Where did you get that information? Where did you get that information?
Neuroscience
In 2006, the brains of a group of individuals were scanned while they were speaking in tongues. Activity in the language centers of the brain decreased, while activity in the emotional centers of the brain increased. Activity in the area of control decreased, which corresponds with the reported experience of loss of control. There were no changes in any language areas, suggesting that glossolalia is not associated with usual language function.[10][11][12] Other brain wave studies have also found that brain activity alters in glossolalia.[13]
The scans also showed a dip in the activity of a region called the left caudate. “The findings from the frontal lobes are very clear, and make sense, but the caudate is usually active when you have positive affect, pleasure, positive emotions,” said Dr. James A. Coan, a psychologist at the University of Virginia. “So it’s not so clear what that finding says” about speaking in tongues.
The caudate area is also involved in motor and emotional control, Dr. Newberg said, so it may be that practitioners, while mindful of their circumstances, nonetheless cede some control over their bodies and emotions.
In 2006, the brains of a group of individuals were scanned while they were speaking in tongues. Activity in the language centers of the brain decreased, while activity in the emotional centers of the brain increased. Activity in the area of control decreased, which corresponds with the reported experience of loss of control. There were no changes in any language areas, suggesting that glossolalia is not associated with usual language function.[10][11][12] Other brain wave studies have also found that brain activity alters in glossolalia.[13]
The scans also showed a dip in the activity of a region called the left caudate. “The findings from the frontal lobes are very clear, and make sense, but the caudate is usually active when you have positive affect, pleasure, positive emotions,” said Dr. James A. Coan, a psychologist at the University of Virginia. “So it’s not so clear what that finding says” about speaking in tongues.
The caudate area is also involved in motor and emotional control, Dr. Newberg said, so it may be that practitioners, while mindful of their circumstances, nonetheless cede some control over their bodies and emotions.
I'm not going to cite the following because I think most posters consider this common knowledge.
Wierwille said that God, being spirit, can only talk to what He is, spirit. This was supposed to explain why "unbelievers" can't hear from God. (They don't have a spiritual connection, no spirit in them.) But, how does that fit with "The Great Principle"? You know, the principle that states that God, being spirit, teaches our spirit, which teaches our minds. If spirit can only speak to spirit, how does our spirit teach our minds? Also, Wierwille said that when you speak in tongues and interpret, the mind is not involved, it's inspiration ("in-spirit action") So, then, how does one explain away studies that clearly show the mind really is involved, even if it is in a passive, subjugation type sense?
In 2006, the brains of a group of individuals were scanned while they were speaking in tongues. Activity in the language centers of the brain decreased, while activity in the emotional centers of the brain increased. Activity in the area of control decreased, which corresponds with the reported experience of loss of control. There were no changes in any language areas, suggesting that glossolalia is not associated with usual language function.[10][11][12] Other brain wave studies have also found that brain activity alters in glossolalia.[13]
The scans also showed a dip in the activity of a region called the left caudate. “The findings from the frontal lobes are very clear, and make sense, but the caudate is usually active when you have positive affect, pleasure, positive emotions,” said Dr. James A. Coan, a psychologist at the University of Virginia. “So it’s not so clear what that finding says” about speaking in tongues.
The caudate area is also involved in motor and emotional control, Dr. Newberg said, so it may be that practitioners, while mindful of their circumstances, nonetheless cede some control over their bodies and emotions.
Thanks Waysider for this information. I've had a chance to read it.
In an earlier post your claim was "Speaking in tongues has been proven to decrease your level of resistance to suggestibility. (Reduces your ability to think on a critical level). I asked you to give me the information from which you based this statement.
First of all, the control group cited in this study consisted of 5 people...only 5. 5 is a very very low number for drawing significant scientific conclusions. Furthermore, if you check the NY Times article you included, one of the women in the control group was a co-writer of the research paper.
The NY Times Article you cited says, "A recent study of nearly 1,000 evangelical Christians in England found that those who engaged in the practice were more emotionally stable than those who did not.". That's 1,000 people who were said to be more emotionally stable. I don't know if I believe that either. My point is, there seems to be no evidence to suggest that mental acuity and stability are adversely affected by speaking in tongues. You may want there to be a difference, but there is no evidence for such an opinion.
Even the study you cited and quoted reads, "...it's not so clear what this finding says" about speaking in tongues'.
I know people who speak in tongues. Two of them have their Master's degrees in education, another is an attorney who was on the faculty of a nationally known law school, another is a medical doctor who graduated third in his class from an Ivy League medical school. I'm not saying that speaking in tongues helped them do these things, but they are obviously intelligent people.
I respect your opinion as to the authenticity of the practice of speaking in tongues. But there is no credible evidence to suggest that those who do so are unable to think critically, or that their resistance to suggestability is lower. Even the studies you cited don't suggest that.
A group of researchers at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine used Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) to analyze brain activity within individuals as they spoke in tongues. It was the first study of this kind. During this technique, a small quantity of a radioactive drug is injected into a person's vein. The scanner then makes detailed images of tissues as cells take up the drug.
During an interview on 2006-SEP-20 by Steve Paulson, Andrew Newberg -- Associate Professor of Radiology, Psychiatry, and Religious Studies and Director for the Center for Spirituality and the Mind, at the University of Pennsylvania -- said that the region of the brain involved in language is not activated when a person speaks in tongues. He said:
"Speaking in tongues is a very unusual kind of vocalization. It sounds like the person is speaking a language, but it’s not comprehensible. And when people have done linguistic analyses of speaking in tongues, it does not correspond to any clear linguistic structure. So it seems to be distinct from language itself. That’s interesting because we did not see activity in the language areas of the brain. Of course, if somebody is a deep believer in speaking in tongues, the source of the vocalizations is very clear. It’s coming from outside the person. It’s coming through the spirit of God. 11
They found decreased activity in the brain's frontal lobes, an area associated with self-control. One of the researchers, Andrew Newberg, said: "It’s fascinating because these subjects truly believe that the spirit of God is moving through them and controlling them to speak." The data partly confirms the subjects' beliefs. In fact, the subjects are not in control of their usual language centers as they spoke in tongues.
Newberg, who is Principal Investigator in the study, was later interviewed about his team's article in the journal Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging. He stated:
"We noticed a number of changes that occurred functionally in the brain. Our finding of decreased activity in the frontal lobes during the practice of speaking in tongues is fascinating because these subjects truly believe that the spirit of God is moving through them and controlling them to speak. Our brain imaging research shows us that these subjects are not in control of the usual language centers during this activity, which is consistent with their description of a lack of intentional control while speaking in tongues."
Newberg went on to explain,
"These findings could be interpreted as the subject's sense of self being taken over by something else. We, scientifically, assume it's being taken over by another part of the brain, but we couldn't see, in this imaging study, where this took place. We believe this is the first scientific imaging study evaluating changes in cerebral activity -- looking at what actually happens to the brain -- when someone is speaking in tongues. This study also showed a number of other changes in the brain, including those areas involved in emotions and establishing our sense of self."
The study also compared the brain activity in the same subjects as they sang gospel music. Newbert said: "We noticed a number of changes" including in brain regions tied to emotions and the sense of self. 12,13
This is a SPECT scan of a person speaking in tongues:
bullet Activity in the thalamus region (bottom arrow) is increased.
bullet Activity in the left basal ganglia (top arrow) is decreased; this region is involved with focusing attention and emotional responses.
Image courtesy of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.
The functions of the frontal lobe include reasoning, planning, organizing thoughts, behavior, sexual urges, emotions, problem-solving, judging, and organizing parts of speech and motor skills (movement).
The frontal lobe is responsible for our ability to think critically. If you remove the ability to think critically, you introduce suggestibility. Speaking in tongues temporarily reduces activity in the frontal lobe and thus renders the subject less able to think critically and be more open to suggestion.
This area of "suggestion" is where the lift list enters the picture.
Supppose Wierwille is at the top of your lift list. You picture him in the most positive light you can muster and speak in tongues. Your critical thinking defenses are down because you have temporarily altered the functions of the frontal lobe.. Your mind accepts that Wierwille is the wonderful person you've been picturing. There is a reduced level of critical thinking taking place to act as a system of checks and balances. Your mind accepts the suggestion you have presented to it.
Thanks Waysider for this information. I've had a chance to read it.
In an earlier post your claim was "Speaking in tongues has been proven to decrease your level of resistance to suggestibility. (Reduces your ability to think on a critical level). I asked you to give me the information from which you based this statement.
First of all, the control group cited in this study consisted of 5 people...only 5. 5 is a very very low number for drawing significant scientific conclusions. Furthermore, if you check the NY Times article you included, one of the women in the control group was a co-writer of the research paper.
The NY Times Article you cited says, "A recent study of nearly 1,000 evangelical Christians in England found that those who engaged in the practice were more emotionally stable than those who did not.". That's 1,000 people who were said to be more emotionally stable. I don't know if I believe that either. My point is, there seems to be no evidence to suggest that mental acuity and stability are adversely affected by speaking in tongues. You may want there to be a difference, but there is no evidence for such an opinion.
Even the study you cited and quoted reads, "...it's not so clear what this finding says" about speaking in tongues'.
I know people who speak in tongues. Two of them have their Master's degrees in education, another is an attorney who was on the faculty of a nationally known law school, another is a medical doctor who graduated third in his class from an Ivy League medical school. I'm not saying that speaking in tongues helped them do these things, but they are obviously intelligent people.
I respect your opinion as to the authenticity of the practice of speaking in tongues. But there is no credible evidence to suggest that those who do so are unable to think critically, or that their resistance to suggestability is lower. Even the studies you cited don't suggest that.
Thanks, erkjohn, for digging a little deeper. I had to come out of lurkdom to agree with you on this one.
I also want to comment on Waysider's statement that "Speaking in tongues has been proven to decrease your level of resistance to suggestibility. (Reduces your ability to think on a critical level)."
The Wikipedia article you quoted only cites 3 references under the "Neuroscience" subhead. One reference, as erkjohn has already pointed out, is to the study that involved only 5 subjects who, by the way, claimed that they SIT'd involuntarily, that they had no control over it. As erkjohn also has pointed out, a study with only 5 subjects hardly constitutes scientific "proof," regardless of whether it reached the conclusion you say it did.
The second reference is to a poster presented at a meeting by some radiologists who evaluated only 3 subjects, which offers even less evidence than the study in the first reference. The third reference is to a NY Times article basically rehashing the 5-subject study and expanding on it.
I'm defintely not seeing any "proof" here. I'm not interested in arguing the validity of SIT. I have my opinion and Waysider clearly has his. But what Waysider claims is "proven" clearly has not been proven.
Getting back to the original subject of this thread, I have to say that those long, twi-leadership-heavy "lift lists" were tedious as he|| and stifled people's sponteneity and heartfelt prayer. Trying to legislate people's private prayer lives is just one more example of how twi leadership tried to stuff people into their mold. But it has no bearing on whether I SIT or not. I did it long before, during, and after twi--and today certanly not with an 8-page list of someone else's idea of who and what I should pray for.
I don't think we have to throw out everything that was associated with twi. Sometimes at meals at HQ we ate strawberry shortcake. I enjoyed eating it before I was in twi, during my time in twi, and I still enjoy it today. I'm not going to stop eating strawberry shortcake or try to prove how bad it was just because it was served to me while on twi HQ staff.
For the record: I've never said anyone should not speak in tongues or pray.
No, not in those words. You said that doing so lowers one's resistance to suggestability. That is, reduces one's ability to think on a critical level. That at least sounds like advice to not speak in tonges. I'm going to join you on the other thread.
In an earlier post your claim was "Speaking in tongues has been proven to decrease your level of resistance to suggestibility. (Reduces your ability to think on a critical level). I asked you to give me the information from which you based this statement.
I agree with you, erkjohn. I think there is far more substantial evidence that activities like being involved with TWI reduce your ability to think on a critical level.
I agree with you, erkjohn. I think there is far more substantial evidence that activities like being involved with TWI reduce your ability to think on a critical level.
Recommended Posts
100% Free
Cute!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Where did you get that information? Where did you get that information?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Neuroscience
In 2006, the brains of a group of individuals were scanned while they were speaking in tongues. Activity in the language centers of the brain decreased, while activity in the emotional centers of the brain increased. Activity in the area of control decreased, which corresponds with the reported experience of loss of control. There were no changes in any language areas, suggesting that glossolalia is not associated with usual language function.[10][11][12] Other brain wave studies have also found that brain activity alters in glossolalia.[13]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossolalia
http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~tim/introframe/tongues.pdf
....................................
The scans also showed a dip in the activity of a region called the left caudate. “The findings from the frontal lobes are very clear, and make sense, but the caudate is usually active when you have positive affect, pleasure, positive emotions,” said Dr. James A. Coan, a psychologist at the University of Virginia. “So it’s not so clear what that finding says” about speaking in tongues.
The caudate area is also involved in motor and emotional control, Dr. Newberg said, so it may be that practitioners, while mindful of their circumstances, nonetheless cede some control over their bodies and emotions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/health/07brain.html
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Thank you. I will give this a look see.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I'm not going to cite the following because I think most posters consider this common knowledge.
Wierwille said that God, being spirit, can only talk to what He is, spirit. This was supposed to explain why "unbelievers" can't hear from God. (They don't have a spiritual connection, no spirit in them.) But, how does that fit with "The Great Principle"? You know, the principle that states that God, being spirit, teaches our spirit, which teaches our minds. If spirit can only speak to spirit, how does our spirit teach our minds? Also, Wierwille said that when you speak in tongues and interpret, the mind is not involved, it's inspiration ("in-spirit action") So, then, how does one explain away studies that clearly show the mind really is involved, even if it is in a passive, subjugation type sense?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
You just have to see it in the original!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
If you drink enough Drambuie, then the alchohol cloud obscures the brain activity while SIT?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
[
Edited by erkjohnLink to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Thanks Waysider for this information. I've had a chance to read it.
In an earlier post your claim was "Speaking in tongues has been proven to decrease your level of resistance to suggestibility. (Reduces your ability to think on a critical level). I asked you to give me the information from which you based this statement.
First of all, the control group cited in this study consisted of 5 people...only 5. 5 is a very very low number for drawing significant scientific conclusions. Furthermore, if you check the NY Times article you included, one of the women in the control group was a co-writer of the research paper.
The NY Times Article you cited says, "A recent study of nearly 1,000 evangelical Christians in England found that those who engaged in the practice were more emotionally stable than those who did not.". That's 1,000 people who were said to be more emotionally stable. I don't know if I believe that either. My point is, there seems to be no evidence to suggest that mental acuity and stability are adversely affected by speaking in tongues. You may want there to be a difference, but there is no evidence for such an opinion.
Even the study you cited and quoted reads, "...it's not so clear what this finding says" about speaking in tongues'.
I know people who speak in tongues. Two of them have their Master's degrees in education, another is an attorney who was on the faculty of a nationally known law school, another is a medical doctor who graduated third in his class from an Ivy League medical school. I'm not saying that speaking in tongues helped them do these things, but they are obviously intelligent people.
I respect your opinion as to the authenticity of the practice of speaking in tongues. But there is no credible evidence to suggest that those who do so are unable to think critically, or that their resistance to suggestability is lower. Even the studies you cited don't suggest that.
Edited by erkjohnLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Brain scans of people speaking in tongues:
A group of researchers at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine used Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) to analyze brain activity within individuals as they spoke in tongues. It was the first study of this kind. During this technique, a small quantity of a radioactive drug is injected into a person's vein. The scanner then makes detailed images of tissues as cells take up the drug.
During an interview on 2006-SEP-20 by Steve Paulson, Andrew Newberg -- Associate Professor of Radiology, Psychiatry, and Religious Studies and Director for the Center for Spirituality and the Mind, at the University of Pennsylvania -- said that the region of the brain involved in language is not activated when a person speaks in tongues. He said:
"Speaking in tongues is a very unusual kind of vocalization. It sounds like the person is speaking a language, but it’s not comprehensible. And when people have done linguistic analyses of speaking in tongues, it does not correspond to any clear linguistic structure. So it seems to be distinct from language itself. That’s interesting because we did not see activity in the language areas of the brain. Of course, if somebody is a deep believer in speaking in tongues, the source of the vocalizations is very clear. It’s coming from outside the person. It’s coming through the spirit of God. 11
They found decreased activity in the brain's frontal lobes, an area associated with self-control. One of the researchers, Andrew Newberg, said: "It’s fascinating because these subjects truly believe that the spirit of God is moving through them and controlling them to speak." The data partly confirms the subjects' beliefs. In fact, the subjects are not in control of their usual language centers as they spoke in tongues.
Newberg, who is Principal Investigator in the study, was later interviewed about his team's article in the journal Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging. He stated:
"We noticed a number of changes that occurred functionally in the brain. Our finding of decreased activity in the frontal lobes during the practice of speaking in tongues is fascinating because these subjects truly believe that the spirit of God is moving through them and controlling them to speak. Our brain imaging research shows us that these subjects are not in control of the usual language centers during this activity, which is consistent with their description of a lack of intentional control while speaking in tongues."
Newberg went on to explain,
"These findings could be interpreted as the subject's sense of self being taken over by something else. We, scientifically, assume it's being taken over by another part of the brain, but we couldn't see, in this imaging study, where this took place. We believe this is the first scientific imaging study evaluating changes in cerebral activity -- looking at what actually happens to the brain -- when someone is speaking in tongues. This study also showed a number of other changes in the brain, including those areas involved in emotions and establishing our sense of self."
The study also compared the brain activity in the same subjects as they sang gospel music. Newbert said: "We noticed a number of changes" including in brain regions tied to emotions and the sense of self. 12,13
This is a SPECT scan of a person speaking in tongues:
bullet Activity in the thalamus region (bottom arrow) is increased.
bullet Activity in the left basal ganglia (top arrow) is decreased; this region is involved with focusing attention and emotional responses.
Image courtesy of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/tongues5.htm
(Bold font added)
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
The functions of the frontal lobe include reasoning, planning, organizing thoughts, behavior, sexual urges, emotions, problem-solving, judging, and organizing parts of speech and motor skills (movement).
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/lobes-of-the-brain-and-their-function.html
My summation:
The frontal lobe is responsible for our ability to think critically. If you remove the ability to think critically, you introduce suggestibility. Speaking in tongues temporarily reduces activity in the frontal lobe and thus renders the subject less able to think critically and be more open to suggestion.
This area of "suggestion" is where the lift list enters the picture.
Supppose Wierwille is at the top of your lift list. You picture him in the most positive light you can muster and speak in tongues. Your critical thinking defenses are down because you have temporarily altered the functions of the frontal lobe.. Your mind accepts that Wierwille is the wonderful person you've been picturing. There is a reduced level of critical thinking taking place to act as a system of checks and balances. Your mind accepts the suggestion you have presented to it.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Thanks, erkjohn, for digging a little deeper. I had to come out of lurkdom to agree with you on this one.
I also want to comment on Waysider's statement that "Speaking in tongues has been proven to decrease your level of resistance to suggestibility. (Reduces your ability to think on a critical level)."
The Wikipedia article you quoted only cites 3 references under the "Neuroscience" subhead. One reference, as erkjohn has already pointed out, is to the study that involved only 5 subjects who, by the way, claimed that they SIT'd involuntarily, that they had no control over it. As erkjohn also has pointed out, a study with only 5 subjects hardly constitutes scientific "proof," regardless of whether it reached the conclusion you say it did.
The second reference is to a poster presented at a meeting by some radiologists who evaluated only 3 subjects, which offers even less evidence than the study in the first reference. The third reference is to a NY Times article basically rehashing the 5-subject study and expanding on it.
I'm defintely not seeing any "proof" here. I'm not interested in arguing the validity of SIT. I have my opinion and Waysider clearly has his. But what Waysider claims is "proven" clearly has not been proven.
Getting back to the original subject of this thread, I have to say that those long, twi-leadership-heavy "lift lists" were tedious as he|| and stifled people's sponteneity and heartfelt prayer. Trying to legislate people's private prayer lives is just one more example of how twi leadership tried to stuff people into their mold. But it has no bearing on whether I SIT or not. I did it long before, during, and after twi--and today certanly not with an 8-page list of someone else's idea of who and what I should pray for.
I don't think we have to throw out everything that was associated with twi. Sometimes at meals at HQ we ate strawberry shortcake. I enjoyed eating it before I was in twi, during my time in twi, and I still enjoy it today. I'm not going to stop eating strawberry shortcake or try to prove how bad it was just because it was served to me while on twi HQ staff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Response is on the Speaking in Tongues Post-TWI thread
For the record: I've never said anyone should not speak in tongues or pray.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
No, not in those words. You said that doing so lowers one's resistance to suggestability. That is, reduces one's ability to think on a critical level. That at least sounds like advice to not speak in tonges. I'm going to join you on the other thread.
Edited by erkjohnLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I never mentioned intelligence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
I know, I apologize. You said "critical thinking". I edited my post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
No apology needed.
Sometimes I don't state things as clearly as I think I have.
Did I just say "sometimes"??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I agree with you, erkjohn. I think there is far more substantial evidence that activities like being involved with TWI reduce your ability to think on a critical level.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Ageed!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.