triunebrain - self-reg with stuart shanker · self=regviewoftriunebrain triune&brain&...
TRANSCRIPT
TRIUNE BRAIN Stuart Shanker
Paul MacLean
• Began to talk about “Triune Brain” in 1960s and published The Triune Brain in Evolu/on in 1990
• Self-‐Reg has capitalized on this idea, but is the point that Self-‐Reg is based on a new model of how the brain works?
• What if MacLean’s theory is flawed?
Argumentum ad verecundiam?
Problem is if “Authority” you’re appealing to isn’t quite as impressive as you’d wish
Or your application not as straightforward as you think
Or you have nothing else to back up your argument
Is the Self-Reg use of the Triune Brain nothing more than rhetorical?
Self-‐Reg View of Triune Brain
Triune Brain does have an important
role to play in Self-‐Reg
But the argument is not without
its complicaKons
And for that maMer, its limitaKons
Needs to be seen as a metaphor,
rather than a theory
The “Three Brains”
RepKlian: primiKve survival
mechanism for lower organisms
Paleo-‐mammalian: meet the social
needs of mammals
Neocortex: serve the cogniKve and interpersonal
demands of higher primates
RepKlian, paleo-‐mammalian, and neocortex in different epochs, each serving a different set of needs
In H. sapiens sapiens, neocortex is said to be layered on top of the “earlier” brains that were retained because of their survival value
The CriFcisms
His view of neuro-‐evoluKon is too simplisKc
Can’t make a “cogniKve” versus “emoKonal” division in brain
Can’t assume that same group of nuclei performs same funcKon in different species (e.g., the amygdala)
All mammals have neocortex (six corKcal layers); smaller mammals don’t have the sulci and gryi
Some structures in limbic system far older than model suggests (e.g., hypothalamus is 450 million years old)
Few assign same role to hippocampus as MacLean
Defenders’ Response
Model is meant to be seen as heurisKc
Goal is to think about the interplay between prefrontal and subcorKcal elements
Not to be aMacked for “technical” shortcomings
The Controversy
“Controversy” is pu^ng it mildly
Served as a flashpoint for the long-‐standing baMle between “conKnuity” and ”disconKnuity” theorist
Debate between “affecKve neuroscienKsts” (e.g., Panksepp) and “neurobehaviourists” (e.g., LeDoux)
“ConFnuity vs. DisconFnuity”
TB picks up on Darwin’s idea that animals display similar basic emoKons as humans
We can learn about human emoKonal experience by
studying animals
Neurobehaviourists: only language-‐speakers experience
emoKons as such
Difference between nonconscious survival
mechanisms and emoKons
Neurobehaviourists: “NeurocepFon” doesn’t equal emoFon
• Sound of family dog sleeping said to send an “all is well” signal to the amygdala
• Mechanism operaKng here dates back 40,000 years • Subject can’t be said to feel safe when amygdala registers this sound; this is a UCR
• Only if we think about the effect of hearing our dog that we experience emoKon of feeling safe
A “Limbic System”?
Neurobehaviourists not even happy with idea of
“limbic system”: i.e., proto-‐emoKonal network
Studies show direct circuit for threat detecKon from
the thalamus to the amygdala
Possible to acKvate a threat response (changes in ANS)
with no conscious awareness
On deeper level, challenges behaviourist view of
behaviour
What does this mean in Real Terms? Neuroscience has been divided b/w those studying PFC operaKons in humans (using fMRI, dense-‐array EEG) and those studying limbic processes in mammals (behavioural and electrophysiological measures)
Self-‐Reg approach: how does the work of Panksepp or LeDoux inform our views of “Blue Brain” processes?
More involved here than simply a case of recognizing how limbic processes can interfere with or even suppress Blue Bran processes
Equally important is recognizing a fundamental categorical disKncKon between “blue brain” and “limbic”
“Limbic UPerances”
Different types of “limbic behaviour”
are associated with distinctive types of
vocalization
Rats, for example, make “pleasure calls” in the 22-kHz range and distress calls in the 50-kHz range
Similar vocalizations evident in young
children when they scream in excitement
or frustration
TreaFng “Limbic UPerances” as if they were RaFonal
Take the case of the youth who is being threatened with all sorts of dire consequences should he refuse to do or accept something
Invariably, this elicits the all-‐too-‐familiar response: “I don’t care!”
This only infuriates us more
But pause and listen carefully and you’ll noKce that his voice is high-‐pitched and strained, the speech rhythms harsh and percussive
“I don’t care!” May be trying to convince himself
An escape
behaviour
A surge of anxiety
A sign of panic
Most likely, a combinaKon of all of the above
Help: I don’t Speak Limbic!
Put it all together and what you have, plain and simple, is the human adolescent version of a 50-‐kHz distress cry
Far from being an intenKonal act of defiance, it is much more typically a sign of feeling paralyzed because of being constrained
Something that, if consistently ignored, or sKll worse, punished, can indeed lead to an externalizing disorder
Triune Brain and Mindlessness • Category-‐error of applying concepts that apply to the PFC to what are, in fact, limbic behaviours
• See the child’s insKncKve reacKons, triggered by subcorKcal arousal, as due to “weakness” or to a lack of appropriate “teaching” (i.e., condiKoning)
• Treat child’s uMerances as an affront rather than an entreaty • Fail to recognize that the reason why we are so easily upset by the child’s behaviour is due to limbic resonance: i.e., it is because our own limbic system is aroused by the child’s that feelings of anger or frustraKon are instantly triggered or more intense
Need to do Self-‐Reg: For both our sakes
Ra/onal behaviour is made possible by self-‐regula/on, not self-‐
control
Whole point of Triune Brain metaphor is to recognize neural shihs occur in which very
different capaciFes are operaKve
The HolisFc Benefits of Self-‐Reg
Limbic state is extremely
expensive: not just in terms of energy consumed, but in terms of effect on reflecKve thinking, awareness and
social relaKonships
In helping a child manage his stress-‐load we aren’t just helping him to create the
condiKons in which he can exercise and develop his raKonal
capaciKes
We are helping him to learn how to stay healthy and resilient and recognize when he is approaching a limbic state that is costly in all sorts of
ways
“MacLeanian” Response
Interplay between top-‐down and boMom-‐up processes
Limbic system can have as great an impact on prefrontal processes – i.e., overload and even subvert them – as prefrontal systems can have on the limbic system (i.e., self-‐regulaKon)
What is operaKng here is not an either/or situaKon but more of a teeter-‐toMer effect
Each system has its own strengths and weaknesses
The “Teeter-‐ToPer” Effect
Fundamental distinction between determining how one acts and rationalizing how one acts
Subject is only truly capable of determining how she acts when top-down processes are dominant
Swings towards rationalizing behaviour when the processing dynamic has shifted to bottom-up
What is Missing in Triune Brain
Most significant element missing in MacLean’s argument: The Interbrain!
Child doesn’t know when he has “gone limbic” and doesn’t know how to get out of that state
We guide these transitions until he can do so on his own, similar to the way that an instructor helps a student in driver’s ed
This is why it is so important to distinguish the different kinds of “triune behaviour” and know how to respond accordingly
Triune Brain is Dyadic
Impossible to exercise these raKonal responses to a child’s distress if we have gone into a limbic state
Child’s capacity to pause and reflect hinges on our own ability to pause and reflect
No more a maMer of self-‐control in us than in child
It is a case of being aware of the stresses and knowing how to miKgate them
No bigger stress when it comes to raising a child then misreading the signs of limbic behaviour
