The world's leading scholar on artificial intelligence once described people as machines made of meat. This nicely captures the consensus in the fields of psychology and neuroscience, which tell us that our mental lives are the products of our physical brains, and that these brains are shaped not by a divine creator, but by the blind process of natural selection.
But, with the exception of a small minority of philosophers and scientists, nobody takes this view seriously. It is offensive. It violates the tenets of every religion, and it conflicts with common sense. We do not feel, after all, that we are just material bodies, mere flesh. Instead, we occupy our bodies. We own them. We are spontaneously drawn to the view defended by Rene Descartes: We are natural-born dualists, so we see bodies and souls as separate.
This dualism has significant consequences for how we think, act and feel. The philosopher Peter Singer discusses the notion of a moral circle -- the circle of things that matter to us, that have moral significance. This circle can be very small, including just your kin and those with whom you interact on a daily basis, or it can be extremely broad, including all humans, but also fetuses, animals, plants and even the earth itself. For most of us, the circle is mid-sized, and working out its precise boundaries -- does it include stem cells, for instance? -- can be a source of anguish and conflict.
The nature of these boundaries is related to our common-sense view that some objects have souls and others do not. If one attributes a soul to something, then it has value; if one sees something as a mere body, it does not. This is often explicit; historically, debates about abortion, for example, are often framed in terms of the question: When does the soul enter the body?
This reasoning can apply as well to how we regard adults. Normally, when we interact with others we see them as both body and soul. We appreciate that they have beliefs, desires and consciousness, and we recognize that they are solid physical things that take up space and are subject to gravity.
Both stances coexist well enough in the normal course of things.?But when we emphasize one perspective over another, there are moral consequences. Social?psychologists have shown that simply getting an experimental subject to take another person's perspective will make the subject care more about the person and be more likely to help. Focusing on the soul, then, leads to moral concern and can expand the moral circle.
The opposite can occur when someone is viewed solely as a body, and one emotion that supports this outcome is disgust. The psychologist Paul Rozin has shown how disgust, as Charles Darwin first noted, is an evolutionary adaptation that deters us from bad meat, so it is naturally triggered by animals and animal waste products. But disgust can readily extend to people. People, after all, are made of meat. Hence, every movement designed to stigmatize or malign some group -- Jews, blacks, gays, the poor, women and so on -- has used disgust. Once a group of people is viewed as disgusting, attention shifts away from them as moral individuals. They become soulless bodies, and the moral circle closes in to exclude them.
Our reaction to soulless bodies is well illustrated in a story told about Descartes after he died. It was known that Descartes had an illegitimate daughter, Francine, who died when she was five years old. According to the story, Descartes was so struck with grief that he created an automaton, a mechanical doll, built to appear identical to his dead daughter. The two were inseparable. When Descartes crossed the Holland Sea, he kept the doll in a small trunk in his cabin. Curious about the contents of the trunk, the captain of the ship crept down to Descartes' cabin one night and opened it. To his horror, the robot Francine arose. The captain, struck with revulsion, grabbed her, dragged her up to the deck of the ship and?threw her overboard.
This story captures how disturbing -- in some cases, revolting -- we find a body without a soul, and it embodies the emotional pull that our common-sense dualism often has. But it also raises a serious problem. Science tells us that common-sense dualism is wrong. There is no consensus as to precisely how mental life emerges from a physical brain, but there is no doubt that this is its source. Thus, if a "soul" means something immaterial and immortal, then it does not?exist. All of us are soulless bodies, no less than the robot Francine.
This is perhaps the main reason why the scientific rejection of dualism may be so hard to swallow: It seems to diminish the moral status of people. If we are to accept scientific facts, we need to construct morality on a new foundation, one without souls.
Paul Bloom is a professor of psychology at Yale University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.