121
" To help them understand that they are not to blame for their deceptive brain messages, we taught Steve and Sarah about Free Won’t, a term popularized by the well-known neuroscientist Benjamin Libet. In a series of carefully executed scientific experiments completed in the 1980s, Libet studied how people decide whether and when to move their own bodies and what generated the initial desire to move. While the meaning of what he discovered is still the subject of passionate disagreement in academic circles, the bottom line for you is this: Your brain—not your mind—generates the initial desires, impulses, thoughts, and sensations, but you can veto almost any action before it starts. This means that while you are not responsible for the emergence of thoughts, desires, impulses, urges, or sensations, you are responsible for what you do with them once they arise. Libet himself interpreted his results in this way and emphasized that you have a choice in whether or not to respond when your brain puts out the call—this is the essence of Free Won’t. As he described it in one of his landmark papers:7 The role of conscious free will [aka Free Won’t] would be, then, not to initiate a voluntary act but rather to control whether the act takes place. We may view the unconscious initiatives for voluntary actions as “bubbling up” in the brain. The conscious will then selects which of these initiatives may go forward to an action and which ones to veto and abort, with no act appearing. In other words, what Libet was saying is that you really can’t decide or determine what will initially grab your attention—your brain does. However, his research also indicated that once your initial attention is grabbed, you can determine whether you keep your attention focused on that object (and act on it) or veto it based on the principle of Free Won’t. Free Won’t turns out to be of the utmost importance because it tells us that we have, in essence, the power to veto almost any action, even though the desire to perform that action is generated by brain mechanisms entirely outside of our conscious attention and awareness. How might that Free Won’t express itself? Through Veto Power. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , You Are Not Your Brain: The 4-Step Solution for Changing Bad Habits, Ending Unhealthy Thinking, and Taking Control of Your Life
123
" Cortical representations are not immutable; they are, to the contrary, dynamic, continuously modified by the lives we lead. Our brains allocate space to body parts that are used in activities that we perform most often-the thumb of a video-game addict, the index finger of a Braille reader. But although experience molds the brain, it molds only an attending brain. "Passive, unattended, or little-attended exercises are of limited value for driving" neuroplasticity, Merzenich and Jenkins concluded. "Plastic changes in brain representations are generated only when behaviors are specifically attended." And therein lies the key. Physical changes in the brain depend for their on a mental state in the mind-the state called attention. Paying attention matters. It matters not only for the size of the brain's representation of this or that part of the body's surface, of this or that muscle. It matters for the dynamic structure of the very circuits of the brain and for the brain's ability to remake itself.
This would be the next frontier for neuroplasticity, harnessing the transforming power of mind to reshape the brain. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
126
" In what’s fondly called the spinning disk experiment, Jenkins trained them to reach through the bars of their cage and keep a couple of digits in contact with wedge-shaped grooves in a four-inch disk that was spinning like an old LP. The monkeys had to modulate carefully the force they applied to the disk: too little, and their fingers would lose contact with the disk; too much and their fingers would ride along as if on a carousel. But if the animals did it just right, maintaining contact without getting taken for a ride, they were rewarded with a banana-flavored pellet. “I’d sit there for hours, hand-training a hungry monkey until he got it,” says Jenkins. Then, some 500 times a day, the monkeys practiced the move; if successful, they got a pellet. “We made sure the monkeys were hungry, and put the disk near them,” recalls Allard. “Once they had mastered the task and were performing it hundreds of times a day for several weeks, we went in to their brains. We found a fourfold increase in the area of the somatosensory cortex responding to signals from these fingers.” This wasn’t a response to something as traumatic as an amputation, a lesion, or a nerve transection, as the earlier work had been. The researchers didn’t have to cut the animal to get a change in its brain: the rezoning was purely a response to purposeful behavior. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
128
" The plasticity of the motor cortex might even underlie something so common, unremarkable, and seemingly inevitable as the tentative gait that many elderly people adopt. With age, walking becomes more fraught with the risk of a spill, so many people begin to walk in an ever-more constrained way. Old people become erect and stiff, or stooped, using shorter steps and a slower pace. As a result, they get less “practice” at confident striding—bad idea. Because they no longer walk normally and instead “overpractice” a rigid and shuffling gait, the motor-cortex representation of fluid movement degrades, just as in monkeys that stop practicing retrieving little pellets from wells. The result: we burn a trace of the old-folks’ walk into our brain, eventually losing the ability to walk as we once did. It is the sadder facet of the neural traces burned into our brain at the beginning of life. There is, though, a bright side: there is every reason to believe that practicing normal movements with careful guided exercise may help prevent, or even reverse, the maladaptive changes. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
131
" In the absence of effort the OCD pathology drives the brain’s circuitry, and compulsive behaviors result. But mental effort, I believe, generates a directed mental force that produces real physical effects: the brain changes that follow cognitive-behavioral therapy for OCD. The heroic mental effort required underlines the power of active mental processes like attention and will to redirect thoughts and actions in a way that is detectable on brain scans. Let me be clear about where mental effort enters the picture. The OCD patient is faced with two competing systems of brain circuitry. One underlies the passively experienced, pathological intrusions into consciousness. The other encodes information like the fact that the intrusions originate in faulty basal ganglia circuits. At first the pathological circuitry dominates, so the OCD patient succumbs to the insistent obsessions and carries out the compulsions. With practice, however, the conscious choice to exert effort to resist the pathological messages, and attend instead to the healthy ones, activates functional circuitry. Over the course of several weeks, that regular activation produces systematic changes in the very neural systems that generate those pathological messages—namely, a quieting of the OCD circuit. Again quoting James, “Volitional effort is effort of attention…. Effort of attention is thus the essential phenomenon of will. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
133
" The will, it was becoming clear, has the power to change the brain—in OCD, in stroke, in Tourette’s, and now in depression—by activating adaptive circuitry. That a mental process alters circuits involved in these disorders offers dramatic examples of how the ways someone thinks about thoughts can effect plastic changes in the brain. Jordan Grafman, chief of cognitive neuroscience at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, calls this top-down plasticity, because it originates in the brain’s higher-order functions. “Bottom-up” plasticity, in contrast, is induced by changes in sensory stimuli such as the loss of input after amputation. Merzenich’s and Tallal’s work shows the power of this bottom-up plasticity to resculpt the brain. The OCD work hints at the power of top-down plasticity, the power of the mind to alter brain circuitry. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
134
" In succeeding chapters we will explore the emerging evidence that matter alone does not suffice to generate mind, but that, to the contrary, there exists a "mental force" that is not reducible to the material. Mental force, which is closely related to the ancient Buddhist concepts of mindfulness and karma, provides a basis for the effects of mind on matter that clinical neuroscience finds. What is new here is that a question with deep philosophical roots, as well as profound philosophic al and moral implications, can finally be addressed (if not yet fully solved) through science. If materialism can be challenged in the context of neuroscience, if stark physical reductionism can be replaced by an outlook in which the mind can exert causal control, then, for the first time since the scientific revolution, the scientific worldview will become compatible with such ideas as will-and, therefore, with morality and ethics. The emerging view of the mind, and of the mind-matter enigma, has the potential to imbue human thought and action with responsibility once again. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
136
" At least one version of quantum theory, propounded by the Hungarian mathematician John von Neumann in the 1930's "claims that the world is built no out of bits of matter but out of bits of knowledge-subjective, conscious knowings," Stapp says. These ideas, however, have fallen far short of toppling the materialist worldview, which has emerged so triumphant that to suggest humbly that there might be more to mental life than action potentials zipping along axons is to risk being branded a scientific naif. Even worse, it is to be branded nonscientific. When, in 1997, I made just this suggestion over dinner to a former president of the Society for Neuroscience, he exlaimed, "Well, then you are not a scientist." Questioning whether consciousness, emotions, thoughts, the subjective feeling of pain, and the spark of creativity arise from nothing but the electrochemical activity of large collections of neuronal circuits is a good way to get dismissed as a hopeless dualist. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
137
" Stapp made the point that there is no stronger influence on human values than man’s belief about his relationship to the power that shapes the universe. When medieval science connected man directly to his Creator, man saw himself as a child of the divine imbued with a will free to choose between good and evil. When the scientific revolution converted human beings from the sparks of divine creation into not particularly special cogs in a giant impersonal machine, it eroded any rational basis for the notion of responsibility for one’s actions. We became a mechanical extension of what preceded us, over which we have no control; if everything we do emerges preordained by the conditions that prevail, then we can have no responsibility for our own actions. “Given this conception of man,” Stapp argued, “the collapse of moral philosophy is inevitable.” But just as Newtonian physics undermines moral philosophy, Stapp thought, so quantum physics might rescue it. For quantum physics describes a world in which human consciousness is intimately tied into the causal structure of nature, a world purged of determinism. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
138
" I began lamenting the terrible social consequences of materialism and my view that the less-than-laudable moral condition of America in general and Santa Cruz in particular (I was grumpy from overwork and have never been particularly enamored of the moral condition of Santa Cruz in any event) could be laid at the feet of nearly three centuries of materialist ascendancy. The reigning belief that the thoughts we think and the choices we make reflect the deterministic workings of neurons and, ultimately, subatomic particles seemed to me to have subverted mankind’s sense of morality. The view that people are mere machines and that the mind is just another (not particularly special) manifestation of a clockwork physical universe had infiltrated all our thinking, whether or not someone knew a synapse from an axon. Do you know what the most addressable cause of all this moral decrepitude is?, I asked Dave. Materialism! Not the materialism of Rodeo Drive, SUVs, and second homes in Telluride, but materialism as a worldview, a view that holds that the physical is all that exists, and that transcendent human mental experiences and emotions, no matter what grandeur they seem—from within—to possess, are in reality nothing but the expressions of electrical pulses zipping along neurons. Chalmers wouldn’t be the first (or the last) to express incredulity that I was blaming the moral morass of the late twentieth century on a school of philosophy that most people had never heard of. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
139
" Materialism, it seems fair to say, has neuroscience in a chokehold and has had it there since the nineteenth century. Indeed, there are those in the neuroscience community whose reductionist bent is so extreme that they have made it their crusade "to eliminate mind language entirely," as the British neuroscientist Steven Rose bluntly puts it. In other words, notions such as feeling, and memory, and attention, and will-all crucial elements of mind-are to be replaced with neurochemical reactions. This materialist, reductionist camp holds that when we have mapped a mental process to a location in the brain, and when we've worked out the sequence of neurochemical releases and uptakes that is associated with it, we have indeed fully explained, and more important understood, the phenomenon in question. Mystery explained. Case closed. "
― Jeffrey M. Schwartz , The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
