Hamer, Dean: The God Gene
The God Gene
Writer: Dean Hamer
Genre: Science
Pages: 215
It’s hard to review this book without launching into my own personal philosophy about the subject, because after all, when we read, we often bring the baggage of our own points of view in order to digest the material.
I picked up The God Gene for a variety of reasons (it’s always a variety that causes these pick-ups): the first, and most obvious, is that I believed the book would relate to certain aspects of my novel. In the end, I’m not sure it has, but it’s given me plenty to think about, especially in terms of human behavior and spirituality, and that will always be beneficial.
But the other reason I picked up the book is my fascination of both science and faith. The television show “Lost” loves exploring these two subjects, and so did “The X-Files”. And because I’m a person that’s more likely to take the middle ground between two extremes, I couldn’t resist this book. A scientific way to explain faith? Bring it on, because whether or not I agree, I’ll be amused to no end.
The God Gene stresses several points, and they’re good points to remember while reading, especially depending where you fall in religious category. People who don’t believe in God may find this theory preposterous, believing that looking for a genetic link to spirituality is a waste of time because it doesn’t exist; people who do believe in God may find this theory completely blasphemous: how dare anyone try to reduce God to a gene, or to science?
Well, here’s the kicker:
1) The term “God gene” is really a catch-all: when exploring the genetic properties of spirituality, the author admits to using the term “God” to encompass everything and anything spiritual/unexplained: this would include beliefs in the supernatural, or to put a lighter twist on it: mystical.
2) The book does not set out to prove whether or not God or a higher power exists. It does, however, seek to explain why people seek out God, or the spiritual life, and whether or not there is a genetic cause for it.
3) Lastly, the book stresses that there is a difference between spirituality and religion. Granted, religion can lead to an interest in one’s own spirituality, but religion is often a vehicle. Furthermore, the book sets out to prove that spirituality can be inherited (genes), whereas religion is something that is learned (memes).
Whether or not you as a reader agree with these “controls” doesn’t matter: these are the limits in which the writer is discussing his theory and experiments. And the experiments and discussions are quite interesting. Do I believe in all of it? I can’t say: it amuses the hell out of me though, and it’s fun to consider. The idea is, at best, popular science, and we’re obviously getting results from a certain point of view. But Dean Hamer does his best to be objective, recording failings where they exist, pointing out limitations where they exist. But anyone who compares the spiritual experience to that of a drug-induced experience gets an A+ in my book: not because it reduces spirituality, but because the same chemicals are at work in the brain in both experiences.
Is it worth the read? If you have any interest at all in spirituality, science, or even want to explore the possibilities as to why (keyword: why) you believe what you do, I definitely recommend this book. For me, it reinforced some things I already intuitively knew: that there’s a reason some people are more spiritual than others, and you can “spiritual” without being religious. There’s a bit of scientific jargon to deal with, don’t get me wrong, but not so much it weighs down the book.