博文
Michael Gazzaniga（2011）：自由意志与大脑
|||
Free will and the brain
自由意志与大脑
Self interest
自我意识与自我利益
Where there’s a will there’s a way
有志者事竟成
Dec 17th 2011 | from the print edition
ONE paradox has come under scrutiny since medical imaging of the brain became common in the 1980s. This is the apparent clash between the mechanical nature of the mind and the impression that people can will their own thoughts and actions. Michael Gazzaniga, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, believes that “we are personally responsible agents and are to be held accountable for our actions, even though we live in a determined universe.”
自从脑部医学成像技术在上个世纪八十年代普及开来之后，人们也开始对一个矛盾现象进行深入推敲。显然，这里说的是人脑的机械本质与人可以随意控制自己的想法和行为这种自身感觉之间的矛盾。圣巴巴拉市加利福尼亚大学的神经科学家迈克尔·葛詹尼加认为“尽管我们生活在一个已经设定好规则的世界当中，但是我们每个人都是自己的责任代理人并且应该对自己的一切行为负责。”
The idea that the mind exists separately from the body has a long history; Descartes invoked it during the 17th century. But in recent years opinion has shifted somewhat behind the notion that people are constrained by their physical embodiment. Individuals are suspected of being predisposed to eat compulsively or drink excessively, and various other characteristics are thought to have a genetic basis. Mr Gazzaniga reckons that, while such studies are useful, they give an incomplete picture of the true nature of humanity.
人的思维与身体是各自独立的存在这一理论具有相当悠久的历史，它由笛卡尔在17世纪提出。近些年人们对这一观点发生了的看法发生了转变，开始认同人们的思维是被束缚在了肉身中这一观念。许多学者怀疑人类个体倾向于强迫性地进食或过度饮水，并指出人类其他的多种多样的个性特征则是基于遗传基础。葛詹尼加则认为，这些研究固然有用，但并没有揭开人类真实本质的全貌。
In his new book Mr Gazzaniga uses animal studies to argue that the brain is shaped by the tasks before it, pointing out that the brains of New World carnivorous bats are more similar to those of Old World carnivorous bats than they are to New World fruit bats, despite these being their closer cousins. But his logic is shaky. He also cautions against applying information gleaned from studying the structure and function of chimpanzee brains to the human realm. Mr Gazzaniga appeals, not wholly convincingly, to quantum mechanics and complexity to provide escape routes from the conclusion that, because the body is a biochemical system, what happens in the mind is physically determined.
葛詹尼加在新书中运用动物实验来论证大脑(的进化发展)是由它面对的任务决定的。他举出的例子是，美洲新大陆食肉蝙蝠与欧洲食肉蝙蝠之间的相似程度超过了它们与近亲美洲新大陆果蝠的相似程度。但他这个逻辑显然不太站得住脚。（因为）他还反对将研究黑猩猩的大脑结构和功能收集到的理论在人体上对号入座。虽然影响力有限，但葛詹尼加先生仍呼吁量子力学和复杂性科学能够提供依据，将研究者们从这样的囹圄中解救出来，那就是：人体是一个生物化学系统，人的所有思维活动都是由身体决定的。
He is on stronger ground with his claim that people can be utterly unaware of what is happening inside their heads, outlining how his patients provide post-hoc “explanations” for their actions. He describes a patient whose moral reasoning has been disrupted by surgery to separate the hemispheres, who then judges that it is acceptable for a waitress to serve sesame seeds to someone she thinks is allergic to them, but who is not. As soon as the side of his brain that did not make the judgment hears what he has just said, the patient tries to offer an explanation: he blurts out that sesame seeds are tiny and cannot hurt anyone.
通过介绍和说明他的病人人是如何为自己的行为给出因果"解释"的，葛詹尼加提出，人们对自己的脑子所经历的改变根本浑然不觉，他的这一理论得到了颇为广泛的认同。他描述了这样一个病人，其道德推理系统已经在医生对其进行分开两个大脑半球的手术时破坏，此后，这个病人认为一个服务员把芝麻送给那些对芝麻不过敏但是服务员认为他们会对芝麻过敏的人这种做法是可以接受的。就在他的判断力所在的脑半球并不能接收到他刚刚所说的讯息的同时，他努力对自己刚刚的反应提供一个解释：他不假思索的说道，芝麻太小了，所以根本不能伤害到任何人。
In an attempt to resolve the paradox, Mr Gazzaniga locates the origin of personal responsibility outside the brain, as a consequence of a social contract between two or more individuals. In so doing, he neatly but unconvincingly removes the physical basis for good or bad behaviour. “Who’s in Charge?” is a wide-ranging and enjoyable exploration of how science interrogates the mind. Luckily for readers who enjoy grappling with issues such as the origin of thought, and whether people are free to will what they want, it leaves plenty more to be written on the subject.
为了解开文章开头提到的矛盾，葛詹尼加将个体的责任感独立于大脑之外，作为人类社会中两个甚至更多个体之间的存在社会契约的结果。这么做的话，葛詹尼加就巧妙地将人类好坏行为的生理基础去掉了，但说服力还是不够。”谁做主？“——这是人们在探究科学如何盘问人心的过程中广泛运用且乐在其中的一个命题。喜欢探寻诸如思维的来源的读者们是幸运的，人类是否应该予取予求这样的论题确实为科学家们提供了巨大的发挥空间。
from the print edition | United States 译者:郑恒
原文出自《经济学人》杂志
译者注：
迈克尔·葛詹尼加（Michael Gazzaniga）是全球著名的脑科学家之一，被誉为“认知神经科学之父”，早年本科毕业于达特茅斯学院，其后进入加利福尼亚理工学院，师从因对人类“裂脑”现象的研究而获诺贝尔奖的Roger Sperry，获生物心理学博士学位。
通过对裂脑人所进行的大量研究，Michael Gazzaniga大大促进了我们对人类大脑功能偏侧性以及大脑两半球之间关系的认识。他不仅在临床以及基础科学研究的圈子内闻名遐尔，而且对外行的社会公众来说也是声名远扬。1985年，他出版了《社会性大脑：发现心智的网络》（The Social Brain: Discovering the Networks of the Mind）一书，对大脑功能偏侧性的特征以及大脑两半球之间的关系进行了研究，成果丰硕；1988年，他出版了《心智问题》（Mind Matters）一书，成为心智紊乱问题研究的入门作品；1992年，他出版了《自然界的心智：思维、情绪、性别、语言以及智能的生物学根源》（Nature’s Mind: The Biological Roots of Thinking, Emotions, Sexuality, Language, and Intelligence），纽约时报评价说：“对脑科学研究来说，此书所做的研究堪比斯蒂芬·霍金的研究之于宇宙论”；1995年，Michael Gazzaniga通过麻省理工学院出版社出版了里程碑式的着作《认知神经科学》（The Cognitive Neurosciences），对九十多位科学家的工作进行了系统总结，被誉为认知神经科学领域的资料库，目前已经出至第三版；2005年，他又出版了《伦理性的大脑》（The Ethical Brain）一书，对大脑发展与人类伦理形成的关系进行了开创性的探索。
自由意志与大脑
Self interest
自我意识与自我利益
Where there’s a will there’s a way
有志者事竟成
Dec 17th 2011 | from the print edition
ONE paradox has come under scrutiny since medical imaging of the brain became common in the 1980s. This is the apparent clash between the mechanical nature of the mind and the impression that people can will their own thoughts and actions. Michael Gazzaniga, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, believes that “we are personally responsible agents and are to be held accountable for our actions, even though we live in a determined universe.”
自从脑部医学成像技术在上个世纪八十年代普及开来之后，人们也开始对一个矛盾现象进行深入推敲。显然，这里说的是人脑的机械本质与人可以随意控制自己的想法和行为这种自身感觉之间的矛盾。圣巴巴拉市加利福尼亚大学的神经科学家迈克尔·葛詹尼加认为“尽管我们生活在一个已经设定好规则的世界当中，但是我们每个人都是自己的责任代理人并且应该对自己的一切行为负责。”
The idea that the mind exists separately from the body has a long history; Descartes invoked it during the 17th century. But in recent years opinion has shifted somewhat behind the notion that people are constrained by their physical embodiment. Individuals are suspected of being predisposed to eat compulsively or drink excessively, and various other characteristics are thought to have a genetic basis. Mr Gazzaniga reckons that, while such studies are useful, they give an incomplete picture of the true nature of humanity.
人的思维与身体是各自独立的存在这一理论具有相当悠久的历史，它由笛卡尔在17世纪提出。近些年人们对这一观点发生了的看法发生了转变，开始认同人们的思维是被束缚在了肉身中这一观念。许多学者怀疑人类个体倾向于强迫性地进食或过度饮水，并指出人类其他的多种多样的个性特征则是基于遗传基础。葛詹尼加则认为，这些研究固然有用，但并没有揭开人类真实本质的全貌。
In his new book Mr Gazzaniga uses animal studies to argue that the brain is shaped by the tasks before it, pointing out that the brains of New World carnivorous bats are more similar to those of Old World carnivorous bats than they are to New World fruit bats, despite these being their closer cousins. But his logic is shaky. He also cautions against applying information gleaned from studying the structure and function of chimpanzee brains to the human realm. Mr Gazzaniga appeals, not wholly convincingly, to quantum mechanics and complexity to provide escape routes from the conclusion that, because the body is a biochemical system, what happens in the mind is physically determined.
葛詹尼加在新书中运用动物实验来论证大脑(的进化发展)是由它面对的任务决定的。他举出的例子是，美洲新大陆食肉蝙蝠与欧洲食肉蝙蝠之间的相似程度超过了它们与近亲美洲新大陆果蝠的相似程度。但他这个逻辑显然不太站得住脚。（因为）他还反对将研究黑猩猩的大脑结构和功能收集到的理论在人体上对号入座。虽然影响力有限，但葛詹尼加先生仍呼吁量子力学和复杂性科学能够提供依据，将研究者们从这样的囹圄中解救出来，那就是：人体是一个生物化学系统，人的所有思维活动都是由身体决定的。
He is on stronger ground with his claim that people can be utterly unaware of what is happening inside their heads, outlining how his patients provide post-hoc “explanations” for their actions. He describes a patient whose moral reasoning has been disrupted by surgery to separate the hemispheres, who then judges that it is acceptable for a waitress to serve sesame seeds to someone she thinks is allergic to them, but who is not. As soon as the side of his brain that did not make the judgment hears what he has just said, the patient tries to offer an explanation: he blurts out that sesame seeds are tiny and cannot hurt anyone.
通过介绍和说明他的病人人是如何为自己的行为给出因果"解释"的，葛詹尼加提出，人们对自己的脑子所经历的改变根本浑然不觉，他的这一理论得到了颇为广泛的认同。他描述了这样一个病人，其道德推理系统已经在医生对其进行分开两个大脑半球的手术时破坏，此后，这个病人认为一个服务员把芝麻送给那些对芝麻不过敏但是服务员认为他们会对芝麻过敏的人这种做法是可以接受的。就在他的判断力所在的脑半球并不能接收到他刚刚所说的讯息的同时，他努力对自己刚刚的反应提供一个解释：他不假思索的说道，芝麻太小了，所以根本不能伤害到任何人。
In an attempt to resolve the paradox, Mr Gazzaniga locates the origin of personal responsibility outside the brain, as a consequence of a social contract between two or more individuals. In so doing, he neatly but unconvincingly removes the physical basis for good or bad behaviour. “Who’s in Charge?” is a wide-ranging and enjoyable exploration of how science interrogates the mind. Luckily for readers who enjoy grappling with issues such as the origin of thought, and whether people are free to will what they want, it leaves plenty more to be written on the subject.
为了解开文章开头提到的矛盾，葛詹尼加将个体的责任感独立于大脑之外，作为人类社会中两个甚至更多个体之间的存在社会契约的结果。这么做的话，葛詹尼加就巧妙地将人类好坏行为的生理基础去掉了，但说服力还是不够。”谁做主？“——这是人们在探究科学如何盘问人心的过程中广泛运用且乐在其中的一个命题。喜欢探寻诸如思维的来源的读者们是幸运的，人类是否应该予取予求这样的论题确实为科学家们提供了巨大的发挥空间。
from the print edition | United States 译者:郑恒
原文出自《经济学人》杂志
译者注：
迈克尔·葛詹尼加（Michael Gazzaniga）是全球著名的脑科学家之一，被誉为“认知神经科学之父”，早年本科毕业于达特茅斯学院，其后进入加利福尼亚理工学院，师从因对人类“裂脑”现象的研究而获诺贝尔奖的Roger Sperry，获生物心理学博士学位。
通过对裂脑人所进行的大量研究，Michael Gazzaniga大大促进了我们对人类大脑功能偏侧性以及大脑两半球之间关系的认识。他不仅在临床以及基础科学研究的圈子内闻名遐尔，而且对外行的社会公众来说也是声名远扬。1985年，他出版了《社会性大脑：发现心智的网络》（The Social Brain: Discovering the Networks of the Mind）一书，对大脑功能偏侧性的特征以及大脑两半球之间的关系进行了研究，成果丰硕；1988年，他出版了《心智问题》（Mind Matters）一书，成为心智紊乱问题研究的入门作品；1992年，他出版了《自然界的心智：思维、情绪、性别、语言以及智能的生物学根源》（Nature’s Mind: The Biological Roots of Thinking, Emotions, Sexuality, Language, and Intelligence），纽约时报评价说：“对脑科学研究来说，此书所做的研究堪比斯蒂芬·霍金的研究之于宇宙论”；1995年，Michael Gazzaniga通过麻省理工学院出版社出版了里程碑式的着作《认知神经科学》（The Cognitive Neurosciences），对九十多位科学家的工作进行了系统总结，被誉为认知神经科学领域的资料库，目前已经出至第三版；2005年，他又出版了《伦理性的大脑》（The Ethical Brain）一书，对大脑发展与人类伦理形成的关系进行了开创性的探索。
Who's in Charge?: Free Will and the Science of the Brain
HarperCollins, 2011-11-15 - 272 页
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-738133-581128.html
上一篇：人类社会的进化与道德复兴
下一篇：《念力：让脑波直接操控机器的新科技．新世界》
扫一扫，分享此博文