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

Home › Neurobiology and Behavior, Week 2 ›

Reply to comment

kdilliplan's picture

Dickinson and Comfortable Science

Submitted by kdilliplan on Sun, 01/31/2010 - 10:01pm.
I prefer the Dickinson model of brain and behavior because it makes the most scientific sense to me.  The brain and its functions can be manipulated and observed directly whereas the soul/mind is only an abstract concept.  I may not have spent any time in a neurobiology research lab, but I am willing to accept that the observations made by people who have done such research are generally valid.  I also think we have an awful lot still to learn about the brain. 
Based on what I have learned about the brain, I believe that it is both necessary and sufficient for the control of every aspect of human behavior. Mechanical functions, senses, emotions, memory, everything.  Brain damage can alter motor function.  Drugs or other chemicals can change senses and emotions.  There is a direct cause-and-effect relationship: alter the brain, alter behavior.  I see no need to include the soul/mind in this model.  I don’t mean to say that the soul/mind can’t or doesn’t exist.  I just mean that it doesn’t necessarily have to for behavior to be explained.  It is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain behavior. 

I was interested in two arguments that were made in defense of the soul/mind.  The first was that there are some aspects of observable behavior that can’t be explained by science but could be explained by the soul/mind.  The other was that it is comforting to think that there is something besides the brain controlling our behavior. In response to the first argument, I don’t see how “We can’t explain this” leads directly to “there must be a soul.”  I agree that the influence of a soul is entirely within the realm of possibility.  I just don’t think it’s very scientific to jump to such a conclusion and then stay there.  In response to the second argument, I don’t think being comforted by an idea is enough to count as evidence that the idea is accurate.  Being comforted by something is a very good reason to continue to try and learn more about it, but I don’t think it should be the entire justification for believing it.   

Reply

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

Remote Ready Biology Learning Activities

Scanning electron microscope image of SARS-CoV-2

Remote Ready Biology Learning Activities has 50 remote-ready activities, which work for either your classroom or remote teaching.

Narrative is determined not by a desire to narrate but by a desire to exchange. (Roland Barthes, S/Z)

What's New? Subscribe to Serendip Studio