Hello again, my empty space of absent readers. If there's any hope of me ever shutting up before August, we'd best find me a job.
Anywhoozle, I said I'd talk about finding morality without religion, so here goes:
I operate on what I've affectionately labeled "The Empathy Principle."
Mirror Neurons
A new and stunning area of research in neuroscience deals with cells called mirror neurons. Primarily, it is believed that these cells are responsible for action learning, as well as language acquisition. These neurons are essentially the "monkey see, monkey do" of the brain. Sort of (too much of the brain's adaptive mechanisms are devoted to learning that such a function can be attributed to a single type of cell found only in certain regions of the brain).
Anyway, in neuroimaging studies, they've found that these neurons not only activate during learning processes, but when we experience and witness emotions. In one study, people who were determined "more empathetic" (via self-report questionnaire) showed greater activation of mirror neurons when they witnessed emotions. It is possible that these strange little neurons are at least partially responsible for empathy. I see some one crying, my mirror neurons activate and I feel a slice of their pain without knowing what made them cry. I feel empathy and want to stop their pain, which I am feeling too. On the other end of the spectrum, ever wondered why they say laughter is contagious? Thank your mirror neurons and enjoy the experience; laughter is a healthy activity for the body.
Interestingly, mirror neurons also play a part in sociopathy (or rather, they were never cast at all). Further, many researchers believe mirror neurons to be another piece to the puzzle that is autism. (This is not to say autism and sociopathy have any link at all, only a common factor with very different implications and results). There you have it: a run-down of mirror neurons, unfit for wikipedia.
Sociopathy
Sociopathy is a relatively rare phenomenon that is often rather poorly understood. Ironically, this strange phenomenon was also one of the things that lead me to my current moral understanding.
Picture yourself as an empathetic being, sometimes wracked with guilt. Now imagine that sensation has an off-switch. This is the core of sociopathy. In terms of mirror neurons, the theory is that sociopaths simply bypass them. They utilize the language-related areas without using the emotion. The misconception arises when people like Ted Bundy hit the scene. Why do you think he was possibly the greatest liar that has ever lived? Speech with literally no emotion. After Ted Bundy gained popularity for savagely killing over thirty women, people got the wrong idea that sociopaths are violent, uncontrollable deviants.
The fact is, they have an exceptional level of control. Ted Bundy and others like him are red herrings because they had total control in social situations, but an insatiable need to kill. In the more garden-variety sociopaths, this is not the case. A true sociopath understands social rules and adheres to them at will, but is not constrained by guilt or active remorse. The reality is that sociopaths comprise an estimated 1% of the population and make exceptional C.E.O.s because of their unrivaled abilities in "climbing the ladder." I'd wager there's an unusual number of sociopaths sitting on Wall Street.
The Empathy Principle
So how does all of this relate to morality? For me, it IS morality. Initially, I saw no difference between a life without religion and a life as a willful sociopath. I think it is this way for many people because religion is their basis for morality. The fact is, I looked at the research behind sociopathy and knew there had to be something more, something that made it worth it to be one of the other 99%. I saw in myself that I was still something more, even without religion. I still felt the pain of others and my desire to go on a killing spree was still at absolute zero. There is something that makes me moral and I believe it starts with the mirror neurons. I adopted the Buddhist code of "do no harm" and set to work figuring out why I should have morals if I don't even believe in good and evil.
I do not harm others because I do not wish to be harmed. Who would have thought this ramble would come down to that obnoxious Golden Rule they teach you in elementary school? It's true though, I got to that annoying "treat others the way you want to be treated" line by pure accident.
I understand the physical pain of being hit, so I don't hit people unless I have to defend myself.
I value my life and the people in it, so I assume others do as well. Good reason not to kill people.
This system makes sense to me, and rather than suggesting we all live by a uniform code of action, it is only a uniform code of principle. This is because it introduces what is essentially a system of weights and measures. Here's a bad example:
If I'm being mugged, yes it will (hopefully) hurt him if I punch my mugger. In this case, my need to get out of the situation and be safe again far outweighs the pain he will feel when I attempt to break his nose.
My morality simply adheres to Newton's third law of motion: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Whatever action my mugger takes to get me into that situation initiates a reaction strong enough to get me out of that situation (or if I throw a weak punch, a reaction that will sue him for my medical bills).
The "Empathy Principle" is my balance of emotion and reason, my belief that there can be, not just peace, but happiness in a reason-filled world. It just passivity; I believe it can also trigger action. I see pain and do what I can to end it, helping me to become more charitable, more earnest and more friendly. For me, the Empathy Principle is a greater good than my ethical religious code because it literally makes us all equal and it is internal. It is a morality that comes from within, meaning I am choosing to be a better person. I am choosing to help others, rather than being told that I should.
Edit: I wanted to add something that I find to be unfortunately reminiscent of what Bill Maher has to say (Maher is one of those people who I consider to be "a necessary asshole"). The idea that there can be no morality without religion is fundamentally flawed because it behaves as an admission that one is moral because of a system of punishments and rewards. How is being "good" (a rather arbitrary term, in my opinion) in order to enter Heaven so much better than being "good" for innate or empathetic reasons. I propose that "morality" without religion is truly moral (pardon the redundancy, but I need it to make a point). The system of reward and punishment which religion advocates is no different than a behavior lab in which I trained a rat. Being "good" so you'll go to Heaven is hardly different than pressing a lever in order to receive food. It is my belief that this religionless morality allows for a moral person, not simply a moral life.
N.D.
No comments:
Post a Comment