Metaphors on the Mind: Psychology

11/15/2010

In his article “This Is Your Brain on Metaphors”, Robert Sapolsky explains the effect metaphors have on the brain and how they can twist our reality. He begins by explaining the basics of neurology: that electrical messages are carried throughout our brain and nervous system by particles called neurons. While the human has the same neurons as most other living organisms (same electrical properties, many of the same neurotransmitters, and the same protein channels that allow ions to flow in and out), we have billions more. Over the time we have evolved, our brains have increased in capacity and neuron count. However, we have not developed new “chambers” for storing and processing information, which is why, Sapolsky believes, we have a hard time differentiating between reality and ideals or metaphors. To explain his theory, Sapolsky concentrates on one “chamber” of the brain in particular; the insula. This area of the brain is responsible for processing both physical and psychic feeling. So if you were to smell hot sauce (and let’s say you don’t like hot sauce), then the insula would formulate a feeling of disgust. The same thing happens if you see hot sauce, taste hot sauce, or even think about hot sauce. When humans developed morals and ethics, those feelings were not put into a new “chamber” but instead were packed into the insula. So if one were to read a story about slavery in the 1700’s they would feel (in most cases) disgusted. Our feelings of disgust, pride, anger, etc. are therefore based solely on the part of the brain in which they are processed (the insula). The same can be said for pain, which we know is both physical and psychic from experience, and is processed by neurotransmitters called Substance P, located in the anterior cingulated (AC). The pain you feel when you are punched is directly related to the indirect pain you feel when you witness loved one being hurt. Sapolsky mentions numerous tests that have been conducted regarding this theory. For example, when subjects were made to hold a stack of heavy books and told to give their opinions on their peers, they judged without congenial interest. However, subjects the were given a cup of warm coffee to hold gave kind, friendly profiles of their peers. While these circumstances may not dictate our overall decisions and opinions, Sapolsky believes they do play a major role.

This article presents a theory that can only be proven scientifically by neurologists who must have a comprehensive understanding of chemistry. Neurology is a theoretical/factual stem from chemistry in that the conclusions drawn from research in this field are often based on the chemical makeup of the human brain. While therapists and psychologists set the foreground into the study of the brain, only using chemistry and biology will neurologists be able to factually understand the most complex component to human anatomy and behavior; the brain.

I enjoy learning about neurology because it explains how we come about our opinions, thoughts, and theories. Sapolsky also explained the linguistic aspect of the brain, which was composed of nuanced observations. He stated that humans have the ability to distinguish what we see/read from what is actually being said. One of his examples was of Russian composer Tchaikovsky and his music rendition of Napoleon being defeated outside of Moscow. While we can relate this jumble of noise to an event in history, we also understand that “Napoleon” relates not just to a man on a horse, but thousands of starved soldiers fighting in the cold, far from home (or more depending on how much one knows). I found these observations to be, although obvious, nonetheless, very interesting.

Luke Connors

Link to article