Advertisement

Neuroethics

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 273–282 | Cite as

Updating our Selves: Synthesizing Philosophical and Neurobiological Perspectives on Incorporating New Information into our Worldview

  • Fay Niker
  • Peter B. Reiner
  • Gidon Felsen
Original Paper

Abstract

Given the ubiquity and centrality of social and relational influences to the human experience, our conception of self-governance must adequately account for these external influences. The inclusion of socio-historical, externalist (i.e., “relational”) considerations into more traditional internalist (i.e., “individualist”) accounts of autonomy has been an important feature of the debate over personal autonomy in recent years. But the relevant socio-temporal dynamics of autonomy are not only historical in nature. There are also important, and under-examined, future-oriented questions about how we retain autonomy while incorporating new values into the existing set that guides our interaction with the world. In this paper, we examine these questions from two complementary perspectives: philosophy and neuroscience. After contextualizing the philosophical debate, we show the importance to theories of autonomous agency of the capacity to appropriately adapt our values and beliefs, in light of relevant experiences and evidence, to changing circumstances. We present a plausible philosophical account of this process, which we claim is generally applicable to theories about the nature of autonomy, both internalist and externalist alike. We then evaluate this account by providing a model for how the incorporation of values might occur in the brain; one that is inspired by recent theoretical and empirical advances in our understanding of the neural processes by which our beliefs are updated by new information. Finally, we synthesize these two perspectives and discuss how the neurobiology might inform the philosophical discussion.

Keywords

Autonomy Pro-attitudes Neuroscience Decision making Experience-responsiveness 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Greenwall Foundation’s Faculty Scholars Program in Bioethics (G. F.) and by a Warwick Transatlantic Fellowship from the University of Warwick’s Humanities Research Centre (F. N.).

References

  1. 1.
    Frankfurt, Harry G. 1971. Freedom of the will and the concept of a person. The Journal of Philosophy 68: 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dworkin, Gerald. 1988. The theory and practice of autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mele, Alfred R. 1995. Autonomous agents: From self-control to autonomy. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mill, John Stuart. 2008 [1859]. On liberty and other essays. OUP Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Raz, Joseph. 1986. The morality of freedom. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Korsgaard, Christine M. 2009. Self-constitution: Agency, identity, and integrity. OUP Oxford.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Weimer, Steven. 2013. Evidence-responsiveness and autonomy. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16: 621–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shadlen, Michael N., and Adina L. Roskies. 2012. The neurobiology of decision-making and responsibility: Reconciling mechanism and mindedness. Frontiers in Decision Neuroscience 6: 56.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roskies, Adina L. 2010. How does neuroscience affect our conception of volition? Annual Review of Neuroscience 33: 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Felsen, Gidon, and Peter B. Reiner. 2011. How the neuroscience of decision making informs our conception of autonomy. AJOB Neuroscience 2: 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Felsen, Gidon, and Peter B. Reiner. 2015. What can neuroscience contribute to the debate over nudging? Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6: 469–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Greene, Joshua D. 2014. Beyond point-and-shoot morality: Why cognitive (neuro)science matters for ethics. Ethics 124: 695–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rawls, John. 1971. A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Noggle, Robert. Autonomy and the paradox of self-creation: Infinite regresses, finite selves, and the limits of authenticity. In Personal autonomy: New essays on personal autonomy and its role in contemporary moral philosophy, ed. James Stacey Taylor, 87–108. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oshana, Marina. 2006. Personal autonomy in society. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Christman, John. 2009. The politics of persons: Individual autonomy and socio-historical selves. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baumann, Holger. 2008. Reconsidering relational autonomy. Personal autonomy for socially embedded and temporally extended selves. Analyse & Kritik 30: 445–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Blöser, Claudia, Aron Schöpf, and Marcus Willaschek. 2009. Autonomy, experience, and reflection. On a neglected aspect of personal autonomy. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13: 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Arneson, Richard. 1994. Autonomy and preference formation. In In Harm’s way: Essays in honor of Joel Feinberg, ed. Joel Feinberg, Jules L. Coleman, and Allen E. Buchanan, 42–75. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fischer, John Martin, and Mark Ravizza. 1998. Responsibility and control: A theory of moral responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anderson, Michael L. 2010. Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33: 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Miller, Earl K., and Jonathan D. Cohen. 2001. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience 24: 167–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Knill, David C., and Alexandre Pouget. 2004. The Bayesian brain: The role of uncertainty in neural coding and computation. Trends in Neurosciences 27: 712–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clark, Andy. 2013. Whatever next? predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36: 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Körding, Konrad P., and Daniel M. Wolpert. 2006. Bayesian decision theory in sensorimotor control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10: 319–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Girshick, Ahna R., Michael S. Landy, and Eero P. Simoncelli. 2011. Cardinal rules: Visual orientation perception reflects knowledge of environmental statistics. Nature Neuroscience 14: 926–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nassar, Matthew R., Robert C. Wilson, Benjamin Heasly, and Joshua I. Gold. 2010. An approximately bayesian delta-rule model explains the dynamics of belief updating in a changing environment. The Journal of Neuroscience 30: 12366–12378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weiss, Yair, Eero P. Simoncelli, and Edward H. Adelson. 2002. Motion illusions as optimal percepts. Nature Neuroscience 5: 598–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goldreich, Daniel, and Jonathan Tong. 2013. Prediction, postdiction, and perceptual length contraction: A Bayesian low-speed prior captures the cutaneous rabbit and related illusions. Frontiers in Psychology 4: 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gold, J.I., and M.N. Shadlen. 2007. The neural basis of decision making. Annual Review of Neuroscience 30: 535–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Beck, Jeffrey M., Wei Ji. Ma, Roozbeh Kiani, Tim Hanks, Anne K. Churchland, Jamie Roitman, Michael N. Shadlen, Peter E. Latham, and Alexandre Pouget. 2008. Probabilistic population codes for bayesian decision making. Neuron 60: 1142–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vilares, Iris, and Konrad Kording. 2011. Bayesian models: The structure of the world, uncertainty, behavior, and the brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1224: 22–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Courville, Aaron C., Nathaniel D. Daw, and David S. Touretzky. 2006. Bayesian theories of conditioning in a changing world. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10: 294–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Braver, Todd S., and Jonathan D. Cohen. 2000. On the control of control: The role of dopamine in regulating prefrontal function and working memory. In Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII, 713–737.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rangel, Antonio, Colin Camerer, and P. Read Montague. 2008. A framework for studying the neurobiology of value-based decision making. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9: 545–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ruff, Christian C., and Ernst Fehr. 2014. The neurobiology of rewards and values in social decision making. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 15: 549–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stephens, David W., and John R. Krebs. 1986. Foraging theory. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kolling, Nils, Timothy E.J. Behrens, Rogier B. Mars, and Matthew F.S. Rushworth. 2012. Neural mechanisms of foraging. Science 336: 95–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pearson, John M., Sarah R. Heilbronner, David L. Barack, Benjamin Y. Hayden, and Michael L. Platt. 2011. Posterior cingulate cortex: Adapting behavior to a changing world. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15: 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    McCoy, Allison N., and Michael L. Platt. 2005. Risk-sensitive neurons in macaque posterior cingulate cortex. Nature Neuroscience 8: 1220–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hayden, Benjamin Y., Amrita C. Nair, Allison N. McCoy, and Michael L. Platt. 2008. Posterior cingulate cortex mediates outcome-contingent allocation of behavior. Neuron 60: 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gigerenzer, Gerd, and Wolfgang Gaissmaier. 2011. Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology 62: 451–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Damasio, Antonio R. 1996. The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 351: 1413–1420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    De Sousa, Ronald. 1990. The rationality of emotion. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tappolet, Christine. 2014. Emotions, reasons, and autonomy. In Autonomy, oppression and gender, ed. Andrea Veltman and Mark C. Piper, 163–180. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nader, Karim, Glenn E. Schafe, and Joseph E. LeDoux. 2000. Reply — Reconsolidation : The labile nature of consolidation theory. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 1: 216–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Stickgold, Robert. 2005. Sleep-dependent memory consolidation. Nature 437: 1272–1278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gais, Steffen, Geneviève Albouy, Mélanie Boly, Thien Thanh Dang-Vu, Annabelle Darsaud, Martin Desseilles, Géraldine Rauchs, et al. 2007. Sleep transforms the cerebral trace of declarative memories. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 18778–18783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Schiller, Daniela, Marie-H Monfils, Candace M. Raio, David C. Johnson, Joseph E. LeDoux, and Elizabeth A. Phelps. 2010. Preventing the return of fear in humans using reconsolidation update mechanisms. Nature 463: 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Xue, Yan-Xue, Yi-Xiao Luo, Ping Wu, Hai-Shui Shi, Li-Fen Xue, Chen Chen, Wei-Li Zhu, et al. 2012. A memory retrieval-extinction procedure to prevent drug craving and relapse. Science 336: 241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Schlichting, Margaret L., and Alison R. Preston. 2015. Memory integration: Neural mechanisms and implications for behavior. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 1: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Politics and International StudiesUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK
  2. 2.National Core for Neuroethics, Department of PsychiatryUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Department of Physiology and BiophysicsUniversity of Colorado School of MedicineAuroraUSA
  4. 4.Center for Bioethics and HumanitiesUniversity of Colorado School of MedicineAuroraUSA

Personalised recommendations