3. Brain physiology
For centuries, philosophers have argued and disagreed whether ethical behavior is and should be based on rational thought, or whether it is based on emotions; whether there are absolute, nature-given standards of ethical behavior, or whether all ethical behavior is relative and results from conditioning by circumstances and learning.
Behavior, thoughts, emotions, and learning are all brain processes. An understanding of these physiological processes and their interconnections should help in the philosophical discussion of ethics. A recent philosophical perspective, the“Physiology of Ethics”
, may open new approaches for the discussion and exploration of ethics.
Certain behavior patterns are controlled by genetically given capabilities of the animal or human brain through predetermined nerval structures and functions. In such cases, certain sensory stimuli trigger specific basic behavior patterns. Sensory stimuli are recognized by sensor specific brain areas (visual, acoustic, olfactory, etc.). As these areas recognize a stimulus, they project this fact by way of nerval connections to other parts of the brain for response behavior. The most basic response behavior patterns are feeding, aggression, flight, mating, and kin protection (mainly offspring). The essential parts of these basic behavior patterns are genetically given with some learning of specific identifying details (specific visual patterns, smell, call, etc.). To the degree that learning sets in, behavior patterns become more complex and less predetermined.
There may be contradictions when sensory stimuli evoke contradictory behaviors (e.g. in a situation of danger: flight vs. protection of offspring). Animals can postpone decisions in uncertainty, can follow priorities between different motivations, and can also balance different signal intensities of different stimuli (distance, smell, etc.) or different memories. Is that thought? It is based on brain processes separate from the sensory areas, specifically in those areas that then evolved into the forebrain in humans. Indications are that the strongest signals prevail in the brain, with different weight being given to different stimuli or memories under different conditions in the perceived environment or in the body.
Behavior patterns can also be triggered by signals originating in the mid-brain, as in connection with natural desires or urges (hunger, sex, and also parental caring, nursing). The hypothalamus is the part of the mid-brain that controls the processing and projecting of natural desires or urges. Nerval projections from there lead to parts of the frontal lobes of the brain which strategize and initiate actions, or change the weight of other motivations occupying the mind. Thereby, such projections of desires or urges substantially influence thought and behavior in the direction of satisfying the originating urges. There is a strong connection between the mid-brain, body chemistry, and the frontal lobes where “reason” resides (via the endocrine system, hormones, neurotransmitters, etc.).
Sensory perceptions result in the activation of all nerves and nerval connection associated with those perceptions. Thoughts are sequences of visualizations of sensory perceptions, including words. A visualization in thought can be understood as the activation of all neurons related to a perception without an originating sensory stimulus. There is only one thought in conscious presence (foreground of thought) at any one time. The progression of the thought process never stands still. As one visualization fades away (as any nerval activation does), another mentally associated one is freshly activated. This occurs through nerval connections (synapses) that, once activated, result in retrievable “memory”. In an endless linear sequence, one visualization follows the other. Most visualizations have many related associations. However, the linear thought sequence only follows the strongest, the most often used, or the most highly valued association; the others most likely are suppressed by the one that does become activated. This is one reason why thought evolution is similar to biological evolution. Sequences are interrupted by sensory inputs with greater signal strength than the thought sequence. Thereby, such new sensory inputs enter consciousness, often resulting in new thought sequences.
Some sequences taper off into the subconscious. Others surface out of the subconscious, appearing as sudden “intuition”.
What is “consciousness”? Possibly nothing more than the fact that prior thought is remembered. This allows the brain to piece together an understanding of the world around it, of the individual doing the thinking, and of the brain itself. Such understanding of the world and itself is as good as the thought capability, the memory, the past experiences, and the learning of the individual brain doing the thinking (whether animal or human).
“Awareness” is the present existence of a conscious thought (or conscious sensory impression), accomplished by short-term memorization of the present thought. Thoughts must have been in awareness to be remembered and, thereby, to become part of consciousness. Thoughts (or sensory impressions) have to exceed a certain threshold signal strength to enter awareness. Therefore, most thoughts in the course of a day are never in awareness and, hence, do not reach consciousness. We remember only a very small fraction of what we experienced and thought.
Thought can be focused. An important thought, e.g. an open problem or a strong and surprising sensory impression, can serve as a “focus” to guide following thought sequences. The focus is a visualization that is kept in a state of activation (temporary memory) in such a way that any following element of a thought sequence is put in reference to this “focus”. Thoughts which meaningfully relate to a given focus gain additional signal strength, possibly enough to reach awareness, or enough to serve as link to the next thought (visualization), thereby eliminating thought sequences which are unrelated to the “focus”. Often, several focus thoughts are retained in memory with varying strength. Therefore, “intuition” can occur at a much later time when a chance thought, possibly in the subconscious, provides an important link to an earlier focus and the resulting signal strength allows penetration to awareness.
Referencing of subsequent thought or sensory impressions to an earlier established focus allows the formation of new associative links and new visualizations in the brain, possibly progressing from simple components to increasingly complex structures. Thus, the mechanism of focused thought is the other reason why thought evolution is similar to biological evolution.
Consequently, the human brain can only “think” in associative sequences of visualization elements which it already possesses, or which it receives through sensory perception (learning) from the outside and values highly enough to retain in memory. However, as elsewhere in nature, the human brain can form ever more complex associative structures out of the elements it contains and processes. Since associative links are strengthened through either high valuation or repetitive use, it takes a certain quantity of personal thought and personal value judgments to form reliable thought sequences in the brain and subsequent behavior patterns. (Watching TV or just listening to a teacher talking is not enough).
Emotions (sometimes called feelings) are different from thoughts. Thoughts are brain processes in the forebrain and are visualizations of sensory images, including words. Emotions, however, are not visualizations (corresponding to images, sounds, words, fragrances, etc.) and, therefore, areabstract
phenomena in the brain. As such, emotions are not describable or measurable in physical terms (only through their symptoms), and are fuzzy in nature. Emotions express themselves as often unlocalized feelings of positive or negative well being (e.g. joy, sorrow). Emotions can originate in the mid-brain or limbic system. Through nerval projections, as from the amygdala, they can stimulate thought responses (and subsequent behavior) in the forebrain. Thereby, emotions have an effect on signal strength in associative links and, consequently, thought sequences. Depending on such relative signal strength, thought sequences continue unaltered or become guided or derailed by emotions. The associative signal strength, as discussed before, can be modified by learning, repetitive usage, and personal thought.
Emotions can be memorized as valuations of memory elements or thought associations by means of connections with the limbic system of the brain, specifically the amygdala. It is important to note that emotions come in a variety of different dimensions (flavors), including:
warmth vs. coldness (love or compassion vs. fear or hate, as to children, enemies, adversaries)
joy vs. sorrow (related to gain vs. loss, especially when human)
good vs. bad (as when doing right vs. wrong), also including guilt, shame
satisfaction vs. anger (calm vs. disturbance)
humor: a class by itself
and more?
As in all biological parameters, there is a statistical distribution of brain structures and brain nuclei sizes among humans and of asymmetries between brain halves. Therefore, it is not surprising that the strength of urges or emotional impact on brain functions and (frontal lobe) thought varies between individuals. It is common knowledge that some individuals are more emotional than others; some are more poetic than others. Consequentially, the emotional versus rational assessment of ethical concerns varies between individuals. Beyond that, there are the learned variations in response to emotions, some on the cultural level of societies.
All emotions (except possibly humor) are related to, or are the base of “ethical” concerns and vice-versa. That is what sets ethical judgment apart from logical or practical thought and measurable cost/benefit considerations.
The mid-brain influences the “sympathetic” nervous system. Generally recognized is the impact that this specialized nervous system has on the stomach, the heart, and the blood vessels (e.g. stomach cramps, heart beat, vasal dilatation). Thus, ancient thinking placed important emotions in the heart, and our language indicates that “disgusting” emotions make people feel sick while good deeds give them a warm feeling. Vice-versa, heart trouble and the lack of oxygen can lead to emotions of anxiety. A pleasantly warm environment can lead to the same emotions that, in turn, can cause the body to relax and generate generous circulation. Symptoms and causes (well-being and emotions) in these loops are sometimes interchangeable. The emotions’ impact on decision making and some actions’ impact on emotions are also reversible.
While the “heart” was thought to play a role in ethical concerns regarding love (compassion/hate), the “conscience” was thought to play a role in ethical concerns regarding good/bad (right/wrong). “Conscience” has been a key concept in ethics as a discipline of philosophy from Plato’s times to our days of modern philosophy and theology. However, there is no indication in brain physiology of any structure or function in neurological terms corresponding to conscience.
The virtual phenomenon of conscience may arise out of holistic thinking, closely related to the right side of the brain, in complex situations. In those situations, thought occurs largely subconsciously with solutions appearing unexpectedly in awareness in a not analytically retraceable way. However, there is a different interpretation to be considered for the explanation of conscience:
“Conscience” appears specifically in conflict resolutions between deeper urges and learned behavior, or when realizing alternate priorities with divergent rank in culturally learned acceptance or “value” scales (love ranks higher than joy, joy ranks higher than physical pleasure or gain).
It is important to note that the relative weight of emotions and, hence, judgment and ethical behavior can change in the course of an individual’s life. A child’s priority of security can be followed by a young man’s enjoyment of adventure (even a fight), possibly followed by the next age’s enjoyment of pleasures. These shifts possibly emanate through varying signal strength from the mid-brain (hypothalamus etc.) and may be related to body chemistry, including neurotransmitters.
As in all conflicting situations, one can possibly regret not having followed the other course when one has decided on a specific course at one time, resulting in feelings of regret, guilt or shame. In other words, most people have learned what the culturally acceptable solution should be when in conflict with one’s own momentary decisions. Humans respond to the same methods used in animal training in order to improve their ethical decision-making capability (reward/punishment, physical or abstract, or impact on the nervous system with neurochemicals in pathological cases).
One should note that some decisions by “conscience” are influenced by what is learned as the culturally accepted value scale. However, this scale changes in the history of cultures. Patriotism and honor, in first place in the value scale before WWII, is now replaced in primary position of importance by the goals of tolerance and equality in ethnic, gender, and social matters. Thus, decisions of generations past cannot be fairly adjudicated by our generation. Will the value scale change further in future times? In what direction? The great leaders of mankind often sensed the needs of people in their times and formed their societies accordingly.
Many ethical decisions are made as a matter of habit. In habit, behavior patterns are followed without evaluation of alternatives in thought. This is accomplished through strongly formed synaptic connections providing a preference path for thought associations. As a matter of fact, most people in any society behave ethically (or unethically) out of habit. Following habit without any thought does not provide any emotional reward, except in secondarily derived experiences.
One should be aware of the fact that ethical decisions are not yet ethical actions. The translation of judgment into action is a major problem for many individuals -- the dreamers, the phlegmatics, the procrastinators, and those who have to “find themselves” first. Action initiation, while often seen as genetically preconditioned, is somewhat related to mid-brain functions and the endocrine system (e.g. adrenalin, possibly also the pituitary and thyroid glands). Thus, it can be influenced by thought (including faith), learning (habit), diet, pharmaceutical products, drugs, exercise, and other environmental factors.
And where is the “soul”? This word has also gone through some change of meaning through the times and different cultures. For the Greeks and Romans, the soul (Greek: “psyche”, Latin: “animus”) was the total spiritual essence of the human being -- thought, emotion, and personality -- continuing after the death of the body. With philosophical scrutiny, the “logic” thought or “reason” (Greek: “logos”, Latin: “ratio”) was separated and polarized from the intuitive and emotional soul. In our post-Victorian, post-romantic, humanistically educated times, soul is the seat of emotions and spontaneous (not reasoned) value judgments (in contrast to cost/benefit considerations). However, the brain does not show any structure or nucleus where the soul would be concentrated. The hypothalamus projects natural drives and urges from the midbrain to the forebrain. The amygdala contributes valuation to thought associations. Memory of what was previously thought or learned is widely distributed in the forebrain. It is there that connections are established for any kind of thought, preference ranking, and action. Consequently, the soul is another virtual phenomenon (as consciousness and conscience) of the brain’s capability to realize and rank visualization and action alternatives with a strong connection to emotions (and the sympathetic nervous system).
Stradivarius understood the structure and function of violins. But he could not explain the mysterious force music exerts on our minds. We may be close to understanding the physiology of the human brain, but we do not understand and can only admire the vague mystery of the force that allows neural signals in the brain to let our “souls” arise in our minds.
Learning, the remembering of experience sequences and their outcome, plays a role in behavior initiation, specifically when prior experiences were associated with pleasure or suffering. Such “valuation” (value giving) of experiences is remembered together with their visualization. The amygdala is the part of the brain that is associated with valuation. The hippocampal area in the brain is related to memory formation. The remembering of valuation may be accomplished through proportional formation in the synaptic connection of memorized associations and their connection to the amygdala. This results in different signal strength of such associative connections when called upon. Thus, when there are several associations of different value (signal strength), the brain can arrive at a “learned” preference selection and a consequent decision.
Learning can change the intensity or priority of responses through a change of valuation in memory. When praise or punishment immediately follows some established behavior, the new valuation may lead to different thought sequences next time and, consequently, to different behavior. If reward or punishment follows much later in an action sequence, the memorization of such a sequence becomes important. It may be that criminals lack the capability to remember or pursue sequences sufficiently to arrive at corresponding evaluation of the consequential value of actions. Sequential steps, like larger distances, bring fast fading of consequences and weaken “reasoned” responses.
The social environment leads to learning when a behavior results in reward or retribution by other individuals in the social unit and, consequently, to valuation of associations in thought sequence.
Habits -- repetitive behavior under similar circumstances without supporting thought processes -- are the result of learning. Habits are initiated by a stimulus. Habits in the sense of motor skills are located in the cerebellum. However, established thought patterns should be understood as synaptic connections in the forebrain, leading to more strongly developed connections through multiple uses. Therefore, as such connections provide stronger signal connections, they lead to preferred thought sequences later on.
The combination of focused thoughts as initiators and subsequent pursuits of habit sequences can lead to the capability to pursue different behaviors under different environmental conditions (focus). This can extend into the ethical realm. Like an actor playing different roles at different times through focusing on role models in his mind, the same person can be compassionate and caring under one set of circumstances and cruel or selfish under another. An employee of a large organization can behave at work in accordance with the organization’s perceived expectations and can behave differently at home or among his or her friends. An adolescent can learn everything about ethical behavior in school or at home and quickly switch back to the norms of a gang of his or her peers in the street. There is hardly a person who has the freedom and strength to be individually consistent with one set of learned or chosen standards unless held in that role by a peer-group, congregation, or culture he or she lives in.
This leads to the significance of approaching a person with the suitable signals to evoke the desired behavior. It also leads to not judging a person (for the better or worse) on the basis of one behavior pattern demonstrated at one time. One should consider that person’s total set of behavior patterns under all possible circumstances (or one should not judge at all). In other words, there are limits of trust, expectation, criticism, fear and rejection. There is great importance in maintaining environments that favor positively valued behavior (also in an ethical sense).
Contradictions occur if different behavior initiators occur simultaneously. Decision postponement or priority resolution occurs in the brain of animals or humans, sometimes to the dismay of the animal holders, parents, or fellow humans. The attempt is often made to enforce desirable behavior selection through a relative increase in the subject’s desired learning loop (strengthening of those associations) by way of more reward or punishment. (The only other approach would be to chemically or physically alter the functioning of the hypothalamus or the amygdala and their nerval projections to the forebrain).
In humans, the reward or punishment associated with actions does not have to be of physical nature. The capability for abstract thought and learning from visualization allows behavior development through communication of visualizations and thought. The reward or punishment does not have to be physical since humans can receive gratification from abstract conclusions (e.g. honor or shame), or from attaining abstract objectives established by prior thought (e.g. to be a valuable human being or to emulate a role model). This is accomplished through pattern recognition of visualizations in the forebrain and, thereby, closing of association links previously established as being desirable by focused thought (as in doing a puzzle or in trying to make one’s own life emulate a role model).
Can ethics be taught or, better formulated, can ethical behavior be ascertained through learning? The thought associations leading to ethical decisions can certainly be learned, leading to the possibility of corresponding focused thought or role playing when called upon. However, when this thought process competes with other thought sequences, emotions, or natural drives, then it is a matter of relative signal strength or valuation. This signal strength varies substantially between individuals, as indicated before, and with circumstances, even with age. Parameters for influencing ethical thought are: impressing of high learned value through personal thought on ethical thought associations, retaining a cultural or social environment supporting the ethical role, ascertaining that consequences are perceived as being preferable in the ethical direction (including exposure to punishment if not pursued). Even then, some individuals are overwhelmed by their drives or emotions, especially when they feel unobserved or alone in certain situations, have seen others get away with it, or cannot develop speculative associative links through several thought steps (neural signal dampening or deterioration, as in many low-intelligence or drugged criminals) to perceive the consequences of punishment.
Out of barbarian eons, the Greeks evolved ideals for the human being, “kallos kai agathos” (beautiful and good) and “maeden agan” (never too much), in terms of their classic virtues. These ideals were superseded by Christian values of love, compassion, and forgiving, then by romantic images of goodness and nobility. We now pride ourselves on secularized humanistic concepts of global equality, justice and well-being. However, in the background lurk again the basic Darwinian pressures for individual or group prevailing. Our minds are able to switch between behavior patterns and value scales under the influence of thought, learning and prevailing conditions. Isn’t it the most noble capability of human nature that it can improve its ethical behavior, maintain roles of high ethical standards, and recover from a fall to re-acquire those roles through own thought (including determination) and learning. It is up to us to think, to learn, to teach, and to positively form the conditions in our own lives and in our society to bring about what we aspire to.
In sum:
Our brain (in its frontal lobes) pursues strategies as driven by stimuli, urges, emotions, and reasoning in a way as established by genetic structures, learning, thought, or habit.
The brain, if not following genetically given pathways (as in caring for off-spring), can only “think” in associations of previously perceived memory elements as resulting from external inputs or thought.
The brain pursues general well-being, balance, or calm in conflicting situations in accordance with a value scale (signal strength in associative linkages) of emotions and thoughts, which is not only given by nature but largely influenced by individual thought, cultural development, learning, and the environment.
Thought sequence follows associative signal strength. Thus, in one case “reason” prevails over “emotion”, suppressing the inclination to unacceptable pursuits. In another case it may be the opposite, with reason serving emotion, justifying and pursuing what one wants.
The conflict resolution in cases between the desire for short term benefit, learned value priorities, and reasoned consequences depends upon momentary relative signal strength. This signal strength varies widely among individuals. Emotional make-up, environment, habit, past learning experience, and learning and reasoning capability all contribute to such conflict resolution.
The mechanism of focused thought allows role-playing or behavior along alternative priorities, expectations, or habits. Thought, learning, environment, and habit can give preference value to any such alternative thought and action patterns.
Focus strength varies statistically between individuals. Given a strong focus, maintenance or introduction of an alternative focus is more difficult.
0%
Author: Helmut Schwab
