Talk:António Damásio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.
Portugal Portal
António Damásio is part of WikiProject Portugal, a project to improve all Portugal-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Portugal-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Portugal To-do:
Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Philosophy and Neurobiology

<Comment on the phrase in Damasio (fourth paragraph)—Damasio's most recent book, "Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain," was published in 2003. In it, Damasio explores philosophy and its relations to neurobiology, suggesting that it might provide guidelines for human ethics.>


Extract from Los Angeles Times, April 27, 2003: Soul-searching science Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain, Antonio Damasio, Harcourt: 356 pp., ISBN: 0151005575. By Margaret Jacob.

We learn that the brain possesses body-sensing regions that enable it to construct "maps of the ongoing body state." These regions are critically important, Damasio argues. Without them feelings would be impossible. Unlike what was previously believed, feelings are not instantaneous. They require anywhere from two to 20 seconds to it takes the brain to register changes in body temperature, glucose levels or genital stimulation {sympathetic nervous system}. Put another way, {William James' bear} was right when he argued that feelings are what happen when the brain senses the body being changed by emotion. Feelings or affect become the end product of a deeply physical process that unfolds in the mind.


From Antonio Damasio's Looking for Spinoza; Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain; ISBN 0151005575 2003; p. :170-1 —Conatus and The Foundation of Virtue:

[1] I wrote early in this book that my return to Spinoza came almost by chance as I tried to check the accuracy of a quote I kept on a yellowed paper, a link to the Spinoza I had read long ago. Why had I kept the quote? Perhaps because it was something I intuited as specific and illuminating. But I had never paused to analyze it in detail until it traveled from my memory to the page I was working on.
[2] The quote comes from 4P18 of The Ethics and it reads: "... the very first foundation of virtue is the endeavor (conatum) to preserve the individual self, and happiness consists in the human capacity to preserve its self." A comment on the terms used by Spinoza is in order before we go any further. First, as noted earlier, the word conatu can be rendered as endeavor or tendency or effort, and Spinoza may have meant any of these, or perhaps a blend of the three meanings. Second, the word virtutis can refer not just to its traditional moral meaning, but also to power, and ability to act. I shall return to this issue. Curiously, in this passage, he uses the word felicitatem, which is best translated as happiness {better is Peace-of-Mind}, rather than laetitia, which can be translated as joy, elation, delight, and happiness.
[3] At first glance the words sound like a prescription for the selfish culture of our times but nothing could be further from their real meaning. As I interpret it, the proposition is a cornerstone for a generous ethical system. It is an affirmation that at the base of whatever rules of behavior we may ask humanity to follow, there is something inalienable: A living organism, known to its owner because the owner's mind has constructed a self, has a natural tendency to preserve its own life; and that same organism's state of optimal functioning, subsumed by the concept of joy, results from the successful endeavor to endure and prevail. Paraphrased in deeply American terms I would rewrite Spinoza's proposition as follows: I hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans are created such that they tend to preserve their life and seek well-being, that their happiness {better is {Peace-of-Mind} comes from the successful endeavor to do so, and that the foundation of virtue rests on these facts. Perhaps these resonances are not a coincidence.
[4] Spinoza's statement rings clear as a bell, but it does require elaboration for its full impact to be appreciated. Why should a concern for oneself be the basis for virtue, lest that virtue pertain to that self alone? Or, to put it more bluntly, how does Spinoza move from oneself to all the selves to whom virtue must apply? Spinoza makes the transition relying again on biological facts. Here is the procedure: The biological reality of self-preservation leads to virtue because in our inalienable need to maintain ourselves we must, of necessity, help preserve other selves {Golden Rule}. If we fail to do so we perish and are thus violating the foundational principle, and relinquishing the virtue that lies in self-preservation. The secondary foundation of virtue then is the reality of a social structure and the presence of other living organisms in a complex system of interdependence with our own organism. We are in a bind, literally, in the good sense of the word. The essence of this transition can be found in Aristotle, but Spinoza ties it to a biological principle—the mandate for self-preservation.
[5] So here is the beauty behind the cherished quote {from 4P18}, seen from today's perspective: It contains the foundation for a system of ethical behaviors and that foundation is neurobiological. The foundation is the result of a discovery based on the observation of human nature rather than the revelation of a prophet.

Yesselman 14:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "American" categories

Are these right? The article doesn't mention him having become an American. None of the interwiki'd articles have any nationality categories except "Portuguese". A Geek Tragedy 16:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Since no-one argued for them I hav removed them. Feel free to put hem back if you know they are right. Probably best you add to the article how he became American too.A Geek Tragedy 11:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scientific materialism

Should António Damásio be listed under the category of materialists, as he seems to reject the notion of Dualism? 69.205.163.163 05:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

What's the deal with the multiple pronunciations? --1000Faces (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)