Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Neuroscience Determining The Validity of Determinism
Neuroscience Determining The Validity of Determinism
Neuroscience Determining The Validity of Determinism
Stoicism, Contemporary.
Abstract
Contemporary philosophy has been starved with respect to being reconciled with
operationalization of external stimuli into encoded action potentials being translated into
potentiation of neuropil, Kant’s capstone of the Modern era with position that the mind
proving valid with the development of science, the opportunity for philosophy to catch up
to the unrealized potential of the ocean of scientific developments and capabilities the
contemporary scene swims in. This reality looms especially with respect to the topic of
society. The work ahead attempts to reconcile contemporary neuroscience with three
major consequences of determinism: “Is there such thing as a free act?” “Are we
condemned to be free?” “Is there such thing as a free will?” Taking a materialistic
hermeneutic, the discussion explores these topics and the consequences of determinism in
light of choice, rehabilitation, and health disorders and how they endure in contrast with
out what his role is in the universe. The ancient philosophers began the process of philosophizing
as they tried to understand the bare elements of the universe, what the nature of the human
person was, and wondering how to find the truth more fully. This epoch was followed by the
medieval philosophers that began to understand the world Christo-centrically and how God could
be understood as the way to find the truth through imitating what God would be like. Modern
philosophy would follow this and begin turning the focus to an anthropocentric model and
realizing that man is able to do many things formerly purported to be limited to God’s level,
made more pronounced with the abundance of sciences and deeper understanding of the
elements of the world. After this tilt the contemporary scene began to face the consequences of
life and finding meaning in the world after the death of God as both a mode of operation and as
grounds for philosophy, for the horrors of the Second World War have helped humankind realize
that they had to face the consequences of having lived as though there was no God.
Today’s world is still lingering in the wake of contemporary philosophy without God,
sitting in a stupor surrounded by so much technology and scientific advancement but remaining
directionless. However, with all of the progress the world has made in STEM-based fields, it
might be time for a technocentric reorientation of philosophical effort in order to help man find
more of himself among this world, as is the typical approach of any existential philosophy. The
world of philosophy might even be able to be aided with how far science has come. In fact, the
realm of philosophy is malnourished with the unrealized potential of how far science has come.
The discussion hereafter is attempting to reconcile philosophy of choice with the advances that
sciences have made. Science has been able to venture into the uncharted territories of realities
is the focus of analytic philosophy, a term is like a problem: it must first be properly defined and
dissolved before being able to move on to solve it. Voluntarism is known as the principle of
seeing actions as freely chosen and not being predetermined or forced, which would be
rational animal and to have a free will, whether one subscribes to theological implications or not.
It is with voluntarism that many systems of operation are based upon in the world, for the justice
system would be devoid of its power if criminals were determined to commit their crimes. Going
into further ramifications in the realm of faith, determinism would render the sacrament of
reconciliation from such a foundational part of the Church to be admitting imminent actions.
With voluntarism being formally defined, one should next explore the history of the
philosophical discussion of choice. As far back as the ancients, Plato discussed it possible to rise
above the impulses of the flesh and order oneself to ponder the forms, the real structures of
reality beyond this corporeal realm. The Stoics would later discuss in ancient philosophy the
notion of not being able to control anything but one’s assent to the bodily impressions and urges
that one is met with. Frankly, they held that one cannot even control being able to cross the street
as they cannot control the world and external influences that might stop them: they can only
control their assent to the desire to cross the street. Later in contemporary philosophy, Jean Paul
Sartre would come to see the human person as his famously quoted line: “condemned to be free.”
Sartre would understand that the human person has two parts that are essential to their being:
freedom and nothingness, which are codependent on each other. Freedom is understood in the
classical sense as being able to choose to freely do and be whatever one desires without any
impediment. Nothingness on the other hand is an understanding of things’ essence via negation.
This is understood in his famous example of walking into the café and not finding his friend,
Pierre, in the establishment. Wherever he looks for Pierre, there is an expectation of Pierre’s
presence or being, but upon looking in an area for a potential location that Pierre could be, that
area is instantly negated by Sartre. So freedom depends on negativity as there must be nothing
holding man back from actualizing more of himself, otherwise he would be fully actualized.
Then negativity depends on freedom as one must be free in thought to be able to think in
When considering the various influences that one is met with when they are making a
choice, there are countless factors to take in. These factors could classify as internal, external, or
even supernatural if one allows the possibility of spiritual dimension. One would classify
external factors as the idols of the cave, as the modern philosopher Francis Bacon would affirm
(Klein et al., 2020), or the element of nurture as psychologists would define them. These could
be the surroundings or anything beyond what a person could control whilst growing up, such as a
of nationalism. These external influences relatively normalize one’s actions if they are in accord
to their society’s normative measures. One should rightfully try to purge themselves of biases if
they want to strive for the truth, for these external influences blind one to the truth and hug
people closely to the point where one might not be able to realize that they are biased. To
analogize this to psychology, it would be as if to say that one might not realize that they have a
problem with themselves or that they are addicted. Such can be seen in the example where
certain actions are seen as addictions in the United States, like alcohol or sex, while it might be
normalized or culturally accepted in other countries like Japan or Brazil. To analogize it in
theological terms, these biases are forms of pride that blind one to the true nature or noumena of
a reality. What one might call self-confidence and assertiveness might be viewed as conceited
and cocky by another, for people do not typically consider themselves as having these negative
qualities. It is instead with the view of another person that meets them as an antithesis and opens
their eyes to help them realize how they are being perceived and helps them through their pride
to see the reality of who they are and consequences of their actions. With these biases in mind,
this paper will explore the realities facing one’s choice in a classic Hegelian dialectic structure
from a neuropsychological standpoint faced with the realities that philosophy poses and try to
Before imploring heavily into neuroscience, one should first map out the structure of the
topic provided by philosophy. Such is the focus of analytic philosophy to explore the nature of
words, most accurately describe a reality with language, and to dissolve the problem first before
solving it. To begin, one should put forth the two contrary views on choice in philosophy:
determinism versus voluntarism. Beginning with the former, one should appreciate the
etymology of determinism. The Latin prefix de- indicates ‘completely’ whilst terminare means
to terminate or finish. So, taking both with the common suffix -ism, which means the idea or
practice of a thing, this would mean the practice of things being completely finished or
terminated. Determinism is an idea in philosophy that holds that things are not free to act the way
in which they would want. Formally put, it is “the idea that every event is necessitated by
antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature” (Hoefer, 2016). Examples of
this would be insects and animals acting out of instinct and basing their actions on pleasures, the
determined nature of the interactions of the universe contained in theorems, postulates, patterns,
and other fixed phenomena of the world, or even reducing the human nature to being limited in
their choices and what they could maximally achieve based on their epigenetic factors. These
epigenetic factors would be accounted for in the dualistic perspectives on the human being where
it is nature mixed with nurture, or genes and environment to take a more biological language.
If determinism is to be held in the analysis of the human person, then this would mean
that the human person is limited in their choices. The human is limited to certain possible
outcomes of choice because of their genetic makeup and their upbringing in determinism, and it
also would mean that the human is fixed to be a particular essence. This leaves no room for the
human person to have choice or to be anything more than what their epigenetic makeup is, which
has many consequences. If there were to be a person that wanted to get over an addiction, the
person would not be able to do anything for themselves. They would be condemned and limited
with their own epigenetic makeup as an explanation and a limitation to their recovery: they
would not be able to cure themselves of their addiction. The gravity of determinism would also
be understood in contexts of culpability. Take the scenario of a crime committed: the murderer
would be able to tell the cops and the jury that he was not responsible for his actions. He would
argue that his limbic system was at fault as was his upbringing, as he could not have done or
known any better than to relieve his anger in any other way than violence. This would allow
people to get away without any punishment as they would point the blame to something
inanimate and something that cannot help or defend itself. This would be analogically blaming
the gun instead of the carrier, and it would be deleterious to society if choice and thereby fault
Next, one should take an appreciation to the opposite view of voluntarism. The
etymology of voluntarism can shine light on the meaning of the philosophical view: voluntas
means ‘will’ or ‘of one’s free will’ also having relation to velle which means ‘to wish’ (Harper,
2021), so it would be the idea or practice of willing something as one would desire. Such is not
far off from voluntarist philosophers that hold that one can will whatever they would want and of
their own control. Formally put, voluntarism is “the principle or system of doing something by
or relying on voluntary action… that conceives will to be the dominant factor in experience or
in the world” (Merriam-Webster, 2021). This view is held often by those that posit the notion of
a free will, and this is favorable for those that argue for the existence of a soul as the soul has
been held as a free, life-giving principle that people identify their true identity with. This soul has
been often posited to be an immaterial existence, though some exceptions have posited a material
existence (Konstan, 2018), but it has been supported often by the notion of a free will that people
The consequences of voluntarism should then be drawn. Voluntarism would admit that
all of the actions that one commits are done so freely and as products of their own willing it. This
places all of the culpability of one’s actions on their choosing it. The person that committed
crime but was born and raised to only learn and know how to get by in the world by criminal
actions would have no excuse for their crime. It does not matter as to what circumstances or
background one has, for the fact that one is found as the source of the committed act is all a
voluntarist would need to know in order to indict them. Morality would of course hinge on one’s
willing it, in contrast to determinists seeing that one’s epigenetic factors being able to produce
the instances of moral actions. Further, if one wants to do anything they would wish, they could
ideally choose between any two choices that are offered before them. This is understood in the
terms of classical Aristotelian logic as the disjunction of choice between X and not-X. The purest
reason for making a choice. Quite literally, the person casts away reason itself in order to choose
as they are fighting for sheer freedom itself (Pinckaers, 1995). There is an irony to this however,
for they cut away all their ties to extraneous reasons or motivators for choosing yet they must be
anchored down to the one motive of fighting for freedom itself. The potency of unadulterated
choice would indicate that they are entirely free to choose whether or not to do something.
those that posit existence precedes essence, people are not as freely willing to do anything they
would want (Flynn, 2013). Not intending to point out the obvious, one must acknowledge there
are physical limitations to the universe. A radical example would evidently be that a human
cannot fly like a bird, for their bodies are denser than birds. Or a less extreme example would be
if a person who is lactose intolerant is faced with the choice of having cheese or not having
cheese on their sandwich, they would naturally be inclined to decline the option so long as they
had previous knowledge of their own allergy. These examples call upon the necessity for
determined and fixed limitations on the human person and what they can so choose. So there
seems to be a middle area that humans operate in between, that of the deterministic limitations
and mechanisms of the physical universe and the rational aspect of the human that can so will to
do what they want. To cop off of Nietzsche, the human seems to be a rope suspended between a
determined animal and a rational being able to will and choose (Nietzsche, 1883).
Now that the problem between the conflicting philosophies on choice has been shown,
this calls on the subordinate sciences to explicate this reality. In a neuroscience experiment by
Dr. John-Dylan Haynes, he found that the brain makes a choice before the person consciously
performs it (Smith, 2008). He subjected participants to an isolated and idle situation where the
participants were in a room and asked to press a button when they wanted to. There would be
one button per hand, but while this happened a series of letters were displayed on a screen every
half second and the participants had to remember the letter that was displayed when they decided
to press the button. Haynes used an electroencephalogram (EEG) to measure the cortical activity
surrounding the choice, and he found that he could predict when the participants would make the
choice up to ten seconds before making the conscious decision. The region that elicited the
predictive measure was the frontopolar cortex in the region of the brain behind the forehead.
Another neuroscientist, Dr. Benjamin Libet, furthered the work done by Haynes. He used
a similar setup but used one button instead of two, and he was able to find predictive activity in
the regions responsible for movement within a few hundred milliseconds before the executed
decision. These experiments have not been without criticism, for some have argued there is no
free will as the neurons will be firing ahead of the person anyways. Others have offered that the
brain might merely be priming itself in anticipation of the movement. However, the fact that the
neurons have anticipatory firing before a decision is still noteworthy, for it shows that there is a
preparation for executing the choice. This draws the logical disjunction back out, for the neurons
seemingly prime themselves to fire the X option or are inhibited to choose the non-X option. In
most cases of neurons throughout the body, the X option can be understood by excitatory
dopaminergic (DOPA) neurons to bring neurons closer to threshold for launching the X option
for launching action potentials. The non-X option could then be operationalized by gamma
aminobutyric acid (GABA) or glycine neurons which would act as the executive inhibitory
neurons responsible for taking the neuron away from threshold. There are of course other
instances in which GABA could actually be excitatory or conversely DOPA that would act as an
inhibitory neurotransmitter, so the point would stand that excitatory neurons would stand as the
priming for the X option and inhibitory for non-X. It would seem, at the most basic level, that a
collection of the inhibitory and excitatory neurons surrounding and monitoring a neuron at its
soma and hillock collectively provide operational faculties for the will to choose.
One might ask then about unintentional actions. “Could forced or unintentional actions
really be accounted for by the will?”, one might wonder. Especially in light of classical
Aristotelian thought on the will described in depth throughout his work the Nicomachean Ethics
(Kraut, 2018), if one is physically forced to do something then they are not culpable for their
acts. Such an example would be seen in the situation of a direct mechanical force pushing
someone to bump into another, but that is an instance where the force is external to the person.
One should ask if this case would serve for an internal force. There is the obvious case of Alien
Hand Syndrome (AHS) where a person suffers involuntary movements not caused by motor
dysfunction. The syndrome was coined after a doctor found a few patients with corpus callosum
(CC) tumors that could not recognize their own hand. The onset of this disorder is due to
pathologies like stroke, parietal lobe or corpus callosum damage, or neurodegeneration typical to
that of the basal ganglia, and patients exhibit it more when a “patient is fatigued, stress, or has
divided attention between concurrent activities.” (Le et al., 2020). This disorder turns one’s own
body against them as some have even reported to have slapped themselves or rebelled against
their own intended course of action. In the aforementioned article, there was an older man that
woke up to his hand slapping himself. After a few visits, the doctors found that the patient’s right
parietal subcortex, right parietal cortex, and right temporal lobe had damage on them. The
parietal region is mostly responsible for “sensory, visuospatial, visual, and language function”
(Dziedzic et al., 2021) while the temporal lobe is accountable for producing and perceiving
speech, auditory and social processes, and even visuospatial information (Patel et al., 2021). If
one is reviewing the symptoms of the disorder, they can reconcile the lack of control of one’s
own limb with lacking the recognition thereof with the affected regions listed in the case report
of that patient. It would sound rather reductionistic to simplify the phenomenon of AHS to
merely the areas responsible for the symptoms, but it serves as a helpful roadmap for diagnosing
With that example in mind, one should turn towards Tourette’s Syndrome, another
syndromes” which are typically “brief, meaningless movements, often involving a single muscle
group” (Albin, 2018). Patients with the disorder have been hypothesized to have dysfunctional
basal ganglia, aberrant DOPAergic activity, or even impairments in the social decision-making
network. These neurobiological underpinnings have been targeted for therapies to ameliorate the
tics’ severity and frequency, however, it has been reported that the “Tics can typically be
suppressed temporarily with conscious effort… patients concentrating intently on a task often
disorder then, but one afflicted with the disorder would not be conscious of their tics or see them
as a difficulty.
With these disorders put forth, one returns to the question as to whether patients afflicted
with either disorder can be held accountable for their actions. In each instance, the patients are
technically the producers of their actions in a materialist view, so determinists would consider
them as bound to be stuck with their disorder as long as there is no external influence.
Determinists would be bound to the scientific interventions in the treating of those disorders as
they would exclude the willing of one’s self-improvement. For AHS, determinists would isolate
the brain regions supporting the exhibited symptoms like the temporal and parietal lobes. Then
for Tourette’s syndrome, determinists would target the overactive regions of the brain with
DOPAergic inhibitory drugs. This stands as the advantage of the determinist view: they use the
definite and scientifically based theorems, equations, principles, and bodies of study to be able to
diagnose, isolate, and treat diseases at the level of the specific regions established to account for
This triumph of determinism cannot be had without any opposition, however. In the
voluntarist view, one can allow room for the will to come into the scene. As was seen explicitly
less tics. Another treatment was to put forth concerted effort to consciously avoid less incidences
of exhibited tics, so determinism would seem to pale in comparison for intentional self-
improvement. Of course, determinism would still be able to wave the finger at voluntarism about
the fact that the person would still be afflicted with the disorder for their whole life, but
voluntarism can fight back at least and show that people can want to get better. Voluntarism is
therefore embodied in the adage of leading the horse to water or for helping addicts to get better:
one must insert their will and assent to the notion before they can ever make progress on it.
Similarly, one must want to get better or have a reason to do so, otherwise they would not
willingly choose to get treatment nor would they cooperate with it. There would have to be a
greater reason for someone to do something unnatural and against their natural inclinations.
Speaking of these inclinations, research has found that there are biases contained in one’s
body that would impact one’s actions. Coined by the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio, the
somatic marker hypothesis (SMH) was formed on the findings of biomarkers and particular
biorhythms predisposing one to be inclined towards actions that would sustain or satisfy those
bodily dispositions (Olsen et al., 2015). The hypothesis was supported by the observation of
altered biochemical levels contained in the frontal cortex and throughout the body would
correlate to altered decision making, deficits in learning, and practical obliviousness to future
outcomes. All of these symptoms are exhibited by those with lesions of the frontal cortex. The
frontal lobe is generally understood to be involved with higher order processes, such as forward
thinking, personality, social and cognitive functions, and fluid intelligence. The prefrontal cortex
(PFC) is a more defined area of the frontal lobe and it has been heavily implicated in the
executive functions like “planning, monitoring, energizing, switching and inhibition” (Roca et
al., 2010). These areas taken together would be prime examples for understanding choice areas
With a basic understanding of the functions of these areas, the SMH would understand
that altered levels of biochemicals in these areas would result in altered behavior. Consider the
example of low DOPAergic firing or presence in the frontal lobe: if the person were to be asked
to choose what to wear or give feedback on the quality of a service, like the waiter of a restaurant
or judging one’s presentation, they would be met with difficulties in making judgments on the
matter. The person would be willingly trying to place judgment, but they would have imprecise
and erred feelings and elaboration. Especially considering elaboration, the body might be
indicating to the person that they want or should be strongly attracted to a stimulus when in
reality they might morally disagree with it and have difficulties overriding their body’s natural
and healthy response. Another example is when sexual attractions are elicited through, say, a
visual stimulus: the secretion of sex hormones into the blood stream would affect the person not
only systemically but also mentally. No matter what the person does, the hormones will be
rushing through their system and reach the brain, activating the amygdala, the classic fight or
flight and emotional association region, and the pituitary gland, a part responsible for hormonal
production. Then, a positive feedback cycle will begin where a signal will be sent back down to
the reproductive organs which will send responses back to the brain, and so on until one is
This example should be explored further, for there is significant content to be unpackaged
in this. Humans have survived thus far in the history of the universe only due to the evolutionary
advantage of having critical windows for learning key skills and abilities for survival. These
critical windows correspond to certain brain states and levels of hormonal production. The
former example can be seen in the example of a newborn that has an abundance of neural matter
or neuropil for learning which synapses to keep and potentiate and which synapses to prune and
that are inopportune for survival and daily life. Then there is the latter example of hormonal
production where a prepubescent boy entering into puberty: the boy has a release of testosterone
and androgens which result in “an exponential increase in germ cell production and testicular
size” (Pryor et al., 2000). This is followed by a series of random erections and sexual hormones
released into the blood steam that match up with critical windows of visual development and
such is basis for learned sexual attraction with visual stimuli. A similar case goes for puberty for
girls as “estrogen and progesterone treatment of prepubertal mice induces… a hallmark of the
columns in primary visual cortex” (Sisk, 2017). It is a learned behavior that is evolutionarily
advantageous to humans that would not only set up the reproductive system but also to attract
This is an advantage to determinists as they can see that it is natural and healthy for one
would not learn the skills and activities crucial to survive. In fact, in the case of the lack of
synaptic pruning and potentiation, neurologists are able to identify that an abundance of
undeveloped neuropil has often coincided with deficits found in Autism Spectrum Disorder
(ASD) (Varghese et al., 2017). Then if the case of delayed or hindered puberty-related critical
windows, it would delay the person’s growth and sexual development which would have
musculature, and have delayed reproduction. If humans were to have delayed reproduction as an
evolutionary trend, then there would have been less humans as they would have not reproduced
Considering these critical windows and how they are, as contained in their name, critical
for the wellbeing and health of humans, it seems that one must cede that the windows are
determined to happen. There is not much that a person can do about the critical windows, for
they are bound to happen due to genetic coding. It is not like one can voluntarily keep on taking
ice baths in order to prevent the progress of puberty and physical development, nor can one
accelerate it___? It would only seem natural to each person and be healthier for them to accept
these determined physiological mechanisms, otherwise if one were to try to hinder the inevitable
they might do more damage to themselves in the long run. Such can be exemplified in
adolescents with body dysmorphia that try to starve or purge themselves in order to achieve what
they see as desirable. In so doing, however, they often deprive themselves of crucial nutrients
and lead themselves onto a vicious cycle between a damaged or interrupted gut microbiome,
known as dysbiosis, and mental health disorders like anorexia. One should accept themselves for
their body and the gifts therein, and strive for what Christian ethicists would term as “freedom
for excellence” (Pinckaers, ibid). This freedom for excellence is understood as opposed to the
aforementioned freedom of indifference, for instead of trying to rebel and be truly free from all
ties but that of the sake of being free, one rather accepts the constraints, laws, gifts, and
limitations put forth before them. It is with all of these that one can see them as a gift and discern
This voluntary freedom for excellence can be better understood in the situation of Leslie
Lemke. Leslie was a baby given up for adoption because he had retinopathy and various other
ailments. His eyes were surgically removed due to the retinopathy, and doctors had only
expected Leslie to live a few months after birth. However, May Lemke decided to adopt Leslie
and ironically chose to be “determined that Leslie would live” (Treffert, 2021). According to a
documentary which even more ironically is called “The Woman Who Willed a Miracle,” May
cared for Leslie, walked with him, helped him hold his fork for meals, and tried to improve his
life. This was an uphill battle for both May and Leslie as “Leslie grew up blind and cognitively
disabled” and still “has spasticity in his hands” (Treffert, ibid.), but one night May woke up to
hearing the playing of a piano and wondered if she had left the television on. She came down and
heard him playing music, though he had never successfully played the piano before (YouTube).
From then on Leslie has since been able to repeat the songs he hears not only by playing the
piano but also in singing. This rare phenomenon is known as echolalia, the perfect repetition of a
sound perceived. Leslie is a modern miracle, a savant, one that went against all odds. This is
especially of interest as the advocacy for voluntarism emerges from the ashes as not only May
but Leslie chose to actualize Leslie’s own potential. For a child that was considered almost
vegetative, May and Leslie both used the constraints and difficulties Leslie faced and helped him
actualize his freedom for excellence in an act of will. It was will on May’s side to be intentional
to keep believing in Leslie and helping him, while it was will for Leslie to cooperate with May.
From this should one return to the SMH and realize that there might be predispositions
for a freedom for excellence in somatic markers. These somatic markers might be seen as
determined to incline one to do certain acts; take anxiety for example: researchers have found at
the level of blood serum that precipitates and systemic products of the anxiogenic drug
yohimbine cause one to have more anxiety (Le-Niculescu et al., 2011). Further, they have found
at the cellular level that an increase of the adenosine receptor ADORA2A and the GABA
anxiety to stressors and other provoking stimuli. A similar case is held with emotion, for
“Regulation of emotion is inseparable from the ability to regulate physiological state” (Pace-
Schott et al., 2019). An example of this is the vagus nerve which sends out efferent signals to
modulate the visceral activity in response to stress. So, whether a person can help it, their nerves
activity when anxious or saddened. With this, one can see that it is determined that the body will
carry on these activities, yet a person does not need to view them as constraints or impingements
upon the will. Instead, one can see that as a freedom for excellence to be able to have a
debilitating. Similarly, one could see the abilities of the vagus nerve as a way to provide for
one’s excellence with the visceral suppression providing for self-preservation or the visceral
body as a mode for freedom for excellence. The flooding of emotion throughout the body could
be mapped through somatic markers and used to understand what one is going through and
capable of doing through interacting with the cortisol from the body’s stress response. Beautiful
acts of love and good will can be offered with the amount of oxytocin that is given in
experiences of emotional and physical contact. Animals operate similarly to humans as well, for
both can perceive the pheromones given off by another creature to sense if the other is hostile,
saddened, sexually available, and so on. An example of this can be seen in zebrafish subjected to
an environment with pheromones of anxiety present, causing them anxiogenic outcomes (Egan et
al., 2009). These physiological mechanisms could then be said to have evolutionarily evolved in
order to provide for more survivability and physical emotional perception in creatures, for in the
example of the zebrafish they are able to sense that something alarmed other fish in the
environment. They could sense their anxiety pheromones, though they couldn’t perceive a
Now, just because the physiological mechanisms are present does not mean one should
take refuge with the determinists. Consider the example of alcohol: the substance is a depressant
that people often abuse in order to induce the effects of lowered inhibitions, loss of balance, and
dysregulation of emotion among other effects. Heavy abuse of alcohol can cause a deficiency in
serotonin, which is involved in sleep regulation, and lead to substance use disorders due to
dependency and withdrawal or even depressive disorders as the machinery that underlies the
desired effects also gets abused (McHugh & Weiss, 2019). It is known as a phenomenon called
synaptic depression, where the neurons involved in the feelings or effects experienced through
the abuse of a substance lose their natural ability to produce the substance naturally. The neurons
realize that the repeated activity of synthetically introduced neurotransmitters renders it no
neurotransmitters ensues. This also coincides with the high demand placed on the neuron sending
the signal to keep on releasing more of the neurotransmitter for the receiving neuron to use, so
with such a high stimulation and demand on the sending neuron this synaptic depression occurs
and causes a similar effect. Similar cases can be seen in other abuses of substances, like the
nicotine in smoking causing difficulties in blood pressure and anxiogenic effects (Oakes et al.
2018), the cannabinoid in marijuana causing impaired reward seeking behaviors, depression,
shakiness, headaches and anxiety (Zehra et al., 2018), or even video games altering the serotonin
production due to overuse of DOPAergic neurons (Gros et al., 2020). Just because the
mechanisms are there for allowing one to do something, does not mean they should repeat doing
it, much to the dismay of the determinists. This is simply because it would not provide for as
great of a quality of life (QOL). A person, having severely depressed their neurons will no longer
be able to activate or elicit the same response let alone with the same intensity. This places a
demand for respecting the deterministic machinery in order to at least be able to have great QOL
With this great schema explored of the deterministic machinery, it is worth noting that
the machinery is needed for at least conducting day-to-day activities. It would be valuable to
explore the situation of marijuana further in detail. Consider that one of the effects after long-
term marijuana and cannabinoid abuse is impaired decision making and considering of pleasure-
seeking behaviors. This would be damaging to the prefrontal cortex in its decision-making ability
as the person would be biased, due to somatic markers, to choose something that has a more
favorable outcome that would provide a greater pleasure response. Similarly, would the caudate
nucleus be impacted, for it is involved in threshold control of positive feedback cycles, learning,
and goal-oriented actions that calculate a favorable outcome of an activity. Damage or synaptic
depression of the caudate nucleus would then hinger one’s association between the activity and
the feedback one gets from it as to whether it corresponds to reward (Driscoll et al., 2021).
People would not want to be stuck in the vicious cycle of always craving or choosing risky,
reward-seeking behavior.
Overall, the picture is painted for choice with respect to neuroscience and philosophy.
There are some things that are deterministic by nature, such as the laws of the physical universe
and the machinery naturally programmed into the human body. However, there is hearkening to
the voluntaristic notions of choice as people should cooperate with what they are given and
achieve a freedom for excellence with it. Such is the notion of the ancient philosophy of the
Stoics, which is that there are most thing that are out of one’s control. If one wanted to try to get
to the other side of the street, they could not even control the outcome of that desire. All that a
person can do is merely assent to the desires they are presented with and the impressions placed
upon their body (Baltzly, 2019). Or as the contemporary philosopher Sartre would say in his
example of the casino, there is a nothingness that holds him back from succumbing to his
addiction. In the end of the day, a choice is merely the result of the determined mechanisms of
Comments are mostly just questions, not a sign that anything is wrong or bad. Comments and
questions are a sign of respect knowing that you’ll take them into consideration and reflect on
them.
I’d kind like to see an outline version of this as well as a concept map. The space that you’re
choice and decision making. You’ve set up the contention between two philosophical views and
then adding in possible neuroscientific theories that connect to those theories. It might be helpful
to give a pretty zoomed out view of the field and then come into the focus for your paper that
means a broader view of philosophy and neuroscience, but explaining how or why you focus on
a specific area. So that’s why both an outline and a concept map help you work through this
complex thought space. In particular zooming out to then zoom in gives you the places where
you’re best able to try to find the places of overlap and contention. It might help with some of the
places that seem disconnected or like they came without a background understanding. Similarly
Mining these and related papers for references might be helpful for seeing how the bridge
between the two fields in decision making has been crossed before.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2015.00288/full
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627308008969
https://med-fom-neuroethics.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2013/06/Felsen-2011-AJOB-Neuroscience.pdf
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1023380907603
Works Cited
URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/stoicism/>.
Driscoll, M.E., Bollu, P.C., & Tadi, P. (2021). Neuroanatomy, Nucleus caudate. In: StatPearls
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557407/.
Dziedzic, T. A., Bala, A., & Marchel, A. (2021). Cortical and subcortical anatomy of the parietal
https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.727055.
Egan, R. J., Bergner, C. L., Hart, P. C., Cachat, J. M., Canavello, P. R., Elegante, M. F.,
Elkhayat, S. I., Bartels, B. K., Tien, A. K., Tien, D. H., Mohnot, S., Beeson, E., Glasgow, E.,
Amri, H., Zukowska, Z., & Kalueff, A. V. (2009). Understanding behavioral and physiological
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2009.06.022.
Flynn, T. (2013). Jean-Paul Sartre, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N.
Gros, L., Debue, N., Lete, J., & van de Leemput, C. (2020). Video game addiction and emotional
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02894.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/voluntary.
bacon/>.
URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/epicurus/>.
Le, K., Zhang, C., & Greisman, L. (2020). Alien hand syndrome - A rare presentation of
https://doi.org/10.1080/20009666.2020.1756610.
Le-Niculescu, H., Balaraman, Y., Patel, S. D., Ayalew, M., Gupta, J., Kuczenski, R., Shekhar,
A., Schork, N., Geyer, M. A., & Niculescu, A. B. (2011). Convergent functional genomics of
anxiety disorders: Translational identification of genes, biomarkers, pathways and
McHugh, R. K., & Weiss, R. D. (2019). Alcohol use disorder and depressive disorders. Alcohol
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/384722-man-is-a-rope-stretched-between-the-animal-and-
the. Wicks, R. (2021). Nietzsche’s Life and Works, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
life-works/>.
Oakes, J. M., Fuchs, R. M., Gardner, J. D., Lazartigues, E., & Yue, X. (2018). Nicotine and the
Olsen, V. V., Lugo, R. G., & Sütterlin, S. (2015). The somatic marker theory in the context of
Pace-Schott E.F., Amole, M.C., Aue, T., Balconi, M., Bylsma, L.M., Critchley, H., Demaree,
H.A., Friedman, B.H., Gooding, A.E.K., Gosseries, O., Jovanovic, T., Kirby, L.A.J., Kozlowska,
K., Laureys, S., Lowe, L., Magee, K., Marin, M.F., Merner, A.R., Robinson, J.L., Smith, R.C.,
Spangler, D.P., Van Overveld, M., & VanElzakker, M.B. (2019). Physiological feelings.
Neuroscience Biobehavioral Review 103:267-304. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.05.002. Epub
Patel A, Biso, G.M.N.R., Fowler, J.B. (2021). Neuroanatomy, temporal lobe. In: StatPearls
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519512/
Pryor, J. L., Hughes, C., Foster, W., Hales, B. F., & Robaire, B. (2000). Critical windows of
exposure for children's health: The reproductive system in animals and humans. Environmental
Roca, M., Parr, A., Thompson, R., Woolgar, A., Torralva, T., Antoun, N., Manes, F., & Duncan,
J. (2010). Executive function and fluid intelligence after frontal lobe lesions. Brain : A Journal
Sisk, C.L. (2017). Development: Pubertal hormones meet the adolescent brain. Current Biology
Smith, K. (2008). Brain makes decisions before you even know it, Nature.
https://doi.org/10.1038/news.2008.751
Treffert, D. A. (2021). To creation and beyond: The remarkable life of Leslie Lemke, Wisconsin
and-beyond-remarkable-life-leslie-lemke.
Varghese, M., Keshav, N., Jacot-Descombes, S., Warda, T., Wicinski, B., Dickstein, D. L.,
Harony-Nicolas, H., De Rubeis, S., Drapeau, E., Buxbaum, J. D., & Hof, P. R. (2017). Autism
spectrum disorder: Neuropathology and animal models. Acta Neuropathologica, 134(4), 537–
566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-017-1736-4.
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWtZA-ZmOAM
Zehra, A., Burns, J., Liu, C. K., Manza, P., Wiers, C. E., Volkow, N. D., & Wang, G. J. (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11481-018-9782-9.