加载中…
个人资料
瓶中信
瓶中信
  • 博客等级:
  • 博客积分:0
  • 博客访问:17,245
  • 关注人气:9
  • 获赠金笔:0支
  • 赠出金笔:0支
  • 荣誉徽章:
相关博文
推荐博文
谁看过这篇博文
加载中…
正文 字体大小:

耶鲁大学心理学讲座(一上)

(2010-02-07 21:56:01)
标签:

文化

     Professor Paul Bloom: We're going to begin the class proper, Introduction to Psychology, with a discussion about the brain. And, in particular, I want to lead off the class with an idea that the Nobel Prize winning biologist, Francis Crick, described as "The Astonishing Hypothesis." And The Astonishing Hypothesis is summarized like this. As he writes, The Astonishing Hypothesis is that:

    保罗布罗姆教授:我们要开始上课了,心理学导论,关于对大脑的讨论。而且,特别的,我希望以诺贝尔生物学奖弗朗西斯克里克的“惊人的假说”来作为我们上课的开头。惊人的假说是这样总结的。他写道,惊人的假说是这样的:

    You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules. As Lewis Carroll's Alice might have phrased it, "you're nothing but a pack of neurons."

   你,你的高兴和你的悲伤,你的记忆和你的野心,你的个人身份的意识和自由意志实际不过是一大堆神经元和他们的联接的分子的行为。正如刘易斯卡罗思爱丽思强调说,“你只是一大堆神经元。”

   It is fair to describe this as astonishing. It is an odd and unnatural view and I don't actually expect people to believe it at first. It's an open question whether you'll believe it when this class comes to an end, but I'd be surprised if many of you believe it now. Most people don't. Most people, in fact, hold a different view. Most people are dualists. Now, dualism is a very different doctrine. It's a doctrine that can be found in every religion and in most philosophical systems throughout history. It was very explicit in Plato, for instance.

   把它描述为惊人的是公正的。这是一个奇怪和不自然的观点我并不指望人们首先信任他。这是一个公开的问题即你是否在这堂课结束时会相信它,如果现在就有很多人相信的话这到让我惊讶。大多数人不相信。大多数人,事实上,持有一个不同的观点。大多数人是二元论者。现在,二元论是一个非常不同的学说。它是一个可以在每个宗教中发现的学说并且在许多历史上的哲学体系中。比如,在柏拉图那里就有非常明确的表述。

  But the most articulate and well-known defender of dualism is the philosopher Rene Descartes, and Rene Descartes explicitly asked a question, "Are humans merely physical machines, merely physical things?" And he answered, "no." He agreed that animals are machines. In fact, he called them "beast machines" and said animals, nonhuman animals are merely robots, but people are different. There's a duality of people. Like animals, we possess physical material bodies, but unlike animals, what we are is not physical. We are immaterial souls that possess physical bodies, that have physical bodies, that reside in physical bodies, that connect to physical bodies. So, this is known as dualism because the claim is, for humans at least, there are two separate things; there's our material bodies and there's our immaterial minds.

  但是最权威和著名的二元论的捍卫者是哲学家笛卡尔,笛卡尔明确地问了一个问题。“人们是否仅仅是物质的机械,仅仅是物理的?他回答说:“不”。他同意说动物是机器。事实上,他把他们叫做野兽机器并且说动物,非人类的动物仅仅是机器,但人不同。这里有一个人的二元性。就象动物,我们拥有物理的身体,但是不象动物,我们不是物理的。我们是拥有物质身体的灵魂,并且有物质的身体,它住在肉身之内,并与肉身联系。因此,它被叫做二元论是因为,至少对人类来说,这里有两类不同的事物;我们有物质的身体和我们有非物质的心灵。

Now, Descartes made two arguments for dualism. One argument involved observations of a human action. So, Descartes lived in a fairly sophisticated time, and his time did have robots. These were not electrical robots, of course. They were robots powered by hydraulics. So, Descartes would walk around the French Royal Gardens and the French Royal Gardens were set up like a seventeenth-century Disneyland. They had these characters that would operate according to water flow and so if you stepped on a certain panel, a swordsman would jump out with a sword. If you stepped somewhere else, a bathing beauty would cover herself up behind some bushes. And Descartes said, "Boy, these machines respond in certain ways to certain actions so machines can do certain things and, in fact," he says, "our bodies work that way too. If you tap somebody on the knee, your leg will jump out. Well, maybe that's what we are." But Descartes said that can't be because there are things that humans do that no machine could ever do. Humans are not limited to reflexive action. Rather, humans are capable of coordinated, creative, spontaneous things. We can use language, for instance, and sometimes my use of language can be reflexive. Somebody says, "How are you?" And I say, "I am fine. How are you?" But sometimes I could say what I choose to be, "How are you?" "Pretty damn good." I can just choose. And machines, Descartes argued, are incapable of that sort of choice. Hence, we are not mere machines.'

  现在,迪卡尔为二元论找到了两个讨论。一个涉及到人类行为的发现。当然,笛卡尔生活在一个非常古典的时代,他那个时代没有机器人。当然,这些不是电子机器人。他们是水力推动的机器人。当然,笛卡尔在法国的皇家花园里散步,法国皇家花园建筑得就象十七世纪的迪斯尼。他们有水流驱动的特点所以如果你踩到了一个特定的踏板,一个佩刀武士就会跳出来。如果你踩到了另外的,一个沐浴美人就会暗藏在灌木丛后面。笛卡尔说:实际上,这些机器以特定的方式反应既特定的行为会带来特定的动作。他说:我们的身体也象这样运作。如果你敲打某人的膝盖。他的腿就会弹起来。当然,我们就是这样的。但是笛卡尔说这是不可能的因为人们能做机器不能做的事情。人类不仅仅局限于反射行为。当然,人们能够协调,有创造性,自发的。我们能够使用语言,比如,有时我使用的语言是反射的。某人说:“你好吗?”我会说:“我很好,你呢?”但有时侯,我会选择我要说的,“你好吗?”“太棒了”我可以如此选择。而机器,笛卡尔讨论说,是不能够做这种选择的。因此,我们不仅仅是机器。

   The second argument is, of course, quite famous and this was the method. This he came to using the method of doubt. So, he started asking himself the question, "What can I be sure of?" And he said, "Well, I believe there's a God, but honestly, I can't be sure there's a God. I believe I live in a rich country but maybe I've been fooled." He even said, "I believe I have had friends and family but maybe I am being tricked. Maybe an evil demon, for instance, has tricked me, has deluded me into thinking I have experiences that aren't real." And, of course, the modern version of this is The Matrix.

第二个争论就是,当然,非常有名的,就是方法。他使用了质疑的方法。因此,他开始问自己这样的问题,“我对什么确信?”他说:“当然,我相信有神,但是实际上,我不能确信这里有神。我相信我生活在一个富裕的国家但也许我被欺骗了。也许一个恶魔,比如,已经欺骗了我,他欺骗我相信我经历了不是真实的经历。”当然,现代版就是矩阵。

 

The idea of The Matrix is explicitly built upon Cartesian--Descartes' worries about an evil demon. Maybe everything you're now experiencing is not real, but rather is the product of some other, perhaps malevolent, creature. Descartes, similarly, could doubt he has a body. In fact, he noticed that madmen sometimes believe they have extra limbs or they believe they're of different sizes and shapes than they really are and Descartes said, "How do I know I'm not crazy? Crazy people don't think they're crazy so the fact that I don't think I'm crazy doesn't mean I'm not crazy. How do I know," Descartes said, "I'm not dreaming right now?" But there is one thing, Descartes concluded, that he cannot doubt, and the answer is he cannot doubt that he is himself thinking. That would be self-refuting. And so, Descartes used the method of doubt to say there's something really different about having a body that's always uncertain from having a mind. And he used this argument as a way to support dualism, as a way to support the idea that bodies and minds are separate. And so he concluded, "I knew that I was a substance, the whole essence or nature of which is to think, and that for its existence, there is no need of any place nor does it depend on any material thing. That is to say, the soul by which I am, when I am, is entirely distinct from body."

  矩阵观念的建立是由于笛卡尔-迪卡尔对恶魔的担心。也许你现在经历的一切都不是真实的,而是某种其它东西的产物,也许是邪恶的,生物。笛卡尔,同样的,可以怀疑他有一个身体。事实上,他注意到疯子有时候相信他们有额外的肢体或者他们相信他们有不同于真实面貌的形状和尺寸,笛卡尔说:“我怎么知道我没有疯狂?疯狂的人不认为他们是疯狂的因此我不认为我不疯狂并不意味着我没有疯狂。我怎么知道”笛卡尔说“我现在没有做梦吗?”这里有一件事,笛卡尔总结说,他不能够怀疑,这个问题就是他不能怀疑是他自己在思考。这就是一种自我反问。因此,笛卡尔用怀疑的方法来说存在他们身体之外的不同的东西。他用这个辩论的方法来支持怀疑论,以这种方法来支持身体和心灵是分开的观念。因此他总结说,“我知道到我是一个物质,完全的本质和本性就是思考,为了它的存在,这里没有任何地方需要或是建立在任何物质的形式上。这就是说,我是灵魂,当我是,是完全与身体远离的。

 

Now, I said before that this is common sense and I want to illustrate the common sense nature of this in a few ways. One thing is our dualism is enmeshed in our language. So, we have a certain mode of talking about things that we own or things that are close to us – my arm, my heart, my child, my car – but we also extend that to my body and my brain. We talk about owning our brains as if we're somehow separate from them. Our dualism shows up in intuitions about personal identity. And what this means is that common sense tells us that somebody can be the same person even if their body undergoes radical and profound changes. The best examples of this are fictional. So, we have no problem understanding a movie where somebody goes to sleep as a teenager and wakes up as Jennifer Garner, as an older person. Now, nobody says, "Oh, that's a documentary. I believe that thoroughly true" but at the same time nobody, no adult, no teenager, no child ever leaves and says, "I'm totally conceptually confused." Rather, we follow the story. We can also follow stories which involve more profound transformations as when a man dies and is reborn into the body of a child.

  现在,我先声明这是一般的意义并且我想用一些方法说明一般的意义。一项要说明的是我们的二元论是用我们自己的语言表达的。所以,我们有一种特定的方法来讨论我们拥有的事情或与我们接近的事情-我的手臂,我的心脏,我的孩子,我的汽车-但是我们也把这延伸到了我的身体和我的大脑,我们讨论我们拥有我们自己的大脑就象某种程度上我们与之分离。我们的二元论表明个人身份的直觉。这就意味着一般意义告诉我们某些人能够是同一个人尽管他们的身体经历了激烈的和复杂的变化。这最好的例子是这些是虚构的。所以,我们毫无问题的理解这部电影某人睡觉时象个年轻人而醒来时是Jennifer Garner,是一个长大的人。现在,无人说:“哦,这是文件。我相信完全真实但是在同一时间无人,无成年人,无年青人,无儿童离开,并且说,“我完全概念地困惑了”当然,我们追随了这个故事。我们也可以追寻这个故事.这包括了更复杂的转生,一个人死了并且在投身为儿童的身体。

 

 

 

Now, you might have different views around--People around this room will have different views as to whether reincarnation really exists, but we can imagine it. We could imagine a person dying and then reemerging in another body. This is not Hollywood invention. One of the great short stories of the last century begins with a sentence by Franz Kafka: "As Gregor Samsa woke one morning from uneasy dreams, he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect." And again, Kafka invites us to imagine waking up into a body of a cockroach and we can. This is also not modern. Hundreds of years before the birth of Christ, Homer described the fate of the companions of Odysseus who were transformed by a witch into pigs. Actually, that's not quite right. She didn't turn them into pigs. She did something worse. She stuck them in the bodies of pigs. They had the head and voice and bristles and body of swine but their minds remained unchanged as before, so they were penned there weeping. And we are invited to imagine the fate of again finding ourselves in the bodies of other creatures and, if you can imagine this, this is because you are imagining what you are as separate from the body that you reside in.

现在,你也许有许多相关的不同观点-这个房间里的人们会对是否存在转世有不同的观念,但是我们可以想象它。我们可以想象一个人死亡然后在另一个身体上出现。这不是好莱坞的发现。上世纪的弗兰兹卡夫卡在他的短篇小说之中是以这样的句子开头的:格里格萨莎一天早上从噩梦之种醒来,他发现自己在床上变形为一只巨大的昆虫。”接着,卡夫卡邀请我们想象我们醒来后变成了一只蟑螂我们可以。这不是现代版的。在基督诞生几百年前,荷马描述奥迪修斯的伙伴的命运他们被女巫变成了猪。事实上,这不是正确的。她没有把他们变成猪。她做了更坏的事。她把她们放到了猪的身体里。他们有头和声音和猪鬃和猪的身体,因此他们被圈起来了哭泣。我们被邀请再次想象我们的命运,发现我们自己在其它生物的身体里,如果你能够如此想象,这是因为你想象你和你所呆的身体是不同的。

We allow for the notion that many people can occupy one body. This is a mainstay of some slapstick humor including the classic movie, All of Me--Steve Martin and Lily Tomlin – highly recommended. But many people think this sort of thing really happens. One analysis of multiple personality disorder is that you have many people inside a single body fighting it out for control. Now, we will discuss multiple personality disorder towards the end of the semester and it turns out things are a good deal more complicated than this, but still my point isn't about how it really is but how we think about it. Common sense tells us you could have more than one person inside a single body. This shows up in a different context involving exorcisms where many belief systems allow for the idea that people's behavior, particularly their evil or irrational behavior, could be because something else has taken over their bodies.

  我们同意这样的观点就是许多人可以占有一个身体。这是包括经典电影在内的某些搞笑幽默剧的主流,包括我-斯蒂芬马汀和莉莉汤米-非常赞同。但是许多人认为这类事情是真实存在的。一个对多重人格疾病的分析就是在你唯一的身体里住着许多人他们争夺对身体的控制。现在,我们将在这学期末讨论多重人格的疾病它证明事情远比这复杂得多。一般的理解告诉我们你可以在一个身体里有更多的人格。这表明在不同的环境的许多不同的信仰体系赞同这样的观点就是人的行为,特别是他们的邪恶或疯狂的行为,是由于其它的东西已经占用了他们的身体。

Finally, most people around the world, all religions and most people in most countries at most times, believe that people can survive the destruction of their bodies. Now, cultures differ according to the fate of the body. Some cultures have the body going to--sorry--the fate of the soul. Some cultures have you going to Heaven or descending to Hell. Others have you occupying another body. Still, others have you occupying an amorphous spirit world. But what they share is the idea that what you are is separable from this physical thing you carry around. And the physical thing that you carry around can be destroyed while you live on.

    最后,世界上大多数人,所有的宗教以及在大多数时候大多数国家大多数人,相信人们在身体毁坏后能够存在。现在,对于身体身体的命运文化是不同的。某些文化中身体会-抱歉-灵魂的命运。某些文化种你会上天堂或下地域。其余的你会占用另一个身体。当然,其它的人已经占用了一个非固定的精神世界。但是他们所分享的是这样的观念你是不同于你持有的身体的东西。你所拥有的物理的身体在你活着时候能够毁坏。

These views are particularly common in the United States. In one survey done in Chicago a few years ago, people were asked their religion and then were asked what would happen to them when they died. Most people in the sample were Christian and about 96% of Christians said, "When I die I'm going to go to Heaven." Some of the sample was Jewish. Now, Judaism is actually a religion with a less than clear story about the afterlife. Still, most of the subjects who identified themselves as Jewish said when they die they will go to Heaven. Some of the sampled denied having any religion at all--said they have no religion at all. Still, when these people were asked what would happen when they would die, most of them answered, "I'm going to go to Heaven."

  在美国这是非常普遍的观念。在许多年以前的芝加哥的远眺,人们会被问到他们的宗教信仰以及他们死后会发生什么。大多数人是基督徒而96%的基督徒说:“当我死了我要到天堂去。”某些人是犹太人。现在,犹太教完全是一个没有关于死后生命存在的清晰的故事的。当然,所有的被当做犹太教的人说当他们死后他们会去天堂。某些样本否定有任何宗教-并且说他们没有任何宗教信仰。当然,当这些人被问到他们死后会发生什么的时候,大多数人会回答,“我会去天堂。”

So, dualism is emmeshed. A lot rests on it but, as Crick points out; the scientific consensus now is that dualism is wrong. There is no "you" separable or separate from your body. In particular, there is no "you" separable from your brain. To put it the way cognitive scientists and psychologists and neuroscientists like to put it, "the mind is what the brain does." The mind reflects the workings of the brain just like computation reflects the working of a computer. Now, why would you hold such an outrageous view? Why would you reject dualism in favor of this alternative? Well, a few reasons. One reason is dualism has always had its problems. For one thing, it's a profoundly unscientific doctrine. We want to know as curious people how children learn language, what we find attractive or unattractive, and what's the basis for mental illness. And dualism simply says, "it's all nonphysical, it's part of the ether," and hence fails to explain it.

   因此,二元论是令人困惑的。有许多是建立在其上的,正如克里克指出的,现在科学家一致指出二元论是错误的。没有一个你是独立的或者与你的身体是分离的。特别的讲,没有一个你是与你的大脑分开的。这样看待认知科学家和心理学家和神经科学家喜欢这样看待,“心灵是大脑的所为”心灵反映了大脑的工作就象计算反映了计算机的工作。现在,为什么你拥有这样一个另人惊讶的观点?为什么你拒绝二元论喜欢这种选择?当然,有一点原因。一个原因是二元论总是存在问题。第一点,这是一个深奥的非科学的教条,我们想要了解就如好奇的人想知道孩子怎样学语言,我们发现是有吸引力的或无吸引力的,什么是心理疾病的基础。二元论简单的说:“这是非物理的,这是某种空谈,”因此不能解释它。

More specifically, dualists like Descartes struggle to explain how a physical body connects to an immaterial soul. What's the conduit? How could this connection be made? After all, Descartes knew full well that there is such a connection. Your body obeys your commands. If you bang your toe or stub your toe you feel pain. If you drink alcohol it affects your reasoning, but he could only wave his hands as to how this physical thing in the world could connect to an immaterial mind.

Descartes, when he was alive, was reasonable enough concluding that physical objects cannot do certain things. He was reasonable enough in concluding, for instance, as he did, that there's no way a merely physical object could ever play a game of chess because--and that such a capacity is beyond the capacity of the physical world and hence you have to apply--you have to extend the explanation to an immaterial soul but now we know--we have what scientists call an existence proof. We know physical objects can do complicated and interesting things. We know, for instance, machines can play chess. We know machines can manipulate symbols. We know machines have limited capacities to engage in mathematical and logical reasoning, to recognize things, to do various forms of computations, and this makes it at least possible that we are such machines. So you can no longer say, "Look. Physical things just can't do that" because we know physical things can do a lot and this opens up the possibility that humans are physical things, in particular, that humans are brains.

  更具体而言,二元论者象笛卡尔试图解释一个物质身体怎样与非物质的灵魂联系在一起。是什么管道?这个联结是如何做的?毕竟,笛卡尔非常知道这确实有这样一个联结。你的身体服从你的命令。如果你敲你的脚趾或掐你的脚趾你将会感到痛苦。如果你喝酒它影响你的判断力,但是他只能摇他的手臂就像这个世界的物理事物可以和非物质的心灵相联系。笛卡尔,当他活着的时候,有足够的理智决定物质的东西不能做那样的事情。他有足够的理智包括,比如,当他做的时候,这里没有什么方法仅仅的物质身体可以玩象棋-因为这种能力已经超出了物质世界的能力因此你不得不运用-你不得不延伸对非物质的心灵的理解但是现在我们知道-我们有科学家叫做基本物质。我们知道物质目标能够做复杂和有趣的事情。我们知道,比如,机器可以下象棋。我们知道机器可以控制符号。我们知道机器有限的能力从事于数学和逻辑推理,为了认识这个事情,做不同形式的运算,这让它至少有可能说我们是这样的机器。但是你不能再说,“看。物质的东西不能够做那些。”因为我们知道物质可以做很多和这就展示了可能性就是人是物质的,特别的,就是人是大脑。

Finally, there is strong evidence that the brain is involved in mental life. Somebody who hold a--held a dualist view that said that what we do and what we decide and what we think and what we want are all have nothing to do with the physical world, would be embarrassed by the fact that the brain seems to correspond in intricate and elaborate ways to our mental life. Now, this has been known for a long time. Philosophers and psychologists knew for a long time that getting smacked in the head could change your mental faculties; that diseases like syphilis could make you deranged; that chemicals like caffeine and alcohol can affect how you think. But what's new is we can now in different ways see the direct effects of mental life.

 最后,有一个强力的证据表明大脑卷入了心理生活。某些人持有-持守一个二元论的观点就是说我们所做的和我们所决定的和我们所想的我们所需要的都没有对心理世界有任何作用,令人不安的事实是我们的心理生活似乎与错综复杂和细微的大脑联系在一起。现在,这已经被知道很久了。哲学家和心理学家很久就知道敲打头部会改变你的心理功能;梅毒等可能会使你的精神混乱;化学品象咖啡因和酒精可以影响你的思考方式。但是新鲜的是我们现在以不同的方式来看待心理生活的直接影响。

Somebody with a severe and profound loss of mental faculties--the deficit will be shown correspondingly in her brain. Studies using imaging techniques like CAT scans, PET, and fMRI, illustrate that different parts of the brain are active during different parts of mental life. For instance, the difference between seeing words, hearing words, reading words and generating words can correspond to different aspects of what part of your brain is active. To some extent, if we put you in an fMRI scanner and observed what you're doing in real time, by looking at the activity patterns in your brain we can tell whether you are thinking about music or thinking about sex. To some extent we can tell whether you're solving a moral dilemma versus something else. And this is no surprise if what we are is the workings of our physical brains, but it is extremely difficult to explain if one is a dualist.

某些人有严格和复杂的心理功能的损失-这个差别被展示为与她的大脑有关。用成像技术象cat扫描,pet,和Fmri研究,说明大脑的不同部分对大脑的不同的心理生活是不同的。比如,看,听,读,和产生文字是与你的大脑不同部分的活跃相一致的。到某种程度,如果你在Fmri扫描仪前这将发现你在真实的时间内做什么,通过看你的大脑之中不同部分的活跃我们可以告诉你你是在解决仪个道德困惑或者某些其它的东西。我们物质大脑的工作就是我们是什么这是毫无疑问的,但是要解释一个人是否是二元论者是非常困难的。

Now, so what you have is--the scientific consensus is that all of mental life including consciousness and emotions and choice and morality are the products of brain activities. So, you would expect that when you rip open the skull and look at the brain; you'd see something glorious, you'd see – I don't know – a big, shiny thing with glass tubes and blinding lights and sparks and wonderful colors. And actually though, the brain is just disgusting. It looks like an old meat loaf. It's gray when you take it out of the head. It's called gray matter but that's just because it's out of the head. Inside the head it's bright red because it's pulsing with blood. It doesn't even taste good. Well, has anybody here ever eaten brain? It's good with cream sauce but everything's good with cream sauce.

  现在,你所有的就是-科学的意见是所有的心理生活包括意识和情绪和选择和道德是大脑活动的产物。因此,你会希望当你撬开这个头骨并且看到大脑时;你可以看到某些事情是非常荣耀的,你们将看到-我不会知道-一个大的,一个有光泽的东西在玻璃试管里和炫目的光和闪亮和精彩的颜色。并且完全是那样,那个大脑是非常令人厌恶的。这就象一个老的肉面包。当你从头脑中拿出来时它是灰色的。这被叫做灰色物质但是这是仅仅在头之外的。在头脑之内它是亮红色的因为血液的流动。它的味道不那么好。当然,是否有人曾经吃过大脑?拌奶油沙司的味道不错但是每个东西拌奶油沙司都不错。

So, the question is, "How can something like this give rise to us?" And you have to have some sympathy for Descartes. There's another argument Descartes could have made that's a lot less subtle than the ones he did make, which is "That thing responsible for free will and love and consciousness? Ridiculous." What I want to do, and what the goal of neuroscience is, is to make it less ridiculous, to try to explain how the brain works, how the brain can give rise to thought, and what I want to do today is take a first stab at this question but it's something we'll continue to discuss throughout the course as we talk about different aspects of mental life. What I want to do though now is provide a big picture. So, what I want to do is start off small, with the smallest interesting part of the brain and then get bigger and bigger and bigger – talk about how the small part of the brain, the neurons, the basic building blocks of thought, combine to other mental structures and into different subparts of the brain and finally to the whole thing.

  因此,问题是,“这些东西是怎样对我们起作用的?”你也许对笛卡尔有某些同情。这里有笛卡尔引起的另一个争论这要比他做的事精细的多,这就是:“这就是人是否对自由意志和爱和意识负责?可笑的。”我所想要做的。神经科学的目标就是,让这种疯狂少一点,试图解释大脑是如何工作的,大脑是如何影响思想的,我今天所想做的是第一次刺入这个问题这就是我们这堂课要讨论的关于心理生活的面貌。我现在要做的就是提供一个巨大的图片。因此,我想要从小的地方开始,对大脑部分有最小的兴趣接着大一点,再大一点,再大一点-谈论关于大脑的很小的部分,神经,思想的最基础东西,联合到另外的心理结构并且进入大脑不同的次级部分最后得到一个完整的东西。

So, one of the discoveries of psychology is that the basic unit of the brain appears to be the neuron. The neuron is a specific sort of cell and the neuron has three major parts, as you could see illustrated here [pointing to the slide]. Neurons actually look quite different from one another but this is a typical one. There are the dendrites – these little tentacles here. And the dendrites get signals from other neurons. Now, these signals can be either excitatory, which is that they raise the likelihood the neuron will fire, or inhibitory in that they lower the likelihood that the neuron will fire. The cell body sums it up and you could view it arithmetically. The excitatory signals are pluses, the inhibitory ones are minuses. And then if you get a certain number, plus 60 or something, the neuron will fire and it fires along the axon, the thing to the right. The axon is much longer than the dendrites and, in fact, some axons are many feet long. There's an axon leading from your spinal cord to your big toe for instance. [the classroom lights accidentally go off] It is so shocking the lights go out.

  因此,心理学的一个发现就是大脑的基本单元就是神经元。神经元是一种特殊的细胞并且神经元有三个重要的部分,你可以看这个演示(指向幻灯片)。神经元通常看起来与其它的是不同的但是它是一个独特的。这就是树突-这些小的突触。树突从其它的神经元那里获得信息。现在,这些信号要么是兴奋,他们增强神经元放射的可能性,或者阻止神经元放射。这些细胞体累积起来你可以从算术的角度来看待他们。兴奋信号是增加,而阻止信号是减少。如果你获得了一个特定的数目,加60或什么的,这个神经元就会放电并且它会通过轴突释放,事情是对的。轴突比树突长得多,事实上,某些轴突有很多尺长。比如有一个轴突从你的脊髓心到你的大脚趾头。(教室里的光偶然关上了)这是令人非常惊讶的灯又亮了。

Surrounded--Surrounding--To complete a mechanical metaphor that would have led Descartes to despair--[the classroom lights turn on] Thank you. Surrounding the axon is a myelin sheath, which is actually just insulation. It helps the firing work quicker. So, here are some facts about neurons. There are a lot of them – about one thousand billion of them – and each neuron can be connected to around thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, other neurons. So, it's an extraordinarily complicated computing device. Neurons come in three flavors. There are sensory neurons, which take information from the world so as you see me, for instance, there are neurons firing from your retina sending signals to your brain. There are motor neurons. If you decide to raise your hand, those are motor neurons telling the muscles what to do. And there are interneurons which connect the two. And basically, the interneurons do the thinking. They make the connection between sensation and action.

环绕的-环绕-为了完成一个机械的隐喻这会让笛卡尔陷入绝忘-(教室里的灯打开了)。谢谢你.在轴突周围是髓翘,这仅仅是隔绝。它有助于更快的发射。当然,这里有一些关于神经的事实。这里有许多-有一百亿多-每个神经元可以数以千计和数以万计的与其它神经元联在一起。因此,这是一个非常复杂的电脑装置。神经元有三种。他们是感觉神经元,它从世界获得信息就如让你看见我,比如,从视网膜发出的神经元能够将信号送到你的大脑。这些是运动神经元。如果你决定举起你的手,这个运动神经元就会告诉你的肌肉应该做什么。这里有中间神经元链接着这两个。并且根本上,中间神经元负责思考。他们在感觉和行动之间链接。

It used to be believed, and it's the sort of thing I would--when I taught this course many years ago I would lecture on--that neurons do not grow back once you lose them. You never get them back. This is actually not true. There are parts of the brain in which neurons can re-grow.

One interesting thing about neurons is a neuron is like a gun. It either fires or it doesn't. It's all or nothing. If you squeeze the trigger of a gun really hard and really fast, it doesn't fire any faster or harder than if you just squeezed it gently. Now, this seems to be strange. Why? How could neurons be all or nothing when sensation is very graded? If somebody next to you pushed on your hand--the degree of pushing--you'd be able to notice it. It's not either pushing or not pushing. You can--Degrees of pushing, degrees of heat, degrees of brightness. And the answer is, although neurons are all or nothing, there are ways to code intensity. So, one simple way to code intensity is the number of neurons firing; the more neurons the more intense. Another way to increase intensity is the frequency of firing. So, I'll just use those two. The first one is the number of neurons firing. The second one is the frequency of firing in that something is more intense if it's "bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang" then [louder] "bang, bang, bang" and these are two ways through which neurons encode intensity.

  这是曾经的信仰,就是那种我会-当许多年前我教这门课时我会这样讲-神经元不会恢复一但你失去了他们。你永远不会恢复。这完全不是事实。大脑许多部分的神经元会再生。一个关于神经元的有趣的事情就是神经元是个象枪一样的神经元。它要么开火或不。它是全有或无。如果你真的很快很硬的抠动手枪的扳机,它不会比你轻轻抠动扳机会更快或更硬的发射。现在,这似乎是奇怪的。为什么呢?为什么神经元是全有或无而感觉是非常有层次的?如果你旁边的某人压你的手-某种程度的按压-你能够注意它。它要么压或不压。你能够-压的程度,热的程度,量的程度。这个回答是,尽管神经元是全有或无,这里有强度编码的方式。因此,一个简单的编码方式是神经元开火的数量;越多的神经元越多的紧张。另一个增加强烈的方法是开火的频率。所以,我会用这两个。第一个是神经元开火的数量。第二个是神经元开火的频率某种更加强烈感觉是“邦邦邦邦邦邦”接着(大声)“邦邦邦”而这两个方法是将神经元加强的编码。

Now, neurons are connected and they talk to one another and it used to be thought they were tied to one another like a computer, like you take wires and you connect wires to each other, you wrap them around and connect them. It turns out this isn't the case. It turns out that neurons relate to one another chemically in a kind of interesting way. Between any neurons, between the axon of one neuron and the dendrite of another, there's a tiny gap. The gap could be about one ten-thousandths of a millimeter wide. This infinitesimal gap--and this gap is known as a synapse--and what happens is when a neuron fires, an axon sends chemicals shooting through the gap. These chemicals are known as neurotransmitters and they affect the dendrites. So, neurons communicate to one another chemically. These--Again, the chemicals could excite the other neuron (excitatory) bring up the chances it will fire, or inhibit the other neuron (inhibitory).

 现在,神经元彼此连接在一起并且他们彼此互相交流以前认为他们象电脑元件那样彼此连接,就象你拿电线然后把他们彼此缠起来,你把它们包起来然后连起来。这证明不是这样。这证明以一种有趣的化学方式彼此连接。在任何神经元之间,在一个神经元轴突和另一个树突之间,这里有一个微小的裂口。这个裂口有一万分之一毫米宽,这里有一个很小的间隙。这个极微小的间隙-这个间隙被认为是一个突触-发生的就是当一个神经元开火时,一个轴突通过间隙发射化学射击。这个化学信号叫做神经元中介并且他们影响了树突。因此,神经元以化学的方式链接。这些-当然,这些化学信号能够兴奋另一个神经元(兴奋性的)给它机会带来引发,或者抑制另一个神经元(抑制性)

Now, neurotransmitters become interesting because a lot of psychopharmacology, both of the medical sort and the recreational sort, consists of fiddling with neurotransmitters and so you could see this through some examples. There are two sorts of ways you could fiddle with neurotransmitters, and correspondingly two sorts of drugs. There are agonists. And what an agonist does is increases the effect of neurotransmitters, either by making more neurotransmitters or stopping the cleanup of neurotransmitters, or in some cases by faking a neurotransmitter, by mimicking its effects. Then, there are antagonists that slow down the amount of neurotransmitters, either because they destroy neurotransmitters or they make it hard to create more. Or in some cases they go to the dendrite of the neuron and they kind of put a paste over it so that the neurotransmitters can't connect. And it's through these clever ways that neurons can affect your mental life.

现在,神经递质是有趣的因为有许多精神药物,无论是医药类还是保健类,都有点神经递质你可以从某些例子之中看到。有两种方法你可以被神经递质糊弄,与两种药物有关。这里有兴奋剂。兴奋剂的作用就是增加神经递质的影响,或者某种情况下滤过某些神经递质,通过模仿它的效果。当然,这里还有拮抗剂可以减少神经递质的数量,他们要么破坏神经递质要么让他们更难于制造更多。或者在某些例子之中他们进入神经元的树突他们涂上某类东西所以神经递质就不能联接了。通过这些聪明的方法神经元可以影响你的精神生活。

So, for instance, there is a drug known as Curare and Curare is an antagonist. It's a very particular sort of antagonist. It blocks motor neurons from affecting muscle fibers. What this does then is it paralyzes you because your motor neurons--You send the command to your arm to stand, to lift up. It doesn't work. You send the command to your leg to move. It doesn't work. The motor neurons are deactivated and then, because the way you breathe is through motor neurons, you then die.

  因此,比如,有一种箭毒的毒药箭毒是一种抗拮剂。这是一种非常普遍的抗拮剂。它的阻止了运动神经元去影响肌肉纤维。这种结果就是让你瘫痪因为你的运动神经元-你向你的手发出命令站立,起立。但它不会工作。你向你的腿发出命令去动。它也不会动。运动神经元无法起作用,接着,因为你的呼吸是通过运动神经元,接着你就死了。

There's alcohol. Alcohol is inhibitory. Now, this may be puzzling to people. It's mildly paradoxical because you may be thinking, "alcohol is not inhibitory. On the contrary, when I drink a lot of alcohol I lose my inhibitions and become a more fun person. I become more aggressive and more sexually vibrant and simply more beautiful. And so in what way is alcohol inhibitory?" Well, the answer is it inhibits the inhibitory parts of your brain. So, you have parts of your brain that are basically telling you now, largely in the frontal lobes, that are--"Okay. Keep your pants on. Don't hit me, buddy. Don't use bad words." Alcohol relaxes, shuts down those parts of the brain. If you take enough alcohol, it then goes down to inhibit the excitatory parts of your brain and then you fall on the floor and pass out.

这里有酒精。酒精是违禁品。现在,这也许是令人困惑的。这也许有点自相矛盾因为你也许想:酒精不是违禁品,相反当我喝了很多酒以后我失去了自制力并且变成了一个更有趣的人。我变得更主动并且更性感并且更美丽。所以为什么酒精是违禁品?”当然,答案是它抑制了你部分的大脑。因此,你有一部分大脑会大体上告诉你,很大部分是前面的耳垂,那就是-好的。穿上你的裤子。不要碰我,伙计。不要说脏话。”酒精释放了,关闭了部分大脑。如果你要喝足够的酒,它将继续抑制你大脑部分。如果你喝够了酒,它将抑制你大脑部分的兴奋接着你倒在地板上然后拖出去。

Amphetamines increase the amount of arousal. In particular, they increase the amount of norepinephrine, a neurotransmitter that's responsible for just general arousal. And so, amphetamines include drugs like "speed" and "coke." There are--Prozac works on serotonin. When we discuss clinical psychology and depression we'll learn the extent to which neurotransmitter disorders are implicated in certain disorders like depression. And one problem is that – for depression – is that there's too little of a neurotransmitter known as serotonin. Prozac makes serotonin more prevalent and so in some extent might help alleviate depression. Parkinson's disease is a disease involving destruction of motor control and loss of motor control, difficulty moving. And one factor in Parkinson's is too little of a neurotransmitter known as dopamine. The drug L-DOPA increases the supply of dopamine and so there is something to alleviate, at least temporarily, the symptoms of Parkinson's.

安非他命增加了兴奋的数量。特别的,他们增加了去甲肾上腺素的数量,神经递质起到了普通唤起的作用。因此,安非他命包括了可卡因和按非他命的药物。他们是-作用于血清素的百忧解。当我们讨论临床心理学的时候和我们要讨论的压抑时我们会学到神经递质的障碍与压抑这样疾病是有关的。一个问题是-压抑-就是血清素中的神经递质太少了。百忧解让血清素更多并且在某种程度上能减少压抑。帕金森病就是一种运动损坏和运动控制减少的疾病,很难行动。帕金森病的一个因素就是神经递质中的多巴胺过少的缘故。药物如 L-DOPA 增加了多巴胺的供应因此这可以使得帕金森症状某些症状减轻,至少是暂时的。

 

0

阅读 评论 收藏 转载 喜欢 打印举报/Report
  • 评论加载中,请稍候...
发评论

    发评论

    以上网友发言只代表其个人观点,不代表新浪网的观点或立场。

      

    新浪BLOG意见反馈留言板 电话:4000520066 提示音后按1键(按当地市话标准计费) 欢迎批评指正

    新浪简介 | About Sina | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站律师 | SINA English | 会员注册 | 产品答疑

    新浪公司 版权所有