Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Reply to comment

eambash's picture

Follow-ups

To respond to some of the things I heard in class on Tuesday...

Saying that humans are operated by neurons and chemicals does not, from what I can tell, mean that those neurons and chemicals operate the same way in all of us. I don't think choosing the "brain = behavior" model is the same thing as saying that we're all the same, that there's no free will, or that the brain doesn't interact with the environment. Instead, I think the effect of the environment on the brain demonstrates the biological basis for behavior. As some classmates have mentioned, we can see how drugs (both legal and illegal) affect our brain tissues and brain functions. We can see the physical effects of external, environmental input. Similarly, we can see things happening in the brain even without any input. And then there are many things we can see when looking through lenses but that we can't clearly associate with certain thoughts or ideas -- at least not yet. Imagine how much we could see a hundred years ago, either with our own eyes or with special tools, but didn't know how to identify until more recently!

Even if the huge descriptor "the brain" were to account for all of our behavior, that wouldn't take away from the intense, exciting mystery involved in behavior (and in the brain). Plus, if we CAN associate certain parts of the brain with certain behaviors and even certain thoughts, even though we didn't used to be able to do so, doesn't that show that as we fix, revise, and hone our scientific methods we just see more and more a) complexity and confusion and b) clarity?

I don't feel satisfied by the idea that a whole (ill-defined) section of behavior is to be labeled "the mind" and blocked off from biological exploration only for that reason. I'd rather assume that there's a lot we don't know - and keep looking. I'm exhilarated by the idea that scientific exploration always yields more and more questions. For everything we see, or learn HOW to see, there are millions more things we still don't understand. For me, that's a reason to keep working, to think, "We aren't YET in the know because we haven't YET found the right means." For me, it's all too much to chalk up to nothing, or to associate with some transcendental thing that we don't even search for physically. Biology and behavior are both intriguing and confusing, and I want to be able to question each of them further.

Reply

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
10 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.