神经决定论将脑和神经活动看作个体心理、行为和社会性的原因,否定人的自由意志,力图通过观察、改变脑神经活动来解释、预测和控制人的心智。然而,神经决定论借以否定自由意志的论据既有实验研究的方法论问题,又表现出对意识的狭隘理解。此外,意识的神经相关物不能等同于意识的原因,修复脑并不能治愈心灵。否定自由意志将阻碍人类对自身心智问题的全面理解、使人的主体性被消解,并带来技术革新的伦理问题。在修正心脑关系后,一种相容论的立场更具适恰性,即物理决定论和自由意志论并不是非此即彼的,更为合理的、更具建设性的提问方式应该是脑是如何活动而使拥有它的个体产生了意识并具有了自由意志。
Abstract
Neuro-determinism views the brain and neural activities as the cause of individual mental nature, behavior, and sociality, denies human free will, and attempts to explain, predict, and control the human mind by observing and altering brain neural activity. Neuro-determinism has three core propositions. First, the cause of behavior is not consciousness, there is a neural activity prior to consciousness, which is the real cause of behavior, and free will is just an illusion. Second, the psychological and social attributes of human beings can be explained by finding the corresponding brain nerves and their structures, which are responsible for all our psychological, behavioral and social attributes. Third, the cause of psychological or mental abnormality lies in the abnormal structure and function of brain nerves. By questioning and disproving the rationality of these three propositions, one will see the logic fallacies of neurological determinism and its possible dangers.
However, the three connotations of neuro-determinism all have substantial logical errors. First, the experimental evidence of neurological determinism to deny free will not only has the methodological problems of experimental research, but also shows a narrow understanding of consciousness. The errors and omissions of the experimental argument by which neurological determinism negates free will reproduces the methodological dilemma of experimental research that “The researcher's observation and experimental design process itself determine its experimental results”. At the same time, consciousness is not the additional initiator of action intention. The reflection of the action intention is consciousness, and the action intention itself is also consciousness. You cannot take the reflection of action intention as the only consciousness and give up free will as an illusion because of its delay. Second, the neural components of consciousness cannot be equated with the causes of consciousness, and mirror neurons (systems) are not the “DNA” of psychology. The belief that neurons in the brain have innate roles and functions and are the cause of individual psychological, behavioral, and social attributes, which clearly overlooks three facts. The specificity of human brain neuron function is based on more primitive and lower order function. Function is innate, but the content of function is environmental and cultural. The plasticity of neurons and the nervous system determines that learning and experience can affect the function and structure of the brain and determines the extent to which the acquired individual's abilities are developed and realized. At last, the biological view of healing the mind by repairing the brain ignores that the brain is a meaning processing system that integrates the information from the internal and external world. Repairing the brain cannot heal the mind.
Accepting neuro-determinism will lead to a series of practical dangers. Denying free will may hinder humanity's comprehensive understanding of its own mental issues, erode human subjectivity, and bring ethical issues of technological innovation. Considering mirror neurons (systems) as the neural basis of human psychological behavior and social attributes, and thus endowing them with excessive value, will lead to the revival of the “brain small person hypothesis”, while neglecting to explore the species and individual developmental characteristics of neural mechanisms. If a person accepts that he does not have free will, he is more likely to become an idle person, reducing prosocial behavior. The comprehensive infiltration of neuro-determinism into various fields will bring ethical controversies such as subjectivity and the right to life. It is necessary to reflect on the dangers posed by new technological advances.
In summary, the following theoretical revisions have been made to neuro-determinism. From the perspective of the relationship between the brain and consciousness, free will is the result of the development of the brain as a biological organization. A reasonable and more constructive way to ask questions should be how the brain, as a biological organization, operates to create consciousness and free will in individuals who possess it. Psychological and behavioral symptoms are the result of processing and resolving pathological conflicts, and they must be resolved by the same psychological processing mechanism. Compared to neuro-determinism, a stance of compatibility theory is more appropriate, that is, determinism and libertarianism are not either here or there, and in the material world of the evolved biological brain, both views can exist simultaneously.
关键词
神经决定论 /
意识 /
自由意志
Key words
neuro-determinism /
consciousness /
free will
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 巴甫洛夫, I. P. (2010). 条件反射 (周先庚, 荆其诚, 李美格译). 北京大学出版社.
[2] 巴拉格尔, M. (2016). 自由意志 (余渭深, 王旭译). 重庆大学出版社.
[3] Carlson N. R.(2016). 生理心理学——走进行为神经科学的世界 (苏彦捷等译). 中国轻工业出版社..
[4] 达马西奥, A. R. (2007). 感受发生的一切: 意识产生中的身体和情绪 (杨韶刚译). 教育科学出版社.
[5] 弗里斯, C. (2012). 心智的构建: 脑如何创造我们的精神世界 (杨南昌等译). 华东师范大学出版社.
[6] 高申春. (2011). 詹姆斯心理学的现象学转向及其理论意蕴. 心理科学, 34(4), 1006-1011.
[7] 哈里斯, S. (2013). 自由意志 (欧阳明亮译). 浙江人民出版社..
[8] 侯世达, D. (2019). 我是个怪圈 (修佳明译). 中信出版集团..
[9] 加扎尼加, M. (2013). 谁说了算?自由意志的心理学解读 (闾佳译). 浙江人民出版社..
[10] 卡拉特, J. W. (2011). 生物心理学 (苏彦捷等译). 人民邮电出版社..
[11] 科赫, C. (2012). 意识探秘: 意识的神经生物学研究 (顾凡及, 侯晓迪译). 上海科学技术出版社.
[12] 况志华. (2008). 自由意志与决定论的关系: 基于心理学视角. 心理学探新, 28(3), 4-8.
[13] 罗斯, S. (2016). 大脑的未来——神经科学的愿景与隐忧 (尚春峰, 许多译, 蒲慕明译). 科学出版社.
[14] 麦金, C. (2015). 意识问题 (吴杨义译).商务印书馆.
[15] 肖特, E. (2017). 精神病学史: 从收容院到百忧解 (韩健平, 胡颖翀, 李亚明译). 上海科技教育出版社.
[16] Baumeister R. F., Masicampo E. J., & De Wall, C. N. (2009). Prosocial benefits of feeling free: Disbelief in free will increases aggression and reduces helpfulness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(2), 260-268.
[17] Burt S. A., Plaisance K. S., & Hambrick D. Z. (2019). Understanding “what could be”: A call for 'experimental behavioral genetics'. Behavior Genetics, 49(2), 235-243.
[18] Caruso, G. D. (2012). Free will and consciousness: A determinist account of the illusion of free will. Lexington Books.
[19] Connor-Smith, J. (2015). Mind reading machine: Mysteries of the brain revealed. Odyssey, 24(3), 23-25.
[20] Cook R., Bird G., Catmur C., Press C., & Heyes, C. (2014). Mirror neurons: From origin to function. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37(2), 177-192.
[21] Dean, W., & Morgenthaler, J. (1991). Smart drugs & nutrients: How to improve your memory and increase your intelligence using the latest discoveries in neuroscience. B and [J] Publications.
[22] Edelman G. M.(2004). Wider than the sky: The phenomenal gift of consciousness. Yale University Press.
[23] Fried I., Katz A., McCarthy G., Sass K. J., Williamson P., Spencer S. S., & Spenser D. D. (1991). Functional organization of human supplementary motor cortex studied by electrical stimulation. Journal of Neuroscience, 11(11), 3656-3666.
[24] Fried I., Mukamel R., & Kreiman G. (2011). Internally generated preactivation of single neurons in human medial frontal cortex predicts volition. Neuron, 69(3), 548-562.
[25] Guggisberg, A. G., & Mottaz, A. (2013). Timing and awareness of movement decisions: Does consciousness really come too late? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, Article 385.
[26] Haynes, J. D. (2011). Decoding and predicting intentions. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1224(1), 9-21.
[27] Huang G. Z., Osorio D., Guan J. T., Ji G. L., & Cai J. J. (2020). Overdispersed gene expression in schizophrenia. npj Schizophrenia, 6(1), Article 9.
[28] James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology, Henry Holt.
[29] Kataria G., Dhyani K., Patel D., Srinivasan K., Malwade S., & Abdul S. S. (2021). The smart pill sticker: Introducing a smart pill management system based on touch-point technology. Health Informatics Journal, 27(4), 1-12.
[30] Libet B., Gleason C. A., Wright E. W., & Pearl D. K. (1983). Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential): The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain, 106(3), 623-642.
[31] Mele, A. R. (2008). Recent work on free will and science. American Philosophical Quarterly, 45(2), 107-130.
[32] Menges, L. (2022). Free will, determinism, and the right levels of description. Philosophical Explorations, 25(1), 1-18.
[33] Moriarty, N., & Dowd, E. (2018). Brain repair for Parkinson's disease: Is the answer in the matrix? Neural Regeneration Research, 13(7), 1187-1188.
[34] Nadelhoffer. T., Murray S., & Murry E. (2023). Intuitions about free will and the failure to comprehend determinism. Erkenntnis, 88(6), 2515-2536.
[35] Parker, D. (2023). Assumptions of twentieth-century neuroscience: Reductionist and computational paradigms. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 48(2), 217-234.
[36] Perchtold-Stefan C. M., Rominger C., Papousek I., & Fink A. (2023). Women and men have a similar potential for malevolent creativity - but their underlying brain mechanisms are different. Brain Research, 1801, Article 148201.
[37] Phillips, T. J. (2021). Genetic and brain mechanisms of addictive behavior and neuroadaptation. Brain Sciences, 12(1), Article 51.
[38] Ramachandran, V. S. (2011). The tell-tale brain: A neuroscientist's quest for what makes us human. Norton & Company.
[39] Sapolsky R. M.(2023). Determined: A science of life without free will. Penguin Press.
[40] Shutts, D. (1982). Lobotomy: Resort to the knife. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
[41] Sinha, C. (2024). Critical psychology and the brain: rethinking free will in the legal context. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science.
[42] Varela F. G., Maturana H. R., & Uribe R. (1974). Autopoiesis: The organization of living systems, its characterization and a model. Biosystem, 5(4), 187-196.
[43] Vohs, K. D., & Schooler, J. W. (2008). The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism cheating. Psychological Science, 19(1), 49-54.
[44] Wexler, A. (2024). At the crossroads of neuroethics and policy: Navigating neurorights and neurotechnology governance. AJOB Neuroscience, 15(2), 77-79.
基金
* 本研究得到新疆心智发展与学习科学重点实验室重点项目（XJDX2003-2022-01）、国家社科基金项目（21BMZ068）和黑龙江省教育科学“十四五”规划2021年度重点课题（GJB1421072）的资助
PDF(437 KB)
