science, spirituality, auras

MindfulBiology grew out of a desire to reconcile my understandings of science and spirituality. That yearning that began in adolescence, during a solo trek of the John Muir Trail, when I was sixteen-years-old. As explained in my essay about that trip, I often felt dwarfed by granite spires looming above meadows sparkling with wildflowers. Geology, biology, and mysticism appeared inseparable. My upbringing and education had taught me to reify science and doubt spirituality, but in the mountains it felt wrong to divide the two, and even more wrong to value the former above the latter.

Those who honor both scientific and spiritual worldviews often confront a big problem. What happens when they contradict each other?

People of mystical sensibility feel convinced of phenomena science rejects as imaginary or delusional. Consider auras. New age enthusiasts feel comfortable talking about them as if they are objectively real, but skeptics will tell you—dismissively—that there is no evidence for their existence.

From a scientific standpoint, data consistent with the physical existence of auras are scanty. Faint electrical signals coming from the heart can be detected around a human body, but it seems doubtful that these account for the play of colors described by those who see auras. For one thing, human eyes lack detectors for electromagnetic waves in the frequency range of those emanating from the heart.

At the same time, it seems clear that people who describe auras truly see something. Some weeks ago my friend Richard Bernstein read my aura. Although he has written a book entitled, The Language of the Aura, Richard is cautious and only rarely offers formal readings. After watching me walk back and forth a few times, he used pastel chalk to demonstrate the hues he saw. As he offered interpretations, I was struck by how he picked up trends in my current situation that went beyond our verbal exchanges: the colors seemed to reveal core shifts we hadn’t discussed. Since Richard is one of the most honest and sincere people I know, this demanded more more than a skeptic’s assumption that I was being manipulated.

One could declare that auras are supernatural, beyond the reach of measurement and rational explanation. But if that’s the case, there’s little more to say about them, since nothing can be proven, and skeptics can hardly be blamed for doubting their existence.

What seems more promising is to recognize that the real issue isn’t how auras can’t be measured, but that they are only seen by those who see them. In other words, they are subjective, not objective. Though science is primarily about objective findings, it can work with subjective states; research psychologists do so often. They employ many methods, including supplementing verbal reports with objective brain imaging. Usually, however, they begin more simply—by using first-person reports to develop testable hypotheses.

Such a hypothesis occurred to me after my time with Richard. What if people who see auras have a form of synesthesia, and thus sense visually what they feel emotionally in relation to others? A Google search showed me this isn’t a new idea; it has even been investigated in a scientific article, though one of limited scope and method.

People with synesthesia experience crosstalk between senses. For example, for some musicians specific notes evoke specific colors. And some mathematicians see different numbers in different hues. Synesthesia has endured the sort of history you’d expect of a rare form of perception that strikes ‘ordinary’ people as impossible, or even pathological. Early on, psychologists felt fascinated by it, but for much of the twentieth century its occurrence was doubted because it seemed to contradict neurology. Nowadays, most scientists who’ve looked into synesthesia accept that it truly occurs subjectively, while functional brain imaging has demonstrated atypical firing patterns that lend objective support.

If some people perceive colors in association with numbers or musical tones, why couldn’t others see them in association with emotional feelings?  Facial expressions, body postures, vocal intonations, and so on are all detectable by emotional regions of the brain and could—in synesthetes of this type—generate characteristic hues. The hypothesis is both plausible and testable: it could be assessed with functional brain imaging.

Auras possess many of the same characteristics as the colors seen by synesthetes, in particular the way they enrich experience: Richard Bernstein doesn’t just see auras, he feels informed by them. He seems able to make productive use of the hues he sees, as have many of the famous synesthetes throughout history.

Here’s my key point: if auras were proven to be synesthetic, they would be explained, but they would not be explained away.  A neuroscientific explanation would deepen our understanding of the phenomenon without detracting from its significance.

As I work to bring science and spirituality together, my goal is NOT to explain away experiences we consider elevated or mystical. Rather, I see science as heightening awe and realism in Life, while spirituality heightens love and mystery. My goal in proposing hypotheses is to help heal the rift between science and spirituality, so we don’t miss the benefit of either.

This should be our guiding light as we try to reconcile spiritual experience with scientific understanding. Mystically inclined people need not fear rational explanations, and rationalists need not fear mystical experience. Both ways of knowing are important human capacities. They can be brought into healthful coherence only to the extent we respect them equally.