Philosophy posts

August 30, 2010
06:03 AM
47 views

Cephalopod Consciousness Part 3: The Case for Cephalopod Consciousness

Here it is, finally: the post you’ve been waiting for. Having already convinced you that you should care about the possibility of consciousness in cephalopods in Part 1 and having briefly outlined the state of research on consciousness in non-human animals in Part 2, I’ll get right down to it and discuss the possibility of [...]... Read more »

MATHER, J. (2008) Cephalopod consciousness: Behavioural evidence. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(1), 37-48. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2006.11.006

Edelman, D., & Seth, A. (2009) Animal consciousness: a synthetic approach. Trends in Neurosciences, 32(9), 476-484. DOI: 10.1016/j.tins.2009.05.008

Young, J. (1991) Computation in the Learning System of Cephalopods. Biological Bulletin, 180(2), 200. DOI: 10.2307/1542389

Finn, J., Tregenza, T., & Norman, M. (2009) Defensive tool use in a coconut-carrying octopus. Current Biology, 19(23). DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.10.052

August 27, 2010
11:08 AM
76 views

Neuroscience of Murder and Aggression: Brain Imaging

by Bill Yates in Brain Posts

This is the fourth in a series of five posts looking at aspects of murder and antisocial behavior. The first post provided an overview of the topic. The second examined relevant epidemiologic research and the third focused on recent genetic research. This post will look at recent brain imaging research.Brain Tutor Screenshot of Orbitofrontal CortexKey brain areas in violent behavior include the frontal lobe and the amygdala. The inferior portion of the frontal lobe is vulnerable to brain trauma. Some victims of traumatic brain injury develop irritability and aggressive behavioral problems. Structural brain imaging has identified several brain volume differences in antisocial personality disorder including:Reduced prefrontal cortex volumesChanges in the right anterior cingulate cortexChanges in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortexReduction is size (15%) in the right and left amygdalaIncreases in the volume of the striatumThe frontal cortex is key in resisting impulsive behavior and reduced function may modulate the disinhibition found in antisocial personality disorder.Functional brain imaging research is beginning to provide additional information about antisocial personality disorder. A summary of the findings from the functional MRI research literature includes:Reduced amygdala activation to sad or fearful face stimuliDecreased orbital frontal cortex response to emotionally provocative stimuliHyperreactive responses in the mesolimbic dopamine reward systemsReduced task activation in the dorsolateral frontal cortexIncreased task activation in the anterior cingulate and orbitofrontal cortexReduced prefrontal cortex glucose metabolism in PET imagingRight and Left Amygdala in Blue from 3D Brain ScreenshoCrowe and Blair from the NIMH recently published a summary of the functional neuroimaging studies in those with conduct disorder and antisocial personality disorder. They note that aggression can be divided into reactive and instrumental aggression. Reactive aggression involves behavior in response to a threat, while instrumental aggression. Reactive aggression is typically found in children with conduct disorder or oppositional defiant disorder when concurrent mood or anxiety disorders are present. Reactive and instrumental aggression is found in the more classical psychopathic individuals.Crowe and Blair's summary concludes:"FMRI studies have consistently implicated the amygdala and vmPFC (ventromedial prefrontal cortex) in the pathology of individuals with psychopathic tendencies. Dysfunction in this circuitry may relate to the suggestion that the core impairments occurring in this population result from atypical stimulus-reinforcement learning and the representation of outcome information. Such impairments would, in turn, interfere with moral socialization and decision-making." Further brain imaging research holds the promise of increased understanding of violent behavior and the potential for behavioral and pharmacologic interventions. In the next post I will look at the current state of knowledge in the treatment of antisocial behavior.Readers who are interested in the Brain Tutor and 3D Brain iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch application can find a review of these applications in one of my previous posts here.Crowe SL, & Blair RJ (2008). The development of antisocial behavior: what can we learn from functional neuroimaging studies? Development and psychopathology, 20 (4), 1145-59 PMID: 18838035... Read more »

Crowe SL, & Blair RJ. (2008) The development of antisocial behavior: what can we learn from functional neuroimaging studies?. Development and psychopathology, 20(4), 1145-59. PMID: 18838035

August 26, 2010
10:55 AM
65 views

Why A Good Friend Has the Same Effect As a Warm Fire

by David Berreby in Mind Matters

"Vision," Stanford's Bill Newsome likes to say, "does not happen in the eye. It happens in the brain." As I mentioned in my last post, this is a general theme in our understanding of the mind and brain: We don't passively record "reality" and then process our perceptions. Rather, we actively create what we see, hear, taste, smell and feel. A nice new example is this experiment, which found that people feel warmer when standing near a loved one, and colder when they're reminded that someone nearby doesn't share their interests.
A growing body of research suggests that physical and psychological perceptions share common pathways. Experiments have already shown, for example, that physically warming up a room causes people in it to feel their relationships are closer. The question Hans Ijzerman and his colleagues took up in this paper was: Would this effect work in reverse? Instead of warming up social perceptions by heating the room, could you make people feel the room was toasty just by putting a loved one nearby?
Answer: Yes. Their paper, recently published in The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, compared the temperature perceptions of people who stood within two feet of an intimate, compared to people who did not. On average, the people who stood close to a loved one guessed that the temperature in the lab was 2 degrees warmer than did those who weren't experiencing that social and emotional connection. (Unfortunately, the work is behind an outrageously expensive paywall and the abstract is incomplete on ScienceDirect's greedy website. So I've had to deduce some details from the abstract and Daily Mail article.)
Photo: Sophie Lair-Berreby
Ijzerman, H., & Semin, G. (2010). Temperature perceptions as a ground for social proximity Journal of Experimental Social Psychology DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.015
... Read more »

IJzerman, H., & Semin, G. (2010) Temperature perceptions as a ground for social proximity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.015

August 25, 2010
01:49 PM
69 views

Neuroscience of Murder and Aggression: Genetics

by Bill Yates in Brain Posts

This is the third in a five-part series examining neuroscience aspects of homicide and aggressive behavior. The first post examined some of the general issues in this topic and the second focused on epidemiology. In this post I will summarize some of the genetic research. Part four will look at neuroimaging research and part five will summarize psychopharmacologic strategies.A series of twin and adoption studies support the role for significant genetic contributions to antisocial personality and aggressive behavior. A recent meta-analytic review estimated that 56% of the variance in antisocial personality and behavior is explained by genetic factors with 31% due to unique environmental and 11% due to shared environmental effects. However, some studies estimate the genetic contribution to variance in antisocial behavior as high as 80%.There is some support for overlap between the clinical diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder and the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder. Antisocial personality disorder is a male predominant disorder while borderline personality disorder is more commonly found in women. Kendler et al in a study of the genetics and environmental contributions to personality disorder, found a genetic factor that loads on both antisocial personality disorder and borderline personality disorder. There has been much less specific attention to the genetics of murder than of the broader antisocial personality disorder phenotype.There has been a significant amount of interest in identifying biomarkers and specific genes that might account for the genetic contribution to antisocial behavior. Gunter et al recently review the molecular biologyCandidate biomarkers and genes include:Event-related P3 electrophysiologic markersResting state EEG brain activity-beta frequency bandReduced skin conductance to stressLow childhood resting heart rateMonoamine oxidase A genotypeCatechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) polymorphismSerotonin transporter genesAnkyrin repeat and protein kinase domain-containing protein (ANKK1)Dopamine transporter (DAT)Dopamine receptors (DRD2)Serotonin receptors 1B, 2A and 3BTryptophan hydoxylase 1 and 2Androgen receptors (AR)The issue of genetic influence in risk for violent behavior has more than a scientific perspective. Legal scholars and practicing attorneys have been interested in this issue as a method of reducing culpability in violent offenders. A Italian judge recently reduced the jail time for a man convicted of murder based on evidence of a genetic risk for violent behavior.Epigenetic factors are also receiving increasing attention in antisocial personality disorder. Smoking appears to modify the expression of gene proteins for many genes. Methylation of MAOA is associated with nicotine and alcohol use in women. Alcohol use also appears to influence the methylation of the dopamine transporter gene. Prenatal, perinatal and childhood stress and abuse also may increase risk for adult antisocial behavior through and epigenetic mechanism.Gunter et al summarize the future directions of the study of the genetics of antisocial personality disorder:“Undertaking a systems approach to the biology of complex illnesses such as antisocial spectrum disorders and psychopathy, using an interdisciplinary research team, is most likely to be useful in determining how individual genetic factors impact neural networks and ultimately behavior. Various laboratory tests and imaging technologies have been employed to identify intermediate phenotypes to better understand the downstream differences that might be attributable to specific polymorphisms.”In my next post, I will explore some of the potential imaging approaches to understanding murder, aggression and antisocial personality disorder. Advances in imaging research paired with genetic findings may provide a powerful strategy for advancing the neuroscience understanding of violent behavior.Translation Genetic Image Courtesy of the NIH and is in the Public Domain.Gunter TD, Vaughn MG, & Philibert RA (2010). Behavioral genetics in antisocial spectrum disorders and psychopathy: a review of the recent literature. Behavioral sciences & the law, 28 (2), 148-73 PMID: 20422643Kendler KS, Aggen SH, Czajkowski N, Røysamb E, Tambs K, Torgersen S, Neale MC, & Reichborn-Kjennerud T (2008). The structure of genetic and environmental risk factors for DSM-IV personality disorders: a multivariate twin study. Archives of general psychiatry, 65 (12), 1438-46 PMID: 19047531Ferguson CJ (2010). Genetic contributions to antisocial personality and behavior: a meta-analytic review from an evolutionary perspective. The Journal of social psychology, 150 (2), 160-80 PMID: 20397592Forzano F, Borry P, Cambon-Thomsen A, Hodgson SV, Tibben A, de Vries P, van El C, & Cornel M (2010). Italian appeal court: a genetic predisposition to commit murder? European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 18 (5), 519-21 PMID: 20216573... Read more »

Gunter TD, Vaughn MG, & Philibert RA. (2010) Behavioral genetics in antisocial spectrum disorders and psychopathy: a review of the recent literature. Behavioral sciences , 28(2), 148-73. PMID: 20422643

Kendler KS, Aggen SH, Czajkowski N, Røysamb E, Tambs K, Torgersen S, Neale MC, & Reichborn-Kjennerud T. (2008) The structure of genetic and environmental risk factors for DSM-IV personality disorders: a multivariate twin study. Archives of general psychiatry, 65(12), 1438-46. PMID: 19047531

Ferguson CJ. (2010) Genetic contributions to antisocial personality and behavior: a meta-analytic review from an evolutionary perspective. The Journal of social psychology, 150(2), 160-80. PMID: 20397592

Forzano F, Borry P, Cambon-Thomsen A, Hodgson SV, Tibben A, de Vries P, van El C, & Cornel M. (2010) Italian appeal court: a genetic predisposition to commit murder?. European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 18(5), 519-21. PMID: 20216573

August 25, 2010
01:12 AM
59 views

Cephalopod Consciousness Part 2: The Case for Animal Consciousness

by Mike Mike in Cephalove

In this second post of the series “Cephalopod Consciousness”, I’ll talk about the methods that scientists have used to attempt to study consciousness in animals. For perhaps the first time in the history of this blog, I’ll write about science without making any specific reference to cephalopods – I’m saving that for part 3. Here [...]... Read more »

BAARS, B. (2005) Subjective experience is probably not limited to humans: The evidence from neurobiology and behavior. Consciousness and Cognition, 14(1), 7-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2004.11.002

Edelman, D., & Seth, A. (2009) Animal consciousness: a synthetic approach. Trends in Neurosciences, 32(9), 476-484. DOI: 10.1016/j.tins.2009.05.008

PANKSEPP, J. (2005) Affective consciousness: Core emotional feelings in animals and humans. Consciousness and Cognition, 14(1), 30-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2004.10.004

Plotnik JM, de Waal FB, & Reiss D. (2006) Self-recognition in an Asian elephant. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(45), 17053-7. PMID: 17075063

Cowey, A., & Stoerig, P. (1995) Blindsight in monkeys. Nature, 373(6511), 247-249. DOI: 10.1038/373247a0

August 24, 2010
04:20 PM
56 views

Neuroscience of Murder and Aggression: Epidemiology

by Bill Yates in Brain Posts

This is the second in a five part series on the neuroscience of murder and aggression. This post will address some key issues in the epidemiology of murder and antisocial personality disorder. The number of murders in the U.S. has been stable at between 16,000 and 17,000 per year over the 2000 to 2008 time period.. The number peaked at around 24,700 in 1991. The number has decreased since the early 1990s despite a steadily increasing total U.S. population.The reason for the decline in number of murders in the U.S. is unclear. Proposed mechanisms for this decline have been:Aging of population as murder primarily a young male phenomenonImproved trauma care with reduced death due to gunshot wounds and other woundsIncreased number of police officersIncrease incarceration rate of violent offendersImmigration--some areas where immigration has been highest have seen the greatest drop in homicide ratesAbortion patterns--a controversial theory links the reduction in violent crime to earlier increased access to abortion servicesThe U.S. murder rate falls mid-way between the highest and lowest rates around the world. The lowest rates have been noted in Ireland, Germany, Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom---these rates are about 80% lower than in the U.S. Higher rates (4 to 10 times higher) have been noted in Russia, Venezuela, Jamaica, Mexico and Columbia.A variety of risk factors for murder have been studied. The following have support as risk factors: male gender, ages 16-30, antisocial personality disorder, gun ownership, alcohol intoxication, alcohol abuse and dependence, drug abuse and dependence, unemployment, low socioeconomic status and other violent behaviors. Antisocial personality disorder is a categorical diagnosis in DSM-IV defined by both childhood and adult symptoms of aggression, rule-breaking, disobedience, disrepect for the law and reduced sensitivity to the pain of others. Although not all individuals with antisocial personality disorder are aggressive, many do have a significant problem with violent behavior towards properts as well as against other individuals. Two recent population based studies have estimated the prevalence of antisocial personality disorders. The replication study of the National Comorbidity Survey estimated the prevalence rate of antisocial personality at 1.0% (95% confidence interval 0.5% to 1.5%). Another household survey in the United Kingdom estimated the prevalence rate at 0.6% (95% confidence interval 0.3% to 1.1%).Although murder is clearly a present or absent variable (you have either committed murder or not), violent and antisocial behavior may be more of a continous behavioral description. A recent research study found support for a more continuous distribution of antisocial behaviors rather than two distinct groups. Antisocial personality increases risk for a variety of other psychiatric conditions including alcohol abuse and dependence, drug abuse and dependence and nicotine dependence.As notes in my previous post, a heirarchy of murders found many with psychopathic and antisocial characteristics. However, some murderers do not meet antisocial personality disorder criteria. They are overlapping groups but do not explain exactly the same groups. In my next post, I will review some of the recent research into the genetics of murder and antisocial personality. Photo of Sparrow Aggression at the Feeder Courtesy of Brain PostsLenzenweger MF, Lane MC, Loranger AW, & Kessler RC (2007). DSM-IV personality disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Biological psychiatry, 62 (6), 553-64 PMID: 17217923Coid J, Yang M, Ullrich S, Roberts A, & Hare RD (2009). Prevalence and correlates of psychopathic traits in the household population of Great Britain. International journal of law and psychiatry, 32 (2), 65-73 PMID: 19243821Marcus DK, Lilienfeld SO, Edens JF, & Poythress NG (2006). Is antisocial person... Read more »

Lenzenweger MF, Lane MC, Loranger AW, & Kessler RC. (2007) DSM-IV personality disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Biological psychiatry, 62(6), 553-64. PMID: 17217923

Coid J, Yang M, Ullrich S, Roberts A, & Hare RD. (2009) Prevalence and correlates of psychopathic traits in the household population of Great Britain. International journal of law and psychiatry, 32(2), 65-73. PMID: 19243821

Marcus DK, Lilienfeld SO, Edens JF, & Poythress NG. (2006) Is antisocial personality disorder continuous or categorical? A taxometric analysis. Psychological medicine, 36(11), 1571-81. PMID: 16836795

August 23, 2010
11:37 AM
55 views

Neuroscience of Murder and Aggression: Part 1

by Bill Yates in Brain Posts

I have been interested in the genetics and environmental factors involved in aggression since working with Dr. Remi Cadoret at the University of Iowa in the 1990s. We published an early study in adoptees that found an interaction between a biological background of antisocial personality and an adverse childhood environment in an additive effect in adoptee agression. Adoptees with a biological relative with antisocial personality (usually fathers) were more aggressive when there were raised in an adverse environment during childhood and adolescence.Jim Fallon, Ph.D. neurobiologist at the University of California recently summarized some of this neuroscience issues in this area in a TED talk titled: "Exploring the Mind of a Killer". This six and one half minute presentation is summarized in my notes here:Fallon was asked by colleague to examine brains of psychopathic killersHe was blind to identity of the killers at the time of analysisMurder risk seems to be linked to interactions between environment and geneticsThere are also epigenetic effects-biological damage to the genesMurders had damage to the orbital cortex--seen in all murders in his studyA high risk gene is the MAOA gene--sex-linked you only get effect in males from motherMAOA-monoamine oxidase A affects serotonin metabolismGene expression is increased with severe adverse traumatic environment during the period of early childhood through adolescenceIncreased violence in the environment expressed through generationsToughness seen as a protective factor preferred by some women in mates--this effect may concentrate the genetic effectDr. Fallon was surprised when he learned of his own genetic backgroundHis cousin was Lizzi Borden the female murderer and he also had a distant grandmother killed who murdered a sonSeven male murderers have been identified on his father's sidePET scanning study completed on his own family with genetic analysisLed him to suspect bad news to come in his family--he doesn't know when it will pop upI ran across an interesting piece from NPR by Dr. Michael Stone who developed a hierarchy of evilness among psychopathic individuals. This scale ranks 22 levels of evilness. Charles Manson ranked 15 on the scale of 22 levels (with 22 the worst) and Jeffrey Dahmer topped out at the most evil level. I ran a Pub Med search and have not been able to find a scientific reference to this scale. If a reader runs into the citation please comment as I would appreciate the citation.It's gratifying that some of the research conducted by Dr. Cadoret in being supported by additional studies of the genetics of violence, murder and antisocial personality. I will be posting more on this issue in the next Brain Posts where I focus on the epidemiology, genetics, imaging and medical care needs of this important public health problem. Cadoret RJ, Yates WR, Troughton E, Woodworth G, & Stewart MA (1995). Genetic-environmental interaction in the genesis of aggressivity and conduct disorders. Archives of general psychiatry, 52 (11), 916-24 PMID: 7487340Gunter TD, Vaughn MG, & Philibert RA (2010). Behavioral genetics in antisocial spectrum disorders and psychopathy: a review of the recent literature. Behavioral sciences & the law, 28 (2), 148-73 PMID: 20422643... Read more »

Cadoret RJ, Yates WR, Troughton E, Woodworth G, & Stewart MA. (1995) Genetic-environmental interaction in the genesis of aggressivity and conduct disorders. Archives of general psychiatry, 52(11), 916-24. PMID: 7487340

Gunter TD, Vaughn MG, & Philibert RA. (2010) Behavioral genetics in antisocial spectrum disorders and psychopathy: a review of the recent literature. Behavioral sciences , 28(2), 148-73. PMID: 20422643

August 20, 2010
02:38 PM
65 views

The Scientist and the Anarchist - Part III

by Eric Michael Johnson in The Primate Diaries

The latest stop in the #PDEx tour is being hosted by Deborah Blum at her website Speakeasy Science.When an estimated 1,400 match-girls went on strike in July, 1888 to protest for better working conditions, it started a fire that became known as New Unionism. Soon after came the London dock workers’ strike, and within twelve months the UK’s Trade Union Congress had increased its membership from 670,000 to 1,593,000. [1]For Thomas Henry Huxley and Peter Kropotkin these labor developments were interpreted very differently, and yet both saw in them important connections with their work in evolutionary biology. Huxley, who had pulled himself out of East London poverty through a combination of sheer brilliance and stubborn determination, was greatly concerned about what the workers democracy movement meant for social stability. Now the President of the Royal Academy of Sciences and a living legend in the recently established field of evolutionary biology, Huxley had come to identify with the aristocracy he’d worked so hard to be accepted by. Kropotkin, however, had rejected the silver spoon he had once been fed with as a Russian prince after coming face to face with the exploitation that made such ostentatious luxury possible. For him, the growing workers movement was the only path by which the poor could achieve any justice in a world that was undergoing radical change. Both saw in these developments a force of nature — one ominous, the other hopeful — and these conflicting visions would ultimately collide on the pages of the Nineteenth Century.Read the rest of the post here (also Part I and Part II) and stay tuned for next week's post at Anthropology in Practice.Peter Kropotkin (1902). Mutual Aide: A Factor of Evolution New York: McClure, Philips & Co.... Read more »

Peter Kropotkin. (1902) Mutual Aide: A Factor of Evolution. New York: McClure, Philips . info:/

August 20, 2010
02:38 PM
51 views

The Scientist and the Anarchist - Part III

by Eric Michael Johnson in The Primate Diaries in Exile

The latest stop in the #PDEx tour is being hosted by Deborah Blum at her website Speakeasy Science.When an estimated 1,400 match-girls went on strike in July, 1888 to protest for better working conditions, it started a fire that became known as New Unionism. Soon after came the London dock workers’ strike, and within twelve months the UK’s Trade Union Congress had increased its membership from 670,000 to 1,593,000. [1]For Thomas Henry Huxley and Peter Kropotkin these labor developments were interpreted very differently, and yet both saw in them important connections with their work in evolutionary biology. Huxley, who had pulled himself out of East London poverty through a combination of sheer brilliance and stubborn determination, was greatly concerned about what the workers democracy movement meant for social stability. Now the President of the Royal Academy of Sciences and a living legend in the recently established field of evolutionary biology, Huxley had come to identify with the aristocracy he’d worked so hard to be accepted by. Kropotkin, however, had rejected the silver spoon he had once been fed with as a Russian prince after coming face to face with the exploitation that made such ostentatious luxury possible. For him, the growing workers movement was the only path by which the poor could achieve any justice in a world that was undergoing radical change. Both saw in these developments a force of nature — one ominous, the other hopeful — and these conflicting visions would ultimately collide on the pages of the Nineteenth Century.Read the rest of the post here (also Part I and Part II) and stay tuned for next week's post at Anthropology in Practice.Peter Kropotkin (1902). Mutual Aide: A Factor of Evolution New York: McClure, Philips & Co.... Read more »

Peter Kropotkin. (1902) Mutual Aide: A Factor of Evolution. New York: McClure, Philips . info:/

August 19, 2010
03:59 PM
55 views

Ethics of Labeling

by Anastasia B in Biofortified

We’ve discussed labeling many times at Biofortified, usually looking at things from a practical perspective, such as in the posts What’s in a label? and Labeling GMOs. I argue that anything that is scientifically proven to be a hazard should be a mandatory label. For example, a label that a product contains nuts is justified by severe allergic reactions, even though the additional label may add to the cost of a product for people who don’t have Continue reading...... Read more »

MacDonald, C., & Whellams, M. (2007) Corporate Decisions about Labelling Genetically Modified Foods. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(2), 181-189. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-006-9245-8

August 19, 2010
09:06 AM
45 views

Scientist Urges "Four Culture" Partnerships on Climate Change Communication

by Matthew C. Nisbet in Age of Engagement

More than 50 years after the publication of CP Snow's seminal Two Cultures, interdisciplinary partnerships between science and other academic "cultures" are being urged once again. Today, urgency is not focused on the Cold War but rather the challenge of engaging society on climate change and other environmental problems.
In an open access article published this month at the journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, I joined with several colleagues to describe the potential for partnerships that involve interdisciplinary "four culture" initiatives across universities and community-based institutions.
The essay is based on the insights, revelations, and conclusions from the 16 member Columbia River Quorum, which was composed of scientists, scholars, and professionals - four representatives from each of what we describe as the four academic "cultures" - who met in Oregon in 2009 for the first of what we hope will be many similar summits across the world (see photo below). The goal of that meeting was to identify and build synergies by which members of traditionally separate disciplinary cultures -- specifically the environmental sciences, philosophy and religion, the social sciences, and the creative arts and professions -- can accomplish collaboratively what none are capable of doing alone.
In the essay, we propose specific strategies for catalyzing these inter-disciplinary partnerships with the goal of creating a new communication infrastructure around the issue of climate change. These strategies include a bold proposal to pool "public impact" money from individual research grants at the university level to be re-invested by a "four culture" expert committee in local and regional public engagement initiatives. It also includes a call for a digital news community--a Chronicle of Higher Ed focused on climate change education and communication--that would serve as a catalyst for identifying and diffusing best practices and partnerships.
One of the organizers of the Four Cultures summit in Oregon was Mark Hixon, professor of Marine Conservation Biology at Oregon State University. In an interview I did with Hixon, he reflects on the origins of the summit and his outlook on the urgent need for Four Culture initiatives on climate change communication and education at universities across the country. Along with the interview, I have posted a photo and a list of the participants in the summit.
What motivated you to organize the Columbia River Quorum?
My Oregon State University (OSU) philosopher / writer colleague and friend, Kathy Moore, and I were sharing lunch, lamenting on the increasingly bad news regarding the state of the global environment and the lack of substantial remedial action by the United States regarding climate disruption. We focused on the need for our society's response to accelerate past the exponentially increasing rate of environmental degradation if all the Earth's children and grandchildren are to enjoy healthy lives.
Where did the idea come from?
The need for an accelerated response by society to climate disruption and other pressing environmental issues stimulated the idea that we need new synergies. Natural science has done a wonderful job documenting environmental threats, yet that knowledge alone has not stimulated an adequate response within our nation. Needed are all four academic cultures -- natural sciences, social sciences, philosophy and religious studies, and communication and creative arts -- to fully engage with each other to create those synergies. Once that need became clear to us, hosting a quorum with representatives from each of the four cultures was the logical next step.
Over the course of the weekend, what things did you come to realize?
In March 2009, Kathy's organization, OSU's Spring Creek Project, hosted 4 members of each of the 4 academic cultures at a beautiful retreat in the Columbia River Gorge (see photo below). The energy of the weekend was exciting and truly palpable. Ideas flowed like the great flood that carved the Gorge! I realized then that the time was right for these new synergies to develop -- that together we in academia truly can help to bring about "the great turning" in new, more integrated, and more effective ways.
If you were to emphasize two take away conclusions from the experience for environmental scientists, what would they be?
First, let go of the entrenched worldview that our role as environmental scientists is ONLY to provide data to society regarding climate disruption and other environmental threats -- that providing data ALONE will stimulate society to respond to these threats. That partial and isolated role has failed and will continue to do so.
Second, engage with social scientists and non-scientist colleagues, indeed, with the public at large regarding these important issues that affect us all. In short, do not abdicate your citizenship -- actively engage in changing the world!
Why do you think some scientists might have reservations about interdisciplinary partnerships focused on public engagement?
There are many reported reasons: (1) the perceived lack of time and energy as we focus exclusively on teaching, research, and university administration, (2) the ineffective worldview that our role is only to provide information, (3) the false belief that our credibility as scientists will dissolve if we fully engage as citizens, etc. I personally reject all these excuses, and I highly recommend that all scientists read Michael Nelson's recent papers on these issues [attached -- check with Michael to see if you can provide download links].
What do you think are steps that can be taken at the university and disciplinary level to encourage greater "Four Culture" partnerships?
Traditional university organizational structures are insufficiently integrated and often terribly isolating, especially between the sciences and the liberal arts. At OSU, two recent efforts building on the Spring Creek Project are fostering new synergies among the four academic cultures. First, the once fully separate colleges of science and liberal arts have been folded into a single division of arts and sciences. Second, a new environmental humanities initiative, the interdisciplinary Three Rivers Institute, has been formed to foster integration among human values, science, and environmental leadership.
If colleagues at another university wanted to organize their own Four Culture quorum, what advice would you give them?
Go for it! Start with a simple foursome of one member from each culture, then build from there. I truly believe that people are ready for revolutionary integration. All four cultures have been working for changing the world in positive ways, largely in parallel, isolated, and often (but certainly not always) ineffective. The time is ripe for new synergies that will accelerate our society's response to pressing environmental threats.

Members of the Columbia River Quorum (March 2009): Back row: Bob Frodeman, Scott Sanders, Steve Vanderheiden, Andreas Schmittner, Hank Green, Fred Swanson, Charles Goodrich, Kathie Olsen, John Bliss, Mark Hixon. Front row: Kathy Moore, Carly Johnson, Michael Nelson, Pam Sturner, Alison Deming, Michaela Hammer. Missing: Eban Goodstein and Matt Nisbet.
Citation:
Nisbet, M., Hixon, M., Moore, K., & Nelson, M. (2010). Four cultures: new synergies for engaging society on climate change Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8 (6), 329-331 DOI: 10.1890/1540-9295-8.6.329
... Read more »

Nisbet, M., Hixon, M., Moore, K., & Nelson, M. (2010) Four cultures: new synergies for engaging society on climate change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8(6), 329-331. DOI: 10.1890/1540-9295-8.6.329

August 13, 2010
01:53 PM
72 views

The Scientist and the Anarchist - Part II

by Eric Michael Johnson in The Primate Diaries

The latest stop in the #PDEx tour is being hosted by Dr. SkySkull at his Scientopia blog Skulls in the Stars.Peter Kropotkin's notoriety as a political radical was equaled only by the high esteem held for his scientific and scholarly achievements. The discoveries he had made of glacial formations during the Quaternary Period in Russia were received with international acclaim and earned him invitations to join the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, the British Association for the Advancement of Science, as well as a Cambridge University endowed chair in geology (which he turned down because it came with the stipulation that he give up his political work). Kropotkin gave lectures on biology and geology throughout Europe, England, and North America and was an outspoken proponent of an ecosystems worldview in which nature was never static but remained constantly in flux. He was a devoted Darwinian from the first publication of On the Origin of Species, and it was this scientific background that he held as the basis for a politics of individual liberty and the necessity of social change. As he wrote in his essay "Revolutionary Studies":Everything changes in nature, everything is incessantly modified: systems, wages, planets, climates, varieties of plants and animals, the human species -- Why should human institutions perpetuate themselves! ... What we see around us is only a passing phenomenon which ought to modify itself, because immobility would be death. These are the conceptions to which modern science accustoms us.Read the rest of the post here. The Scientist and the Anarchist - Part III will conclude next week at Deborah Blum's Speakeasy Science following a stop at Carin Bondar.com.Daniel P. Todes (1989). Darwin Without Malthus: The Struggle for Existence in Russian Evolutionary Thought, London: Oxford University Press.... Read more »

Daniel P. Todes. (1989) Darwin Without Malthus: The Struggle for Existence in Russian Evolutionary Thought. London: Oxford University Press. info:/

August 13, 2010
01:53 PM
77 views

The Scientist and the Anarchist - Part II

by Eric Michael Johnson in The Primate Diaries in Exile

The latest stop in the #PDEx tour is being hosted by Dr. SkySkull at his Scientopia blog Skulls in the Stars.Peter Kropotkin's notoriety as a political radical was equaled only by the high esteem held for his scientific and scholarly achievements. The discoveries he had made of glacial formations during the Quaternary Period in Russia were received with international acclaim and earned him invitations to join the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, the British Association for the Advancement of Science, as well as a Cambridge University endowed chair in geology (which he turned down because it came with the stipulation that he give up his political work). Kropotkin gave lectures on biology and geology throughout Europe, England, and North America and was an outspoken proponent of an ecosystems worldview in which nature was never static but remained constantly in flux. He was a devoted Darwinian from the first publication of On the Origin of Species, and it was this scientific background that he held as the basis for a politics of individual liberty and the necessity of social change. As he wrote in his essay "Revolutionary Studies":Everything changes in nature, everything is incessantly modified: systems, wages, planets, climates, varieties of plants and animals, the human species -- Why should human institutions perpetuate themselves! ... What we see around us is only a passing phenomenon which ought to modify itself, because immobility would be death. These are the conceptions to which modern science accustoms us.Read the rest of the post here. The Scientist and the Anarchist - Part III will conclude next week at Deborah Blum's Speakeasy Science following a stop at Carin Bondar.com.Daniel P. Todes (1989). Darwin Without Malthus: The Struggle for Existence in Russian Evolutionary Thought, London: Oxford University Press.... Read more »

Daniel P. Todes. (1989) Darwin Without Malthus: The Struggle for Existence in Russian Evolutionary Thought. London: Oxford University Press. info:/

August 1, 2010
06:04 PM
103 views

Man as "Monkeys Wearing Pants": Why Humans Make Poor Money Choices

by Bill Yates in Brain Posts

I don't read many economic blogs but one I do follow is Barry Rithholtz's The Big Picture. Barry acknowledges the limitations of human decision making and knowledge. His economic approach is a refreshing humbleness. He has stated that we need to remember that man is not far removed from our primate ancestors---we are basically "monkeys wearing pants". Understanding this, his investment approach is to know that all decisions may be influenced by bias of our monkey-based brain.This last week he posted a TED talk from Dr. Laurie Santo, a Yale University primate researcher. She basicly re-interates some of Rithholtz's claims based on her work with primates. Her primate lab has developed a way to see how monkeys make value decisions that involve money. The presentation is 19 minutes long. If you don't have time to view, I have posted by notes here:Notes on Laurie Santos' TED talk: A Monkey Economy As Irrational As OursTwo important observations about homo sapiens:1. Homo sapiens is really smart (and vain)2. We can be incredibly dumb and make dumb mistakes decisions and systems promoting environmental deterioration decisions and systems leading to global financial market collapseThe errors we make are predictable and persistentThis may be due to one of two reasons:Our environments are designed badly and we just need to redesign the environmentOur minds are designed badly--a more concerning, less manageable situation.Stantos' lab uses the brown capuchin monkeys species-New World primatesA question the have addressed is: "How can we get monkeys to simulate money-making decisions?"Monkeys are taught to use tokens to buy pieces of foodMonkeys are placed in a money marketplaceGiven wallet of tokensProvided choice at what to buyQualitatively and quantitatively the monkeys make decisions matching with the human marketplaceMonkeys did not saveMonkeys steal tokens from other monkeys and humansMonkeys show two decison-making biases Relativity--risk taking is not symmetrical Loss Aversion-we are less likely to risk if loss is involved than if gain is involvedHowever, this loss aversion bias actually at times increases risk for a bad outcomes, i.eHolding on to stock lossesFailure to take lower price on home you ownSo human decision-making biases may be part of our evolutionary developmentIf an evolutionary bias, they may be very difficult to overcome.The good news is that we can recognize our limitations, accept them and try to design an environment that reduces their effectComment: I wonder if in the example given, if risk aversion to loss relates to prioritizing choices that limit risk of starvation. If this is a basic strategy, a monkey would choose an option where two grapes are guaranteed and a chance of one grape (and starvation risk) is avoided. It is concerning that there may some other types of decisions we make might also be rooted in core evolutionary biases. Here, I thinking about choices to go to war and choices to stay in wars despite evidence of failure to make progress.Link to Dr. Santos' LabSantos LR, & Hughes KD (2009). Economic cognition in humans and animals: the search for core mechanisms. Current opinion in neurobiology, 19 (1), 63-6 PMID: 19541475... Read more »

Santos LR, & Hughes KD. (2009) Economic cognition in humans and animals: the search for core mechanisms. Current opinion in neurobiology, 19(1), 63-6. PMID: 19541475

July 30, 2010
10:41 AM
91 views

Donating Eggs from an Anoxic Brain Injury Patient?

by Brian McMichael, M.D. in Pallimed: a Hospice & Palliative Medicine Blog

Last week NEJM published an interesting case in the ongoing series: "A Request for Retrieval of Oocytes from a 36-year old Woman with Anoxic Brain Injury." Usually these cases are diagnostic dilemmas. This one focused on an ethical dilemma at end-of-life. It got coverage in the mainstream media as well.

The Case
A 36-year-old woman, in overall good health taking oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), was on a prolonged international flight, and collapsed. A physician on the plane found no pulse. A 2-hour long, in-flight, complicated course of ACLS ensued with compromised ventilation, until the plane made an emergency landing in Boston. The patient presented to the MGH ED approximately 2.5 hours after her collapse, with unstable vital signs and arrhythmia. She was intubated with a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 9 with some lateralization, eyes roving, not tracking with disconjugate gaze, brain-stem and spinal reflexes intact. Her work up revealed right lower extremity DVT, with multiple bilateral pulmonary emboli and evidence of right-heart strain. Initial CT and MR neuroimaging was unremarkable. The patient was admitted to the ICU.

On day four, the patient’s pupils became fixed and dilated. Repeat CT and MR neuroimaging showed findings consistent with cerebral edema and widespread anoxic brain injury. Her increased intracranial pressure (ICP) aggressively managed. Sedation was withdrawn and she now demonstrated a GCS of 4 with intermittent posturing. EEG showed markedly reduced waveforms and diffuse slowing. Corneal and cough reflexes were intact, and remained intact throughout the following interludes, and until final disposition. So, the diagnosis of brain death was not made. After discussion with her husband and her parents about her dismal prognosis, the patient was extubated and placed on comfort measures only (CMO). Several hours later, in the middle of the night the family rescinded CMO and demanded full-code and maximal medical therapy be reinstituted to see if eggs could be harvested for posthumous conception.

There are several examples in the literature of maintaining maternal life support in the face of maternal neurologic catastrophe for the purpose of fetal survival, development and subsequent delivery. This was differentiated from pursuing perimortem gamete harvesting for posthumous conception. There have been cases reported for perimortem spermatocyte harvesting and subsequent posthumous in-vitro fertilization (IVF), implantation, gestation and delivery. This situation differed materially and would have required a 7- to 10-day controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocol, oocyte harvesting in a dorsal lithotomy position risking harm or even death from increased ICP, oocyte cryopreservation, or IVF with cryopreservation of an embryo, gestational carrier identification, with subsequent surrogate implantation, gestation and delivery. No case of this scenario appeared in the literature.

The patient was taking OCPs for the primary purpose of contraception, with no current desire for children. The husband and family maintained that this course of action is what the patient would have wanted. Aside from the family’s assertions, there was no credible, objective evidence that the patient wanted children or would have consented to such a process. No willing gestational carrier was produced to take on such a pregnancy. The interventions were not offered. After further discussions with the family, CMO were again instituted, the patient was again extubated and died shortly thereafter.

Some ThoughtsFamilies stricken by lethal catastrophe frantically seek relief from their grief and naturally strive for redemption of their loss. These impulses and pressures are what can prolong a pursuit of curative treatments with vanishing likelihood of benefit, delay hospice enrollment, delay termination of life support, and they are what can lead to an exploration of and a decision for organ donation. Giving space to this grasping at straws, this searching for solace while balancing the care of patient can be heart-rending and frustrating.
I think this case also illustrates how the intersections of various, seemingly unrelated advances in medical technology can manifest in unexpected ways. Add to this the knowledge, assumptions, perceptions, attitudes and beliefs on the part of patients and their families and the resulting ethical and social interplay are difficult to anticipate, and as difficult to maneuver through.
I have struggled with families' preferences, recommendations and beliefs based on information, recollection and impressions from websites, traditional journalism, TV, radio and interpersonal anecdote. I have been blindsided when unproven, fanciful, risky or even dangerous treatments and procedures, which are presented with enthusiasm and the assumption that they should be really no big deal. I have then been saddled with disappointment, distrust and anger, when these options are then ruled out by the team. Gentle, progressive, even if need be persistent education and discussion about the rationale for refusal seem often to go only so far with many.
It would be interesting to find out how family members recall and reflect on these complex loss experiences over time, how they perceive the situation, the support and care they received, and their grief process. More objectively, what practices best care for the dying and protect the living in the face of extraordinary loss.
Any insights about this case, or the general phenomena?

Greer DM, Styer AK, Toth TL, Kindregan CP, Romero JM (2010). Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Case 21-2010. A request for retrieval of oocytes from a 36-year-old woman with anoxic brain injury. The New England journal of medicine, 363 (3), 276-83 PMID: 20647203
... Read more »

Greer DM, Styer AK, Toth TL, Kindregan CP, & Romero JM. (2010) Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Case 21-2010. A request for retrieval of oocytes from a 36-year-old woman with anoxic brain injury. The New England journal of medicine, 363(3), 276-83. PMID: 20647203

July 28, 2010
11:54 AM
96 views

Existential thoughts

by David Winter in Careers - in Theory

Can a model of a four-roomed apartment give insights into the existential process of career change?... Read more »

Cohen, B.N. (2003) Applying existential theory and intervention to career decision-making. Journal of Career Development, 29(3), 195-209. info:/10.1177/089484530302900306

Schultze, G., & Miller, C. (2004) The search for meaning and career development. Career Development International, 9(2), 142-152. DOI: 10.1108/13620430410526184

Hind, P. (2005) Making room for career change. Career Development International, 10(4), 268-274. DOI: 10.1108/13620430510609118

July 26, 2010
05:17 PM
121 views

Why People Believe Weird Things

by Bill Yates in Brain Posts

Michael Schermer, the publisher of Skeptic magazine recently presented at TED looking at why humans tend to be open to self-deception. Some appear to be more vulnerable. He proposes this vulnerability is related to the brain's role in pattern recognition and detecting meaningful signal against a back drop of noise.I've linked to the TED video here and it is about 19 minutes. It is pretty entertaining along with being informative. If you don't want to view the video, I've summarized my notes from the talk here: The brain is a Belief engine: pattern seeking primates thrive on association learning Beliefs can be false and result in making poor decisionsThe brain's wiring contributes to risk in belief in strange and paranormal ideasThe brain prioritizes patternicity--the tendency to find meaningful patterns in both meaningful and meaningless noise.But beliefs are open to type I (false positive) and Type II errors (false negative). Patternicity can break down when cost of a type I error is less than the cost of making a type II error.Thd efault position is to assume all patterns are real and importantAnterior cingulate cortex in the brain modulates pattern recognitionPattern seeking increases when you feel out of controlPeople who have high belief in the paranormal more likely to find meaningless patternsRight brain hemisphere is more pattern effectiveDopamine increases pattern recognitionAntipsychotics reduce patternicity. Psychosis is false pattern recognition.Dopamine increases signal to noise ratios. Facial recognition is highlighted in the brain and is a human pattern biasFusiform gyrus in the brain is a key area for facial recognitionAgenticity: Tendency to infuse patterns with meaning, intention, and agency, often invisible beings and from the top down. Responsible for belief in aliens, supernatural and religious beliefs Temporal lobe stimulation produces euphoric out of body experience. The power of expectation and power of belief strongly influence or pattern perception.Krummenacher and colleagues from Switzerland have recently published a study of dopamine, paranormal belief and detecting meaningful stimuli.They examined a group of believers with paranormal experiences and a group of skeptics. L-dopa administration made skeptics less conservative in their decision making but made believers more conservative. They suggest that paranormal ideation is "an important personality dimension and needs to be assessed in investigations on the detection of signals in noise".The tendency to have a bias toward paranormal and suspicious ideas is noted in the description of schizotypal personality disorder. I would agree that this is a domain and personality characteristic that probably does not receive enough attention. Krummenacher P, Mohr C, Haker H, & Brugger P (2010). Dopamine, paranormal belief, and the detection of meaningful stimuli. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 22 (8), 1670-81 PMID: 19642883... Read more »

Krummenacher P, Mohr C, Haker H, & Brugger P. (2010) Dopamine, paranormal belief, and the detection of meaningful stimuli. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 22(8), 1670-81. PMID: 19642883

July 26, 2010
05:30 AM
72 views

Expanding the Definition of Conflict of Interest - Big Food Edition

by Yoni Freedhoff in Weighty Matters

This month the Annals of Family Medicine published a point/counterpoint discussion of last year's awful decision by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) to partner up with Coca-Cola.Howard Brody, arguing that the AAFP's deal was clearly a conflict of interest, explains that by definition a conflict of interest, "arises when individuals or organizations enter into a set of arrangements which under usual circumstances would lead to the reasonable presumption that they will be tempted to put aside their primary interests in favor of a secondary set of interests."and that,"It is true that where a conflict of interest exists, no actual unethical behavior has necessarily arisen."Meaning that simply having the opportunity for a conflict of interest is in and of itself a conflict, and certainly having Coca Cola fund and/or write educational materials on beverage consumption for the AAFP in return for $600,000 sure smells like a conflict of interest waiting to happen.Howard then does a fine job of describing the most common arguments against perceived conflicts which include:Premature accusations: How can you accuse the AAFP of having a conflict? You haven't even seen the educational materials yet!The other party's not evil: There's no conflict - just because Coca-Cola contributes to obesity doesn't make their parent company evil.It'd be wrong not to engage: Conflict or not, it'd be wrong not to enter into a partnership with Coca-Cola because we'd be missing out on an opportunity to influence their behaviour for the good.Counterpoint was delivered by Lori Heim, current President of the AAFP (I interviewed her about the Coca-Cola partnership when it went down).Basically Lori's argument boils down to Howard's premature accusations piece as she notes, "Integral to this discussion is the transparency of the interaction, the rules governing the interaction, and the outcome of the agreement. Examined only in a philosophical vacuum, issues of conflict of interest and the underlying ethics governing behavior become an ideological straitjacket."She then goes on to talk about the AAFP's great core values, the scourge of obesity in society and finally how great the educational materials are on the AAFP site and cites two statements that explicitly call for a reduction in sugar sweetened beverages.You know, I agree with Lori - you can't examine the partnership in a philosophical vacuum, nor a practical one. What do I mean? Well while the duelling Annals pieces were an interesting read, I think they're rather beside the point as I'd argue there's a further litmus test for a conflict of interest, one that a philosophical or practical vacuum would ignore. I'm calling it the, "innocence by association" test.Here's the basic premise: If your partnership with a corporation, regardless of the details or outcomes of that partnership, provides that corporation with the ability to use your partnership as a means to defend products, practices or positions that in turn are contrary to your or your organization's primary obligations, then partnership with said corporation should rightly be described as a conflict of interest.In this case, if Coca Cola can or does use their partnership with the AAFP, an organization whose obligations lie with the betterment and protection of public health, to defend products, practices or positions which in turn are harmful to public health, then AAFP's partnership with Coca-Cola should be considered a conflict of interest.So can or do they?Let's ask Sandy Douglas, President of Coca-Cola North America.Here's Sandy on April 6th 2010 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution citing Coca-Cola's partnership with AAFP as part of his case for why soda taxes aren't necessary or appropriate, "We're for education, through support for organizations such as the American Academy of Family Physicians, which is providing consumers science-based information about sweeteners."Want to see another similar type example?Here's Coca-Cola Canada's Amy Laski defending Coca-Cola's sponsorship of the 2010 Winter Olympics (sorry the article itself isn't linkable), "We formed a red ribbon panel of experts from organizations such as the Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Canadian Diabetes Association to nominate torchbearers for Coca-Cola who committed to leading more active lifestyles and encouraging others to do the same."Maybe I'm just a simple man, but to me it seems pretty black and white. If you enter into a partnership with an organization whose products are anathema to you or your organization's aims it's a conflict of interest. The fact that the AAFP doesn't admit to that in the case of Coca-Cola is shameful and disingenuous and frankly I'd have preferred it if they simply came out and admitted the truth - yes, it's a terrifically unsavory conflict of interest, but hey, we needed the money.Brody, H. (2010). Professional Medical Organizations and Commercial Conflicts of Interest: Ethical Issues The Annals of Family Medicine, 8 (4), 354-358 DOI: 10.1370/afm.1140Heim, L. (2010). Identifying and Addressing Potential Conflict of Interest: A Professional Medical Organization's Code of Ethics The Annals of Family Medicine, 8 (4), 359-361 DOI: 10.1370/afm.1146

... Read more »

Brody, H. (2010) Professional Medical Organizations and Commercial Conflicts of Interest: Ethical Issues. The Annals of Family Medicine, 8(4), 354-358. DOI: 10.1370/afm.1140

Heim, L. (2010) Identifying and Addressing Potential Conflict of Interest: A Professional Medical Organization's Code of Ethics. The Annals of Family Medicine, 8(4), 359-361. DOI: 10.1370/afm.1146

July 23, 2010
10:53 AM
152 views

The will and its freedom: biological evidence from invertebrates

by Björn Brembs in bjoern.brembs.blog

A few weeks ago, Lars Chittka invited me to write an article "about free will in insects" for a Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Biological Sciences) Special Feature on 'Information processing in miniature brains' that he is editing. Given our work on spontaneity in flies and my mentor being Martin Heisenberg, how could I decline?I think I will first give a very brief overview of what people used to call "free will" and why it was such a controversy. I hope to get the gist across in about two paragraphs. Much of this info will be distilled from Bob Doyle's website and his article in William James Studies. Bob also published a letter to Nature in response to Martin Heisenberg's article there. Is it just coincidence that it was Heisenberg's father Werner Heisenberg who discovered the uncertainty principle?Then I plan to go on to argue that today the old, metaphysical free will of course does not exist in the almost 'spiritual' sense and that no prominent scholar has entertained that idea at least since Popper and Eccles' book "The self and its brain" in 1977. Instead, I will try and make the case that the term "free will" should be recast in biological terms, as a trait that evolved and keeps evolving to different degrees in different animals. I plan to use evidence from flies, leeches and other invertebrate animals to emphasize that even so-called 'simple' brains possess the capacity to behave unpredictably, i.e., freely. Any difference in freedom between animals is merely gradual.I probably should also spend a paragraph or so elaborating on the selection pressures leading to spontaneous behaviors and behavioral variability.Once the capacity for freedom has been shown, it will take less work convincing the readers of the capacity to 'will'.All of this should be couched in the notion that the dichotomy between indeterminism and determinism is a false dichotomy, because brains operate in the gray area between the two. This may be the most difficult concept to grasp, that indeterminism and determinism are not mutually exclusive, but delineate a spectrum of what one may call 'probabilism'. I may try and refer to evolution as also using both concepts of mutation (indeterminate) and selection (determinate) in a probabilistic process. I may even try and refer to Bayesian Statistics, although I know little more than the basic idea behind it. The main task of this section will be to argue that what we call freedom is more than just chance. Chance, or randomness is a prerequisite for freedom, a necessary component but it's not sufficient. Let me quote from our press release at the time: [co-author George Sugihara]"This nonlinear signature eliminates the two alternative explanations of spontaneous turning behavior in flies that would run counter to free will, namely complete randomness and pure determinism. These represent opposite and extreme endpoints in discussions of brain functioning which mirror the free will debate." To that, I'd only add that our subjective notion of 'Free Will' is essentially an oxymoron: we would not consider it 'will' if it were completely random and we would not consider it 'free' if it were entirely determined. Nobody would attribute any responsibility to our action if it had happened entirely coincidental. On the other hand, if our action was completely determined by external factors such that there was no alternative, again the person would not be held responsible. So if there is anything remotely close to free will, it must exist somewhere between chance and necessity - which is exactly where fly behavior comes to lie. George again finds the right words: "Our results address the middle ground between simple determinism and randomness that is currently not well understood or characterized. We speculate that if free will exists, it is in this middle ground." This leads me to believe that the question of whether or not we have free will appears to be posed the wrong way. Instead, if we ask 'where between chance and necessity are we located?' one finds that this is precisely where humans and animals differ. Humans may not have free will in the philosophical sense, but even flies have a number of behavioral options they need to decide between. Humans are less determined than flies and possess even more options. With this small reformulation, the topic of free will becomes the new biological research area of studying spontaneous behavior and can thus be discerned from the philosophical question.If after all that there's still room in the article, I'll review some of the data on the human default mode network and what they might contribute to the debate.Let's see, if enough people express interest in the comments, I may put a draft version online for comments and review. All commenters will at least be mentioned in the acknowledgements, of course.Heisenberg, M. (2009). Is free will an illusion? Nature, 459 (7244), 164-165 DOI: 10.1038/459164aDoyle, R. (2009). Free will: it's a normal biological property, not a gift or a mystery Nature, 459 (7250), 1052-1052 DOI: 10.1038/4591052cBriggman, K. (2005). Optical Imaging of Neuronal Populations During Decision-Making Science, 307 (5711), 896-901 DOI: 10.1126/science.1103736... Read more »

Heisenberg, M. (2009) Is free will an illusion?. Nature, 459(7244), 164-165. DOI: 10.1038/459164a

Doyle, R. (2009) Free will: it's a normal biological property, not a gift or a mystery. Nature, 459(7250), 1052-1052. DOI: 10.1038/4591052c

Briggman, K. (2005) Optical Imaging of Neuronal Populations During Decision-Making. Science, 307(5711), 896-901. DOI: 10.1126/science.1103736

Maye, A., Hsieh, C., Sugihara, G., & Brembs, B. (2007) Order in Spontaneous Behavior. PLoS ONE, 2(5). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000443

login

Post List

Philosophy posts

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

Why is this post inappropriate?

search

topics

dates

View

Language

Languages to Display

join us!

News