Believing Brain

Michael Shermer explains a theory of how the human brain makes decisions with an incredibly well-written narrative involving neurons, chemical balances, and DNA that has the feeling of a fictional plotline with suspense and even chemical attraction love stories. If all science could be this accessible to someone who failed Physics in High School, I would have a much easier path in understanding the scientific explanations of the world. Instead, I generally fall into the metaphysical traps of body and mind. The neural process is the same whether we are making causal associations that could save our lives from wild animals or causal relationships that invent an unmoved mover to either praise or blame- as a result of the ability to build relationships in our mind, we have the ability to mislead ourselves, and Shermer shows how easily led astray we are as a species. Interspersed with all of this science is a soapbox for his own personal beliefs as he explores the belief-building process for his own atheism, his debunking of several conspiracy theories, and implying that any other opinion in each example is scientifically unfounded.

Using liberal bias as an example, Shermer, the same scientist who quotes anthropological research on many occasions reviles as unfair the "liberal bias" of colleges, universities, and law schools (the very source of most of the studies cited in the book) leading to an unbalanced education for our children and does not ask why the people teaching our children tend to be liberal. If there is a true connection behind such a “liberal bias”, the fact that media (on the whole) refer to more left-leaning sources than do the Congress could honestly lead the connection-making mind to ask whether our congressional representatives have as much intelligence on average as the public media- considering the intensely left-leaning tendencies of our educators, who are paid in part for their level of intelligence.

"We do not reason our way to moral decision by carefully weighing the evidence for and against; instead, we make intuitive leaps to moral decisions and then rationalize the snap decision after the fact with rational reasons" (The Believing Brain, Michael Shermer). Our morals and emotions do more to build our opinions and beliefs than any facts can, though new connections are presumably possible as long as we can nurture our skepticism. ***Bertrand Russell quote*** According to these facts, our beliefs are unlikely to be changed in the face of new information- no matter what that information may be.

Making politics into a belief system akin to a religion (related to brain activity, at least), and equating it with moral decisions to be rationalized, Shermer describes the two-party American system as a dichotomous belief system based on two distinct sets of values- one based on the ideal that human nature is perfectible, and one based on the assumption that evil is a natural byproduct of humanity. I discovered years ago that my liberal leaning nature is connected with a deep distrust of people. Because I do not believe in the ability for human beings to make the right choices, I know that regulation and social programs are necessary to keep us in line in this complex society we have created. On the other hand, many of the Republican and Libertarians that I have talked with have an inherent respect for human kind that allows them to believe each human being would make the right choices if all regulation were waived.

Our brains evolved a morality to go hand in hand with rationalism. The same variations in the balance of brain chemicals that can cause us to make causal connections which allow us to understand our world are the ones that inspire us to attribute the beauty and mystery of this world to spiritual action- to a first cause. These two things go hand in hand for more than just a teeter-totter of a belief spectrum. We could not have evolved to such a state without the practically inevitable human God. Shermer tends to imply that this human desire for a higher power is a failing that unfortunately springs from the same spring as our rational capabilities and creativity. What if we need God in order to remain creative and rational? Without the experience of the divine, we would have no empathy for others. Without the sense of some great plan behind reality, we would not strive for the improvement of our world.

“In the end, all of us are trying to make sense of the world, and nature has gifted us with a double-edge sword that cuts for and against. On one edge, our brains are the most complex and sophisticated information processing machines in the universe, capable of understanding not only the universe itself but of understanding the process of understanding. On the other edge, by the very same process of forming beliefs about the universe and ourselves, we are also more capable than any other species of self-deception and illusion, of fooling ourselves while we are trying to avoid being fooled by nature.” (michaelshermer.com)