HEADINGBOOK REVIEWS SUBHEAD

connection of experience to the phys- DEBUNKING ENLIGHTENMENT ical brain, and indeed a good part of his book is spent describing “mystical technologies” that seek to alter expe- Thomas W. Clark rience by modifying the neural states responsible for consciousness, either by traditional noninvasive routes such Rational : Dispatches from the Border Between Science and as meditation and chant, or by drugs Spirituality, by John Horgan. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2003, and newfangled electronic devices. His ISBN 0-618--06027-8) 292 pp. Cloth $25.00. staunch commitment to physicalism (or his bias, if you aren’t a materialist) is epitomized by the title of his chapter on Zen adept James Austin: “Zen and he spiritual quest, as much as it seen God or his secular equivalent. He James Austin’s Brain.” seeks to achieve unity with an sometimes seems the personification of T ultimate reality that transcends Daniel Dennett’s “universal acid,” let the person, is still a personal endeavor, loose on the often dodgy constructions colored by the psychology of the seek- of those who hope to find salvation in er. The longing to discover the key to altered states of consciousness.1 “...Horgan tests existence and to reside in God, or some What makes Horgan’s “inquest” (as the skeptical null- atheistic version of the Absolute, is driv- he puts it) into mysticism so compel- en by the problem of life: our capacity for ling is that, despite his skepticism, he hypothesis, which suffering and the desire for its cessation, nevertheless finds himself driven by the our insatiable drive for knowledge and same powerful desire for transcendence states that claims to meaning, and our awareness of mortali- that animates his targets. The book is enlightenment are, ty. To achieve mystical communion—the partially an intensely personal memoir direct understanding of the Real—is to of the struggle between rationality and at bottom, empty of solve this problem, at least temporarily; science on the one hand, and the thirst empirical content, it’s to quiet the restless striving of the for spiritual salvation on the other, limited, egotistic self by experiencing its played out in his modern, articulate even though they connection to the infinite. Historically, sensibility. Those who share Horgan’s speak to fundamental Buddhists have been the most candid in skepticism will enjoy his skewering of recognizing the practical motivational dubious knowledge claims, but some human needs for basis for the spiritual quest, which is will find themselves moved by his own, meaning and simply to end the human suffering root- sometimes anguished, search for mean- ed in fear and craving. ing and consolation. Since the mystical consolation.” The difficulty for hard-boiled rational quest is inevitably personal, Horgan empiricists, such as science writer John does justice to his topic by forthrightly Horgan, who are unimpressed by tradi- conceding his own stake in this project, tional religious solutions to the problem and by his example we learn a great In researching the neural correlates of life, is that mystical experience might deal about the rewards and perils of of mystical experience, Horgan pays simply reflect human wish-fulfillment, seeking enlightenment. an extended visit to Canadian scien- not the true outlines of Existence. In At the heart of Horgan’s skepticism tist Michael Persinger, who studies the Rational Mysticism, Horgan tests the (which almost, but not quite, wins out effects of trans-cranial electromagnet- skeptical null-hypothesis, which states in the end) is a simple but devastating ic stimulation on consciousness, and that claims to enlightenment are, at epistemological question: how do mys- Horgan interviews several proponents bottom, empty of empirical content, tics know they’re right? How can we be of “entheogenic” drugs, including even though they speak to fundamental sure that the deep, revelatory, some- Swiss psychiatrist Franz Vollenwieder, human needs for meaning and consola- times shattering experience of mystical de scribed as “arguably the world’s tion. In this wonderfully engaging narra- union refers (and refers accurately) to leader in psychedelic research involv- tive of encounters with modern mystics anything in the world outside the person ing humans.” He subjects himself to and seekers of all stripes, Horgan is undergoing it? Part of the pull of mys- Persinger’s “God-machine,” but with the scientific knight errant who stands ticism is the noetic intuition that during such anticlimactic results that he ready, indeed, eager, to deflate the such experiences we are in touch with wonders, as magnetic pulses play futile- claims of those who have supposedly some deep truth about the universe, but ly on his cortex, “How will I turn this Thomas W. Clark is a freelance phi- how are we to validate this intuition? into a scene for my book?” In contrast, losopher and director of the Center Hallucinations, after all, are routinely as vividly described in his penultimate for . mistaken for reality. chapter, he samples a South American Horgan is well aware of the intimate hallucinogenic mixture known as aya-

53 http://www.secularhumanism.org Feb. / March 2004 REVIEWS

huasca and is pretty much flattened by by an inquisitor both smart and vulner- need not fear the prospect of inhabiting the experience. But powerful though it able? Horgan discovers that for himself eternal darkness.3 is, Horgan’s interpretation is deflation- the only reliable consolation to be had A rational mysticism consistent with ary: “In retrospect, all my ayahuasca in the face of the Infinite is in human science wouldn’t demand, impossibly, visions seemed more like products of companionship. Unity with the One, that the organism relinquish its self, nor my own brain than transpersonal rev- it turns out, is too impersonal and too would it suppose that consciousness is elations.” This same interpretation, of lonely, ultimately, to be psychologically pitted against the void. It would seek out course, can be applied to any variety sustaining, even if we judge it authentic. mystical experience—the temporary of mystical consciousness, however it’s The One, Horgan half-seriously surmis- suspension of adaptive selfhood—while produced, that purports to represent es, must have split into the Many just to acknowledging that such experience reality the way it “really” is. All such keep Itself company. isn’t a direct cognitive apprehension states are, materialists believe, a func- Such speculations about the “mo- of reality. Rather, the mystical state tion of the brain, so why should we tives” of ultimate reality reinforce the is understood to be a function of an suppose that it’s just these states, as poignant fact that, in confronting the intentionally altered brain, and as such opposed to more mundane brain pro- immensity of extrahuman creation, we can be welcomed as a reinvigorating, cesses subserving ordinary cognition necessarily read into that encounter noncognitive experiential affirmation and perception, that get reality right? our deepest personal fears and hopes. of what scientific theories show to be They might be earth-shattering, ego-dis- Mystical experience, Horgan says, pres- unquestionably the case: our essential solving, and imbued with deep certitude, ents two existentially opposite possibili- and complete naturalistic connection but in retrospect, why should we sup- ties, one in which the self is transcended to the universe. The organism, its self, pose they are veridical? in blissful unification, the other in which its consciousness—the works—all arise Horgan not only engages his subject we are threatened with dissolution by out of the physical world, so the mysti- at the direct experiential level, but does the uncaring, impersonal abyss that sur- cal intuition of unity, albeit noncogni- an excellent job of surveying the intel- rounds our fragile human consciousness. tive, reflects this empirical truth about lectual, cultural landscape of contempo- The first possibility promises to solve ourselves. rary mysticism and its rationales. The the problem of life: to end (literally) Such an approach to spirituality book is laid out as a first-person tour self-induced suffering by losing the self would also drop the disdainful dismiss- of the experts in the field, and it’s great and putting its problems permanently in al of the physical as “mere” matter fun to sit on his shoulder as he does abeyance. The second, of course, is the typical of many of those Horgan inter- battle, courteously for the most part, prospect of death as it’s often conceived: views, who think the categorically spir- with the system-builders and philoso- the end of the self and its world followed itual exists on a higher, more exalted phers of spirituality such as Ken Wilber by the onset of nothingness. The first is plane. Such dualism, after all, creates and Huston Smith. Horgan is self-ad- what we most want, the second what we the problem of traditional spirituality mittedly cantankerous, predisposed to most fear—the complementary halves of in the first place: since what’s most see the guru as manipulator and char- the human condition. real and good is nonmaterial Mind, we latan, always looking for weaknesses in But neither is a real possibility. must somehow (but how?) transcend arguments and assumptions and always Current theories in the of the corruptible flesh and join the other- ready to second-guess the experts and mind suggest that, although the phe- worldly Spirit. Once it is seen that con- even himself as he digs into the philo- nomenal sense of self is a construct of a sciousness, selfhood, and our aesthetic, sophical complexities and the psycho- complex, neurally instantiated repre- moral, and cognitive capacities are all logical pitfalls of the mystical quest. sentational architecture, it’s functionally potentially explicable within a physical- But despite his indefatigable fault-find- essential for the organism. Conscious- ist framework, and thus consistent with ing, he comes away with considerable ness nearly always gets stuck with a being entirely material creatures, then respect for many of those interviewed. “me,” since, as philosopher Thomas matter becomes not so “mere” after all. In particular, he admires British philoso- Metzinger among others has pointed out, Its organization, for instance in the form pher Susan Blackmore, whose relentless a robust sense of self is the organism’s we take, is the marvelous (although not skepticism fits well with Horgan’s tem- way of being successfully egotistic.2 The literally miraculous) source of all that perament. Indeed, Blackmore’s scien- self’s temporary deconstruction in mys- we most value, and indeed of valuing tific critique of the paranormal in books tical experience is possible and perhaps itself. That Horgan doubts that con- such as In Search of the Light (Pro- even desirable, but we are always des- sciousness will ever be understood sci- metheus Books, 1996), is a model for tined to reappear, our projects and prob- entifically (see his The Undiscovered Horgan’s thorough debunking of enlight- lems still to be dealt with. Equally, the Mind, Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1999) enment in this volume. end of the organism and its conscious- might help explain the fact that he never Following the author through his many ness is not, as Horgan sometimes seems quite reconciles the apparently conflict- encounters, both inter- and intra-person- to think, to be faced with nothingness; ing demands of science and spirituality. al, the reader will have enjoyably learned it is not the ego’s plunge into the black Another potential roadblock to such a great deal about the theory and prac- abyss. As Epicurus put it long ago, “when reconciliation, made explicit in the very tice of mysticism. But what, finally, is to I am, death is not, when death is, I am last section of the book (“Free Will and be concluded from this tour, conducted not.” So as much as we fear death, we Other Consolations”), is that Horgan

free http://www.secularhumanism.org 54 REVIEWS

thinks we must believe we have free to be efficacious or to be truly ours.4 in the way that a fully naturalistic will. Although his conception of free Indeed, any sort of causal disconnection understanding of ourselves might per- will isn’t clearly articulated, one pop- of such capacities from antecedent or mit.5 Never theless, Horgan has given ular version is the notion that human surrounding circumstances would mere- us an insightful, gripping, and, yes, beings, alone of the known denizens ly introduce an element of randomness, enlightening account of the spiritual of the universe, have the capacity to lessening both their utility and their quest, one that I highly recommend, choose their character and their actions proper ascription as our capacities that even for (and especially for) the without being fully caused to choose. eventuate in our choices. Such freedom, most skeptical among us. Such contra-causal, supernatural free- clearly, presents no metaphysical obsta- dom, many suppose, is what gives us cle to realizing, both cognitively or expe- Notes dignity, makes us morally responsible, rientially via mystical states, that we are and allows us to be rational knowers fully included in the natural order. 1. Daniel Dennett, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea (New York: Simon of reality. If this is Horgan’s notion of In his last paragraph, Horgan says & Schuster, 1995), p. 63. free will, then of course there’s no way that he “can’t be sure that free will 2. Thomas Metzinger, Being to square such freedom with science, exists,” which leads me to suspect that, No One: The Self-Model Theory of since science presents no evidence for ultimately, he harbors contra-causal Subjectivity (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2003), p. 339. such a capacity, nor could it. And the intuitions about free will. After all, there 3. Thomas Clark, “Death, self, thus defined, becomes an exception is no doubt we are free in the second, Nothingness, and Subjectivity.” The to nature and so ultimately cannot be causality-compatible sense. Were he to Humanist 54, no. 4 (1994). 4. See, for instance, Daniel joined to the rest of existence, whatever divest himself of any lingering suspicion Dennett’s Freedom Evolves (New spiritual technologies and systems we that we are causal exceptions to nature, York: Viking, 2003), chapter 4, “A bring to bear. then the consolation he seeks in free Hearing for Libertarianism” and On the other hand, if the free will will wouldn’t come at the cost of a meta- my “Science and Freedom,” FREE Horgan wants is simply, as he puts it physical dualism that categorically sep- INQUIRY, Spring 2002. 5. On the affinity between natu- at one point, to have “more choices to arates the self from its circumstances. ralism and spirituality, see Ursula consider and select from,” such freedom Since Horgan’s admirable skepti- Goodenough’s The Sacred Depths is clearly consistent with being crea- cism and commitment to science seem of Nature (Oxford University tures entirely caught up in the natural to fail him at the very end (he says “I Press, 1998) and my “Spirituality without Faith” in The Humanist causal matrix. Our capacities for cog- have no choice but to choose free will”), 62, no. 1 (2002). nition, rationality, and morally respon- the true connection between science sible choice don’t have to be uncaused and spir it uality is not, finally, clinched

fertile period—as editor of The Smart THE PASSION ACCORDING Set, (1914–1923) and The American Mercury (until 1933). Most of the essays TO HENRY fall squarely within a twelve-year frame: the Coolidge and Hoover years. In 1925, Mencken reached fever pitch in a series of editorialized dispatches (the former Thomas Larson effacing the latter) while covering the Scopes trial. A quarter of this collection H.L. Mencken On Religion, edited by S.T. Joshi (Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2002, concerns that trial, with Mencken flaying ISBN 1-57392--982-4) 330 pp. Cloth $29. small-minded Dayton, Tennessee, and the “Fundamentalist Pope,” William he pith and purity of his preju- he targeted. When it came to religion, Jennings Bryan. dices, the grit and grace of his Mencken’s view of Christian Science Joshi’s introduction is superb, and language, the dazzle and buck was not much different from his view of, T his skill as an organizer is top-notch. But of his outrage: Does it really matter say, evangelicalism. “Sewers of super- to traverse the territory of Mencken’s what H. L. Mencken attacked? Politics, stition,” he called them all, practice and opinions one will endure much scenery literature, culture? We read him now practitioner. For Mencken, those who and much repetition. As the book works as we have always read him, to see think the divine intercedes in or rules through its nine headings, among them how and how hard he hit whatever human affairs were boobs whose “sin” is not belief but the piety with which “Religion and Science” and “The Beliefs Thomas Larson is a contributing their belief is lacquered. of an Iconoclast,” its progress is static, writer for the San Diego Reader, S. T. Joshi’s anthology, H. L. Mencken like a Baroque opera—too much recita- where he specializes in feature jour- on Religion, brings together seventy like- tive and too few arias. This is not a crit- nalism and investigative reporting. biled excoriations from Mencken’s most icism of Joshi. Rather, it says that, over

55 http://www.secularhumanism.org Feb. / March 2004