Image: Oxford University Press
-
The Wisdom of Psychopaths
In this engrossing journey into the lives of psychopaths and their infamously crafty behaviors, the renowned psychologist Kevin Dutton reveals that there is a...
Read More »
The Self Illusion: How the Social Brain Creates Identity
by Bruce Hood. Oxford University Press, 2012 (29.95)
When a newborn baby's eyes scan a room, Hood writes, the infant does not decide where to focus. Instead inborn cognitive mechanisms respond to the environment and focus the baby's attention. Later in life, the child develops self-awareness and the conviction that he consciously controls his body and brain. Yet what if this belief does not reflect reality?
In The Self Illusion, Hood argues precisely that. After exploring various definitions of self--a soul, an agent with free will, some essential and unique set of qualities--he concludes that what we experience as a self is actually a narrative spun by our brain. To see why, consider an experiment in the 1980s by physiologist Benjamin Libet. He showed that neural activity reveals what an individual will do before that person becomes conscious of having made a decision. Perhaps our sense of free will is just a way for our brain to organize our actions and memories, as Harvard University psychologist Dan Wegner has argued. Building on Libet's and Wegner's work, Hood proposes that our sense of self is an after-the-fact organizational trick for the brain. As with a just-so story, our brain synthesizes the complex interactions of biology and environment to create a simplified explanation of who we are.
Hood likens this fragile, malleable creation to a spiderweb being tugged in many directions at once. In the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment, for example, college students transformed into brutal guards who abused fellow students playing inmates. A milder illustration comes from the questionnaires used to assess personality traits: respondents alter their answers when imagining themselves in different social contexts. Hood argues that our protean personalities allow us to adapt to new surroundings.
Although Hood believes the self may be the greatest trick our brain has ever played on us, he concludes that believing in it makes life more fulfilling. The illusion is difficult--if not impossible--to dispel. Even if we could, why deny an experience that enables empathy, storytelling and love?
See what we're tweeting about
20 Comments
Add CommentFor 2,500 years this is what Buddhism has revealed. The illusion is NOT impossible to dispel. If "self" is the greatest trick our brain plays on us, I for one do not want to play along. Buddhism teaches us and enables us to connect with the authentic beings that we are at the same time coming to understand the illusionary self that is the "I want, me me me, mine mine mine, weaver of the narrative". It is interesting that the article connects empathy and love to the self when both of these are aspects of "selflessness", being able to focus on another human being instead of ourselves. It is important to realize that each of us is a human BEING that learns to master the mind, not be controlled by an illusion, a "trick" of the storytelling ego self that seeks to "fulfill it-self".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisway2ec - Thanks for the post. All of us Buddhists who read SA were of course quick to spot this re-invention of the wheel. For those unfamiliar with Buddhism, he taught that existence has three characteristics: dukkha, anatta, and anicca. Life is unsatisfactory (dukkha), there is no self (anatta) and nothing is permanent (anicca). The concept of no self is at the core of Buddhism and it is not surprising that scientists are finally arriving at a place where Buddhists have been for 2500 years. To experience no self, try the techniques taught by the Buddha - see howtopracticezen.com which is currently down in IE but up in all other browsers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"It is interesting that the article connects empathy and love to the self when both of these are aspects of "selflessness", being able to focus on another human being instead of ourselves"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOnly interesting in the sense that "self" as used in the article and the scientific community is not related, at all, to the term "selflessness" as used in terms of self-sacrifice or empathy. Scientifically, it is our sense of self that allows us to connect with another person by feeling the same sensations as another (for a hypothesis of how this happens, look up mirror neurons). If we had no sense of self in the scientific sense, then there would be no self to project onto the other, no feeling generated by their joy or suffering, no cause for self-sacrifice, and so no "selflessness."
Hence, why it is always dangerous to try to shape scientific discovery into one's philosophical world view.
The self is no more an illusion than our experience of the world around us is an illusion. Both are real biological events in our cognitive brain.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this<a href="http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/06/sense-of-self-is-illusion.html">I could make a joke about marijuana enhancing this perception (so I will).</a> But seriously, as a matter of physics and chemistry too our existence is interconnected with the world around us. The elements and compounds in our bodies change all the time. We are not made of the same matter we were made of a few years ago.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/06/sense-of-self-is-illusion.html This discussion also reminds me of that scene from the Sopranos where Tony is in the hospital with Hal Holbrook (who is a Bell Labs scientist being treated for cancer). Holbrook explains how we are all part of the same quantum field.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Hood proposes that our sense of self is an after-the-fact organizational trick for the brain"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree, our sense of self is, for lack of better word, constructed, like this (our sense of space?):
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=real-outof-body-experiences
But I don't think this kind of organization is special or a trick, let alone "after the fact".
"He showed that neural activity reveals what an individual will do before that person becomes conscious of having made a decision"
Rephrasing: he showed that in some situations neural activity can reveal the start of a particular decision being made before the average person is aware they have started down the road to carrying out said particular decision.
Good points as to the role of the self in something like empathy and love. If we are to use the "illusion" of self as in the article, we run into some problems, the reflection in the mirror of an illusionary self, we recognize our emotions in the emotions of others. If we use the "ego-self" both empathy and love can become self-centered, as in I recognize myself in his or her emotions; I love the other person can become I desire, I want, I need the other person. Selflessness can be seen as seeing the "self" of another as more important than our own, which does not change the illusionary qualities the article refers to. Trying to sidestep the terminology limitations, if we see ourselves as human "beings" and can break out of the illusion of "self" we can arrive at a place of "oneness" or "equality", the "selflessness", where empathy, love, and compassion do not have the qualities of the "me, mine, I", instead, we are connected by the commonality of being human "beings". I sense that the danger you mention is in the idea that science is somehow disconnected from "world view" be it a "philosophical" one or a "scientific" one. As far as the use of the terms self and selflessness in the "scientific community", I say we use much caution as the author states that they are "illusions". How far the "scientific community" has come from Freud's id, ego, and superego, and in such a short time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou buddhists are kooks, just like the christians and muslims. My life is very satisfactory because I (the self) have created permanernt barriers to anyone making it unsatisfactory. Your 3 principles amount to "life sucks, get over it". Of course life sucked for Chinese peasants 2500 years ago. You live in the 21st century. Take control of your life. Be successful, insulate yourself from what others (especially the government) can do to you. Then you can "Don't worry...be happy". Buddha got fat as a cow on the food that fools gave him for his "wisdom". Just like other religions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAh Buddhism the desire to have no desire. Very circular. If the guy is right the implication that even you Buddhist belief is an illusion and thus meaningless just like everything else in your life. Mediate that one away.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAgain everything you just said is an illusion if no God exists your just part of a comic accident and accidents have no meaning. Atheism 101. Clearly you did not take the class.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you sure that I am a Buddhist? Scientists continue to study Buddhists as they have managed, through their meditation techniques, to acquire control of mental states, brain wave patterns, and other physiological conditions that we in the west cannot duplicate nor explain, just as we continue to study acupuncture and other eastern traditions. The fact that Buddhists have revealed that the "self" is an illusion for 2,500 years, which is the title of Bruce Hood's book, makes for a "kookie" connection, ¿no? The three principles, that life isn't perfect, that self-centered egoism (and an illusion at that) doesn't lead to happiness, and that everything changes, nothing lasts forever, (not even our Solar System), doesn't translate as "life sucks", more like, "get real". I wonder about your permanent barriers to anyone making your life unsatisfactory, let alone how you manage to keep your "self" from making it unsatisfactory. What "insulation" do you use, especially against the government? And do you know which of the Buddhas is the "fat one" and why?... what with obesity being a worldwide problem in the 21st century. Hope you don't get too sidetracked with all the Buddhist, Christian and Muslim "kooks" (there are billions of "us") here at Mind Reviews, the article is about how our "self" may be the greatest trick our brains have ever played on us. If the life you have "created" by your Self, for your Self, is all based on an illusion... castles in the sand? a world of smoke and mirrors? or maybe something Greek like shadows on the cave walls?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo, not the desire to have no desire, just an understanding of what desire is, where does it come from, what does it lead to. Same with "I want". Meaning? Meaninglessness? "Who" or "what" or from where does meaning come? God? Sort of like Stephen Hawking's universe not "requiring" God, which doesn't say there isn't one either. One meditation that I find very profound is to meditate on my breathing. There is no "self" that "controls" my breathing. All beings breathe. Started when I was born, stops when I die. Is constant no matter who, what, where, or when. If I want to get away from my desires, wants, mental chatter, to "be here now", just have to focus on my breathing, always here, always now, nothing to do with the past, nothing to do with the future. Science continues to study stress and its effects on our lives. The meditations on breathing are very effective on reducing stress. It is "fun" to challenge my "self's" illusions of control by trying to hold my breath or the opposite, not breathe in. Interesting concept rab31411, trying to meditate something "away". Usually the meditations are to get past illusions to understand the true nature of "things". Back to the circle you mentioned, to understand the true nature of desires-wants-needs, or the freedom from desires-wants-needs. I desire, want, need... a new car? Freedom from the desire, want, need for praise, fame, fortune? And back to the article, what is the true nature of the "self"?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf it is Buddhism you are talking about then is not just being able to focus on another human being but on every living being.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlease, correct.
I have used both the terms human beings and all beings, as in all beings breathe. Compassion encompasses all beings. Empathy tends to be for other human beings as it is easier to recognize or "know" what other human beings experience. Our terminology limits us, love of all life, love for your dog, and another person as your beloved are not exactly the same. At "deeper" levels there is convergence, becoming one with all beings, one with the universe. I'm sure science has its own terminology for being able to recognize that all living beings on the planet have a commonality, evolution from common ancestors, what the sharing of 96% genetic material means, the fact that we are made of "star dust". Ecology teaches the interconnectedness and interdependence of all life. As far as "correct" is concerned, trying to communicate in a common language is challenge enough, translating all this and communicating in other languages becomes an art. And in the blogosphere, good luck transcending, finding enlightenment, and discussing the illusion of self.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUtter nonsense!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's like trying to find out who the author is by reading a book.
Man has free choice so it makes no sense to punish a person for murdering someone if it is built in to his genes.
Another victim syndrome.
Someone needs therapy and it's not the murderer.
Utter nonsense!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's like trying to find out who the author is by reading a book.
Man has free choice so it makes no sense to punish a person for murdering someone if it is built in to his genes.
Another victim syndrome.
Someone needs therapy and it's not the murderer.
This is true, and it's good reminding that this exists, you may feel you've arrived to be anything, or have a positive feeling about your performance and your contributions to society, but if a group starts trying to annihilate your auto-esteem and making you feel guilty by punishing you for no fault, you'll for sure perish under the overwhelming, premeditated and massive attack. All over Europe, by repeating the Cuba or Gulag approaches to silence the dissent, many self-proclaimed "forefronts of the progress" are attacking people this way. Sooner or later the consequences of boring the whole world because they're perfect and they have the indisputable truth and can't be discussed will come.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI know you are probably not going to read this as I have been busy for a few days. I went away to college at 16 and had 5 degrees by 25. I worked my ass off against astronomic odds and became reasonably successful. I married an intelligent woman and took great care in raising my daughter. I made good decisions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI don't waste time "meditating" (napping?). I have total control of my life and anyone who would be stupid enough to invade would get a bullet to the face. I am everything that you can not be, and that is why you think that any religion could possibly help you.
My "self" is very real. Ask anybody who knows me. I enjoy reading about science, but reject anything that can only be proven by the math. There are a few people who are capable of thinking in the theoretical sense, but I prefer to stand firmly in reality.
Buddhism has a new-age following that can't get a grip on reality. You are losers.
Cocktail time.
You know what is funny about your comment, it is that if you look at any videogame forum you will find others just like yourself who go with the "My real life is awesome and I'm better than you" response to anyone who contradicts them or flames them.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this