Belief and oxytocin

[LukeS]

The fact that the arabic word for belief ("yuminuna") stems from a root which means to feel safe or secure, and the English word for belief stems from a root which means to hold dear, love, like and desire...

...and the fact that trust and love are both related to the neurotransmitter oxytocin...

...gets me speculating that belief is related to that same (or similar) neurotransmitter.

What do you think?

Anyone speak other languages and know the root of the word "belief" there too?

[figuer]

Spanish: Creo; From Latin: Credo; from Cor-do = I give my heart

But in Latin faith would habe been; 'opinor', from which derives; 'opinion'.

Online Etymology Dictionary;

Old English creda “article or statement of Christian belief,” from Latin credo “I believe,” perhaps from Proto-Indo-European *kerd-dhe- “to believe,” lit. “heart to put” (cf. Old Irish cretim, Irish creidim, Welsh credu, Sanskrit crad-dadhami).

[LukeS]

The word "faith" comes from Latin fides "trust, belief," from root of fidere "to trust."

Opinion stems from the PIE "op-" to choose.

[figuer]

But in Latin faith would habe been; 'opinor',

That was a mistake: It should have read; But in Latin believe would have been 'opinor',

[LukeS]

End to the hypothesis, or link to empathy?

Harris [1] has shown that belief is related to activity in the ventral medial prefrontal cortex (VMPC), a location in the brain best known for processing reward, emotion and taste.

However this brain area does not seem to belong to the Central Oxytocin System (of rats at least). [2]

The difference between the rats and primate frontal lobe seems to be that rats lack "dorsolateral prefrontal areas" [3], so hope for the hypothesis lay there.

The only evidence I could find was from this (http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowPDF&ArtikelNr=89747&ProduktNr=227088&filename=89747.pdf) document (search for "dorsolateral prefrontal/oxytocin" and you will find that it is a brain area or system related to other's affect and empathy.)

Anyway IF the "trusting" of belief is related to empathy this could be a root cause of the idea that God, or a personal force, is responsible for the facts (as things believed in), and if so then perhaps the etymological idea that belief is a form of love relates to the suggestion that "God is love". Either way, it would back up the suggestion that theism results from application of the social brain to the natural world. Oh, and the idea that belief in spoken things is related to empathy is not soooooo strange: here I am thinking that it is possible that the origin of language might lie in the elaboration alarm calls and their opposite (which could communicate emotional states).

But is there even, before you drug me, a connection between the belief and empathy 'areas'? Here it gets more confusing still. I will leave you with this (http://www.mult-sclerosis.org/news/May2002/SeeingTheBrainBetterThanEver.html) quote: "The prefrontal cortex plays a key role in higher cognitive function and distinguishes humans from other mammals. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex controls working memory while the ventral medial prefrontal cortex is associated with motivation and awareness of rewards that result from behaviors. There is a poor understanding of how cognitive and motivational systems are linked such that actions are planned and executed in a logical way."





1. "Regardless of their content, statements that the subjects believed lit up the ventral medial prefrontal cortex (VMPC), a location in the brain best known for processing reward, emotion and taste. Equally "primitive" areas associated with taste, pain perception and disgust determined disbelief. "False propositions may actually disgust us," Harris writes."

source:http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1694723,00.html

2. "OT fibers and endings have been described in various brain areas in the rat: the dorsomedial hypothalamic nucleus, several thalamic nuclei, the dorsal and ventral hippocampus, subiculum, entorhinal cortex, medial and lateral septal nuclei, amygdala, olfactory bulbs, mesencephalic central gray nucleus, substantia nigra, locus coeruleus, raphe nucleus, the nucleus of the solitary tract, and the dorsal motor nucleus of the vagus nerve. OT fibers also run toward the pineal gland and the cerebellum, with most of them continuing toward the spinal cord."

source: http://physrev.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/81/2/629#SEC5

3. If prefrontal cortex is construed broadly enough to include orbital and cingulate cortex, rats can be said to have prefrontal cortex. However, they evidently lack homologues of the dorsolateral prefrontal areas of primates. This assessment suggests that rats probably do not provide useful models of human dorsolateral frontal lobe function and dysfunction, although they might prove valuable for understanding other regions of frontal cortex.

source: http://research.yerkes.emory.edu/Preuss/RWA.html

[figuer]

Anyway IF the "trusting" of belief is related to empathy this could be a root cause of the idea that God, or a personal force, is responsible for the facts (as things believed in), and if so then perhaps the etymological idea that belief is a form of love relates to the suggestion that "God is love". Either way, it would back up the suggestion that theism results from application of the social brain to the natural world.Seems plausible.

[LukeS]

Here are some more thoughs and observations etc, ranging from the
categorisation of out groups in religion, to qoutes from famous
thinkers, and comments on cognitive biases.

In shared psychosis delusions can spread from the principal or
inducer to others with *close emotional ties*. Seperation from the
principal will likely cure the secondary believer.

Primary socialisation comes from the primary caregivers (ones with
closest bonds).

The development of bonding of our evolutionary ancestors is thought
to pave the way for protracted periods of dependence and
socialisation, as parents could work together to raise the child
instead of a mother being alone. Perhaps it also played a role in
acculturation and opinion formation, with bonds influence being like
genetic checkpoints (form mutation errors)in the cell reproduction
cycle.
(http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/jbio/2004/00000006/0000000
1/05138543)

The bandwagon effect shows that we can go with the crowd which
overrides independent reasoning.(Wik)

Availability cascade — a self-reinforcing process in which a
collective belief gains more and more plausibility through its
increasing repetition in public discourse (or "repeat something long
enough and it will become true"). (Wik)

Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try
to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing,
analyzing, and evaluating ideas. During groupthink, members of the
group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of
consensus thinking.(Wik)

At school many members of a class fell for a teacher's experiment,
where the genius or dominant thinker deliberately gave the wrong
answer to a mental arithmetic question many copied him and abandoned
their thoughts.

Social withdrawal, (breaking ties and bonds) is associated with
psychosis, a disorder of belief. However the belief disorder itself
its thought to be related to, and is treated by altering, the
dopamine system, itself like oxytocin tied to motivation an reward.

Cults, in order to control people's thoughts, often try to remove
them from their social networks.

An Islamic hadith says something like this: do not eat with the
unbelievers or your hearts (minds and opinions) will mix (you will
come to inherit their ways of thinking). Some sermons' contents

(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2402973.ece)

warn against becoming too close: One sermon warns believers to
protect their faith by distancing themselves from the "evil
influence" of their non-Muslim British neighbours. "We are in a very
dangerous position here. We live amongst the kuffar, we work with
them, we associate with them, we mix with them and we begin to pick
up their habits."

Also in Islam
(http://quranicverse99.tripod.com/islamicways/id15.html)
is the concept of loving and hating for the sake of Allah."One of
the aspects of iman (faith) is "al wala wal bara" or loving and
hating for the sake of Allah Alone. It is one of the most important
beliefs of Islam after Tawheed. Allah says in His Book:
Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in
preference to believers. Whoever does this has no connection with
Allah unless you are guarding yourselves against them as a
precaution. Allah bids you to beware of Himself. And to Allah is the
journeying. (Surat Ali Imran 3:28) The reason why al wala wal bara
is so important in Islam is because, if it is taken into practice,
it can remove all the characteristics of Jahiliyyah (ignorance/false
belief) from the Muslim Ummah, it guarantees the preservation of the
Ummah, and it distinguishes the believer from the disbeliever. When
one loves and hates for Allahs sake only, they are raised degrees
higher than those who love, hate, and act based on their own desires
or fake gods or for other meaningless things. Allah states in His
Speech: Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah and those
who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the
friends of Shaytaan. Surely, Shaytaans strategy is always weak...

...Remember what harris said:"Regardless of their content,
statements that the subjects believed lit up the ventral medial
prefrontal cortex (VMPC), a location in the brain best known for
processing reward, emotion and taste. Equally "primitive" areas
associated with taste, pain perception and disgust determined
disbelief. "False propositions may actually disgust us". Recall that
Muslims are taught to regard the unbelievers as perverts, and to
hate them. Surely this relates to the oxytocin ststem as a mediator
of bonds.

Perhaps these and similar pieces of advise regulate religious
beliefs in communities and brains, and account for the apparent lack
of a pure rationality which simply and exclusively consideres the
evidence.

Recall (if you know it) Drew Westen's political bias study:

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Westen)

"Specifically, when Republican test subjects were shown self-
contradictory quotes by George W. Bush and when Democratic test
subjects were shown self-contradictory quotes by John Kerry, both
groups tended to explain away the apparent contradictions in a
manner biased to favor their candidate of choice. Similarly, areas
of the brain responsible for reasoning (presumably the prefrontal
cortex) did not respond during these conclusions while areas of the
brain controlling emotions (presumably the amygdala and/or cingulate
gyrus) showed increased activity as compared to the subject's
responses to politically neutral statements associated with
politically neutral people (such as Tom Hanks)."

Both Islam and some forms of Buddhism and Christianity (at least)
warn against befriending nonbelievers. It is likely that all
ritutually derrogate them. This practice could relate to the
emotional structures governing or influencing credence and doubt, if
they exits.

The "group attribution error" is a group-serving, attributional bias
identical to the fundamental attribution error except that it occurs
between different groups rather than different individuals. Group
members are more likely to attribute the decisions of their own
group to its decision rules, while they tend to attribute the
decisions of another group to its members' attitude. (Wik)

In sociology, an outgroup is a social group towards which an
individual feels contempt, opposition, or a desire to compete.
Members of outgroups may be subject to outgroup homogeneity biases
(*believe* them to all be the same), and generally people tend to
privilege ingroup members over outgroup members in many situations.
(Wik)

Group-serving bias is identical to self-serving bias except that it
takes place between groups rather than individuals, under which
group members make dispositional attributions for their group's
successes and situational attributions for group failures, and vice
versa for outsider groups. (Wik)


Group biases, and groups are bound by ties dependent on oxytocin,
obviously influence the way we think and what we tend to *believe*.

This

(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article157577
6.ece)

article states nothing much about belief, but shows that horemones
determine different experiences and desires in teenage girls and
boys. Counterevidence? Maybe, but the breaking of *family ties* by
teens is related to independent thinking.

In some forms of Buddhism attatchment to people is thought to bind
people to samsara, and it's habitual modes of thought. People are
reincarnated together via bonds, and suffer collective karma (which
relates back to similarities in thought and action).

Bowlby the psychologist apparently found that disturbances to
childhood attatchment to primary caregivers could cause later
delinquency, affectionless psychopathy and/or reduced intelligence.
Um.

Teens, on the other hand, with

(http://www.jstor.org/pss/1131448)

"secure attatchment stratergies engaged in problem solving
discussions characterised by less dysfuntional anger and less
avoidance of problem solving". Obviously, attatchment influences a
range of cognitive events.

Here are some pertinent quotes about belief:

"Scientists don't know what they are talking about when they talk
about religion. Religion has nothing to do with belief, and I don't
believe it has any negative impact on people's lives outside of
intolerance. Why do I go to church? It's like asking, why did you
marry that woman? You make up reasons, but it's probably just smell.
I love the smell of candles. It's an aesthetic thing." Nassim
Nicholas Taleb

"I am of the opinion that one person who says the truth is more
powerful than an entire humanity who believes in a lie." unknown
(niote how veracity and the perception of dominance/power are
related).

"We are all tattooed in our cradles with the beliefs of our tribe;
the record may seem superficial, but it is indelible." Oliver
Wendell Holmes, Sr.

"I have learned never to ridicule any man's opinion, however strange
it may seem." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Has he overcome the emotional
rutual abuse which attacks the person (and severes the bond). WOuld
it be wise to bond with people you disagree with?

"Belief consists in accepting the affirmations of the soul;
Unbelief, in denying them." Ralph Waldo Emerson. Love and
attatchment can also be seen as such an affirnation, and hatred and
derision a denial.

"Belief in oneself is one of the most important bricks in building
any successful venture." Frank Gifford Overall, the benefits of high
self-esteem fall into two categories: enhanced initiative and
pleasant feelings. (http://www.blackwell-
synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1529-1006.01431)

"Some people will believe anything if you whisper it to them." Louis
Nizer. This perhaps understands the relationship between intimacy,
trust and credibility (if it really exists).

"What you hear repeatedly you will eventually believe." Mike Murdock

"What a person believes is not as important as how a person
believes." Timothy Virkkala. Can we break free from the emotional
aspect of belief, or is a necessary trait with positive survival
value?

[LukeS]

Overall then I see that the emotional system influences belief, and OT (oxytocin) probably plays an important contributory role. I would finish by saying that belief can be viewed simplistically (grossly simplistically) as an emergent phenomena depending in many cases on a collective OT system amongst many brains, rather than being reductively determined by single individualised isolate thinkers .

[Togo]

Is there any reason to suppose that the same system is not also linked to scientific beliefs? You talk about religious beliefs a lot, and political beliefs, but why not scientific beliefs, or even logical chains of reasoning?

The most common sight I see in a philosophy or scientific cram session is when someone hears an arguement they don't like, and their face screws up like they just bit into something bad. _Then_ they parse the arguement and try and work out where they think it went wrong.

I like a lot of the ideas here. I think that it is, as you say, grossly simplified. If nothing else, there aren't that many different neurotranmitters used in the brain, so isolating one as being responsible for something so particular is unlikely to prove accurate. That doesn't mean you're necessarily wrong, but you do need a more specific identifier.

[LukeS]

Is there any reason to suppose that the same system is not also linked to scientific beliefs?
No reason at all. I was thinking primarily of belief per se, rather than shared attitudes etc. I see these as 2 distinct areas. From what I can scry, belief is related to the emotions and there could be a link between belief and positive efect, and vice versa.
After that, in the context of "groupthink", similar processes would occur on a different order of magnitude ie. social rather than personal.

Science, insofar as it is defferent, tends to be open to a process of weeding out the evil tendencies we might inherit from the evolution of our mental life.

That doesn't mean you're necessarily wrong, but you do need a more specific identifier.
Yes, it's ok to speculate, but what is needed is hard experimental data to back up or demolish the theory*.

Maybe there might not be a black/white division between the rational and the emotional as traditional philosophy encourages us to think?

*note the not unusual use of verbs here, the associations they might elicit, and their related emotive power...:confused:

[figuer]

Maybe there might not be a black/white division between the rational and the emotional as traditional philosophy encourages us to think?Such division is a fallacy, since in respect to human psychology, reason is only a tool used to organize emotions.

[LukeS]

Maybe there might not be a black/white division between the rational and the emotional as traditional philosophy encourages us to think?Such division is a fallacy, since in respect to human psychology, reason is only a tool used to organize emotions.

I don't know. Do you have any hard evidence to back that assertion?

[figuer]

I don't know. Do you have any hard evidence to back that assertion?
Hard evidence? Well, if you count conclusions from philosophical dissertation as hard evidence, then yes (and I suppose such is the only evidence, since reason can not be observed under a microscope).

Think about it: What is reason (in terms of psychology, not math)? Is it 'something'? No. Reason is not an object, reason is the activity of rationalization, of measuring and comparing. You apply reasoning in order to decide between different emotional impulses. The claim "man is a rational animal" is a myth, man is an animal with the capacity to reason, that is, measure and decide upon the consequences of his actions.

[breezanne]

The philosopher Charles Peirce discussed how we use the "fixation of belief" to assuage the uncomfortable uncertainty of doubt.

[LukeS]

I don't know. Do you have any hard evidence to back that assertion?
Hard evidence? Well, if you count conclusions from philosophical dissertation as hard evidence, then yes (and I suppose such is the only evidence, since reason can not be observed under a microscope).

What about the observing by PET scan prefrontal cortex (rational), as opposed to say the amygdala or cingulate gyrus (emotional), will that not suffice? Or does philosophy trump science? Are phenomenology and introspection, and their "folk psychological" correlates duty bound to represent the more intricate workings of the brain?

You apply reasoning in order to decide between different emotional impulses.
At least thet's what we sometimes say...



I believe it could 'sometimes' be true, but I doubt that reason always has primacy (things could work in the opposite direction), and I doubt that is is so isolated from emotional systems as to be completely independent...

"We consider affective processing to be an evolutionary antecedent to more complex forms of information processing; but higher cognition requires the guidance provided by affective processing.

Ralph Adolphs and Antonio Damasio, “The Interaction of Affect and Cognition” (2001)" ---source (http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=266157)---

No, I do not consider philosophical dissertation to be hard evidence. Why should we? The brain is infinitely more complex that the Platonic tripartate division of the soul....

[LukeS]

The philosopher Charles Peirce discussed how we use the "fixation of belief" to assuage the uncomfortable uncertainty of doubt.Yet again the philosopher puts the phenomenological subject at the centre of the universe, or maybe he sees the apparently cruder instincts governing the supposedly more noble attributes where "we" are oft' mere puppets of the subconscious and beyond..?

[figuer]

What about the observing by PET scan prefrontal cortex (rational), as opposed to say the amygdala or cingulate gyrus (emotional), will that not suffice? Or does philosophy trump science? Are phenomenology and introspection, and their "folk psychological" correlates duty bound to represent the more intricate workings of the brain? No, I do not consider philosophical dissertation to be hard evidence. Why should we? The brain is infinitely more complex that the Platonic tripartate division of the soul....Philosophy provides the definitions used in science. Reason is an activity of measuring. Analysis of the brain simply indicates where measuring takes place, and its mechanistic/materialistic components, but not what reasoning is conceptually.


You apply reasoning in order to decide between different emotional impulses.
At least thet's what we sometimes say...
I believe it could 'sometimes' be true, but I doubt that reason always has primacy (things could work in the opposite direction), and I doubt that is is so isolated from emotional systems as to be completely independent...It seems you did not understand at all what I wrote. I didn't claim reason was isolated from emotional systems and independent, but rather the contrary. Neither did I say or suggest that it had primacy, but again, rather the contrary. I stated the obvious: rational activity in regards to emotions is a tool to choose between different emotional impulses...thus reason operates in function of emotions which have the primacy.

[LukeS]

The philosopher Charles Peirce discussed how we use the "fixation of belief" to assuage the uncomfortable uncertainty of doubt.


Actually Breezanne, my apologies:Cheeky:. Sorry but I see a way that this thought (^^) might vindicate my theory, belief being pleasant like love, and comparative to other emotions at least.

[LukeS]

Analysis of the brain simply indicates where measuring takes place, and its mechanistic/materialistic components, but not what reasoning is conceptually.


Yes, until the cognitive biologists help us with conceptualisation, that is.

[breezanne]

The philosopher Charles Peirce discussed how we use the "fixation of belief" to assuage the uncomfortable uncertainty of doubt.
Actually Breezanne, my apologies:Cheeky:. Sorry but I see a way that this thought (^^) might vindicate my theory, belief being pleasant like love, and comparative to other emotions at least.That's how I meant it.:wave:

[LukeS]

That's how I meant it.:wave:
Thanks, I'll have to watch my suspicious "debate mode" from now on.

Do you accept some kind of correspondence or relationship between belief and horemonal neurotransmitters?

[figuer]

Analysis of the brain simply indicates where measuring takes place, and its mechanistic/materialistic components, but not what reasoning is conceptually.
Yes, until the cognitive biologists help us with conceptualisation, that is.Which they would explain using concepts... I don't see the issue.

[LukeS]

Yes, until the cognitive biologists help us with conceptualisation, that is.Which they would explain using concepts... I don't see the issue.
I see, prima facie fine, and thankyou.

This needs scrutinising though.

Are the concepts of neuron and sodium pump, or electron and particle, philosophical in their inception? I don't see why the reductive description of thought is any more philosophical than the description of a gass' heat in terms of mean molecular kinetic energy.

And if we have a operational test for existence, I don't see why even that be considered so especially sophic.

Once we have the matter at hand, does that naming and characterisation have to be something uniquely removed from the rest of science?

I guess I'm missing the point(s).

[wordy]

Could it not be very different in different religions and between different sort of attitudes within a religion.

I remember that some atheists as grown up fell for Jesus cause they felt his love within their bodies. A bit like when Sam Harris place so much value in his experiences of Buddhist meditation. Could be related to oxytocin I guess.

[LukeS]

Could it not be very different in different religions and between different sort of attitudes within a religion.

I remember that some atheists as grown up fell for Jesus cause they felt his love within their bodies. A bit like when Sam Harris place so much value in his experiences of Buddhist meditation. Could be related to oxytocin I guess.
Yes I agree. There could well for example be a natural difference in attitude towards a completely disembodied and an embodied god.

[LukeS]

AlsoI thought I'd notethat sometimes we talk of "entertaining" beliefs (just like they were people), and sometimes say that weare "attatched" to a theory, or "in love" with an idea.

[figuer]

Once we have the matter at hand, does that naming and characterisation have to be something uniquely removed from the rest of science? I don't see why that would be the case. Any mechanical description would simply parallel the philosophical definition using a different language.

[wordy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7412438.stm
Trust drug may cure social phobia

A nasal spray which increases our trust for strangers is showing promise as a treatment for social phobia, say scientists from Zurich University.

They found that people who inhaled the "love hormone" oxytocin continued to trust strangers with their money - even after they were betrayed.

Brain scans showed the hormone lowered activity in the amygdala - a region which is overactive in social phobics.

Drug trials are under way and early signs are promising say the scientists.


As early as 2005 we had a related text about it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4599299.stm



Exposure to an oxytocin "potion" led people to be more trusting, tests by University of Zurich researchers found.

They report in the journal Nature that the finding could help people with conditions such as autism, where relating to others can be a problem.

But one expert warned it could be misused by politicians who want to persuade more people to back them.

It help lovers to bond to each other too so it has with faith as in faith in a person,
trust in that person as a reliable person. And religious faith is about that too.

Faith in the religious leader or Pastor, Priest and the stories they tell.
The claims they make, to not question the claims maybe.

One can hope that it is not possible to make such administred to atheists to make
them into believers in a future theocratic society. :)

[figuer]

One can hope that it is not possible to make such administred to atheists to make them into believers in a future theocratic society. :)That would depend on the god being worshiped.

[LukeS]

One can hope that it is not possible to make such administred to atheists to make
them into believers in a future theocratic society. :)
I think it has to be taken nasally like coke, possibly somehting to do with not crossing the blood-brain barrier*. So, it could not be slipped into the water supply. If that were possible, I am sure it would have been used by the intelligence services by now.

* (http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?q=73580087017911&mkt=en-GB&setlang=en-US&w=a5d6285a,baaf21f&FORM=CVRE4)Oxytocin given intravenously does not enter the brain in significant quantities - it is excluded from the brain by the blood-brain barrier. Drugs administered by nasal spray are thought to have better access to the CNS.


Incidentally oxytocin release is triggered by the disco drug oxytocin.

And (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071107074321.htm) 'empathy and oxytocin lead to greater generosity'. Perhapse the reverse might be true, leading to social cohesion and a shared culture of trust.

[LukeS]

http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2007/09/oxytocin_and_underst.html

on empathy and theory of mind.

[LukeS]

Also I thought I'd mention that negative and pessimistic thoughts can be related to serotonin and norepinephrine levels (cured by antidepressants like SSRI's and SNRI's), and apparently 'magical/paranormal' thoughts are related to higher levels of dopamine (http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2589), while spiritual openness related to serotonin receptor density (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/140/story_14076_1.html).

So maybe belief is related to multiple neurotransmitter systems, the details of which determine the individuals related personality traits, eg trusting, magical, spiritual and optimistic or otherwise.
So really we are puppets tather than puppetmasters, and ther reasons you give for disbelief in God(s) are less related to voluntary traits as one might imagine from phenomenology.