Making sense of feelings.

IF 3.1 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL
Neuroscience of Consciousness Pub Date : 2024-09-19 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1093/nc/niae034
Brian Key, Deborah J Brown
{"title":"Making sense of feelings.","authors":"Brian Key, Deborah J Brown","doi":"10.1093/nc/niae034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Internal feeling states such as pain, hunger, and thirst are widely assumed to be drivers of behaviours essential for homeostasis and animal survival. Call this the 'causal assumption'. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the causal assumption is incompatible with the standard view of motor action in neuroscience. While there is a well-known explanatory gap between neural activity and feelings, there is also a disjuncture in the reverse direction-what role, if any, do feelings play in animals if not to cause behaviour? To deny that feelings cause behaviours might thus seem to presage epiphenomenalism-the idea that subjective experiences, including feelings, are inert, emergent and, on some views, non-physical properties of brain processes. Since epiphenomenalism is antagonistic to fundamental commitments of evolutionary biology, the view developed here challenges the standard view about the function of feelings without denying that feelings have a function. Instead, we introduce the 'sense making sense' hypothesis-the idea that the function of subjective experience is not to cause behaviour, but to explain, in a restricted but still useful sense of 'explanation'. A plausible framework is derived that integrates commonly accepted neural computations to blend motor control, feelings, and explanatory processes to make sense of the way feelings are integrated into our sense of how and why we do and what we do.</p>","PeriodicalId":52242,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience of Consciousness","volume":"2024 1","pages":"niae034"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11412240/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience of Consciousness","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/niae034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Internal feeling states such as pain, hunger, and thirst are widely assumed to be drivers of behaviours essential for homeostasis and animal survival. Call this the 'causal assumption'. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the causal assumption is incompatible with the standard view of motor action in neuroscience. While there is a well-known explanatory gap between neural activity and feelings, there is also a disjuncture in the reverse direction-what role, if any, do feelings play in animals if not to cause behaviour? To deny that feelings cause behaviours might thus seem to presage epiphenomenalism-the idea that subjective experiences, including feelings, are inert, emergent and, on some views, non-physical properties of brain processes. Since epiphenomenalism is antagonistic to fundamental commitments of evolutionary biology, the view developed here challenges the standard view about the function of feelings without denying that feelings have a function. Instead, we introduce the 'sense making sense' hypothesis-the idea that the function of subjective experience is not to cause behaviour, but to explain, in a restricted but still useful sense of 'explanation'. A plausible framework is derived that integrates commonly accepted neural computations to blend motor control, feelings, and explanatory processes to make sense of the way feelings are integrated into our sense of how and why we do and what we do.

感同身受。
人们普遍认为,疼痛、饥饿和口渴等内部感觉状态是维持体内平衡和动物生存所必需的行为的驱动力。这就是 "因果假设"。越来越明显的是,因果假设与神经科学中关于运动动作的标准观点是不相容的。虽然神经活动与感觉之间存在众所周知的解释性差距,但反过来也存在差距--如果感觉不导致行为,那么它在动物中扮演什么角色?因此,否认感觉导致行为似乎预示着表象主义(epiphenomenalism)--认为包括感觉在内的主观体验是惰性的、突现的,而且在某些观点中,是大脑过程的非物理属性。由于表象主义与进化生物学的基本承诺背道而驰,本文提出的观点挑战了关于感觉功能的标准观点,但并不否认感觉具有某种功能。相反,我们提出了 "感觉创造意义 "假说--即主观体验的功能不是导致行为,而是解释,虽然 "解释 "的意义有限,但仍然有用。我们提出了一个合理的框架,它整合了普遍接受的神经计算,将运动控制、感受和解释过程融合在一起,从而使感受融入我们对如何以及为什么做和做什么的感觉中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuroscience of Consciousness
Neuroscience of Consciousness Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
16
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信