Suffering comes in a
variety of flavours – fear, greed, jealously, lust, anxiety, panic,
stress etc and also, in severe forms, as neuroses and psychoses.
These are not 'comfortable' but they keep us alert to potentially
dangerous changes in the physical and socio-cultural environments.
The human brain has a negativity bias.
Suffering was a key
concept in the teaching of the Buddha for whom the four noble truths
were that:
- in life there is suffering.
- the cause of suffering is craving (for more good stuff and less bad stuff).
- we can put an end to craving and thus to suffering.
- to end craving we must follow the 8-fold path and thus change our minds.
OK - in life there is
suffering - but the human species is prospering anyway. We can
hypothesise that it is because we suffer that we prosper. No
suffering, no prospering. No pain no gain.
In the brains of most
species unconscious intuitions, reflexes and instincts are enough to
meet their needs. They are hard wired in detail by nature and there
is not much need of nurture. (Ref xxx)
The human brain has
evolved, amongst other things, to find food, avoid predators, and be
sociable as part of a group of Stone Age foragers in the African
savannah. That pattern of living began about three million years ago
and ticked over nicely such that the species expanded out of Africa
with a very simple toolkit. Language first appeared 100,00 years ago
and it caused a paradigm shift in terms of collective learning about
our physical and socio-cultural environments. The balance began to
swing in favour of nurture as a powerful force for shaping and
changing minds.
Foraging gave way to
settled agriculture about 4500 years ago. Human groups got bigger and
division of labour took off. There was plenty variety for evolution
to work with – especially for group selection. It gave rise to
myths and magic rooted in cause and effect, seeing patterns, and
supposing agencies.
2500 years ago there
was an Axial Age when there was rapid growth in thinking about
thinking. Topics such as the meta-physical, super-natural, spiritual,
and mystical led to the development of what we now call the major
world religions.
2,500 years later two
new disciplines throw a fresh light on what is involved in changing
minds.
First, neuroscience.
There are Neural Correlates of Consciousness (NCC) - whatever appears
in the mind is rooted in physical changes in the brain and these can
be objectively measured in brain scans. And there is neuroplasticity
– by taking thought the mind can change the brain and vice versa.
Second, evolutionary
psychology - with social psychology and behavioural economics. The
vertebrate brain evolved from fish to philosopher (Homer Smith.)
Evolution tinkers so most of its products are functional but scruffy.
And the vast majority of actions are in the unconscious.
The classic meditators
did not have the understandings of neuroscience and evolutionary
psychology but they had insights into counter-intuitive states of the
human mindbrain. By sittting still and noting what the mindbrain got
up to they realised that reality is mind made. Lao Tzu the father of
Taoism reckoned that “the reality that can be described is not the
real reality. It followed that “those who speak do not know” and
more profoundly that “those who know do not speak”.
From ancient times
there have been remarkable individuals who have subjectively
appreciated a Oneness. Holistic ecologists given to systems theory
know about inter connectedness, Thich Nhat Hahn talks of interbeing.
Biologists appreciate biogeochemical cycles and the life stages of a
wide variety of parasites.
Evolution operates on
three levels – cosmic, biological and cultural. These lay the
foundations for each other and there is ongoing feedback between
them. For example human cultural evolution has contributed to global
warming. There has been no intelligent designer until recently in the
newer
stages of cultural
evolution. Human beings are not only conscious, they are potentially
capable of being conscious of their consciousness and thus, by
default, of the roles played by the unconscious.
1] being conscious
2] being conscious of
consciousness
3] being self-conscious
4] being subjectively
conscious of unconsciousness
5] being objectively
conscious of unconsciousness
1] react automatically
to changes in the environment eg withdraw your hand when it is too
close to fire
2] not only withdraw
your hand but also know that you have done so. The brain gets the
message after the reaction has taken place
3] when there is 'self'
there is 'other' in in-group and out-group situations. The self
concept is a useful illusion in terms of politics but it causes all
manner of psycho-social problems. Many people reckon that their mind
has a mind of its own.
4] meditators
subjectively realise that they have a monkey mind which operates like
a zombie on autopilot. When sitting quietly and letting the
unconscious run its course they reckon that the transcendent Oneness
is essentially beneficient and parent like.
5] Neuroscientists are
now busy cataloguing the NCC of the changes in the brains of
meditators. There is now enough evolved vocabulary to facilitate
collective learning on the vast divisions of labour. The innate
goodness of the transcendent Oneness is no longer supported as a
supernatural, explanatory device. Good and bad are ongoing cultural
constructions hard wired in terms of nature's framework upon which
nurture's cultural details are grafted.
Three ending points:
[1] Human nature is not all nicey nicey, [2] multidisciplinary
consilience brings many different ideas together, and, [3] we now
have better ideas about how to tame and train our minds.
No comments:
Post a Comment