From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Fri Aug 30 2002 - 01:32:22 MDT
gts writes
> Lee Corbin wrote:
>
> > Well, one cannot surmise what's going on just from behavior.
>
> Why then do seem to feel comfortable making such judgments about human
> behavior?
We make our judgments, of course, from our entire web of belief.
Now in the case of other human beings, even if we weren't genetically
influenced to behave towards them in any way, one would still very
rationally conclude that what was going on in one's brain is really
very much what's going on in someone else's.
A hundred years ago it might have been possible to say that this
kind of observation did not extend to the other higher animals.
A further component in our web of belief clearly shows that the
higher animals are like us.
> In any case, to keep the positivists and behaviorists happy, we can say
> "The alligator's behavior was consistent with the emotion of anger,
> which supports the hypothesis that alligators experience anger."
I denigrate the behaviorists as much as you! :-)
> > To me, it all hinges on whether reptiles have limbic systems.
>
> I see that I've used the term "limbic system" loosely in reference to
> alligators. Thanks for pointing that out. I was referring to the "the
> primitive reptilian brain" that controls primitive functions including
> aggression.
Yes, you're welcome. But since we *have* (another piece of our
web of belief) found that emotions tend to be centered in the
limbic system, and reptiles *do not have* such devices, it casts
some doubt on whether reptiles experience emotions. (I agree:
it continue to be useful to describe their behavior anthropo-
morphically.)
> The greater discussion here concerns the question of how
> *humans* experience pleasure and reward. This is a subject
> I have studied in some detail.
Yes, and thanks for the great URLS.
> Rafal believes the cortex is necessary for the experience of reward,
> whereas I believe rewards that involve cortical activation represent
> only a subset of the many types of rewards one can experience.
I would tend to agree with you, because of what I have read
about the limbic system and its role. However, with us and
perhaps even the very highest other animals, it may be mixed
together a bit in the way that Rafal is saying---that is
consider a human without language.
[Please note. For the squeamish, please skip to another
post. I don't want to make anyone sick and then get
harassed for it.]
Ahem. Suppose that you torture a human with language and one
without. Although their limbic systems probably behave quite
similarly, it is the human with language who has the greater
understanding of his predicament, and his lost opportunities,
and even perhaps the potential for losing his life. That has
to add to the pain of the situation, IMO.
> > I would say that there is an *explanation* for every action,
> > but hardly a motive.
>
> Can you give me an example of human action for which there was no
> motivation?
Easy. I looked down just now and noticed that my ankles are
crossed as I type. I don't remember putting them that way.
I think it's a habit. I certainly don't have a motive for
it. Another one: just now, pausing while I think, I looked
to the left. Maybe it has to do with there being a close
wall to my right. I don't know. It strains the language
again, IMO, to say that I had a motivation for that.
> > [The suicide bomber]
> > obtain vastly more satisfaction by getting seriously drunk
> > forty or fifty times during the course of the following year.
>
> Not so in his opinion. The suicide bomber decided that exploding himself
> to kill others was more satisfying than getting drunk, else he would
> have chosen to get drunk.
I think if you asked him, he'd look a little puzzled at that
and it's because he thinks that he's making a sacrifice and
I think that he's right. Even though I know its going to
hurt like absolute hell, I would quickly reach into a boiling
cauldron at this very second if I knew that that was the only
way to save the Earth from the Vogons and keep everyone I
know from dying. Surely if you try to rationalize that as
some sort of quest for reinforcement, you're barking up the
wrong tree. (Yes---we are machines, and yes---I did *decide*
that, so yes, in some utterly tautological way I was momentarily
more *satisfied* with that choice than letting all Earth's
people and my family die---but saying that we are machines
says all that. Simply put: it's wrong to shoehorn that
example into using *reward* to explain the action.)
> > At one level, we should say that his beliefs (memes) took
> > control and caused him to kill himself.
>
> I would say that his "memes" regarding terrorist activity
> activated his reward circuitry and drove him to commit
> terrorist acts at the expense of his own life.
Again, the problem with your description is that it applies
to *everything* --- to *all* behavior --- and so explains
nothing.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:32 MST