3 ms·
No what the author is simply describing is that some mechanical process in the brain should not be taken as causative for some process at the level of behavior.
by Barrin92 5y ago
No what the author is simply describing is that some mechanical process in the brain should not be taken as causative for some process at the level of behavior.
All behavioral processes manifest biochemically in the brain, regardless of the complexity of the cause. It would be magical if it didn't. If the local lead company pours lead into the drinking water every single affected person has extreme levels of lead in the brain. Yet, the correct conclusion is not to blame 'lead-brains' but the ultimate cause of the pollution.
The same thing is true for dopamine and Facebook. Even if the entire explanation was as simple as 'dopamine turns you into a facebook zombie', dopamine is not actual root cause at the level of behavior (that would be the incentive design of the social platform), dopamine is just a proximate agent.
people who buy into these simplistic explanations are actually the ones who engage in a body / mind fallacy. Anything that impacts behavior, regardless of how remote in nature, manifests in the brain, precisely because you are your brain, not despite of it.
- richardatlarge 5y agoI think this is exactly right. To reduce love to dopamine says it all. No experience lacks a neurochemical underpinning so any correlation needs further evidence of causation. One interesting animal study showed that the dopamine effects of cocaine occurred in different brain areas depending on whether it was experimenter administered or self administered. It’s all highly ecological and focusing on a NT is a cheap way to turn all human experience into a video game