Researchers Discover 'Anxiety Cells' In The Brain

Anxiety is a matter of quantity–less pain equals less anxiety-- .The brain is not concerned about whether the pain comes from a bee sting or some major accident; it simply deals with the pain in proportion to the pain’s intensity. But that’s nether here nor there. The main problem I have with this thread is its insistence that religion is evil–and the term is used in general so as to see all religions as remedial by pain- alleviating functions of brains, without giving credit to the good things religion has brought into the world. It’s like shoot the thief and you will help destroy the murderer as if there are only levels of corruption among religious beliefs, which are all bad. There is no real distinction given here between pain and existential angst.
As with the problem of phrenology in assigning brain topography to specific human traits, this thesis neglects the facts of neuroplasticity, which suggests that it takes multiple brain locations to cover a single trait. Consciousness has become the “hard” problem simply because it cannot be localized in the brain, The discovery of anxiety cells in the brain is the finding of a mechanism to deal all types of pain. It is not the finding of a possible antidote for religion.

I suggest you read “What Makes Us Think”.–Changeux, Ricoeur. Especially noteworthy are Ricoeur’s problems with reductionism, which appears to be the modus operandi of your sources. In my 30 yr. old love affair with neuroscience, I never thought I’d agree with Ricoeur; reductionism is so enticing-- but he makes a lot of sense, whereas many speculations connecting specific thoughts to brain chemistry do not.

Anxiety is a secondary emotions from the primary emotion of fear.
‘Emotion’ is from ‘emote’ i.e. to move. The main purpose of emotions are to activate the person to action for some purpose.
Anxiety cells are also linked to the pain circuit.
Thus if there is anxiety and the person do not move in response, then there is a manifestation of ‘pain’ [mental].
In the case of religion, it is the existential crisis that triggers existential related anxieties and religion is the most effective means to dissolve such anxieties. One can read of of this in the many confessions and testimonies of converts and the born-agains.

That religion [some] is evil is so evident.
There are so many cases of evil prone religionists [especially from Islam] quoting verses from the Quran [easily verified] and being inspired by their religion to commit terrible evils and violence.
I do not deny religions has contributed good to humanity.
But given the current trend, the cons of religions are outweighing its pros. Besides other than the psychological balm for existential angst whatever good from religion can be done by the secular.
As psychological balm to deal with existential angst, there is a great potential for humanity to find fool proof secular alternatives to deal with.

Phrenology is not worth mentioning at all especially in the current state of knowledge in the neurosciences.

My thesis is since there is a link between anxiety triggering religions [in one way], there is a possibility to deal with religion [given it has an evil baggage] when we can modulate the anxiety cells via its inhibitors.

The book is from 2000 .
Nevertheless I read a review
metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/po … 494&cn=394

Note there is no issue with reductionism re the sources I quoted.
What I have introduced is one of the fundamental basis of knowledge, correlation, cause and effect, and the need to go into more details.

It appeared Ricoeur is cautious with reductionism but is into phenomenology and hermeneutics which I agree with.
The point is we just cannot rely on Science alone but must compliment Science with all other relevant fields of knowledge, philosophy, wisdom, system theory, holistic thinking and the likes.
Personally I don’t see any problem with reductionism as long as we do not take a unrealistic hasty big jump to reduce everything to the absolute first cause, i.e. God.

The limitation of neuroscience AT PRESENT is this, whatever you have learned in 30 years you have to throw away 90% of what you have gathered in the last 28 years.

Sorry for the short response.

with love,
sanjay

It is realized as wrong even now by anyone with a smattering of reading in neuroscience. As an explanation of what brains do it makes a faulty connection between normal, mechanical biological functioning and folk fables concerning beliefs. It is as close to phrenology as one can get without discovering the God gene, the grandmother cell or the ghost within the machine. As an explanation of what makes us think, it relies heavily on outmoded forms of reductionism. It is unable to explain the sources and even the conditions of existential angst. As an explanation of society’s memes it presents caricatures of traditional faiths. As a philosophical exercise, it fails by continually fudging and tweaking of statements so as to explain what was originally intended.

Note the purpose of such a philosophy forum is to provide a platform for anyone to express their ideas with reasonable arguments for discussion.

I have already provided a reasonable argument;

1. Anxiety cells [existential related] drive humans to religions.

2. Religion assuages anxiety [existential related]

3. Religion causes atrocities (by SOME evil prone believers in Islam)

4. Anxiety cells discovered in the brain

5. Anxiety cells [existential related] are identified

6. Anxiety cells [existential related] identified are modulated.

7. Anxiety driving one to be religious (1) is reduced and/or eliminated - no more religious.

8. Religion waned and/or disappeared

9. Religious atrocities waned and/or disappear.

Note I have already provided references that linked religions with anxiety. (see earlier post). From this one go into more detailed research of this connection.

Obviously the existential angst is from the brain. This is a very complex subject which I have not discussed into the details.
What is critical at this point is, the existential angst manifest existential-related-anxieties [mainly subliminally] which is reflected significantly in the Abrahamic religions with the desperation of the theist quest for eternal life in heaven [soteriology]. The existential factor is also reflected significantly in other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and others.

Note my point;
“Given the current trend of the exponential expansion of knowledge [such as the above and others] and technology, I am optimistic my thesis can be realized .”
Note I did not claim, my thesis WILL DEFINITELY be realized.
You have discount my point re the exponential expansion of knowledge and technology, of which I gave one example re the Human Connectome Project.

Note even in the ancient days, the primitive people could modulate ‘pain’ with natural opioids, then with expansion of knowledge and technology we did it with chemical opioids. Subsequently with neuroscience we understand the workings of the neural pain circuits. The limitations of the above is because it is based on the black-box, input/output, trial & error and very general methods.
With the realized advanced knowledge from the Human Connectome Project we will be able to trace more precisely the specific neurons [individually and groups] that trigger the existential related anxieties that drives a person to be religious.
You tell me why the above is not possible?

Note, a “smattering of reading in neuroscience” is not sufficient to help you to counter the above point.

Why theists [like yourself and others] are so defensive to my views and thesis is because the possibility I have presented is sensed [subliminally] as a threat to their psychological security from angst despite the evident inherent evils [range] within religions.

This is your opinion. You have submitted no evidence which shows it to be true. You have no evidence that it’s applicable to the posters in this thread.

There is no good reason to be making such unfounded personal statements in a philosophy discussion.

Note I have provided reference that linked religions with anxieties re the existential threat.
The point is all theists exist along a continuum of theism in terms of their various sensitivity to the existential threat and other variables.

Note this and point 5;

The existential crisis generate terrible psychological trembling and terrors within at the subconscious level and effect the self subliminally -90% rather than consciously -10%.
Religions and theism provide the crutch [instantly] to soothe the terrible psychological trembling and terrors within the psyche.

This is why any sign [explicit or implicit, conscious or subliminal] will trigger a sense of threat [mentally painful] to the theists psychological security [at the primal level] and most will instantly react in various degrees depending on the psychological state of the theists; i.e.

1. A theistic group when perceived [generally a misperception] a threat to their security [psycho-religio] they will immediately counter attack and at the worst it is genocides where their religion give sanction to kill non-believers, e.g. as in the so-claimed “The Religion of Peace.”

2. Even the slightest as drawing the cartoons of their founder will trigger terrible evils an violence. This is so evident.

3. Even worst, non-believers are killed merely because their existence itself is perceived as a threat to the psychological security of the theists. Thus the coinage of the derogatory term ‘atheist’ in the 16th century.

4. The stake of the theistic psychological stake is so primal, strong and high that its needs will override all other faculties, e.g. intellect, reason, rationality, wisdom, compassion, etc. Note the case of Abraham instant willingness to kill his own son for God’s sake; since God is illusory, actually that is only for his own selfish psychological sake to stabilize his internal psychological security.

5. In more subtle cases where theists are not members of a religion, they will still lash out at those who critique theism as criticisms are perceived instinctively and subconsciously as a threat to their psychological security. This is so evident in forums, discussion and debates.

I would not agree the above is mere opinions.
It is a personal belief with conviction but I agree it is not ‘yet’ objective knowledge since I have not provided full evidences and other references to justify my points [yet].

Listening to music, exercise. enjoying art. There are many human activities that release dopamine in the brain thus assuaging doldrums. Why don’t you list these things as needing to be done away with by modulating the anxiety cells? If your entire thread was not based on loathing for religion, I might have found some credibility in it. Yet you continue to bounce between seeing religion in general and in particular; and always you see it as if it were a type of mental illness.
Apparently, it is more fun to join in the pseudoscientific hoopla over feel good chemistry than to take the complex brain activities involving homeostasis seriously. The fact that you read reviews of “What Makes Us Think”, is not impressive. It’s a short book, which you could probably read in a couple of hours.
It is not outdated, as you would suggest, but speaks to the foibles of oversimplification that characterize most reductionist views about brain chemistry and its use in the economy and ecology of mind/brain functions. Your reductionism here shows little understanding of cultural or societal memes.

Sure, you say that here but in most of your posts you treat theists as a homogeneous group. In fact, you do it in the subsequent paragraphs of your post.

That’s just another restatement of your thesis.

No, they won’t “immediately counterattack”. You choose to ignore all the times when they don’t counterattack … when “threats” are ignored, when disputes are amicably resolved, when confrontations are defused. That doesn’t make the news so it appears not to happen.

Most of those cartoons were intended to mock them, theirs beliefs and the people who they respect. So their negative reaction can be explained as being offended by mockery and ridicule rather than some kind of religious psychology.

Who was killed for his mere existence? You present no actual evidence that it happened and that psychological security was the cause.

The word “atheist” goes back to ancient Greece.

There is no evidence that the story of Abraham is anything more than a story. Why are you treating it as a fact? And how would you know the (real or fictional) psychology of Abraham?

Interestingly enough, religions often state that compassion, reason and rationality ought to overcome baser human instincts.

That’s your opinion. It appears that in this forum and in your threads in particular, you have been criticized for having weak arguments and for not responding adequately to the opposition arguments. I don’t see “lashing out” because of some threat to psychological security.

Well, at least you realize that much.

Note with new Scientific and other discoveries, the two main attention is
‘How to use it to promote good’ and
‘How to use it to prevent, eliminate evil acts’

Listening to music, exercise. enjoying art, etc. are generally good, so there is no need to put a negative view to it.

Note this is the ‘Religion and Spirituality’ section so I have to be on topic.

Technically, what drive theism and religion is a kind of mental illness, i.e. the existential crisis within. But because the majority are effected by it and the pros outweigh the cons, it is accepted as a norm since it emerged to the present.

One cannot ignore the terrible evils and violence that are directly associated with theism and religion. Theism-as-whole inherently and in part has very malignant elements which need to be dealt with. The consequences of these malignant elements are very evident.

I can’t find the book to download to get an idea, so at least I read a review.
Besides I can’t afford a couple of hours as I am on a project with lots of books to read.

You keep mentioning ‘reductionism’ but you did not address my arguments.

1. Anxiety cells [existential related] drive humans to religions.

2. Religion assuages anxiety [existential related]

3. Religion causes atrocities (by SOME evil prone believers in Islam)

4. Anxiety cells discovered in the brain

5. Anxiety cells [existential related] are identified

6. Anxiety cells [existential related] identified are modulated.

7. Anxiety driving one to be religious (1) is reduced and/or eliminated - no more religious.

8. Religion waned and/or disappeared

9. Religious atrocities waned and/or disappear.

Note at present neuroscientists are able to link certain parts [reductionism??] of the brain to certain behavior. Doctors has operated and excised some minor parts to cure epilepsy. This is very crude at present.
healthline.com/health/types … in-surgery

In the future when we can link the anxiety cells and others cells to the existential crisis we would be able to modulate religions and theism more precisely.

I am VERY conscious of gradation along a continuum within reality. That is why I always qualify with terms ‘various degrees’ ‘continuum’ ‘some’ most of the time where relevant. Who else does that? It is my default view but I can’t repeat that all the time whenever I posts.

It is human nature and instinctual to focus on the negative/threat and potential negative to humanity and the individual. This is why BAD-News sell, not Good-News.
This is why I focus in the evidences of evil acts, e.g.

Note this;

So they kill non-believers Primarily because they are mere disbelievers and others are secondary reasons. Note this critical point!

To maintain intellectual integrity, most of what I state here is always based on evidence and what I have read from somewhere. Point is it is very tedious to provide the reference. You will note I am the only one at present who is providing reference and links extensively in my posts. Who else is doing that?

So where is your evidence?
It’s etymology is stated in Wiki but note I mentioned when it was first coined,

“the actual term atheism emerged first in the 16th century.”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

So who is right? See I did not invent it.

I know it is a story but the Christians will think otherwise. Moreover what is critical here is the principle involved.
Note the above principles of psychology can be abstracted from real empirical behaviors and thinking of existing believers. Note the extremes of evils SOME believers are willing to do in the name of God.

Obviously there will always be opposition to any arguments but it is obviously there a loads of snarky responses from many [not you].

Though not qualified, this is a default in any discussion forum in the internet.
To be serious one should publish one’s ideas in research papers in credible societies to be challenged by peers.

The primary function of brains is to achieve homeostasis of brain/body functions.
So what is existential angst? Do atheists suffer from it? If so, why?
Is it just some free-floating, ephemeral dis—ease that affects all humans?
Or is it only indicated in the persons who believe in theism?

If you reread your posts, you will notice how often you make general statements about theists.

I would call this confirmation bias. You are specifically looking for these sorts of statements. They support your agenda.

You originally wrote :
“3. Even worst, non-believers are killed merely because their existence itself is perceived as a threat to the psychological security of the theists. Thus the coinage of the derogatory term ‘atheist’ in the 16th century.”

I don’t know why you added the second sentence about the term “atheist”. The word was already used in ancient Greece and Rome. So what was your point? It doesn’t enhance your claim that those people were killed because of a “threat to the psychological security of theists”. It was an irrelevant addition.

Well, 5% of the population is psychopathic and sociopathic. Therefore, you can expect “extreme” behavior from 1 out of 20 people - believers and non-believers.

We need to add, to facilitate survival and avoidance the threats of of premature death.

I have wrote many times,
the existential crisis generating existential angst is a fundamental potential in ALL humans DNA wise. It is very active [subliminally] within the majority of people. One of the resultant of the existential crisis is anxiety via the anxiety cells [as discovered per OP].

Theism [believing in a God in various forms] is the most effective balm to soothe, inhibit, suppress, deflect, redirect the existential angst which caused terrible psychological turmoil within the pysche.

While theism is an effective solution to soothe the existential angst, it is a double-edged blade, i.e. it facilitates SOME believers to commit VERY terrible evils and violence around the World in the name of their theistic religion.

It is not practical to qualify all the time, but I am trying my best to be specific as much as possible. So far I note I am the only one here who is attempting to qualify and be specific - in using ‘SOME’ ‘degrees’ various, etc. Who else?

If I do not bring supporting evidence, you complain. When I bring supporting evidence you also complain.

My point above is to support the fact that there is an evil ethos inherent in the core texts of the religion of Islam. It is a fact, what is the issue then?

Note when people feel threatened, they will introduce all sorts of derogatory and dehumanizing words directed at the threat [often misperceived], e.g. ‘atheists’ ‘satanic’ ‘apes’ ‘pigs’ so that their people will have a focused-negative attitude toward what is deemed as a threat. Note the current examples of ‘islamophobe’ ‘racists’ bigots, etc. directed as those who critique Islam.

So my point is the term ‘atheist’ was coined in the 16th century to direct a derogatory and negative attitude to non-theists as a threat [based on misperception] and out of unwarranted fears.

Note this was added and followed from the Bible’s,
Psalm 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”

Actually it is estimated within the psychology & psychiatric community, appx 1% are psychopathic, i.e. 70 million.

But note evil proneness come in degrees within a continuum, if psychopathy [malignant] is say 95% evilness then petty evils is say 10% evilness.

From the above one can infer appx 20% of Muslims are active to commit degrees of evilness up to 75% [serious evil] which will including killing, raping, oppression, violence, etc.
20% of of Muslims who are likely to commit serious evils is 300 million around the World.
Note even 1 Muslim, i.e. a lone wolf evil prone Muslim inspired by the inherent evil elements in the Quran can already caused tremendous amount to terrible evil acts and violence. Just imagine the potential from 300 million [~] evil prone Muslims.
This is why the evil and violent acts of Muslims around the World is so evident and that is a critical threat to humanity in the future.

You should reflect wisely on the following;
It is so evident evil prone Muslims [a significant SOME] as inspired by their religion are committing terrible evil and violent acts around the World, - why are you doing nothing about it. e.g. one statistics among the many others;

In addition why are you condemning me to stop me who critique the source of the evils and contributing views to find solutions to the evil and violence acts.

DSMV does not have a listing for theism or for some generalized existential angst.
There are theists who have done much good in the world. You would throw out the baby with the bath water.
Modulation of anxiety cells would require a superior knowledge of where in the brain toxic events actually are seen to occur and why they are taken to be recognized as toxic. Let’s hope future science will have no interest in disturbing normal homeostasis. The brain’s reaction is to pain, regardless of how the pain is characterized. There 's no universal pain called existential angst. The closest you can get to anything like that(universal DNA ordained)is the drive to adapt and to survive. It can be said that religion is an adaptation meme and that the adherents who kill and maim in the name of religion will be sloughed off the genetic evolutionary process as waste.

I’m talking to you. It’s irrelevant what other people are doing.

If you don’t provide evidence, then you are making an unsupported claim.
If you cherry-pick your sources, then you are making a biased claim.

If you are going to talk about theists in the general sense that you do, then your evidence has to apply to the vast majority of theists. Currently it does not.

This is one of your unsupported claims. You haven’t written anything that shows that the use of the word “atheist” in the 16th century was the result of a perceived threat or an unwarranted fear.

I wrote psychopath and sociopaths:

quora.com/What-percentage-o … sociopaths

No, let’s not just make up some numbers.

I’m critiquing your poor arguments, lack of evidence and what appears to be a clear bias.

If that’s a problem for you then maybe a philosophy forum is not the proper place for you.

DSMV cover serious mental illnesses.
Theism arise from a “mental problem” of low degrees which is not of immediate threat to the well being of the individual - thus not covered within the DSMV.
But since theism-as-a-whole generate terrible evil and violent consequences by SOME within a potential pool of >300 millions, it is significant and thus humanity need to investigate the problem to its proximate root causes, i.e. the existential angst.

This point refer to good done in the name of a God. I agree, but note I have stated at present there is a net-pros against the cons of theism, e.g. provide basic morality, charity, social works, etc. But the trend into the future is the cons of theism [especially from Islam] are outweighing the pros of theism.
These theists could also done good if they are not theists by exercising standard human values without driven by a deity [illusory and impossible].

That is why I mentioned the ongoing and progressing Human Connectome Project where human will obtain superior knowledge of the brain connectivity.
I agree with homeostasis per se, but what is normal homeostasis. Homeostasis is like a thermostat where a ‘standard’ need to be set. In the case of humans, there are many standards -some almost fixed and permanent while others can be variable.
Whatever the inborn standard [‘fixed’ or variable] we have to review the related consequences.
I believe we can modulate the anxiety cell without disturbing those ‘fixed’ standards.

Note when a person face the threat of potential premature death, there are definite mental pains to drive the person to avoid the threat to dissolve the pain.
At present the hope of talks with Kim of North Korea would have relieved the related existential pains of a lot of South Koreans and some around the world. Note we are dealing with only possibilities of the potential existential threat, what more if the threat of death is a lingering certainty.

Now what is more significant is this; it is a ‘fact’ all humans face the ‘threat’ of the certainty of mortality and the subconscious [not consciousness] is entangled in a dilemma and this triggered the existential angst.