Neuroethics and the Emory Tibet Science Initiative

I recently interviewed fellow Neuroethics Blog contributors Dr. Julia Haas and Dr. Gillian Hue about courses they taught during the summer at Tibetan Buddhist monasteries in South India as part of the Emory-Tibet Science Initiative (ETSI). Julia (who is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the Philosophy-Neuroscience-Psychology Program at Washington University) taught philosophy of science at Drepung Loseling Monastery in Karnataka, and Gillian (who is the senior program coordinator for the Emory University Initiative to Maximize Student Development, program associate in the Emory Neuroethics Program, and the Managing Editor for AJOB Neuroscience) taught neuroscience at the Sera Jey Monastery in Bylakuppe.

A neuroscience class at Sera Jey Monastery (Photo credit: Gillian Hue)

The ETSI (part of the Emory-Tibet Partnership) works to introduce science programs into the education of Tibetan Buddhist monks and nuns. Julia explained that “for the past six years they had a pilot program in the north of India [in Dharamsala], and now it is gradually being rolled out as part of the curriculum for some of the higher monastic degrees.” Such degrees are offered at Drepung Loseling and Sera Jey, which function as monastic universities.



In our interview, Julia said that she first heard about the ETSI from Neuroethics Blog contributor Brian Dias who taught in Dharamsala the previous year, and she joined the program when a professor in her department, Dr. Mark Risjord, was looking for interested students. According to Julia, the ETSI wants philosophers like her involved because the Tibetan monks' education is heavily based in philosophy and they “thought that might be a good entry point for the monks to start thinking about science before they started learning the specifics.”



The philosophy of science class was the introductory class for the program. Julia defines philosophy of science as “the methods and...practices that are involved in scientific research”. It deals with questions such as: “how are scientific discoveries made, ... how does scientific change come about, or what distinguishes science from non-science?” The class introduced scientific concepts and terminology such as correlation versus causation, measurements, the scientific method, and scientific theories and also “more abstract philosophical ideas.”

Julia Haas's philosophy of science course (Photo Credit: ETSI) 

Teaching in the monasteries is a unique and challenging experience for the ETSI instructors, due to the educational and cultural differences and the language barrier. The monastic students have less knowledge of Western science (though there is a Tibetan scientific tradition), but they have deep philosophical knowledge. Because of this, Julia explained that her course was more about teaching the concepts in a way that would fit into the knowledge they already had:

“These are the elite students in the Tibet tradition. … The monks are very advanced scholars already when you when you walk into the classrooms, so they have these rich and sophisticated worldviews that sometimes are compatible with a scientific approach and sometimes less so. It is a question of translating some of the scientific concepts as opposed to introducing them to a blank slate. You are mostly trying to make ideas fit with a very well developed worldview and find where the similarities are or where the differences are.”

The ETSI translated the American instructors' educational materials into Tibetan, and interpreters (monastic students who spoke English--oftentimes Tenzin Gyatso Science Scholars) translated in the classrooms. Julia did not find the language barrier to be much of a problem, stating that the main issue she had with it was having difficulty getting to know her students on a personal level. Gillian said that the language barrier and cultural differences did impact the way she taught and that she needed to remain aware of them in order to make sure she was communicating her lessons clearly.

A monk writing the names of the cerebral lobes in Tibetan (Photo credit: Gillian Hue)

The addition of the science program constitutes “the first change in the curriculum in the Tibetan monastic universities in 600 years.” But Julia noted that the students she taught “were incredibly open to the sciences, given how new it is to their tradition.” She contrasted their attitude with the resistance scientific thinkers faced from “philosophers and religious movements in Europe” when modern science started to emerge. Their attitude is encouraged by the Dalai Lama's enthusiasm for the program and his belief in the importance of science education for Buddhist monastics. Gillian elaborated, explaining that “neuroscience was the area of study that the Dalai Lama specifically asked to be a focus of the ETSI.” And he had expressed his interest in neuroscience before the creation of the Emory-Tibet partnership, including in a controversial talk at the 2005 Society for Neuroscience meeting where he stated his belief that a better understanding of the human brain could make us more ethical and compassionate: "I believe that the collaboration between neuroscience and the Buddhist contemplative tradition may shed fresh light on the vitally important question of the interface of ethics and neuroscience.”



Gillian said that such ideas are what excite her about the ETSI project and neuroethics in general, though they require background knowledge of neuroscience before they can be properly studied. She commended the ETSI neuroscience curriculum team and instructors for focusing on teaching the basics before discussing more complex issues such as the neuroscience of ethics and consciousness.

(Photo Credit: ETSI)

Both Americans and Tibetan members of the ETSI were aware that there could possibly be unintended results of introducing modern science to an insular and traditional community. Julia explained that she was concerned that it could lead to a decrease in the importance and prevalence of religion in their society, as occurred in Europe in response to the rise of modern science. The issue was also discussed by Dr. Risjord and some of the Tibetan religious leadership, but ultimately they believe that a collaborative program such as this can in fact allow the monks to reconcile science with their religion and “empower the tradition to engage with science, so instead of being threatened by it … they can bring their tradition into harmony with science.”



A project like the ETSI presents many challenges, but such a collaborative effort between different educational institutions can greatly benefit all involved. The ETSI hopes to eventually fulfill the Dalai Lama's dream of creating a sustainable and permanent science education program within the Tibetan monasteries. One of the main goals behind the Science Scholars program is to train monks to teach the science courses at their own monasteries, which should allow further integration of the science curriculums with Tibetan Buddhism.





Want to cite this post?




Queen, J. (2014). The Emory Tibet Science Initiative: Interview with Dr. Julia Haas and Dr. Gillian Hue. The Neuroethics Blog. Retrieved on , from http://www.theneuroethicsblog.com/2014/10/the-emory-tibet-science-initiative.html

More or less human: How can a dog brain imaging study and companion animal neuroscience explain my human-ness?

“It was amazing to see the first brain images of a fully
awake, unrestrained dog,” Berns said. “As far as we know, no one has been able
to do this previously. We hope this opens up a whole new door for understanding
canine cognition and inter-species communication. We want to understand the dog-human
relationship, from the dog’s perspective.”—Greg Berns, MD, PhD

Recently, the Emory laboratory of Dr. Greg Berns published
the first fMRI brain imaging study in unanesthetized dogs.  Popular media reports of the study
touting, “What is your dog thinking?” and “Brain Scans Reveal Dogs’ Thoughts”
have raised the hackles of the public who ask, “Why conduct a frivolous
scientific study on something we already know?”



A closer inspection of the
actual study publication reveals a simpler and still significant result: The
study serves as an experimental “proof of principle”, establishing a model
precedent for future dog cognition studies. As a neuroscientist, I view this
recent dog brain imaging study as opening a new realm of possibilities for
research, not only on dog cognition, but also on the evolution of social
behavior in humans and with non-human animals that have come to define our
human-ness.

FMRI representations of neurological activity produced by reward anticipation in the brains of Callie and McKenzie. Image: Berns et al./SSRN--pulled from Wired

Dog imaging research in unanesthetized, cooperating dogs is
quite frankly, brilliant for 3 reasons that I will describe below.

Importantly, the timing of this research is impeccable. With
mounting trends against animal researchers, especially those who engage in
non-human primate research, the public is calling for different studies where
animals aren’t held captive in unnatural environments for research (some
neuroscience experts are even advocating that we utilize human models,
especially for research on psychiatric disorders).  In fact, not only are these studies non-invasive and call
for the dogs’ “voluntary” cooperation (the dogs were trained 8 months prior to
actually enter and sit still in a scanner with custom sound-blocking
headphones), the dogs are also considered, as stated by the authors, to be more
at home in the research setting: Dogs are human’s oldest domesticated animal
and have evolved to be quite “natural” in a human-dominated environment. In addition,
the scientific research community, along with many humanities scholars, is now
building a case that non-human animals have traits such as empathy, traits that
were previously (perhaps almost sacredly) privileged to humans.

Callie was trained to enter the scanner with headphones and sit still during the scans.

Berns and colleagues took special care with these studies,
seeking advice from the Institutional Review Board (IRB, which reviews human
research protocols) in addition to the Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee (IACUC, which reviews animal research protocols), treating the
animals basically as special, vulnerable research subjects.

Second, it’s simply en vogue to care about animals and to
demonstrate principles of care about our non-human relationships, from the
environment to what animals we (don't) eat. This movement in “Green Capitalism” and
“Charitable Capitalism” can be seen daily, with major corporations providing
sustainable products, seeing sustainability and the organic food movement, for
better and/or worse, as good business.

Third, as a society, we are beginning to more routinely
acknowledge the significance of our non-human relationships; even our legal
policies, which reflect our temporally relevant consensus values and morals,
are currently being challenged. Legal scholars and aspiring lawyers are being
trained in animal personhood and animal law. According to the Animal Legal Defense Fund 141 (versus 125 when I wrote about this 1 year ago) schools in the U.S. and Canada now offer courses in “Animal
Law”.

Scholars like Donna Haraway, author of the Companion Species Manifesto and When Species Meet, believe that our relationship with dogs is
simultaneously a “historical aberration” and a “natural cultural legacy”.
Haraway argues that dogs and humans not only co-habit our worlds but also
co-evolved with us to develop a sophisticated cross-species social existence.

Donna Haraway, a brilliant scholar. You should read all of her books.

In
particular, she is interested in examining, “How might an ethics and politics
committed to the flourishing of significant otherness be learned from taking
dog-human relationships seriously?” And more pointedly, she and many scholars
are troubled by imbalances of “bio-power” and “bio-sociality” wherein “Man
makes himself the hero in the greatest story ever told” and human relationships
with dogs are rarely viewed beyond a “caninophilic narcissm”, an illusion that
one’s dog is a source of unconditional love for its owner.

Several researchers have noted that dogs and other furry
creatures have a track record of benefiting human health and well being of
children, the elderly, and those with and without disabilities. But rather than
viewing domesticated dogs as simply a technology invented by humans-- which she
argues is a unidirectional view of agency-- Haraway suggests a broader view
which acknowledges the existence of multiple directions of agency where dogs
and humans co-create and co-constitute our lives, partners in creating our
society as we know it.

Loukanikos aka "Riot Dog"": Stray dog that joined demonstrators in Athens, Greece.

What is to be gained by exploring this view with
Haraway?  Haraway says that
companion animals are “one instance in a story field of what makes us
human”.  Companion animals in a
sense aren’t just a commodity or piece of property for us, a technology that
humans made. Animal domestication and our lives with non-human animals (and
perhaps other non-human entities) actually makes us who we are as humans.  Our identities, be it human or
non-human animal, are co-created and have co-evolved with our environments and
all of the entities within it. Therefore, in conceptualizing humans, we must also consider
individuals as a product of their relationships, including those with animals.

But how would understanding our relationships with non-human
animals affect our world-view and our practices and what does this relationship
mean for society?

Read more about this in comparative religion scholar, Thomas Kasulis's work.  I recommend his book, Intimacy or Integrity.

Dr. Bern’s studies offer us an opportunity to explore some
powerful lines of research to illuminate human experiences. These lines of
research, some of which have been proposed by psychologists such as Gail
Melson, have not yet been considered in the light of recent brain imaging
studies. Nonetheless, these topics could be explored with neuro-imaging.

First, we could explore humans and animals as interdependent
systems: How do companion animals and their owners mutually reinforce and
modify one another’s behavior and what are the neurological bases of this
reinforcement and behavior modification.   Second, we could explore higher-order cognitive
functioning in non-human animals: How might animal research paradigms be
modified to reflect growing bodies of evidence demonstrating that animals have
qualities, such as empathy, that historically were privileged to humans? How
might these studies impact the growing interest in legal communities to grant
animals legal standing and “rights”? 
For example, how might the IRB and IACUC modify regulations for on-going
research to maximize welfare of research animals and maximize relevance of data
acquired from these experiments? And further, what are the legal ramifications
under various contexts in living with non-human animals such as companion
animals, research animals, and consumed animals?

 

These dog brain imaging and studies of companion animal
cognition are just the tip of the iceberg, opening a new world of research not
a moment too soon. I believe animal studies with dogs as a model may bring very
fruitful insights into understanding human and non-human alike social life. And
in so doing we can have an even deeper conversation and experience in our daily
lives.

In loving memory of Chino Zapata Moreno de Guevera

beloved companion, teacher, and mysterious fellow traveler 

December 14, 1997 - May 10, 2012

Want to cite this post?


Rommelfanger, K. (2012). More or less human: How can a dog brain imaging study and companion animal neuroscience explain my human-ness?. The Neuroethics Blog. Retrieved on
, from http://www.theneuroethicsblog.com/2012/06/more-or-less-human-how-can-dog-brain.html

References and Recommended Reading:

“Functional MRI in Awake Unrestrained Dogs.” By Gregory
Berns, Andrew Brooks and Mark Spivak. Public Library of Science ONE,
publication date to-be-determined.

European Graduate School youtube channel: Donna Haraway
Companion Animals Manifesto (2003)



Donna Haraway When Species Meet (2008) Posthumanities Volume 3

Quotes and Images from Berns pulled from: http://news.emory.edu/stories/2012/05/esc_what_is_your_dog_thinking/campus.html

Gail Melson “Psychology and the Study of Human-Animal
Relationships.” Society and Animals Volume 10 (2002) 347-352



Thomas P. Kasulis. Intimacy or Integrity: Philosophy and Cultural Differences (2002) University of Hawai'i Press