nhamann comments on Meditation, insight, and rationality. (Part 1 of 3) - Less Wrong

35 Post author: DavidM 28 April 2011 08:26PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (120)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: nhamann 29 April 2011 12:09:22AM *  8 points [-]

A brief poke around in Google Scholar produced these papers, which look useful:

Alterations in Brain and Immune Function Produced by Mindfulness Meditation. Psychosomatic Medicine 65:564 –570 (2003)

Mindfulness training modifies subsystems of attention. COGNITIVE, AFFECTIVE, & BEHAVIORAL NEUROSCIENCE Volume 7, Number 2, 109-119

Long-term meditation is associated with increased gray matter density in the brain stem. NeuroReport 2009, 20:170–17

Attention regulation and monitoring in meditation. Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 April; 12(4): 163–169.

Comment author: Zetetic 29 April 2011 04:40:32PM 2 points [-]

Much appreciated! I was hoping that I might be able to get some meta-analysis out of one of the meditation advocates, but unfortunately it has not been offered up.

I do not even know what enlightenment is (or if it is even an actual phenomenon, beyond placebo) in terms of physiology/brain chemistry. It sounds like a threshold dose of LSD, judging by the subjective definitions. Because of this, I am not interested in enlightenment, but I am interested on any known enhancing effects of meditation techniques.

Comment author: Jonathan_Graehl 29 April 2011 01:13:30AM 2 points [-]

Also, meditation reduces pain sensitivity, even for future pain.

Comment author: DavidM 29 April 2011 12:27:30AM 2 points [-]

Thanks for the references. I should have made clear that I meant, not that there are no peer-reviewed studies about meditation, but there are none that I know of that concern enlightenment, the typical stages of meditative experience leading up to it, cognitive / neurophysiological sequelae, etc. (which are what I would find interesting in this context).

If you know otherwise, I'd love to hear about it.

Comment author: nhamann 29 April 2011 01:09:15AM 2 points [-]

Ahh, good point. My comment is somewhat irrelevant then with regards to this, as it seems that what you're interested in is beyond the scope of science at present.

Comment author: Fly 29 April 2011 04:13:39AM 14 points [-]

My gold standard for understanding reality is science, i.e., the process of collecting data, building models, making predictions, and testing those predictions again and again and again. In the spirit of "making beliefs pay rent" if Buddist meditation leads to less distorted views of reality then I would expect that "enlightened" Buddists would make especially successful scientists. As a religious group the Jews have been far more productive than the Buddists. Apparently Buddist physicists have no special advantage at building models that "carve reality at the joints". The Buddist monk may experience the illusion of knowing reality but actually understand less than a physicist. Or perhaps Buddist meditation trains the mind to "not care" or "not trust perceptions" to a degree that interferes with science? In what fields have Buddist monks excelled?

I am following with interest recent studies on brain changes due to mindfulness meditation, specifically improvements in executive function that accompany the enlargement of white matter tracts connecting the prefrontal cortex to the amygdala. So far I interpret the results as brain circuits being strengthened by attentional focus training so that the prefrontal cortex can inhibit signals arising in the amygdala, insula, thalamus, and hypothalamus. For those lacking such control this may be beneficial, i.e., those with low impulse control, for example children. There may be a motivational downside for those who already habitually inhibit such drives, e.g., those who easily become lost in abstract thought.

Comment author: MichaelVassar 02 May 2011 11:41:59AM *  10 points [-]

"In what fields have Buddhist monks excelled?"
Martial arts? Some other arts. Propagating a religion. Overcoming what seem to many people to be overwhelming motivations, such as the motivation to eat or to avoid extreme amounts of pain, convincing people that they are wise, maybe some memory and rapid cognition feats.

If you count Stoics as Buddhists, as I would, governing Rome & providing that part of the content of Christianity for lack of which the ancient world seems most alien.

Comment author: wedrifid 29 April 2011 04:56:33AM 5 points [-]

So far I interpret the results as brain circuits being strengthened by attentional focus training so that the prefrontal cortex can inhibit signals arising in the amygdala, insula, thalamus, and hypothalamus.

Might I suggest that as well as the inhibition you actually benefit from the cortex having more access to the information and processing that the aforementioned regions provide? Because generalised inhibition in itself isn't all that difficult, mindfulness aside. It is nuanced, well considered inhibition that takes work. It is also what lasts in the long term - because simply inhibiting the signals from those centres doesn't help eliminate the cause.

Comment author: DavidM 29 April 2011 12:20:45PM *  3 points [-]

Do you have statistics or studies concerning the claim that Buddhist physicists are not advantaged in science? How would you even begin to rationally approach the issue? It seems complicated---you'd have to adjust for education levels, the possibility that meditators are inclined to pursue subjects other than physics, the fact that meditation takes up time that could otherwise be devoted to studying physics, different cultural backgrounds of meditations vs. controls...

Intuitively, I think your claim is likely to be true, but I can't really see how you can rigorously support it. Data on the % of Buddhist physicists, if it even exists, would only be scratching the surface of what you would need to support your claim. (Not that I want to debate the claim. But if you feel it's important, I want a non-handwavey argument.)

A better model for enlightenment, meditation and rationality, I'd say, is that these things give you tools that allow you to be more rational if you're so inclined. As with everything in life, it's your own goals and inclinations that determine what you do with them.

An analogy is drinking coffee. Paraphrasing Paul Erdos, a mathematician is one who turns coffee into theorems. Do coffee drinkers have a special advantage in mathematics? Probably not. So perhaps Erdos was wrong; perhaps having to empty one's bladder more often actually interferes with being a good mathematician? Again, probably not. Most likely, drinking coffee leads to mathematical productivity for people who are interested in increasing mathematical productivity.

Comment author: novalis 29 April 2011 05:47:55PM 1 point [-]
Comment author: [deleted] 30 April 2011 01:46:11AM *  1 point [-]

A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems.

Attributed to both Alfréd Rényi and Paul Erdős

Comment author: [deleted] 29 April 2011 06:12:59PM 1 point [-]

Heh, coffee (and caffeine in general) is such an ingrained part of the culture here.

Comment author: Bongo 29 April 2011 08:07:29AM 0 points [-]

*Buddhist

Comment author: DavidM 29 April 2011 03:02:18AM *  0 points [-]

Unfortunately, as far as I know, it's an issue that hasn't been studied...but because of the detailed knowledge that has come out of communities interested in enlightenment, I see no principled reason why it couldn't be studied.

Actually, I think it's low-hanging fruit.