difference is humility vs arrogance. The humble approach to religion is to acknowledge that religion is purely hope and that no one knows what happens when we die because there is zero evidence of a soul, or God, or heaven. But the arrogant approach to religion claims to have exclusive knowledge without any proof. They turn religion into an abusive cult where they speak for God and everyone else must get in line without questioning (needing evidence.)
I mean, that’s exactly what this paper is about. One is mental illness, while the other isn’t.
The first group consisted of 106 male Vietnam War veterans who had sustained traumatic brain injuries during combat. These men, aged between 53 and 75 at the time of brain imaging, were part of a long-term study conducted at the National Institutes of Health. The second group included 84 patients from rural Iowa who had experienced brain injuries from various causes, such as strokes, surgical resections, or traumatic head injuries. This second group was more diverse in terms of gender and had a broader range of injury causes.
Are those sample sizes big enough?
I’ve had this hair brain theory for a long time, extreem heat and cold damages the brain in some way.
Look at all the parts of the world that are really messed up they’re places with extreme temperatures.
I know correlation and causation don’t mean the same thing but still.
