In the 1950s psychiatrist Robert Heath of Tulane University launched a controversial program to surgically implant electrodes into the brains of patients institutionalized with epilepsy, schizophrenia, depression and other severe neurological conditions. His initial objective: to locate the biological seat of these disorders and, by artificially stimulating those regions, perhaps cure individuals of their disease.

According to Heath, the results were dramatic. Patients who were nearly catatonic with despair could be made to smile, converse, even giggle. But the relief was short-lived. When the stimulation ceased, the symptoms returned.

This article was originally published with the title The Joyful Mind.

8 Comments

1. 1. Trojan_Horus 08:11 AM 7/30/12

   What this life business needs is happiness and once we can fake that we've got it made... I think not

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. engineer.sci 04:58 PM 7/30/12

   "According to Heath, the results were dramatic. Patients who were nearly catatonic with despair could be made to smile, converse, even giggle. But the relief was short-lived. When the stimulation ceased, the symptoms returned."
   
   Perhaps an interesting observation here -- and a crucial one as the acceleration of depression in the general population is heading towards the point that it could even become a leading cause of death in the not-too-distant future.
   
   It seems that not the hedonistic sites that had the temporary effect are the key, but rather somehow working the circuit that is now thought to mediate desire. Suppose that instead of external material stimuli causing "joy," it was internal stimuli. There might be at least two advantages:
   
   1 - It will not be limited by the availability of the external stimulus.
   
   2 - It can be continuous, as compared to coming in spurts and limits with material stimulus. [Like getting full after eating what started out as a delicious meal.]
   
   But there would be a third very important advantage.
   
   3 - The stimulus could be directed to the much larger enjoyment of others.
   
   Imagine if that could be down -- bestowal become a fantastic, towering pleasure in its own right. One's pleasure would become not only evermore statistically continuous, but it would magnify.
   
   And what would it mean if we could get pleasure in this way? Perhaps we wouldn't have the artificial "needs" that power unnecessary production the uses up and trashes the planet faster than it can replenish. Perhaps we would find true satisfaction, taking us away from depression that seems to go primarily in those populations most blessed with material goods. As well, if the pleasure could be directed into bestowal, mutual responsibility between the people, corporations, and countries of this planet would become extremely easy -- and working for each other than against each other will prove a great boon even regarding our material prosperity. -- However, we will hopefully have vastly greater pleasures from which to find life worth living.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. stanislavzza 07:52 AM 7/31/12

   See the series of articles at the Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies starting with:
   
   <a href="http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/eubanks20120310">Is Intelligence Self-Limiting?</a>.
   
   The idea is that if we become smart enough to simply fiddle without own feelings directly, we have no motivation left to do it 'in reality.'

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. S. N. Tiwary 07:37 PM 8/1/12

   A new pleasure may come in several ways. An eternal pleasure or happiness or bliss comes through religion and spirituality. Religion and spirituality are well connected and has a great impact on physical, mental, psychological health as follows:
   Religion
   Religion was created by humans to explain, contain, and stimulate spiritual experiences.
   Religion is other people telling you what that experience is supposed to be.
   Religion claims that the Divine exists outside of you, and you are apart from it. Thus, the purpose of religion is then to make you acceptable to this outside judge.
   Religion asserts that humans are imperfect and/or ignorant, if not actively sinful and evil. Religion then aims to set you straight and guide you how to improve yourself.
   Religion imposes one person's spiritual experience upon others.
   Religion aims for acceptance of what other people have experienced and said to be true.
   Religion seeks a relationship with the Divine, but not union. Religion separates you from the Divine, while seeming to encourage closeness.
   Religion is the rules about the seeking.
   Religion insists on its rules as absolute truths.
   Religion is externally focused. The experience isn't the focus, but whether you're following the rules is.
   Religion puts an intermediary (priest) between you and the Divine. It is someone else interpreting the Divine for you.
   In religion, morality is dictated by obedience to an authoritarian rulebook (law).
   The aim of religion is to make you a cohesive, beneficial member of the congregation.
   Religion is the toddler-version of spirituality: it is a stepping stone and guide towards spiritual union. Religion is from man.
   Religion serves as a container for spirituality, for those who have found the real purpose of religion. For others, religion acts as a pseudo-spirituality, relieving them of the responsibility to actually live a spiritual life.
   Religion usually demands unquestioning obedience to dogma. You know what you are told to know.
   In religion, the goal of personal "salvation" is achieved only by those who adhere to its beliefs and rules.
   Religion is meant to serve spirituality, yet it is commonly twisted around to be exactly the opposite. Or worse, it serves the goals who seek control and "power."
   Religion confuses the basic issues of power and control. It tries to control others, rather than seeking to control self.
   Religion keeps you dependent and spiritually immature . . . unless you perceive the spirituality beyond it.
   
   Religion employs literature and rituals in its worship.
   Religious people are generally spiritual.
   Religion is a group phenomenon.
   Religion is a pathway to connect to God.
   Religion is based on trust, faith and belief; kindness, love, affection, system.
   Religion tends to breed separation - my religion vs. your religion, my God is the only real God, my ethics are better than yours, etc.
   Religion can be with or without Yoga.
   
   
   
   
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. S. N. Tiwary 07:46 PM 8/1/12

   Religion and spirituality will bring new eternal happiness or pleasure or bliss as follows:
   
   Religion Spirituality
   Religion was created by humans to explain, contain, and stimulate spiritual experiences. Spirituality is inborn. Spiritual experiences are as natural to human beings as breathing.
   Religion is other people telling you what that experience is supposed to be. Spirituality is an experience within yourself, inexpressible and unforgettable.
   Religion claims that the Divine exists outside of you, and you are apart from it. Thus, the purpose of religion is then to make you acceptable to this outside judge. Spirituality holds that you and the Divine are One, inseparable. Thus, the purpose of spirituality is simply to fully remember this fundamental truth.
   Religion asserts that humans are imperfect and/or ignorant, if not actively sinful and evil. Religion then aims to set you straight and guide you how to improve yourself. Spirituality asserts that you are inherently perfect, whole, and lovable. You do not need to "heal" or change. Although you will be happier if you realise your perfection, which is what spirituality helps you do.
   Religion imposes one person's spiritual experience upon others. Spirituality acknowledges that everyone's spirituality is uncompromisingly unique; no one can say what another's spiritual path could be.
   Religion aims for acceptance of what other people have experienced and said to be true. Spirituality aims for personal experience of the Divine, and an internal understanding of what you believe to be true.
   Religion seeks a relationship with the Divine, but not union. Religion separates you from the Divine, while seeming to encourage closeness. Spirituality is having a personal, intimate relationship with your Source.
   Religion is the rules about the seeking. Spirituality is the seeking of union with the Divine.
   Religion insists on its rules as absolute truths. Spirituality does not have rules. The most it offers is guidelines and spiritual practices that have helped others and are likely to benefit you.
   Religion is externally focused. The experience isn't the focus, but whether you're following the rules is. Spirituality is internally focused. What occurs is between you and the Divine, alone.
   Religion puts an intermediary (priest) between you and the Divine. It is someone else interpreting the Divine for you. Spirituality is talking to God yourself, and hearing the Divine's response.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. Mythusmage 08:07 PM 8/1/12

   Methinks certain parties would do well to read the full article published in the magazine, instead of relying of the excerpt presented on the Web.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. brahna 08:40 PM 8/2/12

   In the magazine at the end of the article there is a link for further info which is not posted on this page.
   The link has a video clip and is:
   www.scientificamerican.com/aug2012/pleasure

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. wywong 12:02 AM 8/21/12

   Although the decoupling of desire and pleasure sounds plausible, the authors' use of licking as a measure of eating pleasure is dubious. In most mammals, licking is often used for cleaning. A pet dog or cat can be seen spending more time licking its body, including its backside, than its lips after a meal. I myself licks my lips more after a messy meal, not after a tasty meal, because I lick for the sake of getting rid of food residues. After consuming a tasty meal, a rat may lick more because it is more sensitive to the type of food and thus more aware of the presence of food residues, which has nothing to do with the feeling of pleasure.
   
   A better measure of pleasure in lab animals may be distractibility. For example, some annoying or threatening stimulus (e.g. bright light, hot air, noise, cat sound) is applied to a rodent while eating until it pauses or abandons eating, and the strength of the stimulus required should correlate with the pleasure derived from the food.
   
   In an experiment in the full article, it was found that an increase in dopamine level in a rat caused less, not more, licking. The authors conclude that dopamine is not involved in the feeling of pleasure, but offer no explanation for the reduction in licking. In my opinion, however, that the rat probably felt more pleasure, which made it less aware of other stimuli, including the presence of food residues.
   
   The question of how dopamine affects pleasure should best be obtained directly by asking people consuming dopamine affecting drugs (legal or otherwise). Why use such a doubtful proxy instead?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this