The passage that leapt out at me the most was the one in which Pinker describes how science exorcises the ghost in the machine, saying "It is the ghost in the machine that has been subject to the most withering threats from modern science. Cognitive science has shown that the formerly mysterious power called 'intelligence' can be explained in mechanistic terms, by thinking of beliefs as information, thinking as a kind of computation... and that emotions and motives and goals can be understood... as mechanisms of feedback and control."
This expulsion of the ghost from the machine most likely resonates the most with me because it vindicates some of my core beliefs. Science has always led me to believe that there is no such entity as soul which exists entirely separate from the body. Why should there be, when neuroscience so comprehensively explains our behavior without needing to reference this supernatural, transcendental soul? Unfortunately, many people seem to fear this concept, that we might actually be the "heaps of glorified clockwork" Pinker describes. This fear gives rise to the "fear of determinism." Yet Pinker is able to demonstrate that, even though our actions may be purely a result of our biological make-up, that does not undermine our system of justice. We still have an obligation to remove dangerous individuals from society, and to attempt to discourage future antisocial behavior. In this way we can reconcile the ideas of determinism and justice.
...Interesting how you chose to discuss "the ghost in the machine" by mentioning the soul; indeed, from what it seems, the commonly held idea of a "soul" may resonate more with the qualities of an apparition (that is, something little children believe in) than "the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans" as Dictionary.com (and many others) would put it.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the notion that "neuroscience so comprehensively explains our behavior." Sprinkled throughout the many branches of science are a large assortment of unanswered questions--we were even privy to one this past week: why does acupuncture work? Simply put, Western science doesn't have an answer! I also feel possessing the belief that our knowledge is nearing completion will actually limit it; if we think we know all there is to know, we will venture less and less into those areas which truly remain unexplored. In retrospect, I feel the following, overly elaborate metaphor may be a more accurate description of our accumulation of scientific knowledge up to this point in history: we have come to admire and treasure the single drop of water we have amassed, often forgetting there lies an entire ocean beneath us.
But don't you think, M. Jacques, that Pinker is out to make beliefs in souls = 'religious' and then = 'dumb'? Lots of leaps there....
ReplyDelete