The truth revealed by science leads to a loss of meaning. In the face of this existential anxiety, how should we deal with it? This article from the micro-channel public number: nerve Reality (ID: neureality) , Author: Ephrat Livni (writers, lawyers ), Translator: Sixin, Reviewer: Zhang Meng, Editor: Yang Yinzhu, Typesetting: North, Head Image from: Visual China span>
Foreword by translator
Many previous articles on neurological reality are related to the topics discussed in this article, including cognitive mechanisms, free will, existential crises, morality, etc. Being a man is not easy. In fact, it has never been easy, if you believe Shakespeare. In the 16th century, the playwright wrote: “Life is like a dream, full of noise and commotion, but meaningless.”
Neuroscience is increasingly corroborating this view. The more scientists understand about the human brain and its operating mechanisms, the more they believe that it is no big deal to be born as a human being. We are just animals, a complex biological system that operates according to a series of physical, chemical and biological natural laws. Many scientists, including the late Hawking; and philosophers, including Duke University professor of philosophy and neurobiology Owen Flanagan(Owen Flanagan) and Greg Caruso, professor of philosophy at the State University of New York (Gregg Caruso), in the November 2018 issue of The Philosopher’s Journal.(Gregg Caruso) The span class=”text-remarks” label=”note”>(The Philosopher’s Magazine) advocates: We have no soul, no unchanging self, and no inner purpose. We exist only because we exist (like a small spot on a small planet in the vast universe), not because God created the earth for us. This “naturalistic” concept has caused many people to be deeply anxious, consciously or unconsciously, so they try to find meaning.
In general, regardless of whether we are clearly aware of the impact of scientific discoveries, many people in society are suffering from what Flanagan and Caruso call a “neuroexistentialism” crisis. They wrote: “Now, the third wave of existentialism-neuroexistentialism has emerged. It embodies such an anxiety: Even if science reveals the truth about human nature, it also makes us no longer hold on to human nature. Fantasy.“
waves of anxiety
Caruso and Flanagan define existentialism as the weakening of human self-image caused by social or political changes. These changes caused general discomfort, and ultimately prompted people to repair and reconstruct their views on the meaning of life.
The representatives of the first wave of existentialism were some thinkers in the 19th century, such as Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, and Nietzsche. They try their best to solve moral problems in a world where there is no god to decide right from wrong. In the 20th century, after the Second World War and the Holocaust, tens of millions of deaths and immeasurable human suffering seemed to disintegrate our notions of cherishing life and believing in common interests. This makes Sartre, Camus, and Beauvoir struggle to find the meaning of existence.
However, the philosophical crisis of the 21st century has nothing to do with religion or politics. It is rooted in the changes brought about by scientific discoveries. Flanagan and Caruso believe that these scientific discoveries are the final blow to the concepts of God, immaterial soul, spirit, self, initiative, etc. They explained: “Neuroexistentialism is caused by the rise of the scientific authority of the humanities and the conflict between the image of human science and the image of humanities.”
This modern anxiety comes from an expanding knowledge system: Everything we experience is just the result of a neural process[1]. Research results show that introspection or self-recognition cannot lift the veil of the soul[2], and death is us The end of everyone. If the operation of the brain gives us the experience of life, and the “non-material spirit” or soul does not exist, then once the brain stops functioning, there is nothing else behind us, and everything ceases to exist. In addition,Understanding our human beings as animals controlled by natural laws and physical mechanisms [3] will also lead to subjective Loss of initiative or free will [4].
It’s not just God who died. As Nietzsche claimed, if the physical process determines who we are, and our survival and operation are determined by the brain rather than the spirit, then it seems that we can no longer shape our lives by character qualities Up. In other words, there is no “superman” that Nietzsche proposed to fill the vacancy of God. Our Will to Survive——Expressed by existentialist playwright Samuel Beckett(Samuel Beckett)” I can’t move forward, I will continue to move forward” determination- now succumb to a series of physical mechanisms.
Scientists have evidence that they treat us as organic, biological machines. This concept has created a new kind of postmodern anxiety [5]. “With the development of brain science, we have become more and more aware of the mechanisms that affect human behavior, and we have become more and more convinced that we do not have the so-called’soul control’[6].” Flanagan and Caruso said, “There is no reason to believe that there is a non-physical self that controls behavior and is not determined by natural laws. The constraints of the argument.”
We don’t necessarily know why we feel lost or blame science for it. But for many people who believe in knowledge rather than in God, it is getting harder and harder to believe that “life is meaningful”. In the past, many traditional concepts can give people a sense of special, valued and self-reality, but these traditional concepts are slowly being disintegrated by scientific discoveries. Scientists are increasingly discovering that “self” is just a necessary illusion created by the brain, which is usually more fragile than we think.
At the same time, suicide, depression, and anxiety are increasing. In 2018, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention disclosed: Since 1999, the number of suicides in the United States has increased by 25%, covering most races and age groups. althoughOf course, there are many factors that cause mental illness. Behavioural scientist and popular science writer Clay Rutledge (Clay Rutledge) believes that this trend is not just As a result of the lack of mental health services, on the contrary, we are facing a brand new and modern “meaningless crisis.” In an article in the Dallas News in 2018, he explained: “To prevent anxiety, we must discover and maintain a sense of’life is meaningful’. Our species is not only working hard to live, but also It’s to live meaningfully. We want to have a meaningful life. People are psychologically most vulnerable when they cannot maintain a sense of meaning.”
Routledge believes that the pursuit of meaning comes from “neural mechanisms that help us survive and give us a unique ability to reflect”. He believes that the evolution of the human brain is to find meaning, but now it is more difficult to feel that “life has meaning” than before. There are many reasons, including more serious alienation, smaller family structure, and weaker religious beliefs.[7] span>. He believes: “Modern Americans, especially young people, are increasingly unlikely to identify with religious beliefs, go to church or participate in other religious activities. But my research shows that the sense of meaning provided by religion is difficult to restore in a non-religious environment. Now.”
Flanagan and Caruso believe that the “public mental attitude” obsessed with meaning will continue to exist. After all, people outside the scientific community still don’t understand what “self is an illusion” means to us as individuals, and they lack the expertise to discuss this new concept. Old ideas have existed for thousands of years, so it is difficult to discard them. And this new perspective on human beings will only make some people feel uncomfortable, thinking that it is impossible to live a meaningful life.
the moral instinct
But don’t despair. Embracing naturalism does not mean that morality does not exist, or that we will completely become prisoners of mysterious physiological processes that cannot be understood through introspection. Just as existentialists in the past found a new way to explore the problems of human existence and gave a new explanation to the question of “why we should strive to be good people and live a meaningful life”, so do today’s scientists and philosophers in this way.
Flanagan and Caruso are the editors of “Neuroexistentialism: Meaning, Morality, and Purpose in the Age of Neuroscience,” which explores when “the mind can no longer be separated from the material world to become the basis of meaning.”The “fundamental anxiety” caused by the foundation. In the book, thinkers from various fields discuss modern anxiety and propose methods to integrate empirical science into social psychology, so as not to lose hope for life.
For example, the cosmologist and physicist Sean Carroll of the California Institute of Technology (Sean Carroll)’s paper outlines the classics Mechanics, quantum physics, time, the nature of emergent phenomena, and the belief that the vastness and randomness of the universe all prove that the universe has no essential meaning. However, he still insisted that life is precious at the level of individuals and human groups, even if “modern science has completely destroyed the hope that the universe itself has a higher purpose or inner meaning.”
Carroll believes that our lives and society are important because we exist, coexist with others, and value meaning. So we can act purposefully, even if we are not part of a grand cosmic plan. He distinguished two things: Mankind has a definite plan, but the universe does not seem to[8] .
Psychologist and neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga(Michael Gazzaniga) is the SAGE of the University of California, Santa Barbara Mind Research Director of the center. Similar to Carol, he believes that there is nothing wrong with the naturalist perspective on human nature. The reason why we have a sense of responsibility and morality is that our brain has evolved the ability to allow us to do this.
We use cognitive mechanisms to reason, remember, perceive and judge. It is precisely because of our abilities that we have developed community norms that require us to think for and be responsible for each other[9]< /span>. The universe may be random, and on the mechanical level, “causes must have effects” may not be true, but at the level of human experience, we have certain moral and legal obligations, and we have the ability to fulfill these obligations.
Thomas Clark of Brandeis University Behavioral Health Institute(THomas Clark) explained in his commentary on neuroexistentialism that we can be good without God, because moral behavior is based on science. Clark wrote: “Science can explain why we are moral animals. The moral intuition engraved in us is so strong that no science can eventually overthrow it.”
There is evidence that altruism, cooperation, empathy, and love are “bio-embedded,” so we don’t need greater power to force us to consider the needs of others [10]. He believes: “People’s concern about moral foundations just proves the fact that we have moral nature. So, even if we know that morality is made up of lowliness such as oxytocin and vasopressin(or noble?) is adjusted by chemical substances, and it is unlikely that we will lose our moral capacity[11].”
The prospect of humanity
Flanagan and Caruso, as well as other contributors to the book, are relatively optimistic about the prospects. Instead of being discouraged by scientific discoveries, they came up with a “constructive plan.” This project involves restoring human self-image (as previous waves of existentialists have done) to think about difficult problems(Although there is no simple answer).
In their articles, these philosophers believe that we should “use our knowledge and insights on behavior, cognition, and neuroscience to resolve our concerns about existence, and reap a certain degree of health, happiness, and achievement satisfaction.” Ignoring the evidence does not revive the stale ideas of God, soul, self, or human particularity, nor does it give meaning to life. On the contrary, we should change our anxiety on a personal or social level. After all, now, as they say, “Naturalism is the only way in the world.”
Notes
[1] At the level of consciousness, everything we experience is nothing but the result of neural processes. “The Pursuit of Consciousness” explores the neural basis of consciousness and introduces the theory of integrated information theory (IIT) and global neural workspace (GWT).
[2] “The Revolution of Self-Awareness” pointed out that it is difficult for people to fully and accurately express their desires and motivations through reliable self-observation.
[3] At the level of behavior, we are just animals governed by natural laws and physical mechanisms. In “The Brain is a Predictive Machine”, humans are described as a biological system that models and predicts the relevant aspects of the environment in order to respond to changes in the environment and maintain an inherent homeostasis. “To reconcile with the body weight, let it cover the mind” also mentioned the “predictive coding” model. Predictive coding treats the brain as a “statistical organ” that predicts sensory information based on past conditions. The brain “explains the stimulus it encounters” based on hypotheses tested by sensory evidence (sensed by the internal organs). The actions we take in response to internal sensory signals—that is, the contingency and stability adjustments that internal stability needs force us to make—can reduce our prediction errors about our environmental expectations.
[4] “There is no such thing as free will” points out: the brain is described by neuroscience as a physical system: the firing of one neuron triggers other neurons, causing our thinking And behavior. The firing of neurons not only determines part or most of our neural activity, but all our thoughts, hopes, memories and dreams. When the nervous system in a certain state is subject to a certain stimulus, there will be a certain specific response. In the words of Saul Smilansky, a philosophy professor at the University of Haifa in Israel, this is called “given “An unfolding of the given” (an unfolding of the given). Here comes the disturbing question: if the brain isWill surely feel desperate. In the modern era when the positive filters brought about by religious beliefs have disappeared, existential anxiety has become more serious. (“Depressive Realism”)
[8] Christian List, a philosopher at the London School of Economics and Political Science, also expressed a similar view to Carol. He believes that the classic refutation of free will has made a big mistake. It confuses different levels of description. If we are looking for free will at the level of basic physics, we are completely in the wrong place. Even if the atoms that make up you don’t make decisions, you can make decisions. (“Christian List: To Determinists, Free Will Exists”)
[9] How humans develop empathy and other moral intuitions has always been a topic of interest to neurophilosopher Patricia Churchland . For her, conscience is not a set of absolute moral truths, but a set of community norms gradually generated because of its practicality. For example, “Don’t lie” and “Keep promises” make a community loyal to each other. Even today, our brains are still consolidating these norms. If the society approves our behavior, the brain will release pleasant chemicals; on the contrary, if it is not approved, the brain will release unpleasant chemicals. (“Brain says: To be a man, we must have a conscience”)
[10] “Did the theory of evolution take morality off the altar? “It points out: Evolutionary scholars have solved the secret of biological altruism. There is a hypothesis that at a certain stage of evolution, the externalization of altruistic tendencies into normativeness gives humans more survival advantages, and thus develops a moral system centered on altruistic psychology.
[11] What role oxytocin plays in human higher cognitive functions is still in a state of speculation. Morality, as a spiritual phenomenon, definitely does not only come from the so-called “moral molecule” oxytocin. (“Oxytocin: The Source of Morality?