At this point, and using the ideas presented in previous chapters, we can begin to outline a more elaborate scheme of what the gross organization of the human mind might be, related to the factors that determine and/or affect decisions, and therefore participate in the behavior of each individual.
Up to now, these approaches are limited to a theoretical basis where they integrate the incomplete scientific information available today, the empirical observation of human behavior, and pure reasoning, since we have not yet complete information or a technology capable of studying human brain functions in accurate detail at the neuronal level.
This work aims to propose a different, more logical and less idealized alternative, as to why human beings behave as they do in the real world, often in a selfish, cruel, violent and dehumanized way, and in others, with such an altruistic and generous dedication, for the benefit of others.
To recapitulate, let us remember that in our theory the human being has, from a functional point of view, not one, but two brains, each from different evolutionary origin and time: the primary brain, more similar and comparable to the one of other mammals, and the secondary brain, or neocerebrum, which is the one that distinguishes us from them, and gives us the high human characteristics and capabilities, which make us unique in the animal kingdom.
It is neither possible nor desirable to attempt a precise functional and anatomical characterization of both brains, on the one hand because we do not have the necessary technology, and on the other, because through its thousands of years of evolution, it is very likely that in the human brain there has been occuring modifications in the assignment of functions to zones or structures that originally had different purposes. This is coupled with the enormous number of inter-zonal associations, characterized by complex systems of both positive and negative feedback between them.
Notwithstanding this, it is clear that the secondary brain is based mainly (though not exclusively) on the large cortical mantle of both hemispheres.
In a less precise distribution, the primary brain includes more primitive brain areas from the evolutionary point of view: among others, brain stem, midbrain, thalamus, limbic system, and primitive cortical areas, through all of which it interconnects densely with the secondary brain.
We have said that the interaction of both brains is especially complex and not without many imperfections (chapter 3), to the point that each of these brains (or processors) can in many cases suggest or stimulate the individual to take totally opposite decisions and actions in the face of a given situation, thus generating conditions that explain many of the conflicts, sometimes very serious, that characterize people, and which historically have tried to be explained as manifestations of illness, insanity, neurosis, psychopathy, etc. (Famous in human history have been numerous cases of "vital contradictions").
A transcendent question has sought to be unveiled by many thinkers throughout human history: is it man at birth a blank slate, capable of absolutely conforming to his upbringing, education, and, in general, to all the influence of the environment where he lives? Or is it, on the contrary, a being that already comes pre-molded, predestined to have certain behavioral characteristics and traits that will accompany him all his life?
There have been authors who have been inclined to each of these options, although without doubt the first one is the one that more support "of the scholars" has had through history.
As we continue with our analysis, we can see that both positions have elements of truth, and that the definitive explanation, which until now seemed so difficult to achieve, is much simpler to understand if we study the problem from the point of view of our double brain scheme, the primary-secondary brain binomial.
Our primary brain comes pre-molded (hardwired), with lots of information and pre-programmed responses (just like other animals).
On the other hand, our secondary brain starts essentially "blank", prepared both to incorporate information from the internal (our own organism), and external environment, and to develop a series of capacities.
Thus, the human being brings in his primary processor or primary brain a program, (comes "wired", "pre-programmed", brings a "chip"), genetically codified, including a lot of information, reflexes and reactions ready for execution, some very simple and others more elaborate, to respond to a myriad of situations, some of them vital, that he could face during its existence.
In this respect the human being does not differ essentially from other animals, such as tigers, dogs, sheep, eagles, etc., which also bring their own programming, which allows them, without having to be "taught", to recognize which enemies are dangerous, which food is appropriate or not, how and when to develop walking, running, flying, etc.
We must note from now on, as was pointed out in previous chapters, and as a fact of the utmost importance, that has a direct relation with the genetic information of each individual and with the embryological systems that participate in the generation of his brain(s), that this pre-programming is characterized by a similar general basis in all members of the same species, but at the same time contains great variability from one individual to another, thus determining, both for animals and for humans, significant differences in the responses (behavior) of these individuals to the same stimulus, as well as the perception they have of each other, and indeed, of themselves and the world in which they are immersed.
This variability is indeed enormous, probably much greater than the variability of physical traits, since it is clearly expressed in cases of identical twins, who are easier to distinguish by their behavior and typical reactions than by their physical characteristics.
Moreover, it is precisely because of the great variability of the configuration of the primary-secondary cerebral binomial that it is so difficult to characterize human beings on the basis of a single pattern of behavior. To the extent that all individuals are unique and unrepeatable, it is impossible to characterize them only based on rigid patterns: there are as many configurations as individuals, and each configuration generates more or less different behaviors.
This does not mean, however, that just as there are physically alike human beings, there can not be behaviorally similar and groupable individuals, who, despite having differences, can share very marked traits that are quite similar.
This happens, for example, with all those people who present psychopathic traits originated in similar tendencies, a subject with which we will dwell later.
Thus, both in humans and in animals, certain characteristics of behavior may be distinguished very early, including those that differentiate an individual from another or others, such as, for example, primary features as courage or cowardice, recklessness, tendency to domination or submission, to exercise or to appropriate more or less eagerly of certain rights, to the use and control of territory, feeding, etc.
But at the same time, and unlike those animals, human beings have developed in their evolution this second brain (secondary processor), which is "prepared to incorporate and structure a great amount of information", and therefore has an enormous capacity of learning and subsequent performance, that is developed and refined as the individual grows and relates to the environment, through his 3 most distinctive and powerful tools: memory, imagination and language, which are extensively used for its analytical capacity.
The secondary brain, which unlike other mammals has only reached this very high development capacity in human beings, is nourished by information and experience from several sources:
from the primary brain, (which is what makes it "feel from the heart ", in the words of literarians and other artists), and from the external environment, through the sense organs.
All data is received, integrated, analyzed and processed by both brains, although in the case of the primary brain in an unconscious and / or preconscious way, while the reception of information and its analysis by the secondary brain constitute a very important part of consciousness (and simultaneously self-consciousness with enormous recursive capacity).
All this information received, and capable of being consciously analyzed by the secondary brain, has been the subject of a series of processes of great complexity, about which today there is much more ignorance than certainty, processes in which different and numerous zones have participated, that communicate and feedback with each other, both positively and negatively, through complex neural networks.
As we have said before, the final behavior of the individual will be determined by the complex interaction of both brains, a phenomenon that we will try to characterize next.
An essential element in our theory is to recognize that the interaction between both brains, by the very fact that the secondary brain has the ability to adapt to the current world, while the primary brain brings a preprogramming intended to favor the survival of the individual in conditions of very primitive relation with the environment, (including especially the other living beings), is an interaction that often results very conflictive.
Thus, the primary brain can stimulate the individual to take actions totally opposite to those suggested by the secondary brain, which has "learned" to recognize as the most convenient, practical and appropriate behaviors, all what we consider "normal" in our modern and civilized world.
In this way we can start from the premise that any act or behavior of an individual can be a response to the command of his primary brain (especially when it is more instinctive and emotional, preconcious or totally unconscious - even totally irrational), or his secondary brain, when it is more reflexive and analytical. And it can also be a "mixed" product, originated in the more or less balanced influence of both.
We then place in the primary brain the fundamental preprogramming of our mammalian species, which takes care of everything that is more "instinctive", and in the secondary brain, everything that is more rational.
The Affective Filter.
Along with this, and due to the existence of powerful drives or tendencies, which we will see in more detail below, our primary brain constitutes a true "filter" through which we "feel" the world, both internal and external, and which gives us the basis of our "tastes," "vocations," and "innate values" (which are not necessarily "socially correct" - see Chapter 2).
Thus, our primary brain comes pre-programmed with a series of innate "tendencies" that will be characteristic of each individual, which can be felt with enormous intensity, and that are able to determine our destiny dramatically, depending on their strength and orientation.
Thus, these tendencies will have the ability to determine the life of a person, especially in all those cases where they are very strong, being able to lead the individual through a meritorious and successful path if they are positive, or through a very negative path if they are more contrary to the "common good" and what is "socially accepted".
We include here a list of several of those tendencies that we characterize as innate and not totally avoidable, in a conception that is opposite to the usual and more common interpretation that has been made (and continues to be made) through human history, and which relates them more with "goodness", "virtue", "evil" and / or "vice or sin".
Free will?
These tendencies have the capacity to influence, often decisively, even against what rationality (secondary brain) recommends, in the performing of certain acts that analyzed coldly by an observer can appear as absolutely "incomprehensible" and " inexplicable".
This means that, in many cases, a certain behavior is "forced by a tendency imposed by the primary brain", and, therefore, is not product of a completely "autonomous, free and rational" decision on the part of the individual.
This is a consideration of great transcendence in the interpretation of human behavior.
Moreover, in many cases, and contrary to what has historically been accepted, it is often the case that the most rational part of the individual (secondary brain) not only fails, though he may try, to determine propper behavior, when he "opposes" the drives coming from the primary brain, but can even reach the point of "being dominated and put to the service" of this primary brain, for the achievement of purposes that the latter presents as inevitable imperatives.(eg cases of methodical and elaborately designed, planned , and executed acts of vengeance).
Thus, we consider as a fact that the primary brain can dominate over the secondary brain, and we assign to the existence of very powerful tendencies, which are pre-programmed in the primary brain, the cause of all the more instinctive and even irrational behaviors. Among these, there are a series of behaviors that characterize certain individuals, among which the most outstanding are those that are contrary to the "social order" normally accepted as correct and adequate.
We can mention as examples of these tendencies:
The tendency to exert violence and / or threat to obtain certain results, effects or benefits.
The tendency to use deception and / or simulation for the same purpose.
The tendency to obtain and hold great power and domination over others.
The tendency to possess great wealth, in territories, in goods, and money.
The more or less preferred and more or less exclusionary tendency to heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality, among the most prevalent sexual inclinations.
The tendency to religiousness as a fundamental element of moral guidance, support for our fears and the unknown, and that allows us to "understand and accept the inexplicable."
The tendency to suffer intense feelings of guilt, circumstance that weakens us and makes us "manageable".
The tendency to help, to collaborate, to defend (and / or save) others.
The tendency to insecurity and fear.
The tendency to submission.
The tendency to be reckless, courageous, leader.
The tendency to idealization, and to the self-convincement that these idealizations are or could be real.
(It is more comforting to think that what one wants most is what really exists, even if it is not so, another weakness of which some unscrupulous ones use in their favor, those characterized by some of the tendencies mentioned above, and which exist in all fields of human activity).
The concern (or lack of) of maintaining an adequate image in front of the others, resulting, in certain cases, the need to hide our true feelings and / or thinking.
The tendency to feel (or not feel) naturally as "own", values and principles that defend the integrity of individuals and societies, to the point of being (or not being) individuals naturally inclined towards respect for human rights, justice , honor, equality of opportunities, the right to life, dignified death, etc.
(From this we deduce that even the moral, religious and political position of each individual are determined, or at least greatly influenced, by the primary brain).
As we said before, this set of tendencies, according to the intensity of each, produce a very characteristic "configuration" in each person, distinguishing that individual from others. (This configurations constitute a special subject in a future chapter).
The Tribe.
It is important to emphasize the fact that there is also a preprogrammed set of inclinations aimed at protecting the immediate collective of the individual (those with whom he relates more directly), which have been crucial and determinant in the ability to survive of the human race, and have probably been originated and established very early in the evolutionary process of hominids. They are characterized by the fact that individuals generally "know and understand" them, regardless of how much they "feel them like theirs."
Thus, there is a preprogramming probably established in the most evolved part of the primary brain, if not in the transition area that gave rise to the secondary brain (primitive cortex), consisting of a set of tendencies that have as main goal the protection of the community more or less immediate to which each individual belongs (family, clan, tribe, etc.).
These tendencies imply the concept of the "common good" and a certain "moral order", key elements for the survival of that group, and on which all its members must at least appear before others as genuinely committed.
If the rest does not trust the "loyalty" of a certain member, the group characterizes that individual as potentially dangerous, and eventually deserving to be separated from the community or tribe, with the loss of rights and protection that that belonging implies.
Of course, and depending on the behavior of that individual, and the seriousness of his "betrayal," he may become worthy of proportional punishment, including death.
From the point of view of the individual, he who intuitively and / or consciously understands the importance of this concept will always try to appear very committed to the common good, whether he feels it genuinely or not, and will try to maintain an image that shows (or not) his true feelings and / or thinking. Along with this, if he always appears to be loyal to the group, he says the right things, and appears to behave appropriately, and tends to emphasize more the positive than the negative aspects of those around him, will be granted with a lot of success and popularity (emotional intelligence).
Thus, and as a consequence of this fundamental preprogramming, we continue and will continue to experience values such as loyalty, solidarity, and altruism as the most important for mankind.
Based on this concepts, we can understand the origin of the set of "social values" that characterize our life in community.
The Modern Processor.
On the other hand, along with the "feelings" we experience in our existence from our primary brain, there is our "thinking", which originates primarily in our secondary brain.
These two influences do not occur in a totally pure and separate form, since our "consciousness" probably comes from a complex interaction of both brains, to the point that we do not normally discriminate in a precise way which is weighing more in the evaluation that we make of any specific situation.
However, if we do a more directed and attentive exercise of analysis, using our secondary brain (on which we have more "control"), we understand that in general everything that comes from the primary brain is characterized by a strong emotional component, which we "receive" already more or less elaborated in our conscience and which is of clear pre-conscious or unconscious origin.
We must therefore include in our primary brain everything that seems to "reach us from the heart," "the irrational". "I feel I am in love," "I hate this person".
While everything that is more analytical, resulting from a more conscious evaluation process, based on experience, on acquired knowledge and skills, is what comes from our secondary brain.
("Joining this business may not really benefit me," "if I do this I want so much, I might be catched and fall into the hands of justice," etc.).
In this way, it is in our secondary brain, "our rational side", where our most analytical capacity, our powerful capacity for learning and inventiveness reside.
It is also where we analyze and value our moral conscience, and where, therefore, we perceive all the conflicts that produces in us to understand as "inconvenient, inadequate, or morally reproachable those thoughts", those "unconfessed desires" that we can feel. (Coming from our primary brain).
Who Wins?
However, the fact that a person brings certain pre-programmed tendencies into his or her primary brain, even if they are very strong and contrary to the protection and defense of human rights, it does not automatically mean that these tendencies will be expressed without limit.
On the contrary, as we have already said, there are different levels capable of opposing them, with different degree of success, according to the particular "configuration" that each "brain binomial" (primary-secondary brain) reaches in the different stages of the life of the individual.
To the purest tendencies, especially if they are "negative", those "unconfessed appetites" will oppose to a greater or lesser extent varied factors, that if powerful enough, might be able to block them from actually being performed.
Among these factors we must, of course, include our "moral conscience."
This moral conscience can become a true "building" of greater or lesser strength, which has been built based on a series of ingredients that are integrated to conform it.
First, the codification existing in the primary brain itself for the protection of the clan or tribe (which can reach only the immediate environment or be more widespread), immediate or extended family group, neighborhood, community, country, interests group, fans of a sports club, etc.), which in each individual, due to the variability that we have exposed before, can be of moderate strength, or very strong, or very weak.
Second, from the secondary brain, by the series of social norms "learned" as part of family rearing and school education, and from the influence and pressure of both the people in our immediate environment, and through the media like newspapers, radio, television, directly or through the internet, etc.
Third, from the moral convincement developed that a person can achieve from the positive elements that his religion provides. (Which unfortunately are often mixed with negative elements).
The moral conscience is added as a factor that discourages the concretion of the most negative tendencies, the fear of rejection and the reaction that the "environment" can exert against the person, capable of producing in practice a punishment that can be both moral and physical .
In the evaluation of the risk of this rejection and potential punishment, the secondary brain intervenes directly, based on a rational analysis, to which ingredients are added from the primary brain, like the tendency to recklessness, courage, defiance, arrogance, etc. , which according to their respective intensity are also able to finally tilt the balance in the sense of unleashing that "appetite" or not.
In addition to the above, we should consider the possiblity that under the influence of both brains, these "unconfessable tendencies" can be taken into practice, if there is a certainty of being able to do so in a more or less secret or reserved way.
The social rejection and reaction can come from different sources, depending on the age of the offender and the nature and seriousness of the offense: from the parents and the immediate family environment, from the peers themselves, from the wider community if the person is very well-known and / or the fault is very serious, from the earthly justice, from the divine justice, etc.
Thus, the person can live an existence in which his brains permanently struggle with each other, producing more or less tension in the individual, as these opposing forces collide, the most basic tendency, when it is contrary to the social and moral order, versus the moral conscience and the fear of the consequences of its concretion.
In this contest, the possibility that these tendencies are expressed or not will depend on the relative strength of both brains, and on the circumstantial dynamics of a given moment, which may make some of them stronger than the others.
Should we be optimistic about the future?
Regardless of how pessimistic or optimistic we are about the strengths and weaknesses of the human species, it is an undeniable fact that our secondary brain has been made over time, through generations, increasingly stronger and more developed if compared to the primary brain. Therefore, mankind is becoming, in many parts of the world, more humane and civilized.
Nevertheless, it is also a fact that we must continue to coexist for a long time with the important share of suffering caused by the behavior of all those whose primary brains prevail too much over their secondary brains, unleashing harmful behaviors for themselves and for those around them, especially in situations of marked social inequality, huge differences in living standards, high inequality of opportunity (the only remedy in the medium and long term is the availability of good education for all) , and at the same time in permissive environments that do not adequately discourage reprehensible, harmful, and / or downright criminal behavior.
Regarding the implications of this, and the necessary changes in the educational, preventive and repressive systems that human society must implement, if we truly want to decrease the incidence of abuse, violence, crime, and frauds of all kinds, we will dedicate at least one future chapter, to the transcendent subject of delinquency.
Stay tuned ;)
* This theoretical proposition has been conceived by me, based on pure reflection, for several years now. Only recently has come to me information about the work by Paul MacLean and his theory of the triple brain (The Triune Brain). Although I have read some references and comments on this theory, which seems to include concepts that are very similar to mine in terms of the probable existence of competition and conflict between these brains, which would enjoy different degrees of autonomy and independence, I do not wish to study it in detail, in order to continue to elaborate my own theory without being exposed to influence from that work.
Jorge Lizama León.
Santiago, April 2008.
