Consciousness & Causality Dr Magda Osman Room 2.25 Office hours Mondays

Course outline Lecture 11 & 12 Sleep Lectures 1 & 2 Lectures 21 & 22 Theoretical Views Lecture 13 & 14 Dreams Lectures 15 & 16 Causality Lectures 17 & 18 Mental Causation Lectures 19 & 20 Causality & Control Lectures 1 & 2 Minds and Bodies Theoretical Views Lectures 3 & 4 Hypnosis Lectures 5 & 6 Implicit Decision making Lectures 7 & 8 Implicit learning Beh I Lectures 9 & 10 Implicit learning Beh II Lectures 21 & 22 Revision Lecture

Minds & Bodies

Learning objectives 1. to understand the different conceptual approaches to understanding the relationship between mind and brain (i.e. monist, dualist perspectives) 2. to understand how the different empirical approaches to examining consciousness connect to monist and dualist perspectives

Do you believe that your mind controls your actions Yes No Not sure

Do you think that there are exceptions in which your mind has no control over your actions? Yes No Not sure

“Cogito ergo sum” Descartes (1596-1650) Q: What can we know with certainty? A – One can only be certain of is ones own conscious awareness - Consciousness – reflects the mind - Consciousness – is not the body - Mind and Body are therefore different? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HHzt-mCCUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAjWUrwvxs4

Conceptions of the Mind-Body association Monism Idealism – There are only mental things that exist – there is nothing outside of our experiences of our mental states (i.e. only Minds) Materialism – There are only material things that exist – the physical/biological/neurological (i.e. only bodies)

Conceptions of the Mind-Body association Dualism Substance dualism [Descartes]– material (brain) cannot think, and the mind has no physical capability – they are made up of two different substances material/mental {or Qualia} one doesn’t reduce to the other. They can both operate entirely independently of each other Property dualism – same as above, but for the fact that non-physical (i.e. mental substances) exist in physical substances (i.e. the brain), because there is only one substance with different properties [Mind/brain] The brain is the connection between the mind and body

So what? Cutaneous rabbit effect (CRE) Rapid taps to the wrist, then to the elbow, can create an illusion of touches between the two, as if a rabbit has hopped up the arm. The effect depends on the time interval between the taps (CRE, Geldard & Sherrick, 1972; Flach & Haggard, 2006). The CRE has been used to illustrate how the brain constructs the subjective experience of time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCpsQ8LZOco

Cutaneous rabbit effect Illusion of conscious experiences of Space or Time Using FMRI - show that illusion activated those parts of the somatosensory cortex – the area of the brain processing touch signals – that correspond to the points of illusory contact. (Blankenburg, Ruff, Deichmann, Rees, & Driver, 2006) (for Review - Brooks, J., & Trojan, J. (2017). The Cutaneous Rabbit Effect: Phenomenology and saltation. Scholarpedia, 12(12), 52363) The brain makes assumptions (not always correctly) on the basis of input from the senses (i.e. tapping on the hand). The brain 'filling in' is carried out within brain areas responsible for conscious processing And recruits areas which at the cortical level would suggest that the sensation is not imagined by REAL Are mental substances influencing physical substances?

Cutaneous rabbit effect Illusion of conscious experience of time & space & causality On the one hand (represent time and space separately) an explicit representation of time interacts with a tactile representation of space to produce the time-dependent mislocalization effects i.e. concept of time passing fills in the passing of effects on space (i.e. skin across the arm) – the ordering of events suggest a causal link between events – hence a rabbit hopping across the arm. (see Asai & Kanayama 2012)

Recap: what is monism? The mind doesn’t reduce to the brain The brain doesn’t reduce to the mind There is only one type of thing (either brain or mind)

Recap: what is dualism? The mind and brain operate in entirely separate ways There is only one type of thing (either brain or mind)

Relationship between Mental & Physical How are minds and bodies related? Interactive substance Mental and Physical substances interact directly with each other Psychophysical parallelism Mental and Physical substances exist in parallel, and do not interact with each other

Problems with Dualism How can non-physical substances influences physical substances? (i.e. CRE) How can the non-physical be localized to the physical? Why are there corresponding changes to consciousness when there are changes to physical states?

Do we need Dualism? Dualism is unable to account for all phenomena that current neuroscience has revealed Cognitive consciousness has been explained by reference to the physical, and this is largely through new empirical methods (EEG/MEEG/TMS/fMRI) Dualism is not necessarily the most parsimonious explanation Prescribing two types of substances is not as simple as describing just one

If not Dualism, then what? Materialism Epiphenomalism [an indirect form of dualism] Mind is a by product of the brain, the mind cannot influence the brain (Leibniz, Spinoza – latter day behaviourists) Identity theory [form of physicalism] States of the mind correlate with states of the brain (Hobbes) Functionalism {either materialism/dualism} Mental states have functional relationships to behaviour [causal roles] (Chomsky) Emergent interactionism States of the mind emerge from states of the brain [as a process of interaction of mind and brain – and even external world] (Vandervert, Sperry)

Epiphenomalism Scientific explanation should be attached to phenomena that are observable (i.e. measurable). E.g. any inferred state of mind beliefs, desires, ideas, hopes, fears, feelings x Inferred mental states are not useful descriptions of causal phenomena Explanations of behaviour should depend on external factors e.g. reinforcers which can be positive (presentation of desirable outcome) or negative (removal of undesirable outcome)

The main principles A theory of behaviour should be built around: The Stimulus (the external determinant of behaviour) The Response (the observable external behaviour) The Reinforcer (the external factor that maintains behaviour) The Consequences (the way in which behaviour is shaped) Human behavior is a set of variable that responds to the environment, because: of the selective action of that environment during the evolution of the species its effect in shaping and maintaining our repertoire of behaviors of its role as the occasion upon which behavior occurs – i.e. the trigger

Game 1: Paper, scissors, stone Skinner Wins

Game 2: Paper, scissors, stone I Win

Link to Epiphenomalism Game 1. I don’t need to know anything about mental states, I just need to need to know the motivators, and the consequence of actions [this is depend on specifying the Environment] Game 2. Skinner can perfectly predict my behaviour because he knows the conditions of the environment that will generate my behaviour (stimulus-response) There is no need for any reference to mental states Mental states don’t have any causal efficacy

Skinner Skinned There is a difference in explaining how, and explaining away (Daniel Dennett) The fact that simple mechanisms can explain away seemingly complex concepts (wants, desires and intentions) – i.e. mental states doesn’t explain why our behaviours appear as if it is dictated by wants, desires and intentions – (i.e. mental states seem to have casual power)

Identity theory Identity theory proposes that mind and brain correspond Problem 1. – too narrow an approach if associating mental with only brains: What about computers? What about other organisms? Problem 2 - a subjective experience is different from the brain state that it is correlated with it (i.e. one is physical the other mental) We can’t be sure that the mental and physical occupy the same space, (e.g., dissociations between consciousness and electrophysiological activity in brain, Libet’s work)

Emergent interactionism Sperry (split brain studies) – attempted to revive materialism by claiming the following: The mind is an emergent property of brain functioning, and what it usefully does is read states of the brain and transform them to mental states – which feedback into the system. Therefore, it is possible for consciousness to exert control on specific neural firings in the brain – subjective causation.

Subjective causation (Downward causation) Emergent interactionism implies Downward causation E.g. - if you decide to drive somewhere, your decision can activate a chain of events that will cause your car to move, according to the principles of downward causation. But, it ignores Upward causation E.g. - the movement of gasoline molecules cause the engine to work, thus causing your car to move. It is important to remember that both of these perspectives are accurate and that they are complementary. One does not exclude the other.

Functionalism Functionalism Being in a particular mental state is determined by the functional role of the state – i.e. mental state of pain has a functional role – it refers to an inner condition This has lead to the analogy of the Computational mind Mind as computer program Brain as computer hardware (Cognitive psychology is founded on this principle) Problem – Can conscious states be exhaustively analysed in terms of function?

Back to the cutaneous rabbit effect What is the best position to account for the cutaneous rabbit effect? our conscious perception is not accurate, it is created after integrating sensory inputs that occur within a certain time window (Miyazaki, Hirashima, &Nozaki, 2010) Monist? Dualists? For review of these positions and their implications for psychology Kreitler (2018)

Monist Dualist Interactionist Which position is most consistent with what you think about the mind and brain? Monist Dualist Interactionist

Summary II Dualism, a current and more widely accepted approach to the understanding of behaviour (many current theories of consciousness adopt this view) Suggests that both material and mental events are necessary for behaviour to emerge.

Summary I (single) Materialism (or monism) proposes that behaviour is strictly a function of physical events (i.e. the brain activities). Typically, the physical events (behaviour observed by the outside world) are associated with or are directly a function of brain activity (Boring, 1950). “The chief function of the brain is – thought, perhaps, or consciousness”

Summary III (interaction) Interactive substance postulates that behaviour is mediated only by mental or cognitive functions, and that mental and physical substances interact with each other E.g., Cutaneous rabbit effect