There is a long tradition of scientists and philosophers fooling themselves that social traits may be altered by scientific evidence, Darwin's efforts to combat slavery with evolutionary theory (see "Darwin the abolitionist, Prospect February 2009) being a case in point. In a recent article, "Science is just one gene away from defeating religion," neurobiologist Colin Blakemore supplied another example. "When we understand how our brains generate religious ideas, and what the Darwinian adaptive value of such brain processes is, what will be left for religion?" he asked, to which the obvious answer is "about 5bn believers."
Yet, stripped of its pugnacious missionary rhetoric, the study of religious belief's neurological foundations could cast useful light on how the brain makes judgements and decisions. A team at the US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (perhaps the name alone makes the point) claims to have located the brain networks responsible for key psychological components of religious belief: God's perceived level of involvement, God's emotions (angry or loving, say) and religious "knowledge" as derived from doctrine and experience.
Subjects of varying religiosity were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with statements that probed these issues—for example, "God is removed from the world," "God is wrathful," and "Religion provides moral guiding"—while undergoing magnetic resonance imaging to reveal which parts of the brain were used in deciding on a response. The results showed that everyone tended to use the same brain regions for each question.
The point is that these networks are already known to serve other cognitive functions. Statements concerned with God's love, for example, activated a part of the middle frontal gyrus known to be involved in positive emotions and suppression of sadness. In general, statements about God's perceived emotions engaged regions linked to the "theory of mind"—the brain's ability to perceive intent and emotion in others. This has a clear adaptive benefit, since it's valuable to know that not everyone thinks as you think. In other words, the mind regards God much as it does anyone else. So not only is there nothing sui generis about the mental processing of religious belief, but it's possible to see how such belief can arise as an extension of the way we process human interactions. There is, however, nothing here to prevent religious believers from responding that we regard God as we regard others because He, like them, exists.
Unravelling some EU red tape
Like most caricatures, the image of the EU as a hapless morass of red tape contains a grain of truth. A report on the sixth framework programme (FP6), the EU's funding system for scientific research from 2002-06, has issued some damning criticisms. FP6 supplied member states with €17.5bn—just 4-5 per cent of their total spending on science and technology research, but nonetheless a substantial pot intended to turn European science into competitive technologies. The seventh framework programme, which ends in 2013, has €53.2bn at its disposal.
But the report—which was requested by the European commission itself—says that the system of allocating and providing the money in FP6 was inefficient and opaque, and that the bureaucracy may deter industries, especially small businesses, from applying. It charges the administration of FP6 with "complexity and lack of timeliness," setting high barriers to applicants and being slow to deliver funds once awarded. This process, it says, needs "radical overhaul, not incremental tinkering."
One of the complaints is that the system is too controlling and interventionist, insisting on detailed auditing as a project progresses rather than trusting the researchers to get on with the job. Even the FP7's European Research Council, which is meant to "support and encourage creative scientists to be adventurous and take risks in their research," is hindered by financial constraints and obligations, and the report recommends that it be made autonomous. All this will hopefully feed into the shaping of the eighth framework programme, due to begin next year.
The search for earth-like planets
Nasa's space telescope Kepler was launched perfectly from Cape Canaveral on 6th March. Ten years in the making, Kepler will scan the heavens for Earth-like planets, spotting them from the tiny dimming of starlight (typically by just 0.01 per cent) as they pass in front of their parent stars. Since the first "extra-solar" planet was detected in 1995, there have been over 300 such sightings. But most are huge, comparable to Jupiter, since these induce a bigger wobble on the star they orbit—the most common way of detecting them. Kepler can spot small rocky planets like ours, which are more likely to be habitable. It will scan about 100,000 stars in our region of the Milky Way galaxy.
The telescope's findings will enable astronomers to figure out how close to the star any such planets are. That determines whether they might have liquid water, which on Earth is an essential ingredient for life. At the very least, we'll learn something about how uniquely placed our world is.
