Do you believe that people seek to believe in a Higher Power (or powers) because this power really exists, or is it because people need to believe so they simply follow that instinctive need for The Divine that’s embedded in them?

For as long as I can remember, I have been fascinated with the issue of religion and spirituality, and have been very fond of science as well. Mix those elements together, do a little research on each, engage in discussions with people of different faiths and those without, and you will get soul-searching chaos Tololy-style.

I first heard about the theory behind the God gene from my sister, and that was years ago. Today, I finally decided to blog about it because I want to communicate it to people who may not have heard about it. Basically, as the question in the first passage of this post asks, the quest for a Deity (or more) just might have something to do with genetic predisposition. Read this article from TIME, dating back to October 2004, and titled Is God in Our Genes? , or you could read the following excerpts:

Which came first, God or the need for God? In other words, did humans create religion from cues sent from above, or did evolution instill in us a sense of the divine so that we would gather into the communities essential to keeping the species going?

. . .

Chief of gene structure at the National Cancer Institute, [Dean] Hamer not only claims that human spirituality is an adaptive trait, but he also says he has located one of the genes responsible, a gene that just happens to also code for production of the neurotransmitters that regulate our moods. Our most profound feelings of spirituality, according to a literal reading of Hamer’s work, may be due to little more than an occasional shot of intoxicating brain chemicals governed by our DNA. “I’m a believer that every thought we think and every feeling we feel is the result of activity in the brain,” Hamer says.

. . .

Hamer also stresses that while he may have located a genetic root for spirituality, that is not the same as a genetic root for religion.

Spirituality is a feeling or a state of mind; religion is the way that state gets codified into law. Our genes don’t get directly involved in writing legislation. As Hamer puts it, perhaps understating a bit the emotional connection many have to their religions, “Spirituality is intensely personal; religion is institutional.”

. . .

What do you think?

Do you think that students must never appear to be smarter than their teacher, even if they are? Convince us.

It is most curious that the posts that harvest the most comments (and supposedly generate most reactions and/or debates) are either political or personal.

Should I take it that people enjoy politics and gossip more than literature? (I have an uneasy feeling about the answer to this question) What do you think?

What is democracy and does it extend beyond theory? What do you think?

In your opinion, what are the advantages/disadvantages of cyber friendships? What do you think of this new “trend” in human relationships? Is it real? Good? Bad? Why?

The first salon entry was, in my estimation, delightful. It generated such important debates in the Box, over at Lina’s place and even reaching Egypt.

Yes, it is an old-new argument and counter-argument and, positively, actions speak louder than words. But the truth of the situation has it that people do want to touch upon this issue.

“Part of the problem is that “Arabness” doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Every Arab has other identities (i.e., Sunni Muslim, Shiite Muslim, Christian, Libyan, Jordanian, economic class, etc). Each identity has its own agenda. IMHO, it is the clash of these identities that is the biggest of the obstacles facing Arab unity.” - Peter S.

” I think that arabs are amazing people that need a great and powerful leader to unite them and bring the best in them, Prophet Mohammed, and the great caliphs after him, Salahiddeen, and to certain extent (Jamal Abdulnasser). ” - Electro

“I am afraid an Ideological dream is no more, bad be that or good. However there is plenty of room for mutual beneficial corporation, but that dose not sleep easy with back stabbing!” - Nidal

“I for one don’t want it based on religion, muslim nor christian, I want it based on the fact that in the end we would all be better off if we worked as a unit. ” - Lulwa

“Jordan came up with that nationalistic slogan of Jordan First a few years ago. Truth is, every Arab country has had their own slogan for years and years, and we just started getting more seriously in to the game.

The west has a vested interest in keeping us seperated and now enough time has passed for us to be brainwashed into thinking that there is a huuuuge difference between a syrian and an egyptian…or even worse…a jordanian and a palestinian. we’ve been convinced from everyone and everything of these differences and these assumptions become a wedge which seperate everyone.” - Nas

” On some level, of course, there is a bond — ethnic and linguistic similarities count for something. But from my distant vantage point, “pan-Arabism” is little more than a cynical political ploy to create a false sense of community in order to direct public ire away from internal problems that the state is unable or unwilling to address.” - Vincent

“The issue of “American Influence” is more complex than we customarily think of it and it is indeed a two-way street. Yet underpinning the ability of America to have the final call in any situation is due to immense military power (Nuclear Diplomacy) and its PetroDollars. ” - Gafgafa

” The Arab context is not the best context to talk about unity in. The people that you want to unite half of them don’t even identify with being Arabs and more importantly lack the ability to identify with the rest of the group, and on the other hand even those who identify with being Arab and identify with other Arabs are still not guaranteed to fully cooperate simply because the majority of them still operate in a tribal mode that fails to see the big picture beyond the tribe.” - Hamzeh N.

Now who’s talking about Arab Unity? It’s you.

I’m sorry, I just can’t stop laughing at this thought. Are you, dear readers, afraid of going to jail? Is that why only one person dared to answer the question about Arab Unity in that first Salon entry? Mmm? Or is this question a bit “off”? Rotten and boring?

Ah. Like I said before, the possibilities are endless. But this makes me laugh, just as I was starting to debate doing politics - the irony of it all!

Among the messages I received last week following the “Say it as it is” post, I found one (From Peter S.) to be particularly in harmony with notions I had had previously but never got to enact. So I am devising a new section through which I hope more reader-to-reader interaction can be attained.

In this section, I only ask a question. You answer it, debate other answers, or look up some additional information. In short, it’s all about you and what you think. The possibilities are endless and I think it should be interesting to observe how conversations grow to promote better understanding.

What do you think happened to that dream we were brought up believing would come true one day : Arab Unity?