Researching Immortality

©University of California, Riverside

John Fischer, project leader of the Science, Philosophy, and Theology of Immortality project

“Eternity is a long time, especially towards the end,” quipped Woody Allen. But his thought raises a serious issue. Is the possibility of an afterlife a threat or a promise?

A range of fascinating questions follow from this thought, argues John Fischer, distinguished professor of philosophy at University of California, Riverside. Does belief in immortality have an impact upon people’s behavior and character? In what form would human beings survive bodily death, which clearly comes to us all? Does it make any rational sense to desire an afterlife?

Fischer heads up an impressive panel of scientists, philosophers, and theologians that will commission research into these empirical and philosophical questions as part of the Science, Philosophy, and Theology of Immortality project. Supported by a $5 million grant from the John Templeton Foundation, the project will also sponsor public events and publications to discuss the issues.

One key area of research is likely to be concerned with the impact that belief in an afterlife has upon personal behavior. To date, empirical work in this area is limited, Fischer reports. Some research indicates that a belief in hell and a retributive God make it less likely that an individual will commit certain crimes, but the result needs further exploration. For example, is it that belief in hell provides motivation for individuals to behave better or simply that it makes them fearful of being punished? “I think it would also be helpful to have a better ‘catalogue’ of what people actually believe about the afterlife,” continues Fischer. The diversity of beliefs might then be correlated to the effects they have on people’s lives.

It would also be intriguing to explore how personal behavior has changed in countries where belief in an afterlife has changed in recent generations, as well as between countries with different views on an afterlife.

There are fascinating theological and philosophical issues to explore, too. Some thinkers have focused on the unappealing nature of an afterlife on the grounds that it goes on for so long. The argument here is that it would strip life of meaning by rendering it boring and joyless. It is also suggested that immortality would make the practice of virtues impossible because a virtuous life is one that takes risks, not least in the face of death.

Other thinkers have argued that many of the deepest experiences in life have two key characteristics that immortality would enhance, not demean. First, they are “repeatable pleasures,” as Fischer puts it. Think of listening to great music that demands we listen to it time and time again. Second, they are “self-focused,” which is to say that they are worthwhile in themselves and so don’t depend upon any externalities like death. Religious believers might argue that worship is one such experience.

The particular projects that will receive support will emerge from international competitions—proposals on “The Science of Immortality” are currently being accepted—so it is impossible to predict what specific issues they will address. However, advances in modern science are likely to feature in the research also. The most dramatic of these is the possibility that human life might be extended indefinitely, offering future generations practical immortality. “It is helpful to have philosophers ‘out front’ on these issues, prior to the development of the technology that could actually make immortality possible,” explains Fischer.

Furthermore, perhaps the greatest benefit of thinking about immortality is better to understand what is valuable and worthwhile in our own finite lives.

The announcement of the award received extensive international media attention from publications including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Chronicle of Higher Education, and the Huffington Post.

Much of the attention focused on the public interest in near-death experiences, although the study of such experiences and their proper interpretation will not be the central focus of the grant. “Also,” continues Fischer, “we are not setting out to prove or disprove the existence of an afterlife as conceptualized in any of the major religions.”

The grant was awarded because of the emphasis on scientific rigor in all the empirical aspects of the project. The team associated with the grant is also neutral when it comes to religious beliefs. “We are approaching these issues with open-mindedness, respect, and the important virtue of humility,” explains Fischer. “We will proceed deliberately, respectfully, and carefully. We are deeply aware that these issues are difficult, personally felt, and resist easy or facile solutions.”

“Sir John Templeton’s interest in the topic of immortality, the significance of this topic to a variety of audiences, and the contrarian spirit of Professor Fischer’s project make this grant one for which there is tremendous enthusiasm on the part of the Foundation,” adds John Churchill, director of philosophy and theology programs at JTF.

Choosing Wisdom

For some people, traumatic experiences lead to truly debilitating outcomes. For others, adversity really does seem to lead to “post-traumatic growth,” where individuals move through suffering and find their lives changed in positive ways as a result.

What factors make the difference is the central issue in a new study conducted by a team of researchers at the University of Virginia. Margaret Plews-Ogan, Justine Owens, and Natalie May share their findings, along with practical advice and inspiring stories, in their new book, Choosing Wisdom, published by Templeton Press. Included with the book is a companion PBS documentary which premiered on National Public Television in July 2012.

The book is based on research funded by the John Templeton Foundation and consists of interviews with two distinct populations—medical patients coping with chronic pain and physicians coping with having been involved in serious medical errors. Choosing Wisdom explores how people respond to adversity, how they adjust, and what factors help or hinder positive change.

Creativity and the Wandering Mind

What lies behind a “eureka moment?” A new study suggests that flashes of creativity are sparked when the mind is allowed to wander.

Research conducted by Benjamin Baird and Jonathan Schooler, psychologists at the University of California, Santa Barbara, showed that groups of students who had spent some time doing undemanding tasks, thereby allowing the mind to wander, showed more creativity when subsequently solving problems than groups of students whose minds had been prevented from wandering. Being able mentally to chew on problems seems to be key.

To put it another way, there is real value in allowing the mind to zone out. The researchers speculate that zoning out may have had survival advantage in our evolutionary past because it resourced more creative responses to threats.

The research, funded by the John Templeton Foundation, was reported by the leading science journal Nature and will be published in the journal Psychological Science.