November 22, 2016
Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer
Dear Reader,
This is my sixteenth response to “The basic emotional circuits of mammalian brains: Do animals
have affective lives?” At this point it is becoming clear to me how wrong Panksepp
is in putting all his cards on gaining broader acceptance from the neuroscience
community. In spite of the fact that “the evidence for various types of
affective feelings in other mammals is now rather overwhelming,” the majority
of the neuroscientists are still not listening to him. Why are knowledgeable
people incapable of accepting facts which refute their beliefs?
The
way of talking, which maintains beliefs that prevent people from looking at the
facts, needs to be addressed before these beliefs can be changed. Panksepp’s stubborn
adherence to a behavior-causing “mind” didn’t gain him any support from the
behaviorist community. He once told me in an email that he had started out as a
behaviorist, but he became dissatisfied with it as it. It is the Panksepp the
behaviorist who writes “Wherever in the ancient subcortical reaches of the mammalian brain
we evoke coherent emotional behaviors with electrical stimulation of the brain (ESB),
we can also demonstrate that the central states evoked can serve as rewards and
punishments.”
One moment, he uses behavioral
constructs, such as “rewards and punishments”, but another moment, he refers again
to the “affective aspects of mind.” He goes back and forth between behaviorism
and mentalism; in the former, behavior is caused by environmental stimuli, but
in the latter, behavior is assumed to be caused by the “ancient subcortical
reaches of the mammalian brain.” I understand his dilemma.
Panksepp deserves credit for
explaining “the fundamental nature of “reinforcement”
as a brain process.” How could it have been anything
else? It had to be a brain process, but this of course doesn’t change the fact
that our brains are also affected by environmental stimuli. Behaviorists should
be grateful for the great work of Panksepp, who gives a neuroscientific
analysis of reinforcement and punishment.
No comments:
Post a Comment