Re: Belief Engines and Multiple Intelligences
Shermer's hypothesis of a "Belief Engine" within the brain may not require such a leap into nebulous wishful thinking, or bad science. Especially if we consider this within the framework of Howard Gardner's theory of
Multiple Intelligences.
Gardner's theory argues for at least eight seperate modalities of human intelliegnce; each working according to its own rules and mechanisms as ways we work to solve problems, communicate effectively, and fashion products deemed useful and meaningful within various cultural contexts.
His list of eight include: Verbal Linguistic; Math Logical; Body Kinesthetic; Visual Spatial; Music Rhythmic; Inter Personal; Intra Personal; and Naturalist.
He also offers the possibility of a ninth intelligence he calls the
Existential Intelligence where humans grapple with ultimate issues and concerns regarding the meaning, purpose and value of existence. He allows the potential of a variety of Existential Intelligence to be named "
Spiritual Intelligence", but finds it very problematic
Quote:
I think it best to put aside the term spiritual, with its manifest and problematic connotations, and to speak instead of an intelligence that explores the nature of existence in its multifarious guises. Thus, an explicit concern with spiritual or religious matters would be one variety - often the most important variety - of an existential intelligence.
Gardner, Howard (1999) Intelligence Reframed. Multiple intelligences for the 21st century, New York: Basic Books.
Thus, Shermer's postulation isn't entirely unfounded, even if not completely spelled out.
For an excellent introduction to Professor Howard Gardner's work and biography try
www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm 
Tweet This Topic
In case you haven't noticed, I have an aversion to the contemporary fashion that requires non-fiction authors to present a brand-new theory, when really they are re-explaining what's been said before in a slightly different way. No insult to Shermer intended; his book is interesting and well-written. It's not new, but ideas don't have to be new to be worth expressing. (Obviously, or no one except advanced theorists & researchers would ever be able to say anything!) 
