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)
