Modern neuroscience: Room for the soul?

By John Beggs

Outline

• Introduction

• Neuroscience background

• Free Will

• Ethics

• God

• Conclusions

Outline

• Introduction

• Neuroscience background

• Free Will

• Ethics

• God

• Conclusions

Apollo’s chariot…

…or rotation of the earth?

Science killed Apollo.

Will neuroscience kill the soul?

Dualism

Rene DescartesBody Mind

Dualism

Rene Descartes

Body and mind are separate

The mind influences the body

Mind is the fundamental truth

The modern view: monism

Antonio Damasio

The brain produces the mind

Body, or matter, is the fundamental truth

The conflict

The conflict

• Dualism: Just as mind is separate from the body, so Free Will, Ethics and God originate independently of the brain.

The conflict

• Dualism: Just as mind is separate from the body, so Free Will, Ethics and God originate independently of the brain.

• Monism: Just as the brain produces mind, so Free Will, Ethics and God are merely products of the brain.

Outline

• Introduction

• Neuroscience background

• Free Will

• Ethics

• God

• Conclusions

Trying to explain different levels

macroscopic

mesoscopic

microscopic

Cortical neurons from rat

~1010 neurons in human brain

Neurons generate voltage pulses

time

volt

age

Output is communicated by pulses through synapses

time

volt

age

Memory?

Each neuron makes and receives many connections

~ 103 – 104 outputs

~ 103 – 104 inputs

If all the inputs exceed a threshold, the neuron will “fire”

out

in

in

in

in

Otherwise, it won’t

From the lab of David McCormick, Yale University

Logical operations: AND gate

A

B

C

If C has a threshold of 2,then it will fire only whenA AND B fire

A

B

C

If C has a threshold of 1,then it will fire whenA OR B fire

Logical operations: OR gate

Neurons form networks for processing information

Networks form the cortical “sheet”

The cortical sheet is responsible for higher functions

Beggs lab: small sections of the sheet

In collaboration with Alan Litke, UC Santa Cruz

Cortical structure is fairly uniformFunctions are partially localized in cortex

EEG: Electro-encephalogram

Measures electrical activity through the skull

PET scan: Positron emission tomography

Measures glucose metabolism

fMRI: functional magnetic resonance imaging

Measures blood-oxygenlevel dependent responses

TMS: Transcranial magnetic stimulation

Bulk stimulatescortical regions

Outline

• Introduction

• Neuroscience background

• Free Will

• Ethics

• God

• Conclusions

Every physical system that has been investigated has turned out to be either deterministic or random. “Both are bad news for free will,” he said. So if human actions can’t be caused and aren’t random, he said, “It must be — what — some weird magical

power?” - Michael Silberstein

Every spear tip we have ever seen has been made of either flint or bone. Both are bad news for tungsten. So if you claim that “tungsten” isn’t flint and can’t be bone, it must be – what – some weird new material?

- Cave Man

Dualist: Free will could exist independently

of some of our brain processes.

Monist: Free will is produced by our brain,

and might even be an illusion.

Benamin Libet’s experiment

Readiness potential precedes will to move

Therefore, there is no free will.

You thought you were deciding, but the decision was already made by that point!

Not so fast…why not this:

Will

Hand movement

Conscious reflectionon decision

Prepotential

“I have decided”

Are there any examples of our awareness “lagging behind”?

Blindsight

(Lawrence Weiskrantz)

So, conscious awareness can come after recognition

Also…

Low-level processes are often automatic: I can tie myshoes without thinking about it; I can drive home in my sleep. I have subconscious biases in my thoughts.

Do these low-level processes truly reflect my will, or do they just reflect my tendencies?

Implicit Association Test (IAT)https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

Implicit Association Test (IAT)https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

Laughter

orGood

orEvil

So…

My tendencies could be detected by electrodes, or by questionsthat you ask me.

But I do not necessarily act on all my tendencies.

Example: I may be angry at someone, but I may chose to forgive them.

Which takes more “willpower”: anger or forgiveness?

Free Will

• Free will may be a new type of process, as yet not fully understood.

Free Will

• Free will may be a new type of process, as yet not fully understood.

• Signals of my intentions may come before my sensed decision. But my choice may actually come before both.

Free Will

• Free will may be a new type of process, as yet not fully understood.

• Signals of my intentions may come before my sensed decision. But my choice may actually come before both.

• We have many strong automatic tendencies, but these are often overruled by our will.

Outline

• Introduction

• Neuroscience background

• Free Will

• Ethics

• God

• Conclusions

Neuroethics

“the examination of how we want to deal with the social issues of disease, normality, mortality, lifestyle, and the philosophy of living informed by our understanding of underlying brain mechanisms”

-The Ethical Brain, by Michael Gazzaniga (emphasis his)

Prefrontal lesions: amoral behavior

Phineas Gage

Clearly, the health of our brain affects our ability to make moral choices.

But should we also look to the brain to tell us what is morally right?

If you are a dualist, then no.If you are a monist, then yes.

Jonathan Cohen

A runaway trolley is hurtling down the tracks toward five people who will be killed if it proceeds on its present course. The only way to save them is to hit a switch that will turn the trolley onto an alternate set of tracks where it will kill one person instead of five.

Most people hit the switch, saving five

As before, a trolley threatens to kill five people. You are standing next to a large stranger on a footbridge that spans the tracks in between the oncoming trolley and the five people. In this scenario, the only way to save the five people is to push this stranger off the bridge, onto the tracks below. He will die if you do this, but his body will stop the trolley from reaching the others.

Most people refrain from pushing, letting five die

“Emotional” areas(footbridge dilemma)

“Cognitive” areas(trolley dilemma)

How does the brain respond to these two dilemmas?

Going further:Should one smother a crying baby to death to protect the lives of many when enemy soldiers are approaching?  Here they compared the activation patterns in the brains between those who approve (utilitarians) and those who do not (deontologists).

Deontologists: Don’t smother – “emotional” brain areas dominate

Utilitarians: Smother – “cognitive” brain areas dominate

"The social-emotional responses that we've inherited from our primate ancestors . . . undergird the absolute prohibitions that are central to deontology. In contrast, the 'moral calculus' that defines utilitarianism is made possible by more recently evolved structures in the frontal lobes that support abstract thinking and high-level cognitive

control."  - Greene and Cohen

(Descriptive)Before, they were telling us how the brain responded to these dilemmas.

(Prescriptive)Now they seem to be suggesting what we should do.

If they are correct…

If they are correct…

• Utilitarianism, being most recent, is correct

If they are correct…

• Utilitarianism, being most recent, is correct

• Deontological views, being most ancient, are incorrect

If they are correct…

• Utilitarianism, being most recent, is correct

• Deontological views, being most ancient, are incorrect

• Joshua Greene should give up his federal research funding, because we could feed many more people than just him with it.

If they are correct…

• Utilitarianism, being most recent, is correct

• Deontological views, being most ancient, are incorrect

• Joshua Greene should give up his federal research funding, because we could feed many more people than just him with it.

• Intellectual superiority equates with moral superiority

Outline

• Introduction

• Neuroscience background

• Free Will

• Ethics

• God

• Conclusions

Does God exist?

Does God exist?

Dualist: God could exist independently of our minds

Does God exist?

Dualist: God could exist independently of our minds

Monist: God only exists in our minds

Julian Jaynes (1920-1997)

God’s voice?That’s just the other hemisphere talking.

There are…recent examples [of TE], like one of the founders of the Seventh Day Adventist Movement, Ellen White. Born in 1827, she suffered a brain injury aged 9 that totally changed her personality. She also began to have powerful religious visions.

Temporal lobe epilepsy (TE)

Disruptions of this general area may also lead to increased ritual behavior.

Michael Persinger

80% of Dr Michael Persinger's experimental subjects report that an artificial magnetic field focused on …[left temporal lobe] brain areas gives them a feeling of 'not being alone'. Some of them describe it as a religious sensation.

Scientists like Andrew Newberg want to see just what does happen during moments of faith. He worked with Buddhist, Michael Baime, to study the brain during meditation. By injecting radioactive tracers [PET scan] into Michael's bloodstream as he reached the height of a meditative trance, Newberg could use a brain scanner to image the brain at a religious climax.

So, religion is something that only happensoccasionally?

Out-of-body experience?

Even Richard Dawkins…

The “God Module”

V.S. Ramachandran

People with temporal lobe epilepsyhad religious hallucinations

After seizures, they were more prone to prefer religious wordsover erotic words. Control grouppreferred erotic words.

I see my wife; she produces activity in my visual cortex

Seizure or stimulation causes activity in my visual cortex even when my wife is not there. Therefore, my wife is always an illusion?

Religion is not just:

• Feeling another presence

• An out-of-body experience

• Ritual

• A climactic moment of faith

Just because activity in the brain correlates with experiences of God does not mean that God does not exist.

Outline

• Introduction

• Neuroscience background

• Free Will

• Ethics

• God

• Conclusions

Conclusions

• Mental functions are produced by the brain

Conclusions

• Mental functions are produced by the brain

• This includes mechanisms of will, moral choice, and perceptions of God

Conclusions

• Mental functions are produced by the brain

• This includes mechanisms of will, moral choice, and perceptions of God

• From this it does not follow that:

Conclusions

• Mental functions are produced by the brain

• This includes mechanisms of will, moral choice, and perceptions of God

• From this it does not follow that:

• Free will is an illusion

Conclusions

• Mental functions are produced by the brain

• This includes mechanisms of will, moral choice, and perceptions of God

• From this it does not follow that:

• Free will is an illusion

• Utilitarianism is correct

Conclusions

• Mental functions are produced by the brain

• This includes mechanisms of will, moral choice, and perceptions of God

• From this it does not follow that:

• Free will is an illusion

• Utilitarianism is correct

• God is an illusion

Accept the science, but be critical of the non-scientific conclusions.

Other interesting topics

• “Mind reading” fMRI scans• Remote control of rats• Neural control of prosthetic limbs• Mentally moving a cursor for shut in patients• Closed loop experiments: “Brain in a dish”• Split brain experiments• Hemineglect• Prosopagnosia• The case of H.M.; no new memories• “Gay” rams?• Spiritual machines?

Modern neuroscience: Room for the soul?

By John Beggs

Thanks!

Successfully uploaded 9.6MB file NeurosceinceRoomForSoulBeggs.ppt.

It may be accessed via this URL: https://www.slashtmp.iu.edu/public/download.php?FILE=jmbeggs/12502F84fuG

•

Or email me at: jmbeggs@indiana.edu

Religious experience has a cognitive component

Differences betweenhappy emotions and religious thoughtsinvolve cognitive areas