Book Review the God Gene

Journal of Psychology and Clinical Psychiatry

Book Review The God Gene

Book Review of Perspective

The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired into Our Gene, by Dean Special Issue - 2015 Hammer, (2004) Doubleday, New York, USA, pp. 241. Dr. Samuel A Nigro M.D* Retired, Assistant Clinical Professor Psychiatry, Case Western be welcomeGeorge Orwell’s compared book to 1984 what has we allhave the now people from doing Hollywood, a daily fivethe Reserve University School of Medicine, USA minute hate program to exercise their hatefulness. Such would *Corresponding author: Dr. Samuel A Nigro M.D, Retired, but The God Gene is dishonest in that the book describes an in- Assistant Clinical Professor Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve major networks and books like this. Perhaps I protest too much, University School of Medicine, 2517 Guilford Road, Cleveland the author calls “spirituality” admitting overtly that such is nei- Heights, Ohio 44118, USA, Tel: 216 932-0575; Email: therstinctual “God” genetic nor “religion. basis for “ meditation Some feeble and association reflection of states this type which of “spirituality” with churchgoers is described but there is nothing Received: August 19, 2015 | Published: October 06, 2015 public relations advertisement promotional ploy -- basically dishonest.firm about it. Thus the use of the word “God” is a transparent reason, without revelation, without consciousness squared (C2), without inspirational stories to create imagination, and without The author does not accept “God” but instead “spirituality” metaphysical engagement. He has no Apostle’s Creed and is basi- meaning “meditation” as a genetic instinct associated with the cally theophobic, intellectually dishonest, believing that a moan- ing phoneme circus is “spirituality.” Hammer seems to offer a gen- described self-transcendent scale of spirituality from a Roman otype of self-delusional meaningless dreaming which is basically Catholicdiscovery researcher of a specific named individual Cloninger. gene Not identified to give details with vaguely of this self-transcendent scale on which he relies so heavily is frustrating. that the brain processes religion. I had to do a crash literature search and believe it is safe in say- nature worship...It fits! On the positive side, Hammer confirms ing that this self-transcendent scale has very little to do with the That he still harps about the Church’s treatment of Galileo re- divine transcendentals (matter, identity, truth, oneness, good and veals him to be unhistorical also. Galileo never proved that the beauty). The self-transcendent scale has to do with the dereistic ocean tides mean heliocentricity (and Galileo’s manic, grandiose, - blabbing about such was fundamentally antisocial in those days, deserving all the condemnation he received). Hammer’s belief in feel-good self-hypnosis which the so-called scientist unscientifi evolution reveals his own genetic spirituality leaves much to be Furthermore, Hammer gets into the “meme” business -- iden- cally alludes to be an identification with God. desired (Read my article, “Why Evolutionary Theories are Unbe- lievable”) [3]. from one individual to another through writing, speech, ritual and imitation”tified as “self-replicating (Pg. 13). Philosophically, units of culture, the “meme” ideas that is nothingare passed more on - wood, so is God. He even uses the word serendipity (Pg. 175) in a positiveHammer way seems which, to while believe common, that if theis totally crucifix inappropriate is made out for of than a “construct” artificially labeled “scientific” so that it is palat isable that to memesnon-believers and genes and sound unphilosophical alike. How (unscientific, clever. And thisactually) from the world (Coined by Horace Walple, “serendipity” referred to the scientists?donuts who have neither beginning, end nor middle. The artifice Threelearned Princes men because of Serendip “serendipity” in an old is collection the longest of standingfolk tales joke called in Essentially, Hammer claims to identify genotypes which are stooges” and the biggest quacks you would never want to run associated with “spiritual” activities as meditation. That the brain into.the Peregrinaggio. The classical story The misinterprets three serendips “serendipity” were the first as being “three a - - cal relevance because revelation needs Scripture which requires es discovered and determined a mule to be one-eyed because it awould brain have an area for such could(consciousness be confirmation squared of theologi C2) [1]. reflecting on reflection ate“happy the worstfinding grass by chance.” on one sideThe ofparadigm the road is rather that the than three the betterprinc The ability to focus more deeply in ecstatic, self hypnotic, self grass on the other side of the road. But, of course, if the grass was emergence could be the neuropsychological accompaniment of eaten, how do you know it wasn’t better to begin with? Years ago “religion” as well as “spirituality. “ Indeed, Latin (as the highest I actually ran an ad in a Cleveland newspaper: “Wanted: one- - horse and it always picked the best bowl of grain to eat wherever istangelic linked hierarchy’) to genes for[2] dereistic requires meditation a definite (“spirituality”)understanding wouldwhich iteyed was mule placed.) for harmless Hammer research.” and anyone All else I could who find uses was “serendipity” a one-eyed seemgoes beyond important the superficial(although perhaps also. That it brainmay he areas more are important found to ex to in a positive way does not know what he is talking about, like an atheist talking about God. - lahsfind wouldthe genes be very for bizarreproductive). beliefs, lying, and just plain obstinant Finally, Hammer’s failure to reference Teilhard de Chardin and malevolence -- no doubt studies of journalists, scientists and mul The book is worshipless, without decent intellection, without Stanley Jaki reveal him to be a dilettante rather than an expert in this area of the scientific basis for God.

References 2. Nigro SA (2001) Angels as Words. Pro Eccelesia, p.14. 1. Nigro SA (2002) The Attainment of Psychological Freedom. 3. Nigro SA (2004) Why Evolutionary Theories are Unbelievable. Social Justice Review. pp. 176-179. The Linacre Quarterly, 71(1): 58-65.

Citation: Nigro SA (2015) Book Review The God Gene. J Psychol Clin Psychiatry 3(6): 00159. DOI:

10.15406/jpcpy.2015.03.00159