Avoid the Horizon
The Politics of the Upper Visual Field
What does spatial orientation have to do with politics, religion, and shyness?
The convergence of space and time seems to have occurred in the mammalian brain long before its introduction into the theory of relativity. As the evolving mammalian visual systems extended their reach towards more distant targets, the older peripersonal and ambient extrapersonal systems would have to make room for the strong human propensity for distant space. Indeed, the orientation towards deep space is a uniquely human attribute, and one that has become remarkably integrated into human political and religious behavior.
In the brain, the construction of space has many faces, with each face closely associated to the movements of selected parts of the body, such as the limbs and neck. For example, the brain's construction of peripersonal space, which is the space within our grasp, is tightly integrated with the movements of the arms and hands. Peripersonal space is biased towards the lower visual field, as primates spend a disproportionate amount of time manipulating objects below eye level, supporting the consummatory behaviors of drinking and eating.
Fred Previc has proposed four distinct neurological realms of 3-dimensional space, and further, integrated those concepts into an ingenious theory of religiosity (2006). I have previously proposed a strong neurological relationship between Previc's dopaminergic-spatial theory of religiosity and the hemisphericity theory of political orientation (see God, Dopamine, and 3-Dimensional Space). While I have previously discussed Previc's four realms of 3-dimensional space at length, they will briefly be reviewed here.
The first realm of space is the aforementioned peripersonal (PrP) space (see the yellow field in the diagram below), which is consummatory space, that is, where food and objects are manipulated by the upper limbs. It is oriented towards the lower visual field, and has a distinctive neuroanatomy organized along the dorsal cortical networks extending from the visual pathways and through the lateral and medial portions of the parietal lobe, and into the superior-lateral portions of the frontal lobe. Its neurochemistry runs right into the hemisphericity theory of political orientation, as it is primarily supported by the noradrenaline and serotonin systems, which are the systems most closely associated with liberal cognitive styles. The right, or more "liberal" hemisphere, plays a greater role in the management of peripersonal space.
The next realm of space also has a liberalistic bent, known as the ambient extrapersonal system (AmE), and depicted as green in the diagram below. Extrapersonal space is the space beyond our grasp, and the ambient system supports the body's posture and orientation in gravitational space. As such, it is largely responsible for the movement of the lower limbs. Previc's AmE space starts where PrP space ends, about 2 meters from the body, and extends to the horizon, which is outside one's frame of motion, thereby stabilizing the perceptual world, and improving the functioning of the other spatial systems.
Like PrP space, it also has a downward bias towards the lower visual field. And like the peripersonal system, it employs the dorsal visual pathways and the noradrenaline and serotonin systems, along with the right hemisphere, which places it firmly at the feet of liberal cognitive styles.
Previc's Four Realms of Space
While PrP and AmE space share a common liberalistic bloodline, the conservatives have their own spatial bias, and this bias is towards salient targets in distant space. Relative to liberals, conservatives are more active in the seeking of physical rewards, which ultimately supports higher reproductive rates. Previc proposed two closely connected spatial realms that support the searching and identification of rewards located in topographic space: the focal extrapersonal system (FcE) (see the red area above), and the action extrapersonal system (AcE) (the blue area).
The focal extrapersonal system is the one most closely related to visual search, object recognition, and facial recognition. It is the most limited in scope, focusing on the central 30° of the visual field. Unlike the PrP and AmE systems, the FcE has a strong bias to the upper visual field, and runs ventrally through the occipital- temporal pathways and into the lateral and medial regions of the frontal lobe. Further, the FcE system is highly reliant on the dopamine system, which we have proposed to be a determining feature of conservative cognitive styles.
The action extrapersonal system manages the space we move around in, that is, topographical space. It also helps to orient to salient targets, and integrates episodic memory with visual, auditory, proprioceptive, and vestibular inputs, which concern the movement of the head in space. Neurologically, it is a close cousin to the FcE, as it also runs through the occipital-temporal pathways, engages the dopamine system and the left hemisphere, and is biased toward the upper visual field.
In Previc's theory, the AcE is the spatial system most closely linked to religiosity. The predisposition of the AcE to the upper visual field explains many of the cross-cultural traits of religious behavior: the placement of god, heaven, and other religious icons into upper, distant space; the high frequency of religious, near-death, and out-of-body experiences that are all byproducts of dopaminergic neurotransmission and favor the upper visual field; and, the close connection between paranoid schizophrenia and religious delusions, both of which have been associated with the hyperactivation of the dopaminergic system.
Given the proposal that the AcE and FcE exhibit the distinctive flavor of religious conservatism, it implies that conservatives are more oriented towards their upper visual field and action extrapersonal space, while the liberals are more oriented towards the lower visual field, peripersonal, and ambient extrapersonal space. These are wild proposals indeed.
However, we have uncovered some indirect evidence in a recent survey, administered on the internet, which asked 1,703 respondents to classify the direction of their gaze while walking into one of the following three categories: straight ahead (parallel with the ground); towards the ground; or in between. In the graph below, the percentages of those indicating they generally keep their eyes positioned straight ahead while walking are displayed.
Chart 1: Direction of gaze parallel to the ground while walking (by Religious Disposition)
(F=Female,M=Male)
(NR=Never think about religion,AG=Agnostic,AT=Atheist,SP=Spiritual,
LR=Little Religious,MR=Moderately Religious,VR=Very Religious)
The trends in the above graph are striking, and indicate a stronger bias of the religious towards distant space. Further, females, on average, have a slightly greater bias than males, at least while walking. This is interesting, in that females tend to be more religious than males.
The lowest bias towards distant space were those that never think about religion (NR). 45% of the NR females and 39% of the NR males indicated that they keep their gaze fixed parallel while walking. The NRs are cognitively similar to the agnostics (AG), although they tend to avoid categorizing themselves as such. They exhibit the lowest religious valence, that is, they spend very little time contemplating religious concepts, and interestingly, have the lowest bias towards distant space and the upper visual field.
The agnostics (AG) were next (females=45%, males=44%), again indicating an inverse relationship between religiosity and distant space. In our survey, the female atheists (AT) had an interesting elevation not seen in the male atheists, although this is probably a statistical fluctuation. What is consistent between genders is the elevation in the spiritual (SP). Those that classify themselves as spiritual actually share more cognitive traits with the agnostics and atheists than they do with the religious, and this is one of the few exceptions.
Those that describe themselves as a little religious (LR) are more oriented towards upper, distant space than any of the nonreligious cohorts (NR, AG, or AT), but still less inclined than the spiritual. There is a progressive increase in the moderately religious (MR), and the zenith of orientation towards distant space is seen in the very religious (VR), which is remarkably consistent by gender (Females=59%, Males=58%).
Given the strong correlation between religiosity and political affiliation, let's see how our political cohorts look when it comes to the orientation towards distant space. In the graph below, we see the percentages, by political cohort, of those that keep their eyes fixed straight ahead while walking.
Chart 2: Direction of gaze parallel to the ground while walking (by Political Disposition)
(F=Female,M=Male)
(VL=Very Liberal,L=Liberal,M=Moderate,C=Conservative,VC=Very Conservative)
The above graph is remarkable in the progressive shift towards distant space as one moves from left to right in the political spectrum. The liberals in both genders exhibit the lowest orientation towards distant space, while the conservatives have the strongest. This trend is certainly consistent with the proposal that conservative and religious tendencies are indeed correlated with elevated activity in the dopaminergic system (associated with the management of upper, distant space), while secular liberalism is more oriented towards the serotonergic and noradrenergic systems (associated with the lower visual field, and the management of peripersonal and ambient space).
Discussion
Two of the most deeply hidden tendencies of religious conservatism are the greater propensity to displace mass (see The Secret Symbiosis) and the greater orientation towards distant space. Indeed, these two seemingly unrelated behaviors have a common point of origin: the dopamine system. The detection, orientation, and approach of targets in distant space has been under considerable Darwinian pressure, and a focus of the dopamine system.
Indeed, approaching targets seems to be a complementary behavior for those oriented towards distant space. In cross-correlating the orientation towards distant space with the other survey variables, one relationship was very notable: those with a straight ahead gaze rated highest on the shyness-boldness scale. The high boldness rating of those with a greater orientation to distant space was dramatic, and follows from the general approach and reward-seeking orientation of the dopamine system.
And it is the dopamine system that explains so many attributes of religious conservatism: high rates and greater stability of pair-bonding (which supports higher levels of reproduction); orientation towards cognitive coordination within smaller groups and higher levels of altruism within those groups (which also supports higher rates of reproduction); orientation towards emigration to relieve population stress; greater tendency to displace mass, that is, move things around (also supporting reproduction); greater orientation towards upper, distant space, and the placement of religious icons therein; positive valuation of social dominance; higher stability of beliefs; higher levels of xenophobia; aversion to rapid technological progress; higher rates of male dominance, which increases reproductive rates; higher rates of autism, delusional ideation, and paranoid schizophrenia; lower rates of anxiety and depression; and a greater need for both energy and living space.
Charles Brack
December, 2008
References:
D. Bhugra, B. Corridan, S. Rudge, J. Leff, R. Mallett (1999) Early manifestations, personality traits and pathways into care for Asian and white first-onset cases of schizophrenia. Social Psychiatry & Psychiatric Epidemiology 34(11): 595-599, 1999.
M. Coltheart, R. Langdon, and R. McKay (2007) Schizophrenia and Monothematic Delusions. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 2007.
H. Demaree, D. Everhart, E. Youngstrom, D. Harrison. (2005) Brain Lateralization of Emotional Processing: Historical roots and a future incorporating "dominance". Behavioral and Cognitive Science Reviews.
K. Dewhurst and A. Beard (1970). Sudden religious conversions in temporal lobe epilepsy. British Journal of Psychiatry, 117, 497–507.
V. Goel and R. Dolan. (2003) Explaining modulation of reasoning by belief. Cognition 87.
ICMR (1988) Multicentre collaborative study of factors associated with the course and outcome of schizophrenia. Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi.
K. Kampe, C. Frith, R. Dolan, and U. Frith (2001) Psychology: Reward value of attractiveness and gaze. Nature 413, 589 (Oct. 2001).
K. Knutson, J. Wood, M. Spampinato, and J. Grafman (2006) Politics on the Brain: An fMRI Investigation. Social Neuroscience. 2006 March ; 1(1): 25–40.
D. Nettle (2005) Schizotypy and mental health among poets, visual artists, and mathematicians. Journal of Research in Personality 40 (2006) 876–890
E. Peters, S. Day, J. McKenna, and G. Orbach (1999). Delusional ideation in religious and psychotic populations. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 83–96.
F. Previc (2006) The role of extrapersonal brain systems in religous activity. Consciousness and Cognition 15 (2006) 500-539.
P. Rudalevièiene, T. Stompe2, A. Narbekovas, N. Raškauskiene, R. Bunevièius (2008) Are religious delusions related to religiosity in schizophrenia? Medicina (Kaunas) 2008; 44(7).
