-->
Celebrity psychologist Derren Brown is an
extremely clever man. Having watched a few of his TV shows, I have to admit to
being as amazed as anyone else at the things he manages to do. He uses
hypnotism, NLP (neuro-linguistic programming) and psychology to perform some
marvelous magic and spectacular stunts. And I am not just saying that. Some of
his tricks have literally made my jaw drop! But he is also arrogant, and his
arrogance has led him to a direct assault on religion.
He recently produced a two-part TV show
called Fear and Faith. The second
part of the show focused on what he called “the biggest placebo of them all –
god”. His aim was to show that, whilst religion claims to give experiences that
have positive effects in people’s lives, spiritual experiences can be explained
away. His claim was that if he could manufacture a religious experience then he
could prove that religion is wrong to claim that the divine element is
necessary.
So using techniques such as NLP, suggestion
and association (subconscious linking of a physical trigger with an emotional
response), he went ahead and (inside 15 minutes) caused an atheist to have a
spontaneous emotional experience that made her reconsider whether the
supernatural was real. She said, “In that moment I felt that all the love in
the world had been thrown at me. It had always been available. But I’d somehow
mistreated it by pushing it away and not letting it into my life. My spectrum
of experience was broadened. It felt supernatural.”
He also showed that the mere suggestion
that there is someone watching us, or that there are patterns and meaning in
events, will cause us to change our behaviour. It doesn’t have to be real to
make us act differently. Hence he asserts that the idea of god was invented in
order to help keep moral order in society, and through the association of
emotional experiences it has become ‘hard-wired’ through evolution into the
human psyche.
His final summary was, “I think the most
honest answer to the question 'why do you believe in god' is 'because it makes
me happy'. There is no reason to argue with that. We all find ways of making
ourselves happy. And understanding religious experience as a human process is
to me a far more resonant and a more beautiful approach because it's real and
it shows how astonishing we are, and what emotional riches we are capable of.
We each live an extraordinary and improbable life.”
Very very clever. There is no need to doubt
his integrity, or claim that he did anything underhand. Sure, it was all
trickery. But that was the point. He explained almost every step of his
trickery and manipulation. His lies and psychology brought about an experience
that was real. But are his conclusions right?
There are several reasons why I don’t think
Christians in particular should find this a credible challenge to their faith.
First, just because something can be
mimicked does not mean that the original is fake. Just because I might be able to
make a perfect copy of a Picasso does not make the original Picasso any less a
Picasso! So just because Derren Brown can make a copy of a religious experience
does not mean that real spiritual experience is not possible. His logic seems
to be that psychology is everything, so psychology explains everything. It’s a
bit like Pharoah’s magicians and Moses in Exodus 7:8-13. Moses performed
miracles, and Pharoah’s magicians managed to reproduce them. Did that make
Moses’ miracles less miraculous? No!
He also proves too much, in one sense at
least. I’m pretty sure that a psychologist and hypnotist of Derren Brown’s
caliber could make a man fall head over heels in love with any woman - a bit
like the film Shallow Hal I guess (but
it doesn’t really matter whether he sees her as she really looks or not). He
could do effectively the same procedure as he did with the atheist to give the
man loving emotions when presented with an associated trigger and the presence
of a particular woman. Does that mean that all love would be proved to be
unreal? If not, that would leave questions about what defines love, if someone
can feel love under manufactured psychological conditions? We’d then start
talking about free will, and whether actually love is just something that
emerges when certain triggers and associations are present, whether
manufactured or accidental.
Bottom line, if spiritual experience can be
explained away by psychology, then so can love… and any other emotion or human
experience.
Second, Derren Brown’s analysis of human
motivation can lead to the devaluation or denial of the reality of altruism and
humanitarianism. He thinks that we believe in god ‘because it makes me happy’,
and says, ‘we all find ways of making ourselves happy’. But you see, if our own
happiness were our highest goal – and that would apply to all humans in this
worldview – then all acts of self-sacrifice, giving to the poor, putting others
first, etc, would have to be construed as selfish. In other words, seeing
people in danger or in need makes us unhappy, so helping them makes us happy.
So we help people in order ultimately to make ourselves happy, whatever our
stated motivation is (religious, altruistic or otherwise). If ‘making ourselves
happy’ were the sum total of everyone’s motivation, our reasons for doing
everything we do, then we would be kidding ourselves if we thought that self-giving
and sacrifice was truly possible.
And that isn’t necessarily a problem
directly, I admit, in an atheist worldview. As long as poor and needy people are being helped, who cares
whether the motives are selfish or not? I just see it as another example of
where atheism will take its adherents where they don’t necessarily want to go.
Consider, for example, that coupled with the atheist focus on the individual, selfish
motives can be used to justify anything
that makes me happy, even things that make other people unhappy.
But my final counter to Derren Brown’s
attack is that true Christianity is not about raw experience. He acts as if
debunking an experience is debunking religion entirely. People have emotional
experiences for any number of different reasons, and with lots of different
causes. One of those causes is spiritual, if there is in fact a spiritual realm
as Christians believe. And it cannot be otherwise in a Christian worldview,
because God created us with emotions.
But God also created us with mind and
intellect. He created logic and order, so that we could understand the world
around us, and seek Him. Christians don’t believe in God simply because He
makes them happy. Most thinking Christians are aware that even emotions
experienced in church may not be caused by God, or even a genuine response to
God. The real reason we believe in God is because God is real, and there is no
making sense of reality, knowledge or morality without Him. Arguing about the
existence of God is like arguing about the existence of air (while we are
breathing it), or arguing about the use of logic (while using logical
arguments).
All Derren Brown is doing is using his own
perspective on Christianity and generalizing it. I read somewhere that he was a
Christian in his late teens, but lost his faith because he (incorrectly in my
view) came to see it as intellectually flawed and based on circular reasoning.
He came to believe that, in the absence of rational support, Christian faith
(and any other religious faith) must be based on strong experiences which draw
people in. Following those experiences, Christians continue to believe despite any
evidence presented that they are wrong.
However, to conclude, what he has ended up
doing is displaying the same circular reasoning that he was desperately trying
to escape. He now believes that everything evolved, including human beings, and
believes that behaviour and emotion is all explained by psychology. Hence in
looking at emotional experiences that Christians claim to be of spiritual origin
he immediately dismisses the possibility that they can be of spiritual origin.
Instead he only looks for evidence that psychology can explain emotional
experiences. Once he has found that he stops looking any further.
In my opinion, Derren Brown should stick to
his tricks, his feats of memory and perception. I will continue to enjoy those.
But, more importantly, I’ll also continue to enjoy the hope of glory, through
the real Jesus, the Son of the real God, who really died and really rose again
from the dead, and was really witnessed as risen by hundreds of people and
testified as risen in the Bible. I’ll continue to be emotionally moved by the
glory and majesty of my Creator, the grace of my Saviour and the witness of the
Spirit who dwells in me. Sometimes I will laugh with elation, sometimes I will
cry with joy or amazement, sometimes I will sit dumbstruck with awe, sometimes
I will hide or weep with shame and guilt. I am not embarrassed about the
emotional experiences we have as Christians. But I will also continue to make
clear that none of that would be genuine, or even possible, if Christianity
were not true, and truth is a rational category requiring rational belief. So I
will continue to ground my faith deeper and deeper in truth, with a mind open
to facing every challenge.
Thanks for posting:D God bless you!
ReplyDelete