Extraverts, Free Will Go Hand in Hand Philosophers’ views on freedom and moral responsibility are influenced by inherited personality traits. If they can’t be objective, can anyone? Philosophers are trained to think things through logically and reach conclusions based solely on reason. But as science provides increasing evidence for the interconnectivity of mind, body and emotions, is that sort of intellectual objectivity truly possible? A newly published study suggests the answer is no — at least when it comes to addressing one fundamental issue. It finds deep thinkers with a specific type of personality — warm and extraverted — are more likely to believe that free will remains a viable concept, even in the light of research suggesting our behavior is largely determined by unconscious impulses. While this may sound like a theoretical argument, the researchers, led by Eric Schulz of the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin, argue it has potentially profound implications.
Chapter 7: Neuroscience-Based Lie Detection: The Need for Regulation - American Academy of Arts & Sciences “I swear I didn’t do it.” “The check is in the mail.” “The article is almost done.” In our lives and in our legal system we often are vitally interested in whether someone is telling us the truth. Over the years, humans have used reputation, body language, oaths, and even torture as lie detectors. The possibility of effective lie detection raises a host of legal and ethical questions. These issues are fascinating and the temptation is strong to pursue them, but we must not forget a crucial first question: does neuroscience-based lie detection work and, if so, how well? It is not. Arguably all lie detection, like all human cognitive behavior, has its roots in neuroscience, but the term neuroscience-based lie detection describes newer methods of lie detection that try to detect deception based on information about activity in a subject’s brain. The most common and commonly used lie detector, the polygraph, does not measure directly activity in the subject’s brain. The U.S.
Is Neuroscience the Death of Free Will? The Stone is a forum for contemporary philosophers and other thinkers on issues both timely and timeless. Is free will an illusion? Some leading scientists think so. For instance, in 2002 the psychologist Daniel Wegner wrote, “It seems we are agents. It seems we cause what we do… It is sobering and ultimately accurate to call all this an illusion.” More recently, the neuroscientist Patrick Haggard declared, “We certainly don’t have free will. Many neuroscientists are employing a flawed notion of free will. Such proclamations make the news; after all, if free will is dead, then moral and legal responsibility may be close behind. Indeed, free will matters in part because it is a precondition for deserving blame for bad acts and deserving credit for achievements. Here, I’ll explain why neuroscience is not the death of free will and does not “wreak havoc on our sense of moral and legal responsibility,” extending a discussion begun in Gary Gutting’s recent Stone column. Leif Parsons
A Fact More Indigestible than Evolution Ever wonder how people can believe Elvis and Hitler are still alive? Sad fact is, we are bunglers when it comes to believing things we can’t immediately see. We are prone to over-simplify. We are prone to feel certain about dubious things. The list goes on and on. Science can be seen as a kind of compensatory mechanism, a family of principles and practices that allow us to overcome enough of our cognitive shortcomings to waddle toward an ever more comprehensive understanding of the world. Of course, believers in prescientific worlds generally don’t know anything about our theoretical incompetence, nor would they want to. We can believe that hard, that stupidly. Science is the cruel stranger, the one who tells us how it is whether we like it or not. Take evolution. According to most traditional accounts of our origins, we’re something really special—like really, really. So here’s the question: What other bitter pills does science hold in store for us? R.
What is Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)? Functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, is a technique for measuring brain activity. It works by detecting the changes in blood oxygenation and flow that occur in response to neural activity – when a brain area is more active it consumes more oxygen and to meet this increased demand blood flow increases to the active area. fMRI can be used to produce activation maps showing which parts of the brain are involved in a particular mental process. The development of FMRI in the 1990s, generally credited to Seiji Ogawa and Ken Kwong, is the latest in long line of innovations, including positron emission tomography (PET) and near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), which use blood flow and oxygen metabolism to infer brain activity. As a brain imaging technique FMRI has several significant advantages: 1. It is non-invasive and doesn’t involve radiation, making it safe for the subject. 2. How Does an fMRI Work? The cylindrical tube of an MRI scanner houses a very powerful electro-magnet.
Science and Free Will The Stone is a forum for contemporary philosophers and other thinkers on issues both timely and timeless. The Stone is featuring occasional posts by Gary Gutting, a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, that apply critical thinking to information and events that have appeared in the news. Could science prove that we don’t have free will? An article in Nature reports on recent experiments suggesting that our choices are not free. The experiments show that, prior to the moment of conscious choice, there are correlated brain events that allow scientists to predict, with 60 to 80 percent probability, what the choice will be. But my wife might be 100 percent certain that, given a choice between chicken livers and strip steak for dinner, I will choose steak. Following out this line of thought, David Hume, for example, argued that a free choice must be caused and that, therefore, freedom and causality must be compatible.
A Fact More Indigestible than Evolution (Part II) For centuries, the human brain has been a kind of black box, a place we could theorize with impunity, which is to say, without fear of scientific contradiction. Well, the box has been cracked open, and our theoretical free lunch is at an end. And what contemporary brain and consciousness research is discovering is at best, perplexing, at worst, terrifying. Indigestible. So what will the result be? As a culture, and perhaps as human beings, we simply find some facts too unpalatable. This is what happens when science serves up facts more indigestible than evolution. Think about it for a moment. As the tools and techniques of brain science become ever more sophisticated, you can bet the manipulation will become ever more sophisticated and ever more effective. Did I forget to mention that we’re prone to always think it’s always the other guy who’s been duped? Like I said, the list goes on and on and on... R.
The Potential Role of fMRI in Lie Detection - ERADIMAGING.COM: RT CE Shalisa Ladd BS, RT(R) and Jeff L. Berry MS, RT(R)(CT) *Radiologic Technologist, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Tulsa, Oklahoma.†Assistant Professor, Radiography Program Director, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, College of Allied Health, Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Disclosure Statement: The authors report having no financial or advisory relationships with corporate organizations related to this activity. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a relatively new form of imaging that is being used in a variety of promising ways, including brain mapping, cancer treatment mapping, and blood flow detection. Full Course Content available to active members of eRADIMAGING.com Sample eRADIMAGING Course * * This sample course is for reference purposes only.
Does One Crime Justify Another? Understanding why God hardens Pharaoh's heart. Reprinted with permission from The Torah: A Women's Commentary, edited by Tamara Cohn Eskenazi and Andrea L. We Also Recommend Weiss (New York: URJ Press and Women of Reform Judaism, 2008). God's hardening of Pharaoh's heart in Exodus 10:1 presents a theological problem on two levels. Commentators, equally bothered by this thorny moral dilemma, have provided inspired interpretations. With Adversity Comes Strength The hardening of Pharaoh's heart might also be viewed as a paradigm for what Fran Burgess calls the "transformative power of adversity." Did you like this article? Please consider making a donation today. Rabbi Singer currently serves Temple Beth El in Riverside, CA as rabbi and educator.
In sexual assault cases, athletes usually walk In sexual assault cases, athletes usually walk By Tom Weir and Erik Brady, USA TODAY As Kobe Bryant's sexual assault case winds its way through pretrial motions and hearings, the Los Angeles Lakers star may have one intangible factor working in his favor. Of those 168 allegations, involving 164 athletes, only 22 saw their cases go to trial, and only six cases resulted in convictions. "I would say almost the exact opposite would be true in the normal course of business," says Nancy O'Malley, who chairs the sexual assault committee of the California District Attorneys Association and who is Alameda County's chief assistant district attorney. "In some areas, the conviction rate is 80-85%" at trial, O'Malley says. National statistics also suggest most ordinary defendants charged with sexual assault are punished. "These are cases where frequently even if the claim is legitimate there is enormous pressure on the victim not to press charges, that you're ruining his career," Fairstein says. B.