Human nature

Transkrypt

Human nature

Projekt współfinansowany przez Unię Europejską w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego
Philosophical issues and the contemporary science
Part II. The concept of human nature in the
context of discoveries in contemporary science
• Author: Katarzyna Zahorodna, PhD
Wroclaw University of Technology
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences
e-mail: [email protected]
Human nature and contemporary science
• Goals and objectives of the course:
 Providing students with key information on some issues
from the borderline between philosophy and
contemporary science.
 Presenting and explaining the role of humanities in
modern scientific thinking.
 Enhancing student’s ‘soft skills’.
Human nature and contemporary science
Contents of particular lectures:
1. Human nature. What does the concept of human nature mean? Philosophical and psychological
roots of the concept [3h]
2. Cognitive science and the concept of human nature as a human mind [2h]
3. Social neuroscience. Biological evolution of social human nature [2h]
4. - 5. Human nature and neuroscience of empathy. Simon’s Baron-Cohen’s theory of evil . What is
autism? [4h]
6. Morality and antisocial behaviour [2 hr]
7. Homo aestheticus - neuroaesthetics [2h]
Lecture 1
Human nature
What does the concept of human nature mean?
Philosophical and psychological roots of the concept (3h).
Human nature
Agenda:
1. The reason for studying humanities.
2. Basic notions connected with the concept of human nature.
3. The usefulness of knowledge on human nature.

Conclusion
Human nature
1. The reason for studying humanities
●
●
Snow’s thesis:
„the intellectual life of the
whole of western society was
split into the titular two
cultures — namely the
sciences and the humanities
— and that this was a major
hindrance to solving the
world's problems”
WHY?
Human nature
„A good many times I have been present at gatherings of people who, by
the standards of the traditional culture, are thought highly educated
and who have with considerable gusto been expressing their
incredulity at the illiteracy of scientists. Once or twice I have been
provoked and have asked the company how many of them could
describe the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The response was
cold: it was also negative. Yet I was asking something which is the
scientific equivalent of: ‘Have you read a work of Shakespeare’s?’ (…)
I now believe that if I had asked an even simpler question — such as,
‘What do you mean by mass, or acceleration’, which is the scientific
equivalent of saying, ‘Can you read?’ — not more than one in ten of
the highly educated would have felt that I was speaking the same
language. So the great edifice of modern physics goes up, and the
majority of the cleverest people in the western world have about as
much insight into it as their neolithic ancestors would have had”.
Snow, 1959
Human nature
For better mutual understanding:
a) critical thinking and innovations,
b) the ability of widening and changing perspective,
c) the role of interdisciplinarity – the holistic world view,
d) increasing students awareness of meaning cooperation,
e) ‘soft skills’, the ability of disputing,
f)
sensitizing students to ethic issues.
Human nature
Critical thinking:
„the intellectually disciplined process of actively and
skilfully
conceptualizing,
applying,
analyzing,
synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered
from, or generated by, observation, experience,
reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to
belief and action”
Defining Critical Thinking,
A statement by Michael Scriven & Richard Paul, presented at the 8th Annual
International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform, Summer
1987.
Human nature
Innovations, creative thinking:
„Creativity involves the production of novel, useful products."
Mumford, M. D. Where have we been, where are we going?
Taking stock in creativity research, „Creativity Research Journal”,
15 (2003), 107–120 (p. 110 )
„In psychology, creativity is usually defined as the production
of an idea, action, or object that is new and valued,
although what is considered creative at any point in time
depends on the cultural context.”
MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Sciences, p. 205
Human nature
Innovations, creative thinking:
„Contrary to the popular image of creative solutions appearing with the
immediacy of a popping flashbulb, most novel achievements are the
result of a much longer process, sometimes lasting many years. We
can differentiate five stages of this process (Wallas 1926), with the
understanding that these stages are recursive, and may be repeated in
several full or partial cycles before a creative solution appears.”
Human nature
Creative thinking - stages of the creative process
(Wallas 1926):
1. Preparation;
2. Incubation;
3. Insight;
4. Evaluation;
5. Elaboration.
More information below
Human nature
Creative thinking - Creativity as a Systemic Phenomenon
Creativity can best be understood as a confluence of three factors:
-
a domain, which consists of a set of rules and practices;
-
an individual, who makes a novel variation in the contents of the domain;
-
and a field, which consist of experts who act as gatekeepers to the domain,
and decide which novel variation is worth adding to it (Csikszentmihalyi 1996).
Human nature
Creative thinking - Creativity as a Systemic Phenomenon
„A
burst of creativity is generally caused, not by individuals
being more creative, but by domain knowledge becoming
more available, or a field being more supportive of change.
Conversely, lack of creativity is usually caused, not by
individuals lacking original thoughts, but by the domain
having exhausted its possibilities, or the field not
recognizing the most valuable original thoughts”.
Human nature
The ability of widening and changing perspective:
-
-
-
-
elasticity of thinking,
taking into considderation different points of view, different
possibilities,
increasing the contyngency in communication,
observing, adapting and using models from different
disciplines.
Human nature
‘Soft skills’:
-
personality traits (like?),
-
empathy,
-
social graces,
-
communication&language,
-
personal habits,
-
friendliness and optimism that characterize relationships
with other people.
Human nature
The ability of disputing:
-
the art of discussion,
-
scientific discussion,
-
-
conversations about subjective ideas (might serve to
extend understanding and awareness),
conversations about objective facts (may serve to
consolidate a widely held view).
Milton Wright, The Art of Conversation
K. Patterson, J. Grenny, A. Switzler, R. McMillan, Crucial Conversations:
Tools for Talking When Stakes are High
-
-
Human nature
2. Basic notions connected with the concept of human nature
?
Human nature
Human
nature
refers
to
the
distinguishing
characteristics, including ways of thinking, feeling and
acting, which humans tend to have naturally (ex
definione as humans).
What makes us humans?
What defines us as human beings?
Human nature
2. Basic notions connected with the concept of human
nature
Philosophy
Religion
?
?
Human nature
2. Basic notions connected with the concept of human
nature
Philosophy
-
human as a rational being,
-
reasonable scientist,
-
responsible,
-
determined/indetermined,
-
good or bad.
Religion
?
Human nature
• Soul, reason (intellectual faculty), mind, identity, personality,
consciousness.
• Is our nature stable or changeable?
• Innate or created? (tabula rasa, determinism, nature or nurture?)
• Good or bad?
• Social animal, political animal?
Human nature
Soul:
-
immortal, indestructible,
-
the source of life and motion,
-
dualism of body and soul:
=> bad and good
=> Plato, Plotyn, maniheism, gnosis & christianity.
Human nature
Soul:
-
-
-
„The soul is the first actuality of a natural body that is
potentially alive;”
Form is what makes anything what it is – gives it its nature.
It is the essence of anything;
vegetative, animalistic and reasonable.
(Aristotle, De Anima)
Human nature
Soul:
-
-
-
-
Psyche (Greek ψυχή, Latin - Anima) - the totality of a
human mind, conscious and unconscious,
Pneuma (Greek πνεῦμα - "air in motion, breath, wind”) spirit;
Thymos (Greek θύμος, indicates a physical association with
breath or blood); mood, area of a soul where feelings of
pride, shame etc are located;
Nous (Greek νοῦς ) - intellect, mind, reason, necessary for
understanding what is true or real.
Digression
- Logos, gr. λόγος
• ”knowledge”, "a ground", "a plea", "an opinion", "an
expectation", "word", "speech", "account", "to reason”,
"reasoned discourse”, "the argument,"
• Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BCE) - used the term for a
principle of order and knowledge.
Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (2nd ed): Heraclitus, 1999
Human nature
Mind
-
-
in modern philosophy (from René Descartes, 1596 – 1650),
the set of cognitive faculties that enables consciousness,
perception, thinking, judgement, and memory;
-
a system that is capable of having mental states;
-
a system that stores and processes information.
(U. Żegleń, Filozofia umysłu, s. 25 - 26)
Human nature
-
the body-mind problem - is the problem of explaining how
our mental states, events, and processes are related to the
physical states, events, and processes in our bodies,
MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Sciences, p. 546)
- materialism, dualism, functionalism (of substances or of
properties), emergentism, etc.
Human nature
Consciousness
- Is it only a human feature?
- Are non-human animals conscious?
- Which animals might have sth like it?
- What function is served by consciousness?
- What evidence could resolve these issues?
- What is dreaming?
Evan M. MacPhail, The Evolution of Consciousness,
Oxford University Press, 1998.
Human nature
Consciousness
- phenomenal consciousness and self-consciousness.
- the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an
external object or something within oneself;
- sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to
experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of
selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind.
G. Farthing, The Psychology of Consciousness
biology of self-awareness
• Philippe Rochat, Five levels of self-awareness
as they unfold early in life, „Consciousness and
Cognition,” 12 (2003), pp. 717–731.
Human nature
Personality
-
-
-
individual differences among people in behavior patterns,
cognition and emotion,
relatively stable and consistent for a person way of reacting
and behaving,
does it exist?
W. Michel, Y. Shoda, R. E. Smith,
Introduction to personality: Toward an integration
Human nature
Personality
-
-
-
-
Idea, that a type of personality is always connected with a
type of body and posture;
Ernst Kretschmer, author of thypology (the theory of
personality types);
Type A and Type B personality theory (Meyer Friedman
and Ray Rosenman);
Type D personality.
Human nature
William Sheldon
Body Type (Somatotype) Theory
Artistic
Sensitive
Apprehensive
introverted
Tolerant
Relaxed
Love comfort
and luxury
Pleassant
extraverted
Courageous
Energetic
Active
Dynamic
Assertive
Aggresive
Risk-taker
Human nature
Multiple personality disorder (Dissociative identity disorder)
-
-
DSM IV - an adult recurrently controlled by two or more
discrete identities or personality states, accompanied by
memory lapses for important information that is not
caused by alcohol, drugs or medications and other medical
conditions such as complex partial seizures.
ICD-10 Version:2010 – F44.8 Other dissociative [conversion] disorders
Human nature
Personality disorders
-
-
„are a class of mental disorders characterized by enduring
maladaptive patterns of behavior, cognition and inner
experience, exhibited across many contexts and deviating
markedly from those accepted by the individual's culture.
These patterns develop early, are inflexible and are
associated with significant distress or disability”.
Usually they are „ego-syntonic (i.e. the patterns are
consistent with the ego integrity of the individual) and are,
therefore, perceived to be appropriate by that individual”.
DSM V, pp. 646–649.
Human nature
Personality disorders
-
Borderline
-
Obsessive-compulsive
-
Avoidant
-
Antisocial-psychopathic
-
Schizotypal
+ Narcissistic
+ Dependent
+ Histrionic
Human nature
Is our nature stable or changeable?
Human nature
• Nature innate or created? (tabula rasa, determinism,
nature or nurture?)
Human nature
• Good or bad?
Human nature
• Social animal, political animal?
• Aristotle – Greek polis;
• In the context of the theory of evolution.
Human nature
3. The usefulness of knowledge on human nature
-
-
-
Enhance our knowledge;
In psychology (changed attutude towards mental illness as
possesions);
In psychotheraphy and education (Is our nature stable or
changeable? [philosophically unsolvable, psychologically the
second is useful]);
-
In law (brain damages and sociopaths etc.);
-
In medicine (consciousness or a persistent vegetative state?).
Conclusions - on the definition of human nature
• Traditionally - soul, spirituality
• In the context of contemporary science:
– Reason (intellectual faculties)
– Social animal
– Moral sense
– Sense of beauty
Lecture 2
Cognitive science and human nature
Cognitive science and the concept of human nature as a human
mind [2h]
Cognitive science and human nature
Agenda:
1. Artificial Intelligence
2. Cognitive science
3. Embodied mind

Conclusion
Golem (Hebrew ‫)גולם‬
• an animated anthropomorphic being, magically created entirely from
inanimate matter (like mud, stone and clay);
• the most famous version - Judah Loew ben Bezalel, the late-16th-century
rabbi of Prague and second version by Rabbi Eliyahu of Chełm (1550–
1583);
• in some tales a golem is inscribed with Hebrew words, such as the word
emet (‫‘ אמת‬truth’ in Hebrew) written on its forehead [or names of God].
The golem could then be deactivated by removing the aleph (‫ א‬in emet
=> met = death).
•
Moshe Idel, Golem: Jewish Magical and Mystical
Traditions on the Artificial Anthropoid,
State University of New York Press,
Albany, New York 1990.
Other ‘golems’
• Automatons - machines that can move by themselves (for
example: The Digesting Duck by Jacques de Vaucanson,
hailed in 1739);
• Frankenstein's monster (Mary Shelley, 1818);
• Androids - robots or synthetic organisms designed to look and
act like humans, especially the ones with a body having fleshlike resemblance (artifitial women and children too).
•
Jeff Prucher, Brave new words: the Oxford dictionary of science fiction.
Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 6–7
What do we want from machines, if we want
them to be like a human?
What do we want from machines, if we want
them to be like a human?
• Planned and skillfull bahaviour;
• Reasonable thinking (computation?);
• Awerness and consciousness;
• Feelings and emotions.
'Can machines think?'
„How many different automata or moving machines can be made by the
industry of man [...] For we can easily understand a machine's being
constituted so that it can utter words, and even emit some responses to
action on it of a corporeal kind, which brings about a change in its organs;
for instance, if touched in a particular part it may ask what we wish to say to
it; if in another part it may exclaim that it is being hurt, and so on. But it
never happens that it arranges its speech in various ways, in order to
reply appropriately to everything that may be said in its presence, as
even the lowest type of man can do.”
Descartes, René, Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy.
Yale University Press, New Haven & London 1996, pp. 34–5
Blade Runner - Do Androids Dream of
Electric Sheep? (Philip K. Dick)
• 'Can machines think?' - The Turing test is a test of _
machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to,
or indistinguishable from, that of a human.
• "Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in
the imitation game?"
Turing, Alan, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence",
Mind, LIX (236/1950): pp. 433–460.
Thinking and other cognitive abilities
• Thinking algorithmically – Deep Blue (machines are
faster than humans);
• Creative, critical thinking?
• Heuristic thinking?
• Perception? Memory?
• Consciousness? Attention?
• Emotions? => BODY
Cognitive science
• Cognitive science is „an interdisciplinary field of researchers
from
psychology,
neuroscience,
linguistics,
philosophy,
computer science, and anthropology that seek to understand the
mind and its processes.”
George Miller, "The cognitive revolution: a historical perspective„
•
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7/2003
• _The fundamental concept of cognitive science is "that thinking
can best be understood in terms of representational structures in
the mind and computational procedures that operate on those
structures”.
•
Thagard, Paul, Cognitive Science, The Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
Cognitive science
„It includes research on intelligence and behavior (focusing
on how information is represented, processed, and
transformed in faculties such as perception, language,
memory, reasoning, and emotion) within nervous
systems (human or other animal) and machines (e.g.
computers)”.
•
Thagard, Paul, Cognitive Science, The Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
Human nature according to cognitive
science?
• Instrumental ability of thinking as computing on a
basis of neuronal system;
• Thinking is embodied and embedded (so it is
connected with a body and a situation of a living
human being as a person and as species).
Explanation of human nature according to
cognitive science?
• In the context of:
- nervous system,
- proper body,
- ontogenesis and philogenesis,
- current and previous situations,
- other people, etc.
Human nature and a nervous system
Phrenology (from Greek: φρήν, phrēn, "mind"; and λόγος, logos,
"knowledge") „is a pseudoscience primarily focused on
measurements of the human skull, based on the concept that
the brain is the organ of the mind, and that certain brain areas
have localized, specific functions or modules”.
• Developed by German physician Franz Joseph Gall in 1796.
Fodor, Jerry A., Modularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology,
MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1983, p.14, 23, 131
• an idea that the Nobel Prize winning biologist, Francis Crick,
described as "The Astonishing Hypothesis” says:
• ”You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your
ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will are in fact
no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and
their associated molecules. As Lewis Carroll's Alice might have
phrased it, "you're nothing but a pack of neurons”.
•
Francis Crick, The Astonishing Hypothesis,
The Scientific Search For The Soul, 1995.
• How a nervous system could produce a soul,
consciousness,
self-identity
and
‘immaterial’, spiritual entities?
other
• Folk psychology, metodological and ontological reductionism
and the theory of mind.
•
Paul Churchland, Eliminative Materialism and the Propositional Attitudes, „The
Journal of Philosophy”, Vol. 78, No. 2. (Feb., 1981), pp. 67-90.
•
Particia Churchland, Can Neurobiology Teach us Anything about Consciousness?,
http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Papers/Py104/church.neuro.html
•
Particia Churchland, Braintrust: What Neuroscience Tells Us about Morality, 2011.
• Disorders of consciousness are medical conditions that
inhibit consciousness,
1. Locked-in syndrome,
2. Minimally conscious state,
3. Persistent vegetative state,
4. Chronic coma,
5. Brain death.
•
J. L. Bernat, "Chronic disorders of consciousnes”,
Lancet 367/2006 (9517), pp. 1181–1192.
Embodied cognition as a human nature
(1) cognition is situated;
(2) cognition is time-pressured;
(3) we off-load cognitive work onto the environment;
(4) the environment is part of the cognitive system;
(5) cognition is for action;
(6) offline cognition is body based.
•
Margaret Wilson, Six views of embodied cognition,
„Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2002, 9 (4), pp. 625-636.
(1) cognition is situated;
„Cognitive activity takes place in the context of a real-world
environment, and it inherently involves perception and action”.
•
(2) cognition is time-pressured;
„We are “mind on the hoof”*, and cognition must be understood in
terms of how it functions under the pressures of real-time
interaction with the environment”.
•
* Andy Clark, Being there: Putting brain, body, and world
together again, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 1997.
•
(3) we off-load cognitive work onto the environment;
„Because of limits on our information-processing abilities (e.g.,
limits on attention and working memory), we exploit the
environment to reduce the cognitive workload. We make the
environment hold or even manipulate information for us, and we
harvest that information only on a need-to-know basis”.
•
(4) the environment is part of the cognitive system;
„The information flow between mind and world is so dense and
continuous that, for scientists studying the nature of cognitive
activity, the mind alone is not a meaningful unit of analysis”.
+ Extended mind hipothesis
(4) Margaret Wilson, Six views of embodied cognition,
(5) cognition is for action;
„The function of the mind is to guide action, and cognitive
mechanisms such as perception and memory must be
understood in terms of their ultimate contribution to situationappropriate behavior.”
•
(6) offline cognition is body based.
„Even when decoupled from the environment, the activity of the
mind is grounded in mechanisms that evolved for interaction with
the environment—that is, mechanisms of sensory processing
and motor control.”
•
• Cognition goes through a body;
• Emotions
-
somatic
marker
hypothesis
-
proposes
a
mechanism by which emotional processes can guide (or bias)
behavior, particularly decision-making.
•
Antonio R. Damasio, Descartes' Error: Emotion,
Reason and the Human Brain, 1994
Conclusions
• Human nature as embodied cognitive system;
• Reason, perception, attention, memory,
imagination, language, emotions.
Lecture 3
Social neuroscience.
Biological evolution of social human nature
The concept of human nature in the context of the
evolutionary vision of emerging species [2h]
Social neuroscience
Agenda:
1.Social neuroscience – basic issues and the definition.
2. Social brain – The social intelligence hypothesis.
3. Evolutionary origins of culture.
•
Your handbook: Jamie Ward,
The Student’s Guide to Social Neuroscience, pp. 49 – 70
Social neuroscience
• an attempt to understand and explain, using the methods
and theories of neuroscience, how _ thoughts, feelings, and
behaviours of individuals are influenced by _ actual,
imagined, or implied presence of others.
•
Cacioppo & Berntson, Social psychological contributions
to the decade of the brain: Doctrine and liulti-level analysis, 1992;
• fMRI, EEG, tomography, transcranial magniteic stimulation.
•
The definition after your handbook: Jamie Ward,
The Student’s Guide to Social Neuroscience, p. 5
Social brain – basic questions
• Modularity domain – a notion that certain cognitive
processes (or regions of the brain) are restricted in the
type of information they process and the type of
processing carried out;
• Domain specificity – an idea that a cognitive proces (or
brain region) is specialized in processing only one
particular kind of information;
•
Definitions after your handbook: Jamie Ward,
Social brain – two major, radical, opposite but
possible accounts
A. Modularity and domain specificity - Are there any
particular neural substrates in a brain that are involved in
social cognition but not in other types of cognitive
processing?
[Jerry Fodor, The modularity of mind, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1983];
A. alternative percpective argues that a ‘social brain’ is
no, in fact, specialised uniquely in social behaviour but is
also involved in non-social aspects of cognition (e.g.
reasoning, visual perception, threat detection);
•
A. Modularity and domain specificity
• A module = ”a computational routine that responds to
particular inputs and performs a particular computation of
them, that is, a routine that is highly specialized in therms
of what it does to what”;
• one module = one domain specificity (the module
processes only one kind of input like face recognition,
feeling social emotions, and so on).
•
B. Anti-Modularity and domain specificity
• Social and non-social cognition evolved hand-in-hand, but they did
not lead to highly specialised routines in the brain for dealing with
social problems;
• hypothesis (e.g. Gould, 1991) – evolving general neural and
cognitive mechanisms that increase intellect, such as having
bigger brains, may make us socially smarter too (or that the social
needs for developing brain leads to general cognitive advances in
other domains).
•
Between these two are others, more
compromise – ‘in-betweens accounts’
• e.g. Frith – a possibility says that there are particular kinds of
neural mechanisms especially suited to sociall processes, like
mirror system;
•
C. D. Frith, The social brain? [in:] N. Emery, N. Clayton & C. Frith (eds.),
Social intelligence: From brain to culture, Oxford Univ Press; Oxford 2007.
• Mirror neurons respond both when an animal sees an action
performed by someone else and when they perform the same
action themselves.
•
Rizzolatti & Craighero, The mirror-neuron system; „Annual Review of
Neuroscience”, 27/2004, pp. 169-192.
The social intelligence hypothesis
• Homo sapiens sapiens (anatomically modern humans,
anatomically modern Homo sapiens) – is a subspecies of Homo
sapiens. Others subspecies were homo sapiens idaltu and
(probably) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.
- Biologically 200,000 years,
- Behaviourally 50,000 years,
- Tools, art, burings,
- We are separated from our nearest living ancestor (chimpanzee)
by 1,6% of DNA – so why is there the difference?
”it’s because the main evolutionary pressure for human
intellectual developement is not the ability to be smarter
person but rather the ability to understand and predict
complex social interactions and to outwit our peers”.
•
N. K. Humprhrey, The social function of intellect; [in:] P. Bateson, R. A. Hinde (eds.),
Growing points in ethology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK 1976
As so – complex culture would be seen as a by-product of
earlier, more general adaptations.
•
Key terms:
• Social intelligence – the ability to understand and predict
complex social interactions and to outwit our peers;
• Social intelligence hypothesis (= social brain hypothesis) –
Evolutionary pressures to be socially smarter lead to more
general changes (e. g. increased brain size) resulting in
increased intellect in non-social domains.
Key terms:
• Culture – a shared set of values, skills, artifacts, and beliefs
amongst a group of individuals; culture is shared amongst
members of a group via a process of social learning both within
and across generations… (skills - like literacy; technology - like
tool-making; beliefs - like but only religious beliefs, etc.).
• Social learning – _ transmission of skills and knowledge from
person to person.
•
• Culture - biology or behavour? Innate or learned?
• Culture - biology or behavour? Innate or learned?
„whilst the differences between cultures are entirely attributable
to enviromental factors (our time and place of birth), the
similarities between cultures (including the fact that we are all
immersed in one) are almost certainly down to biology and
evolution.”
•
The social intelligence hypothesis -
- three possible meanings of the hypothesis
1. ”Intelligence is manifested in social life”;
2. ”Complex society selects for enhanced intelligence”
(‘amount’);
3. ”Complex society selects the specific characteristics
of intelligence” („type”).
•
A. Whiten, C. P. van Schaik, The evolution of animal ‘cultures’ and social
intelligence, „Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B,
362/2007, pp. 603-620,
• „The larger the brain, the greater the number of social
relationships that can be sustained;
• Humans are adapted to an optimal group size of about 150
people;
• Although most of us know many more people than this, the claim
is that our brains can only support active relationships (based on
regular exchanges) with around 150 others”.
•
•
R. I. M. Dunbar, Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates, „Journal
of Human Evolution”, 20/1992, pp. 469-493.
• The brain size, the length of immaturity and social learning:
An unusually long time of reaching adulthood in humans costs a lot
(resources, offspring protection, etc.). But thanks to this we are able
to learn and adapt to our enviroment and culture (by social
learning).
•
T. H. Joffe, Social pressures have selected for an extended juvenile period in primates,
„Journal of Human Evolution”, 32/1997, pp. 70-78.
So =>
„Intelligence is equally a product of our nature (as a genetic
disposition to learn from each other) and nurture (our accumulating
knowledge of the world)”.
•
The Student’s Guide to Social Neuroscience, p. 53.
The social intelligence hypothesis –
- other species
• Dolphins and great apes – different lines of evolution, but similar
selection pressures (e. g. the need to deal with social complexity);
• Dolphins – about 60-70 associates, but not sharply demarcated (divided)
into stable groups;
• Dolphins (like apes, but not monkeys) – are able to recognise themselves
in mirrors (what has been linked to self-awareness - Schilhab, 2004).
•
D. Reiss, L. Marino, Mirror self-recognition in bottle-nose dolphins: A case of cognitive
convergence; „Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences of USA”, 98/2001, pp.
5937-5942.
•
T. S. S. Schilhab, What mirror self-recognition in nonhumans tell us about aspects of self,
„Biology and Philosophy”, 19/2004, pp. 111-126.
language – by-product or a needed adaptation?
Has language evolved to facilitate the bounding of large social
groups?
• Dunbar: Yes, language enables greater cohesion of groups.
•
R. I. M. Dunbar, Gossip in evolutionary perspective,
„Review of General Psychology”, 5/2004, pp. 100-110.
• Pinker & Bloom: No. Language did arise from selection of
pressures relating specifically to communicative needs.
•
S. Pinker, P. Bloom, Natural language and natural selection,
„Behavioral and Brain Sciences”, 13/1990, pp. 707-726.
language – by-product or a needed adaptation?
•
Language is more complex and should not be considered as a single entity
(speach production, syntax, semantic concepts, etc.);
•
For example – larynx.
„Is whether larynx descent occured because of _ the need to increase the repertoire
of speech (i. e. it evolved for the function of communication) or wheather it
occured for some other reason not related to communication). For example, a
descended larynx makes an animal sound bigger, thus making it more attractive
to a mate and enabling better opportunity to achive social dominance” (red deer).
•
Evolutionary origins of culture
• Evolution of culture – a newborn of first behavioral homo
sapiens would become a typical child, teenager and adult if
grew in our times;
• Culture in non-human species - ?
• ”Tradition - a distinctive pattern of bahaviour shared by two or
more individuals in a social group; multiple traditions may
constitute a culture”.
•
Cumulative culture
Culture
Traditions
Social information transfer
A. Whiten, C. P. van Schaik, The evolution of animal ‘cultures’ and social
intelligence, „Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B,
362/2007, pp. 603-620,
• Non-imitative social learning – social learning performed without an
understanding of the goals, intentions, and mental states of individuals.
• Types:
– Mimicking - copying the action without understanding the goal of
action (example – ‘talking’ parrots);
– Stimulus enhancement and local enhancement – having another
individual draw attention to an object [location] may increase the
likelihood that the observer will be interested in that object [location];
– Contagion – repetition of behaviors that are innate rather than
learned (e. g. yawning).
• Imitation – social learning based on an understanding of the
goals, intentions, and mental states of individuals.
•
M. Tomassello, The cultural orygins of human cognition,
Harvard University Press, Boston, MA 1999
• Understanding and reproduction of the actions of others;
• In humans it is observable in the first year of life;
• ”Imitation is not straightforward to spot; the challenge lies in
finding ways to observe, via behaviour, the unobservable (i. e.
mental states)”.
•
• Intentional stance – the tendency to explain or predict the
behaviour of others using intentional states (e. g. wanting,
liking).
•
Daniel Dennett, Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The panglossian paradigm
defended, „Behavioural and Brain Sciences”, 6(3)/1983, pp. 343-355.
• Even human infants show evidence of goal-based imitation
– ‘a study with a button and a forehead’.
•
G. Gergely, H. Bekking, I. Kiraly, Rational imitation in preverbal infants, „Nature’
415/2002, pp. 755
•
Imitation in non-humans – scientists
„studied imitation in young
chimpanzees. They observed a familiar person ram a stick several times into
a hole in the top of the box, and then insert the stick into a front hole in order
to extract a food reward. In one condition, the top of the box was transparent
and it could be seen that the first stage was meaningless (i.e. the top hole
was not connected to the reward). In another condition, the top of the box
was covered except of the hole . Young chimpanzees in the transparent
condition omitted the first step and went straight for the reward by putting the
stick in the front. Young chimpanzees in the covered-box condition performed
both steps. It suggests that the chimpanzees in this task are imitating, based
on an understanding of goals and perhaps intentions”.
•
• So why human imitation and culture is far more prolific that
the one found in apes?
• Creativity and innovations (so we have more things that are
worth imitating);
• Maybe in humans imitations is rewarding itself (not only as a
way to food, but for example as a way of binding groups
together)?
•
A. Dijksterhuis, Why we are social animals: The high road to imitation as social glue, [in:]
Hurley, Chater (eds.), perspectives on imitation: From neuroscience to social sciene, Vol
I, MIT Press, Camblidge, MA, 2005
•
Evolutionary origins of culture - Cultural skills
• Mirror neurons respond both when an animal sees an action
performed by someone else and when they perform the same action
themselves;
„Thus, the response properties of mirror neurons disregard the distinction
between self and other, and this may provide a crucial basis for
imitation. (…) The response properties of these neurons are quite
specific. They are often tuned into precise actions (e.g. tearing, twisting,
grasping) that are goal directed.
• Moreover, mirror neurons respond if an approprioate action is implied as
well as directly observed.”
•
•
Rizzolatti & Craighero, The mirror-neuron system; „Annual Review of Neuroscience”, 27/2004, pp.
Social nature of human beings,
socially embedded cognition
• Language,
• Communication,
• Face recognition,
• Intentionality / following the moves of eyes,
• Autism…?
Edward Wilson
• In this book the problem
of social human nature is
directly expressed.
Lecture 4&5
Human nature and neuroscience of empathy
Neuroscience of empathy & Simon Baron-Cohen’s theory of evil.
On autism. [4h]
Human nature and empathy
Agenda:
1. Science on empathy,
2. Poblems with empathy,
3. Autism – is autism unhuman in nature?
”Allan Young proposes that contemporary fMRI research in social neuroscience is giving
rise to a new conception of human nature based on a neurally-based, natural, prosocial benevolence. Young provides a historical perspective on social neuroscience’s
discovery of empathy, arguably the most important concept in cognitive neuroscience,
as it purportedly distinguishes humans from other animals and, Young argues, marks a
shift from the Enlightenment notion of human nature (“Human Nature 1.0”) to the new
version, still emerging through evidence from fMRI studies (“Human Nature 2.0”).
While the former version 1.0 characterizes the mind as self-contained and in its normal
state, rational, the new version 2.0 is characterized by a capacity to directly
communicate, or resonate, with other mind–brains. This new interpenetration
between minds occurs in the form of mirroring or empathy, via the recently discovered
mirror neuron system, a capacity of normal humans, which when absent, manifests _
disorders such as autism, schizophrenia, and psychopathy”.
Suparna Choudhury, Jan Slaby, Critical Neuroscience.
A Handbook of the Social and Cultural Contexts of Neuroscience, p. 16.
The whole citation below
Empathy
Key terms
(all definitions after Jamie Ward)
- Empathy – in the broadest sense, an emotional reaction to or
understanding of another person’s feelings or thoughts;
- Perspective taking – putting oneself in someone else’s situation;
- Sympathy – a feeling of compassion or concern for another person;
- Pity – a concern about someone else’s situation;
- Personal distress – a feeling of distress in response to another
person’s distress or plight;
- False belief – a belief that does not correspond to current reality.
•
The Student’s Guide to Social Neuroscience, p. 130-131
Empathy – as a multi-faceted concept
1. „Knowing other person’s internal state, including his or her thoughts and
feelings.
2. Adopting a posture or matching neural response of an observed person.
3. Having an emotional reaction to someone else’s situation, although it does
not have to be the same reaction.
4. Imagining how I would feel/react in that situation (i.e. given my personal
history, traits, knowledge, beliefs).
5. Imagining how the other person would feel/react in that situation (i.e. given
their personal history, traits, knowledge, beliefs).”
•
The Student’s Guide to Social Neuroscience, p. 130-131
Empathy
How do we understand the mental states of others?
• Mental states – consists of knowledge, beliefs, feelings,
intentions, desires, etc.
• Mentalising – the process of inferring or attributing mental
states to others;
• Theory of mind – just like mentalising, but with a particular
view on how the mechanism for inferring mental states works;
•
Empathy - simulation theory
• a basic assumption states, ”we understand other people’s
behaviour by recreating the mental processes on
ourselves that, if carried out, would reproduce their
behaviour – that is, we use our own recreated (or
simulated) mental states to understand, and empathically
share, the mental states of others”;
• consciously
or
unconsciously
(mirror
systems
–
perception/action);
•
Neuroscience of empathy
•
Thesis - watching someone in pain activates certain parts of our own pain circuitry, but:
„Singer et al. (2006) had participants in an fMRI scanner play a game with someone who
plays fairly (a ‘Goodie’) and someone else who plays unfairly (a ‘Baddie’). Mild electric
shocks were then delivered to the Goodie and Baddie (who, of course, were only virtual
characters but the participant did not know this). Participants empathically activated their
own pain regions when watching the Goodie receive the electric shock. However, this
response was attenuated when they saw the Baddie receiving the shock. In fact, male
participants often activated their pleasure and reward circuits (such as the nucleus
accumbens) when watching the Baddie receive the shock, which is the exact opposite of
simulation theory. This brain activity correlated with their reported desire for revenge,
which suggests that although simulation may tend to operate automatically it is not
protected from our higher order beliefs”.
•
implications for conditions associated with a lack of
empathy
„Bandura argues that acts of inhumanity, such as genocide, depend
on our ability to self regulate and dissociate self from other.
Although genocide is an extreme example, displaying lack of
empathy towards socially marginalized groups (e.g. illegal
immigrants, welfare cheats) could be regarded as a typical facet
of human behaviour”.
Vide: surgeons
•
•
A. Bandura, „Reflexive empathy: On predicting more than has ever been observed,” „Behavioral and
Brain Sciences”, 25(1)/2002, pp. 24-25.
•
John Gray, „Straw Dogs. Projekt
Thoughts
on Humans and Other Animals”,
współfinansowany przez Unię Europejską w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego
Imitation-based simulation is flexible and
context sensitive
• the extent to which two people imitate each other depends on:
– the characteristics of an imitator,
– and the person being imitated,
– as well as characteristics of social situation.
Baaren, R.B. van, Janssen, L., Chartrand, T.L. & Dijksterhuis, A.J, Where is the love? The social
aspects of mimicry. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences,
364(1528)/2009; pp. 2381-2389;
- A case of social stigma (a facial scar or obesity)
-
L. Johnson, Behavioral mimicry and stigmatization, Social Cognition, 20(1)/2002, pp. 18-35.
- Ethnic group (ingroup/outgroup)
-
Bourgeois & Hess, The impact of social context on mimicry, „Biological Psychology” 77 (2008),
pp. 343–352.
Three components of empathy - Decety and Jackson (2004)
1. Shared representations between self and other, based
on perception–action coupling.
2. An awareness of self–other as similar but separate. This
is related to mechanisms of self-awareness.
3. A capacity for mental flexibility to enable shifts in
perspective and self-regulation.
Human nature and empathy
• Professor
Psychopathology
of
at
Developmental
the
University
of
Cambridge in the United Kingdom; the
Director of the University's Autism Research
Centre, and a Fellow of Trinity College;
• He is famous for his theories of autism;
• The science of evil : on empathy and the
Simon Baron-Cohen
origins of cruelty, Basic Books, A Member
of the Perseus Books Group, New York,
2011;
First definition of empathy
by Simon Baron-Cohen
”Empathy occurs when we suspend our single-minded focus of
attention and instead adopt a double-minded focus of
attention. “Single-minded” attention means we are thinking
only about our own mind, our current thoughts or perceptions.
“Double-minded” attention means we are keeping in mind
someone else’s mind at the very same time”.
Simon Baron-Cohen, The science of evil, p. 16
Second definition of empathy
Simon Baron-Cohen
„Empathy is our ability to identify what someone else is thinking
or feeling and to respond to their thoughts and feelings with
an appropriate emotion”.
Two stages in empathy:
• Recognition;
• response.
Explaining “Evil” and Human Cruelty
-
Turning people into objects;
-
“evil” as an “empathy erosion;”
„When people are solely focused on the pursuit of their own
interests, they have all the potential to be unempathic. At best
in this state, they are in a world of their own and their behavior
Will have little negative impact on others. They might end up in
this state of mind because of years of resentment and hurt
(often the result of conflict) or, as we see, for more enduring,
neurological reasons.”
The Empathy Mechanism: normal distribution
The Bell Curve
The science of evil – operationalisation of the concept
The Empathy Quotient (EQ)
Simon Baron Cohen, Sally Wheelwright, Bonnie Auyeung, and
Carrie Allison
1. I can easily tell if someone else wants to enter a
conversation.
2. I find it difficult to explain to others things that I
understand easily, when they don’t understand it the first
time.
3. I really enjoy caring for other people.
4. I find it hard to know what to do in a social situation.
5. People often tell me that I went too far in driving my point
home in a discussion.
The Empathy Quotient (EQ)
6. It doesn’t bother me too much if I am late on a meeting
with a friend.
7. Friendships and relationships are just too difficult, so I
tend not to bother with them.
8. I often find it difficult to judge if someone is rude or polite.
9. In a conversation, I tend to focus on my own thoughts
rather than on what my listener might be thinking.
10. When I was a child, I enjoyed cutting up worms to see
what would happen.
Levels of empathy
•
At Level 0, an individual has no empathy at all
„At Level 0 some people become capable of committing
crimes, including murder, assault, torture, and rape.
Fortunately, not all people at Level 0 do cruel things to others
since others at this level just find relationships very difficult but
have no wish to harm others. For others at Level 0, even when
it is pointed out to them that they have hurt another person,
this means nothing to them. They cannot experience
remorse or guilt because they just don’t understand what the
other person is feeling. This is the ultimate extreme: zero
degrees of empathy.”
„At Level 1, a person may still be capable of hurting
others, but they can reflect on what they have done to some
extent and show regret. It’s just that at the time they can’t
stop themselves. (…) Under certain conditions the person
may be able to show a degree of empathy, but if their violent
temper is triggered, they may report that their judgment
becomes completely clouded or that they “see red.” At that
moment other people’s feelings are no longer on their
radar.”
„At Level 2, a person still has major difficulties with
empathy, but they have enough to have a glimmering of
how another person would feel for this to inhibit any physical
aggression. This may not stop them shouting at others, or
saying hurtful things to others, but they have enough
empathy to realize they have done something wrong when
another person’s feelings are hurt. However, they typically
need the feedback from that person, or from a bystander, to
realize that they have over-stepped the mark.”
Simon Baron-Cohen, The science of evil, p. 24-25
„At Level 3, a person knows they have difficulty with empathy
and may try to mask or compensate for this, perhaps avoiding
jobs or relationships where there are constant demands on their
empathy; making the effort to “pretend to be normal” can be
exhausting and stressful. (…) They may realize they just don’t
understand jokes that everyone else does, that other people’s
facial expressions are hard to read, and that they are never quite
sure what’s expected of them. Small talk, chatting, and
conversation may be a nightmare for someone at this level,
because there are no rules for how to do it and it is all so
unpredictable”.
„At Level 4, a person has a low-average amount of empathy.
Most of the time their slightly blunted empathy does not affect
their everyday behavior, though people with this level of
empathy may feel more comfortable when the conversation
shifts to topics other than the emotions. More men than
women are at Level 4, prefer to solve problems by doing
something practical or offering to fix something technical rather
than having prolonged discussions about feelings. Friendships
may be based more on shared activities and interests than on
emotional intimacy, though they are no less enjoyable or
weaker because of this”.
„At Level 5, individuals are marginally above average in
empathy, and more women than men are at this level. Here,
friendships may be based more on emotional intimacy, sharing
of
confidences,
mutual
support,
and
expressions
of
compassion. Although people at Level 5 are not constantly
thinking about other’s feelings, others are nevertheless on their
radar a lot of the time, such that they are far more careful in
how they interact at work or at home. They hold back from
asserting their opinion so as not to dominate or intrude. They
do not rush to make unilateral decisions so that they can
consult and take into account a range of perspectives”.
„At Level 6, we meet individuals with remarkable
empathy who are continually focused on other
people’s feelings, and go out of their way to check on
these and to be supportive. It is as if their empathy is in a
constant state of hyperarousal, such that other people are
never off their radar”.
When Zero Degrees of Empathy Is Negative?
„Zero degrees of empathy means you have no awareness of how
you come across to others, how to interact with others, or how to
anticipate their feelings or reactions. (…) You feel mystified by
why relationships don’t work out, and your lack of empathy
creates
a
deep-seated
self-centeredness.
Other
people’s
thoughts and feelings are just off your radar. This leaves you
doomed to do your own thing, in your own little bubble, not just
oblivious to other people’s feelings and thoughts but also
oblivious to the idea that there might even be other points of
view. The consequence is that you believe 100 percent in the
rightness of your own ideas and beliefs, and judge anyone who
does not hold your beliefs as wrong or stupid.”
Zero-Negative Type B
• Borderline personality disorder (BPD) (emotionally unstable
personality disorder, emotional intensity disorder, or borderline
type in the ICD-10);
• DSM-V - the essential feature of which there is a pattern of
marked impulsivity and instability of affects, interpersonal
relationships and self image;
• five
main
areas
of
dysregulation:
emotions,
behavior,
interpersonal relationships, sense of self, and cognition.
Zero-Negative Type P (the psychopath) – Antisocial personality disorder
DSM-IV-TR
A)There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring for
15 years, as indicated by three or more of the following:
1) failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by
repeatedly performing acts that are ground for arrest;
2) deception, as indicated by repeatedly lying, usage of aliases, or conning others for
personal profit or pleasure;
3) impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;
4) irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;
5) reckless disregard for safety of self or others;
6) consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work
behavior or honor financial obligations;
7) lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt,
mistreated, or stolen from others.
B)The individual is at least 18 years old.
C)There is evidence of conduct disorder with onset before 15.
D)The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or
a manic episode.
Zero-Negative Type P (the psychopath)
• The concept of the psychopath goes back to Hervey Cleckley’s
1941 book, The Mask of Sanity. His characteristics enumerates:
• superficial charm,
• lack of anxiety or guilt,
• undependability and dishonesty,
• egocentricity,
• inability to form lasting intimate relationships,
• failure to learn from punishment,
• poverty of emotions,
• lack of insight into the impact of their behavior,
• failure to plan ahead.
Zero-Negative Type N
The Baron-Cohen’s example:
„James is sixty-four years old. Like Carol, James also came to
our diagnostic clinic. He feels angry at the world. He feels that
he has done only good things all his life and that others have
not reciprocated. As a result, he feels he has been badly
treated by society.”
The Baron-Cohen’s example [James words]:
“I have tried to live a good life, always helping others, supporting
my family, visiting sick friends and relatives in the hospital,
helping others. And guess what? Other people are shits. They
don’t bother helping me. They don’t visit, they don’t call, they
even cross the road when they see me coming. I eat alone
every day. You wouldn’t treat a dog the way people treat me.
I’m entitled to friendship just like everyone else, so why do they
offer it to others and not to me?”
Zero-Negative Type N - Narcissistic personality disorder
„is a personality disorder in which a person is excessively
preoccupied with personal adequacy, power, prestige and
vanity, mentally unable to see the destructive damage they
are causing to themselves and to others in the process”.
Theodore Millon, Disorders of Personality: DSM-IV-TM and Beyond,
John Wiley and Sons, New York 1996, p. 393.
DSM-IV-TR:
• Expects to be recognized as superior and special, without superior
accomplishments,
• Expects
constant
attention,
admiration
and
positive
reinforcement from others,
• Envies others and believes others envy him/her,
• Is preoccupied with thoughts and fantasies of great success,
enormous attractiveness, power, intelligence,
• Lacks the ability to empathize with the feelings or desires of others
• Is arrogant in attitudes and behavior,
• Has expectations of special treatment that are unrealistic.
When Zero Degrees of Empathy Is Positive
Zero-Positive means that alongside difficulties with empathy,
these individuals have remarkably precise, exact minds.
the autistic spectrum*
Classic autism ?
Asperger Syndrome
* - disputable classification
ICD-10
F84.5 Asperger syndrome
A disorder of uncertain nosological validity, characterized by the
same type of qualitative abnormalities of reciprocal social
interaction that typify autism, together with a restricted,
stereotyped, repetitive repertoire of interests and activities.
It differs from autism primarily in the fact that there is no general
delay or retardation in language or in cognitive
development. This disorder is often associated with marked
clumsiness. There is a strong tendency for the abnormalities to
persist into adolescence and adult life. Psychotic episodes
occasionally occur in early adult life.
„People with Asperger Syndrome are Zero-Positive for two
reasons.
- First, in their case their empathy difficulties are associated
with having a brain that processes information in ways that can
lead to talent.
-
Second,
the
way
their
brain
processes
information
paradoxically leads them to be supermoral rather than
immoral”.
„Zero-Positive is the result of a mind constantly striving to step out of
time, to set aside the temporal dimension in order to see—in stark
relief—the eternal repeating patterns in nature. Change represents
the
temporal
dimension
seeping
into
an
otherwise
perfectly
predictable, systemizable world, where wheels spin round and round
and round, levers can only move back and forth, or church bells peal
in beautifully mathematical patterns. After many such repetitions the
Zero-Positive person loses any sense of time because events are
the same each time. Such a state is what I assume people with
autism are referring to when they talk of “stimming.” They may
become aware of the dimension of time only during events that
contain novelty and that therefore violate expectations.”
Still Positive?
• ICD-10 Childhood autism
A type of pervasive developmental disorder that is defined by: (a)
the presence of abnormal or impaired development that is
manifested before the age of three, and (b) the characteristic
type of abnormal functioning in all the three areas of
psychopathology:
reciprocal
social
interaction,
communication, and restricted, stereotyped, repetitive
behaviour. In addition to these specific diagnostic features, a
range of other nonspecific problems are common, such as
phobias, sleeping and eating disturbances, temper tantrums,
and (self-directed) aggression.
Still Positive?
„(…) I defined loss of empathy as occurring when one person
treats another person as an object. But not everyone who
treats others as objects intends to cause harm. For example,
people with classic autism frequently treat others as objects,
yet I would not want to group them with those who knowingly
cause harm”.
Simon Baron-Cohen, The science of evil, p 118
The Empathy Gene
•
Researches on twins;
•
genes of aggression;
•
genes of emotion recognition;
•
genes associated with the Empathy Quotient;
•
genes associated with autistic traits;
•
other animals and empathy.
Reflections on Human Cruelty
-
-
-
Evil as lack of empathy,
lack of empathy as a longterm or terminal mental
disease;
(alcohol, fatigue, and depression are just a few examples of
states that can temporarily reduce empathy, and schizophrenia
is another example of a medical condition that can reduce
empathy).
‘Therapy for good?’ - The neuronal empathy circuit
Treatment of zero degrees of empathy should target the empathy
circuit;
Possible forms of treatment:
-
educational
software
[such
as
the
Mindreading
DVD
(www.jkp.com/mindreading) or the Transporters children’s animation
(www.thetransporters.com)];
- forms of role-play;
- oxytocin inhalations?
Autism – is autism unhuman in nature?
PROJECTING MENTAL STATES EVERYWHERE – THE
ORIGINS OF ANTHROPOMORPHISM?
• Anthropomorphism - The attribution of human characteristics to nonhuman animals, objects, or other concepts.
• The tendency to anthropomorphize may depend on whether something
looks like us or move like us. Heider and Simmel (1944) found that people
readily ascribe mental states to animations of two interacting geometric
objects, such as ‘the blue triangle wanted to surprise the red one’.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTNmLt7QX8E !!!
• Ergo: intentions tend to be inferred from actions.
•
Theory of mind
KEY TERMS
• Attribution - In social psychology, the process of inferring the
causes of people’s behavior.
• Intentional stance - The tendency to explain or predict
behavior of others using intentional states (e.g. wanting, liking).
•
‘The Sally-Anne task’
• H. Wimmer, J. Perner, ”Beliefs about beliefs: Representation
and the constraining function of wrongs beliefs in young
children’s understanding of deception”, Cogniton 13/1983, pp.
103-128.
• Paul Bloom, Tim P. German, Two reasons to abandon the
false belief task as a test of theory of mind, Cognition 77/2000,
B25±B31.
Theory of mind
•
„Zero-order intentionality - The assumption that an agent possesses no
beliefs and desires. It responds to stimuli reflexively, such as producing a scream
when frightened or running to evade a predator.
•
First-order intentionality - The inference that an agent possesses beliefs and
desires, but not beliefs about beliefs. It may produce a scream because it believes
a predator is present or wants others to run away.
•
Second-order intentionality - The inference that an agent possesses beliefs
about other people’s beliefs. It may produce a scream because it wants others to
believe that a predator is nearby. False belief tests operate at this level (e.g. ‘I
think that Sally thinks that the marble is in the box’).
•
Third-order intentionality . An agent possesses beliefs about other people’s
beliefs concerning beliefs about other people, such as ‘I think that John thinks that
Sally doesn’t know where the marble is".
•
The Student’s Guide to Social Neuroscience, p. 140-141.
Autism as mind blindness
• Autism - A developmental condition associated with the
presence of markedly abnormal or impaired development
in social interaction and communication and a markedly
restricted repertoire of activities and interests (DSM IV).
• Asperger’s syndrome - A sub-type of autism associated
with less profound non-social impairments.
Autism as an extreme form of ‘male
brain’ – Simon Baron-Cohen:
• the characteristics of all individuals can be classified according
to two dimensions:
– ‘empathizing’ (allows one to predict a person’s behavior
and to care about how others feel);
– ‘systemizing’ (requires an understanding of lawful, rulebased systems and requires an attention to detail).
• Your handbook: Jamie Ward, The Student’s Guide to Social
Neuroscience, p. 148.
Lecture 6
Morality and antisocial behaviour [2 hr]
Morality and antisocial behaviour
Agenda:
1. The neuroscience of morality.
2. Anger and agression.
3. Control and responsibility – ‘me and my brain’.

Conclusion
Stiven Pinker – TED talk
• Noble savage - an idealized indigene, who has not
been
"corrupted"
by
civilization,
and
symbolizes humanity's innate goodness;
• Romantics;
• Are humans essentially good?
therefore
• Conventional rules – rules of conduct that are agreed via
consensus; may include not swearing, dressing neatly for a job
interview, shaking hands when being introduced; breaking these
norms is rude or offensive, but it does not usually lead to
physical or mental harm of another person;
• Moral norms – rules of conduct that are based on personal
welfare; norms like not hitting other person, respecting the
property rights of other person (theft, damage, etc.), breaking
these norms is likely to incur punishment (
law).
•
• Antisocial behaviour – any bahaviour that violates the social
norms of particular culture;
• Antisocial does not mean criminal;
• ”The law can therefore be regarded, in psychological terms, as
defining those collectively agreed upon social norms that, if
broken, require punishment to be metered out on the offender.”
•
• Moral judgments – whether (an intention of) a particular behaviour is
‘right’ or ‘wrong’?
• Meanings of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’:
1. ”Whether it feels right or wrong (emotional reactions – pride – guilt),
2. Whether society deems it to be right or wrong (law),
3. Whether the consequence of an action is likely to be net positive or
net negative (a rational cost-benefit analysis)”.
•
Making moral decisions –
- two possible mechanisms might be postulated:
• Reason
• Emotions
• Moral reasoning
• Moral intuiton
• A more deliberate attempt at
• A mechanism
reasoning through a problem
emotional
(considering basis for the
instincts of good).
judgment, and weighing the
alternative answers).
based on
evaluations
(or
• J. Haidt, The New Synthesis
in Moral Psychology, Science
316, 998 (2007);
The new synthesis in moral psychology –
Jonathan Haidt
Principle 1: Intuitive primacy (but not dictatorship)
Principle 2: (Moral) thinking is for (social) doing
Principle 3: Morality binds and builds
Principle 4: Morality is about more than harm and
fairness
•
J. Haidt, The New Synthesis in Moral Psychology,
Science 316, 998 (2007); pp. 998-1001.
Moral intuition and emotions - Jonathan Haidt, „The Moral Emotions”
• Guilt,
Features of moral emotions:
• Shame,
• Self- vs other-conscious,
• Embarrassment,
• Self- vs other-critical,
• Pride,
• Indignation/anger,
• Contempt/disgust,
• Self- vs other-praising,
• Other-suffering.
• Pity/compassion,
• Awe/elevation,
• Gratitude.
Key terms
• Moral disgust - an emotion arising from a judgment
about the moral standing of another person relative to
oneself in terms of their general disposition to engage
in acts that are deemed to be wrong;
• Dehumanization
-
treating
certain
human
groups/individuals as animals;
•
Your handbook: Jamie Ward, The Student’s
Guide to Social Neuroscience, p. 230.
Dehumanisation
•
Albert Bandura, Claudio Barbaranelli, Gian Vittorio Caprara, Concetta
Pastorelli, Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement in the Exercise of Moral
Agency, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, Vol. 71, No. 2,
pp. 364-374
•
Joshua Greene, From neural ‘is’ to moral ‘ought’: what are the moral
implications of neuroscientific moral psychology?, NATURE REVIEWS |
NEUROSCIENCE, VOLUME 4 | OCTOBER 2003, pp. 847 – 850;
On moral reasoning
• Joshua Green – trolley dilemma;
• First version – more personal dilemma – emotional
processing;
• Second version – more impersonal dilemma intellectual/rational reasoning (utilitarian thinking).
Joshua D. Greene, Leigh E. Nystrom, Andrew D. Engell, John M. Darley, Jonathan D.
Cohen, The Neural Bases of Cognitive Conflict and Control in Moral Judgment,
„Neuron”, Volume 44, Issue 2, 14 October 2004, pp. 389–400.
Three principles of moral reasoning
• The “action principle” (causing harm by action is worse than
causing the same harm by omission),
• the “intention principle” ( harm as a mean to a goal is worse
than the same harm as a side effect of a goal),
• the “contact principle” (causing harm through physical contact
is worse than the same harm caused without physical contact).
•
Fiery Cushman, Liane Young, Marc Hauser, The Role of Conscious Reasoning and
Intuition in Moral Judgment, Testing Three Principles of Harm, „Psychological
Science”, vol 17, nr 12, pp. 1082 – 1089.
Universal morals?
Moral variations.
Absent morals.
• Are there any universal morals?
• Are they innate?
• Morals with relatively small or with no variability
across gender, age, religion, politics?
Moral vs conventional norms –
- nature or nurture?:
1. Liberal versus conservative moral attitudes;
2. Moral versus conventional suppression of racist
attitudes;
3. Moral versus conventional distinction in psychopathy.
Key terms:
Anger and agression
• Anger - the emotion felt when someone else is judged to
have intentionally violated a social norm;
• Aggression – any behaviour directed toward other
individual that is carried out with the proximate (immediate)
intent to cause harm (but the ultimate [primary] intention
may be to assert dominance over others or to defend
ourselves, by defending status or well-being).
Anger and agression
Key terms:
• Instrumental aggression – aggression that is selfinitiated and goal-directed;
• Reactive aggression – aggression that occurs in
response to threat.
•
Deffinitions from Your handbook: Jamie Ward, The Student’s
Does aggression have a social function?
• Dominance and aggression – in animal societies
instrumental aggression has a clear function (social
dominance – hierarchy, leadership, privileged access to
resource).
•
Patricia H. Hawley, The Ontogenesis of Social Dominance: A Strategy-
Based Evolutionary Perspective, „Developmental Review” 19/1999, pp. 97–
132.
Does aggression have a social function?
• many aggressive behaviours do not result in physical harm.
•
Konrad Lorenz, On Aggression, (1966) (Das sogenannte Böse.
Zur Naturgeschichte der Agression, 1963)
• Dominance – by non aggressive but warning behaviours like
posturing (to make one look bigger), vocalizations (e.g.
roaring) and facial expressions (bearded teeth, direct gaze);
• Appeasement bahaviours – display signals that convey
defeat (e.g. cowering, distress [fear] display, averting gaze,
saying ‘sorry’ – in humans).
Anger (emotion) and angriness (trait)
• Trait (of character) – a stable disposition that varies across
individuals;
„People with high trait angriness are biased towards interpreting
the intentions of others in a hostile manner (e.g. as a
wrongdoing, not an inadvertent mistake) and may opt for
confirmation and appeasement. Those with high trait angriness
pay more attention towards angry faces”.
•
Van Honk, Tuiten, van den Hout, Putman, de Haan, Stam, Selective attention to unmasked and
masked threatening words: relationships to trait anger and anxiety, „Personality and Individual
Differences”, Volume 30, Issue 4, March 2001, pp. 711–720.
•
Poor = violent (society)?
• No!! The factor is an inequality (between the
poorest and the richest);
• Perception of injustice and unfairness cause
anger and violence.
•
Wilkinson, Pickett, The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost
Always Do Better, London, Allen Lane 2009.
Experimental economics
„Fehr and Gachter [it may be found in „game studies”] when punishment
was available in sessions, they found that subjects were willing to punish
other individuals who contributed little or nothing to the public fund.
Subjects did this even though they incurred a cost by doing so and
despite the fact that, due to randomized, anonymized design of a game,
they might not interact with the punished individual again (and would not
know it even if they did). The availability of punishment had a
dramatic effect on cooperation: average contributions were two to four
times higher in the punishment condition than in the non-punishment
condition, with contributions in the final rounds being six to seven and a
half times higher when punishment was available)”.
•
Suhler, Churchland, The neurobiological basis of morality, [in:] Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics,
współfinansowany przez Unię Europejską w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego
Edited by Judy Illes,Projekt
Barbara
J. Sahakian (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford 2011, S. 39
Biological roots or social learning of
aggression?
• Social learning – the series of Bandura famous experiments
with doll Bobo [modelling behaviour];
• Criticism of these experiments – children are able to make
distinction between aggression and play fighting (and they
understand, that a doll is not alive and does not feel pain and
sadness).
Biological roots or social learning of
aggression?
Biology of aggression:
• Fight-or-flight response – the decision whether to respond to
a threat aggressively or to escape the threat;
• Warrior gene and genetic transmission;
• Testosterone;
• Neuroregulation and neurobasis of aggressive behaviours.
Control and responsibility – ‘me and my
brain’
• Responsibility – extend to which someone can be held to
account for his/her actions; connected with a possibility to
control ones behaviour;
• Differences in responsibility:
– personal features like age (children/adults) or sanity;
– situational changes (e.g. defensive, provoked, unprovoked).
For a discussion - examples of experiments connected
with a free will concept (citation from J. Ward):
•
Participants are more likely to interrupt a (staged) conversation between the
experimenter and other person when they have been primed, in a previous task, with
words relating to rudeness than those primed with words relating to politeness or
not primed at all (Bragh, Chen, Burrows, 1996).
•
Participants who have been primed by an irrelevant task (containing words relating
to old age) subsequently walk more slowly to get an elevator than those primed by
words relating to young age (Bargh et al., 1996).
•
People are more likely to litter in a particular place when it contains graffiti than
when it does not (Keizer, Lindenberg, Steg, 2008).
•
If you find a dime on the street, you are more likely
to help a passer-by who
accidentally drops some papers (Isen, Levin, 1972).
•
Neuroscience and the free will problem Benjamin Libet
Experiment versions:
• Wrists moves,
• The choose of time,
• Simple clicking.
• Delayed - at least 0.3s
Sense of control…?
• Just a post hoc justification for the unconscious
decisions we made?
•
Gazzaniga, Who's in Charge? Free Will and the Science of the Brain, New
York: Ecco (imprint of HarperCollins), 2011
• We can be considered to be in control of our actions, so
we are also responsible for them, even if we are not
consciously aware of all the information that enters into
the decision.
•
Suhler, Churchland, Control: conscious and otherwise, „Trends in Cognitive
Sciences”, 13(8)/2009, pp. 341-347.
Key points of the lecture:
• Moral emotions;
• Moral judgments underpinned by different sources of
knowledge;
• Aggression linked to brain structures;
• Responsibility and the free will concept.
Lecture 7
Homo aestheticus and science of art
Neuroaesthetics and the artful brain [2h]
„Art is a human activity and, like all human
activities, including morality, law and religion,
depends upon, and obeys, the laws of the
brain”.
Semir Zeki
Homo aestheticus
Agenda:
1. Homo aestheticus.
2. Science of art.
3. Laws of beauty and art.

Conclusion
Homo aestheticus
• What is beauty?
• What does it mean that sth. is beautiful?
• Aesthetic emotions?
• Aesthetic judgments?
• Aesthetic taste, sense, reason?
• Are there artistic universals? (across time and cultures?)
Aesthetics
„Aesthetics (æsthetics and esthetics) is a branch of
philosophy dealing with the nature of art, beauty, and
taste, with the creation and appreciation of beauty”.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aesthetic
„It is more scientifically defined as the study of sensory or
sensory-emotional values, sometimes called judgments of
sentiment and taste”.
Zangwill, Nick. "Aesthetic Judgment", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aesthetic-judgment/
Neuroaesthetics
• How does a brain respond to art?
The concept of neuroaesthetics
• Neuroaesthetics
is
the
science
investigating
the
experience of beauty and appreciation of art. In the
context of working brain;
• cognitive paradigm;
• scientific approach & reductionism;
• beauty = stimulation of the dopamine system (the reward
system, the limbic system).
Aims of neuroaesthetics
• to discover laws of aesthetics (perception);
• to research for esthetic emotions and judgments;
• to define neural basis and patterns of stimuli in the
aesthetic experience;
• to define the adaptive role of art (it extends our cognition);
+ an artist as a neuroscientist.
Laws of art
• Vilayanur S. Ramachandran:
– the inner logic of art (law like principles);
– evolutionary context;
– Neurophysiology.
V.S. Ramachandran, William Hirstein,
The Science of Art. A Neurological Theory of Aesthetic Experience,
„Journal of Consciousness Studies”, 6, No. 6-7, 1999, pp. 15–51.
1. Peak shift principle
•
Emphasizes essential features, differences
(cf. caricatures);
•
explains why people like non-realistic art.
2. Grouping (Gestalt)
• Vision evolved mainly to discover objects and
to defeat camouflage;
• we connect elements following some rules (like
colour, pattern) to find an object.
3. Perceptual problem solving
• The very act of searching for the solution is
pleasing;
• not obvious scene is more rewarding (nude seen
behind a diaphanous veil);
• every act of perception involve judgment!!
4. The law of isolation
• Isolating a single cue to optimally excite cortical visual
areas;
• you can't have simultaneously two overlapping
patterns of neural activity;
• allocating an attentional resources to one thing at a
time (ex. outlining sketches).
5. Contrast
- contrast extraction – prior to grouping – is
reinforcing (allocates our attention);
- specialized cells detect, perceive borders - cells in the
retina, lateral geniculate body and in the visual cortex
respond mainly to edges (step changes in luminance)
but not to homogeneous surface colours.
Contrast & camouflage
• The discovery of objects — it is the main goal of
vision.
„Contrast extraction is concerned with the object’s
boundaries whereas grouping allows recovery of the
object’s surfaces and, indirectly, of its boundaries as
well”.
The Science of Art. A Neurological Theory of Aesthetic Experience, p. 27.
• http://www.imprint.co.uk/rama/art.pdf
Contrast & grouping
- Discovering objects — it is the main goal of vision;
- „contrast extraction is concerned with the object’s
boundaries whereas grouping allows discovery of the
object’s surfaces and, indirectly, of its boundaries as well”.
6. Symmetry
• adaptive (early-warning system because predators, prey
and mates are symmetrical & health, because parasitic
infestation - detrimental to fertility - often produces
lopsided, asymmetrical growth and development);
• it synchronizes work of cerebral hemispheres.
7. The Generic Viewpoint
This rule illustrates „the universal Bayesian logic of all perception:
your visual system abhors interpretations which rely on a
unique vantage point and favors a generic one or, more
generally, it abhors suspicious coincidences (Barlow, 1980)”.
•
but: cubism!
8. Art as a metaphor
• A metaphor is a mental tunnel between two concepts or
percepts that appear grossly dissimilar on the surface;
• art extends our cognition (generalizations, concepts
organizing our world: e.g. prey vs. predator, edible vs.
inedible, male vs. female, etc.);
• art is adaptive – cumulates our knowledge (economy of
coding).
• Shakespeare said ‘Juliet is the sun’... Why? What
does it mean?
• Seeing a deep similarity between disparate entities is
the basis of all concept formation whether the
concepts are perceptual (‘Juliet’) or more abstract
(‘love’).
• Synesthesia.
Plus other possible laws, like:
• the principle of visual repetition or ‘rhythm’;
• the principle of equilibrium (harmony).
Summary:
Neuroaesthetics:
• coherent with a cognitive paradigm;
• confirmed in laboratory investigations;
• it concerns common, universal laws (for homo sapiens)
[what about originality?];
• as a new account gives us promises of new discoveries;
• it
might
be
helpful
for
the
other
neuro-explanations
(neurotheology?).
Explanatory difficulties of neuroaesthetics
• the issue of individual preferences;
• the issue of talent, gift that is of a brilliant creator and
neural functional structures responsible for his/her
abilities.
Literature
• Kawabata H., Zeki S., Neural correlates of beauty, Journal of
Neurophysilogy;
• Markiewicz P., Przybysz P., Neuroestetyczne aspekty komunikacji
wizualnej i wyobraźni;
• Przybysz P., Wstęp. W stronę neuroestetycznej teorii sztuki;
• Ramachandran V. S., Hirstein W., The Science of Art;
• Zeki S., Inner vision, An Exploration of Art and the Brain;
• Zeki S., Neural Concept Formation and Art: Dante, Michelangelo,
Wagner, Journal of Consciousness Studies;
• Zeki, S. Art and the brain;

Human nature

Transkrypt

Podobne dokumenty

automotive engineering

Lublin, dnia 18