Antidepressants, human consciousness and philosophy

I've been thinking a lot recently about antidepressants and the human brain (not that I'm an doctor or anything) and it occured to me that if mood is nothing more than a balance (or imbalance) of chemicals in the brain, surely this must mean that everything we know, feel, think and experience is nothing more than the interactions of chemicals in the brain?

If we can regulate mood with drugs, then the next natural conclusion is surely that every feeling, thought, memory, emotion and idea you and everryone else has ever had is nothing more than a bunch of chemicals interacting inside your skull, the random firing of a few neurons pusling with electricicy?

Call me old-fashioned, but I find that incredibly depressing. What this must logically mean is that there is no "us" at all, that our consciousness is nothing more than an illusion, a succession of electrical impulses and chemical reactions? No soul, not even any real mind to speak of, because if all that is required for consciousness is a small ball of electricity and liquids, then our minds must be nothing more than hightly complex machines. Also, where does this leave free will? If everything we think, feel and do is governed by physical interactions of substances in our brains, then do we even have any say in what we think/feel/do, or are we just slaves to the chemicals?

I can imagine a grim Matrix-like future where nobody does anything anymore, and instead just hook themselves up to big machines to give themselves artificial experiences by manipulating brain chemistry.

What do you think? Apologies if this has depressed anyone, but I've been obsessed with this kind of thinking recently (a symptom of my possible depression, I suppose). Any thoughts (assuming thought exists, that is)?

Exactly.

I think you've hit upon why the simplistic explanation drug companies push (that depression is a result of chemicals in your brain not being in balance) is just that -- too simplistic to be true.

A state of balance suggests equilibrium, and it also suggests that we know what that equilibrium looks like in a "normal" brain and can measure it. The fact is, we can do neither.

Emotions and thoughts are really the result of a complex interaction between brain chemicals, experiences, personality, your social connections, and so much more. To pull out just one of those factors and focus all treatment on it seems to me, anyway, to be missing the subtle complexities of this disorder (and others).

Best,
DocJohn

Those ideas are familiar to me too. The thing is, even if we can understand thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in terms of electrical and chemical interactions, that doesn't mean that they are less real, just that we understand more about what happens when we think, feel, or act. Isn't it just as plausible that it is our thoughts, feelings, and actions that cause the chemical changes? Why do we assume that the chemicals and electrical impulses control us when it could just as easily be the other way around?

Maybe the more we understand of the way things work, the less awe we have for it sometimes. It doesn't have to be that way though. When you think about it, you're talking about some very complex and delicate processes, and we are just beginning to be able to understand some of the basics of how it works. There is so much more that we haven't figured out yet. Being able to explain a process doesn't make it less real.

Your questions are really good, interesting philosophical issues, that deserve a second thought. They can be extended further. It has been said that any science sufficiently advanced will seem to be magic to those who don't have the ability to understand it. As we learn more and more, sometimes it seems like we lose the magic, but there is always more to learn, isn't there? I probably shouldn't go there, but I feel like this also applies to the nature of God and creation. As science explains more and more, we come closer to understanding things that were beyond humand comprehension before. But it doesn't have to subtract from these things, and neither does it make them less real, just because we have increased our knowlege and abilities.

Okay, so for a condensed answer - we don't have to be slaves to the chemicals, but how about masters of them instead? Sounds better that way to me anyway.

<font color=orange>"They accused us of suppressing freedom of expression. This was a lie and we could not let them publish it." ... from the Director of Censorship...

</font color=orange>

MrPants I read a lot about this. Recent Scientific American issues have had interesting articles on why we need sleep, the nature of depression, and the characteristics of an addicted brain.

The last was in the most recent issue, and explains a lot more about the process of chemical "transactions" that lead to pleasure, stimulation, and how the processing of these chemicals is effected after being influenced by drugs or other addictive substances or actions.

These new understandings will likely lead to much better treatments for addiciton in the future. And similar studies will continue to lead to better treatments for depression, bipolar, etc, and possibly some day even a cure.

So yes, in once sense, things like how memories are stored and how emotions are formed is being better understood by science and can be "broken down" into chemical reactions in the brain. Bear in mind of course that we are really extremely far from any real understanding of these mechanics, we are only scratching the surface.

But that of course doesn't answer your question, and in my opinion there is no reason to worry. Because aside from all the understanding of the "mechanics" of thought and emotion, there is another layer involved that no one has even the slightest clue about. And that of course is the issue of conscieness and sentience. Even if some day we can understand exactly how memories are stored, how visual and other sense information is processed, etc, that does not begin to explain why we understand such information. Why we are "we" and not someone else, or why we are "anyone" at all. Why do we "feel" these emotions. If we discover "how" we think we still don't know "why" we think. Why are we curious? Why do we worry that there might be nothing more to "life" than a series of chemical interactions.

So hopefully you can believe (and why do we "believe?") as I do that you have asked two different questions. Yes, we may begin to understand more about mood, thought, and memory. But your real question is about "soul" and "mind" and this physical knowledge doesn't even begin to address this question. There have been many scientific and philosophical books on the subject and most describe the difficulty in even addressing the question rather than any scientific suggestions as to the answers. I believe, without expressing any specific feelings about religion or the nature of life, that the subject of consciousness may always remain a mystery. It may be metaphorically impossible for our brains to understand our brains. As long as that mystery exists, there will always be "free will", life, conciousness, and faith. Faith will always be necessary because the answer to the sentience question may never be resolved by anything other than faith, in god, in the universe, in the supernatural, or in whatever we choose, with our free will, to invest our faith.

(Somehow I think someone is supposed to sing "god bless america" right about now, I don't know why )

-- The world is what we make of it --
-- Dave
-- <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.idexter.com>http://www.idexter.com</A>

I hope my post above gives you something to think about to ease your discomfort rather than keeping you up with nightmares about the subject

comfort was my intention.

-- The world is what we make of it --
-- Dave
-- <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.idexter.com>http://www.idexter.com</A>

Hope I didn't scare everybody off...

-- The world is what we make of it --
-- Dave
-- <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.idexter.com>http://www.idexter.com</A>

Did we stop talking about rollercoasters? Damn, I'm always a day late and a dollar short...

a DISCOMBOBULATED Greg