Showing posts with label psychiatry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label psychiatry. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Our brain dichotomies - Saeed Ahmed

Here is another guest-post written by Saeed Ahmed:

Have you ever thought about the question “Who am I?” or the question “Why do I do the things I do?”

On the surface, perhaps these seem trivial questions, and yet they have been discussed by philosophers for thousands of years, with no firm answers, and the dialog continues.

Modern neuroscience has reached a point that it can in some ways inform this dialog. Three recent podcast interviews, based on books written for lay audiences, illuminate slightly different aspects of the debate, provide some answers, and raise many more questions.

Two dichotomies are emphasized in these podcasts; conscious and unconscious mental processing, and the functions of the left and right hemispheres.

Each author has been interviewed several times, and I have posted below links for sessions with three very experienced interviewers.

David Eagleman, interviewed by Terry Gross, is a neuroscientist and talks about a competition for attention among the myriad of neural processes (central, peripheral, sympathetic, parasympathetic) that we all possess. Volition and action occur on the basis of which processes “win.” Virtually all of the competition occurs unconsciously. In a way, Eagleman provides an organic basis for what an aspect of “unconscious: may be. In the latter part of the book, he discusses implications of this, including those for our legal systems. Fresh Air - (feed)


Daniel Kahneman, interviewed by Leonard Lopate, is a nobel-prize winner in economics. While this may seem a bit odd (why economics; isn’t that about supply and demand curves, utility functions and mathematical models?), it isn’t really, because aspects of behavior, particularly “non-rational” behavior, are becoming very important in economics research, as it has become more and more apparent that participants in markets often do not act as rationally as traditional models have assumed. Kahneman describes two neural systems: one that operates quickly with virtually no sense of voluntary control and a second that allocates attention to effortful activities. He too speculates about legal implications, e.g. the effect of judicial decisions on whether judges are hungry or have just eaten. Leonard Lopate Show - Feed

Kahneman also wrote an article on the same subject matter as his book for Scientific American, which can be accessed here.

My favorite interview of the three, was of Iain McGilchrist a British psychiatrist, who sat with Phillip Adams of Australia’s Radio National, who discusses the implications of the left-brain/right-brain dichotomy. The left-right dichotomy is just as fundamental as the conscious-unconscious one (although both ultimately are reductionist). Briefly summarized, just as one may hypothesize that the phenomena of perception/conception/volition/action are determined in some way by a competition between multiple unconscious processes, so too may one say that these phenomena occur due to states generated by the cooperative/competitive “discussion” between the two “persons” who exist inside us, and very different persons they are, apparently. McGilchrist goes beyond mechanistic explanations, and it is his foray into the implications of this dichotomy that I found quite compelling, speculative though they might be. The basic hypothesis he puts forth is that due to a predominance of left-dominant thinking, certain tendencies of western civilization have become damaging. In his own words (from his book’s introduction):
“Here I suggest that it is as if the left hemisphere, which creates a sort of self-reflexive virtual world, has blocked off the available exits, the ways out of the hall of mirrors, into a reality which the right hemisphere could enable us to understand. In the past, this tendency was counterbalanced by forces from outside the enclosed system of the self-conscious mind; apart from the history incarnated in our culture, and the natural world itself, from both of which we are increasingly alienated, these were principally the embodied nature of our existence, the arts and religion. In our time each of these has been subverted and the routes of escape from the virtual world have been closed off. An increasingly mechanistic, fragmented, decontextualised world, marked by unwarranted optimism mixed with paranoia and a feeling of emptiness, has come about, reflecting, I believe, the unopposed action of a dysfunctional left hemisphere.”
Right/Left brain speculations, in books and blog posts on the hidden power of the right brain, are becoming quite fashionable, but they sometimes overstate the implications of the evidence they put forth to support their claims. Gilchrist advocates balance between the left and the right hemispheres. It is always hard to judge how far one may speculate, given any line of evidence, and I don’t think Gilchrist went too far, but not everyone may see his suppositions about social and humanistic issues well-grounded in research in this area. But few will fault his effort to reach this far.

More about the three books can be found at Amazon, Wikipedia (thinking fast and slow) (the master and his emissary).

Sunday, June 15, 2008

Nirvana and the Brain

Some time ago I reported about the podcast My Three Shrinks. This podcast is linked with a blog named Shrink Rap, so that it gets easily mixed up with Shrink Rap Radio, the psychology podcast by David van Nuys. For a psychiatry podcast and a psychology podcast to exist with such entangled names and range of subjects, they were bound to meet one day and so they did. Van Nuys took the initiative and invited the three psychiatrist onto Shrink Rap Radio show #156. Dinah, Roy and Clink Shrink took their friendly banter with them and the result was likewise.

Another fine issue of Shrink Rap Radio I heard recently was "Nirvana and the Brain", a fascinating interview with brain scientist Dr. Jill Taylor. What makes Taylor and especially interesting guest to speak on the brain, is that she suffered a stroke, which knocked out part of her brain, forcing her into a recovery track that took nearly a decade. Yet, the stroke did not just cause suffering. Taylor relates also the bliss it brought. Van Nuys tracked her through a video on TED that I link up below.



More Shrink Rap Radio
Psychoanalysis - Shrink Rap radio review,
Conscious Living,
The Happiness Hypothesis,
Sign language for babies,
Doll Work and what with the brain,

More My Three Shrinks:
Conversion Therapies,
My Three Shrinks Podcast.

More TED
Karen Armstrong,
Ben Dunlap. (highly recommended)

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Friday, March 14, 2008

Irvin Yalom on Wise Counsel and KQED

The philosopher Rochefoucauld stated you cannot stare straight into the face of the sun, or death. Psychiatrist Irvin Yalom took te first part as title to his book about facing death: Staring at the Sun. Yalom gave two wonderful interviews about his findings to Wise Counsel and to KQED Forum.

Even though Yalom is an existentialist and personally doesn't cherish a religious belief, he respects his patients' inclinations, because their wellness is central. But his own inspiration is largely taken from the Greek philosopher Epicurus. Just as Epicurus, Yalom proposes that death is not to be feared. At least, death should not be feared that it takes over life - in the way of an anxiety.

He hopes to show, the face of death can even trigger an inclination to life; life in the Epicurean sense: a life that is as much as possible free from fear and pain and as much happy and tranquil. He emphasizes also that even though life doesn't go on, we pass on our traits and not just through our off-spring.

Other guests on Wise Counsel were a.o.:
David H. Barlow,
Richard Heimberg,
Tony Madrid,
Francine Shapiro,
Amy Baker.

More KQED Forum:
Susan Jacoby,
Christopher Hitchins.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Friday, February 8, 2008

Conversion Therapies - My Three Shrinks

My Three Shrinks invited Dr. Chris Kraft from Johns Hopkins Hospital, clinical director for sexual behavior's consultation, to speak about conversion therapy. From Wikipedia I get this refers to methods aimed at changing gay, lesbian, and bisexual people's sexual orientations to heterosexual, or at eliminating or diminishing same-sex desires and behaviors. My first reaction: is this for real?

Kraft is a clinical psychologist, specialized in issues of sexuality and gender. He starts the subject by posing it as a question: "What can you do for people who feel uncomfortable with their sexual orientation?" There are conversion therapies - this is very controversial - but it is still used and tried. And there is a demand. Traditionally this is about homosexuality, but also other paraphilias. Of course this is culturally defined. Homosexuality used to be defined as a problem and in certain subcultures it still is. In such a constellation there is need for treatment.

What do you do as a clinician? Especially if you do NOT perceive the sexual tendency as wrong? The therapist could send the client to shop around until he finds a doctor with the same set of values. The clinician can even say this is not an option for treatment. One would not want to be at the mercy of the client's definitions and alternately the client had better not be at the mercy of the therapist's definitions.

Conversion therapy distinguishes between emotions, fantasies and behavior. The therapy is directed to the behavior and this has been reported to work. (There are statistics) It is really hard and rare that emotions and fantasies have changed. For paraphilias that are still widely considered problematic such as exhibitionism and pedophilia conversion therapy is the way to go.

Kraft's explanations are clear and the panel's questions are so as well. The light conversation style makes for very relaxed listening, hence the podcast allows for a very low threshold peek into the complicated and sometimes too technical world of psychiatry.

More:
My Three Shrinks Podcast,
Psychology, psychiatry and the brain,
David Lukoff at Shrinkrapradio,
Morality as a brain function.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Friday, January 18, 2008

Doll Work and what with the brain

The latest of Shrinkrapradio features an interview with Geri Olson from Sonoma State University. She has integrated into her approach of psychology the making of dolls. She makes them herself and she organizes workshops to have her students make dolls. She has found that the making of a doll has a significant effect on people. It allows them to express and mold into an image what effects them most deeply.

While on the subject of Shrinkrapradio, I would like to point you to two other shows that I find particularly valuable. I usually comment only on the latest shows and so, these issues, that were published way before I started a blog, are constantly overlooked. The first show is the interview with Daniel Amen. Amen is a psychiatrist and a neuro-scientist, and his approach to the psychology of man is first ad for all, through the brain. He actually gets quite angry psychologist and some psychiatrists know so little of the brain. He claims to have found many 'mechanical' brain relations to all sorts of symptoms in psycho-pathology and hence proposes to deal with them with medication and/or surgery in stead of wasting time on psychotherapy.

This brings me to the interview with David Sinclair who, after a life time of study in Finland, has found a medication that can effectively (up to 90%) treat addiction. He has analyzed how the brain learns as it were to be addicted and his medication, proven with alcohol and heroine abuse, basically helps UNlearn the addiction. The medication needs to be taken throughout life. Its effectiveness to generally unlearn, leads Sinclair to investigate on other fields where it could be applies, for example with eating disorders.

I have listened to the last two issues in conjunction and it has often made me wonder, what will be our fate. Once we know everything about the brain and we can chemically learn and unlearn whatever we like, what does that mean for our human condition?

More Shrinkrapradio on this blog:
Confronting Death (and more),
Process Work,
Authoritarianism,
Leadership and AI,
Dysfunctional personalities in the workplace,
Adventure Therapy


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Thursday, January 17, 2008

My Three Shrinks Podcast

By chance I ran into the podcast My Three Shrinks. I was looking something up on the web about the podcast Shrinkrapradio and found a blog named Shrink Rap which is the written complement to the My Three Shrinks Podcast. There is no relation with Shrinkrapradio and it also has a slightly different focus. Shrinkrapradio is a psychology podcast. My Three Shrinks is a psychiatry podcast.

Three psychiatrists, Dinah, ClinkShrink and Roy, write in the Shrink Rap blog and speak as a panel in the podcast about subjects in psychiatry. As in other panel podcasts, the tone is very light, there are some inside jokes, or maybe running jokes, but there is also the serious talk on various subjects. In the latest show,which was the last of the year edition, they spoke about New Year Resolutions and answered questions received on the blog and discussed the podcast reviews they had on iTunes.

What I like very much about this podcast is the fact that is an enhanced podcast. The cast is also available in regular MP3, but the feed, by default pushes the MA4 format. Users like myself then can enjoy the segments of the show and view their separate titles. The light and natural conversation tone of the show have advantages and disadvantages; it makes it more fun to listen to, but at certain moments can interrupt the handling of the subject go in depth. All in all a good podcast for anybody interested in psychiatry.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Saturday, September 15, 2007

David Lukoff at Shrinkrapradio (110)

David Lukoff should return to Shrink Rap radio, for he and Dr. Dave and are not done talking yet. This issue of SRR, #110, focuses mostly on David's success at getting a new diagnostic category -- Religious or Spiritual Problem -- accepted into the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. He describes how he, in collaboration with others, achieved the recognition for the diagnostic category.

What is very impressive, is that Lukoff has suffered a severe psychotic episode himself. He has been able to recover and even made the experience contribute to his consequent work in psychiatry and psychology. When he relates about this episode, especially the starting point of it, I think we see, much what every listener could identify with. Maybe each one of us, allows oneself to slide into a crisis to some degree. Not necessarily to the degree Dr. Lukoff has done, which included substance abuse, homelessness and psychosis. Nevertheless, such crises, seem, in the end, to be beneficial, when incorporated properly into 'healthy' life.

Much about this, is left unsaid. And in the end both Lukoff and Van Nuys agree, they should meat again. I can only say: do not wait too long.