Hedgehogs, Aristotle, and Ritalin
September 15th, 2009 at 22:001. I AM A HEDGEHOG
First, let me begin my response by making it explicit that I am hedgehog and not a fox. If you are unfamiliar with the meaning of the hedgehog/fox dichotomy it is this: A hedgehog is focused one thing and sees unity, a fox, on the other hand, is focused on many things and engages in distinctions. Put another way, a hedgehog believes that education should be “an inch wide and a mile deep”. A fox, on the other hand, believes that education should be “a mile wide and an inch deep.” I am a hedgehog and I will strive for focus in all of my posts. That brings me to point #2
2. THRESHOLD QUESTION: WHICH ETHICAL THEORY?
A threshold question is how we are even approaching/defining “ethics” – for there are a number of competing approaches which I will not get into. But the take home point is “ethics” encompasses a variety of theories and approaches to “the right and the good”. For my part, I am an Aristotelian and a virtue ethicist. What that means is that I believe that ethical issues are issues about the traits that persons should have in order to lead a flourishing life (p.s. I have a view about what a flourishing life is). This is not the only ethical framework out there, mind you – and even positive psychologists disagree about the nature of flourishing. But I come at these questions with a very specific viewpoint.
3. READINGS VS. QUESTIONS
The readings and the questions are asking very different things and to answer all adequately would require me to avoid my hedgehog nature. So I am going to focus my comments on the paper about MPH (Ritalin).
4. THE ETHICS OF MPH
Adele Diamond, a neuroscientist who works on ADHD, has suggested that ADHD is the result a child’s failure to learn to self-regulate and develop cognitive control known as EXECUTIVE FUNCTION (EF). EF enables one to “stay on target” to stay focused – hedgehog like – on the task at hand. EF enables one to stay on a goal without getting derailed by temptations/distractions. Many students are unable to do this. Indeed many adults are able to do this. But it is a skill that can be learned with practice and effort. Indeed, the learning and mastery of such a skill has, in my view, tremendous effects on the individual and on flourishing. In fact, I think it is necessary for human flourishing.
Aristotle was aware of he brains natural reward system involved in learning and mastery. And he exhorted people to learn, learn, learn, so as to engage in the highest pleasure known to man and to further stimulate this natural reward system. But I also believe that he claimed that EF must be conquered first. Csikszentmihalyi, who I have mentioned before, refers to the interplay of the brain’s natural reward system and a challenging activity as flow. He also suggests that one can become addicted to the brain’s natural rewards that come from intense focus and concentration. He notes that virtually all human accomplishments are products of the flow state – a natural state of intense focus in which one is completely absorbed in an activity. Such a state presupposes a well developed EF.
I fear that the “normalization” of MPH will “hijack” the brain’s natural reward system for flow activity – and will diminish the individual’s chances of producing such focus – and of developing EF– through her own effort and concentration. Indeed, it is seeing oneself exert effort and concentration – seeing oneself go through the hard and painful work – that awakens the natural flow state and concentration. The work of Albert Bandura on self-efficacy is apt. It matters whether one sees one self focused because one has taken MPH, and it matters whether one sees one self focused because one is exerting sheer will-power.
I fear that the benefits of will-power are being eclipsed by the belief that it “cognitive enhancement” is an end in itself. It is not. It matters, developmentally, how cognitive enhancement is achieved. In 585 B.C. Thales successfully predicted the first eclipse without MPH. We should be focused on getting back and cultivating that natural ability – tied up with the brain’s natural reward and pleasure system – that Aristotle recognized as existing over two thousand years ago and that Csikszentmihalyi is reminding us of today.
To read Adele Diamond’s brief article on how an innovative school program, Tools of the Mind, is helping to develop self-regulation, click here.
Tags: 1st week, bereitschaftspotential, Csikszentmihalyi, Executive Function, Self-Regulation
September 16th, 2009 at 1:56 am
So, in a nutshell, you seem to be saying that the use of neuro-enhancers is bad because they interfere with the natural development of the types of self-regulatory cognitive behaviors crucial for the development of a flourishing individual.
This seems a reasonable view on the surface.
However I note that we seem to be talking about two distinct groups of users. Diamond is looking at very young children. The non-medical use of MPH is largely among older children, adolescents and even adults.
Are you saying that Ritilan is bad at any age, and if so why?
Basically it seems like your entire argument rests on your unproven contention that the development of self regulatory cognitive abilities, (EF), is impaired by drugs like Ritilan.
Is there any hard evidence that Ritilan impairs EF development?
Also I think there is a contradiction buried in your logic around the issue of the widely-accepting belief that EF skills are learnable. One of the main reasons people use Ritilan is the belief that it promotes learning, so why should we speculate that Ritilan helps learning in general, but not in the case of EF, which are widely-considered learnable?
Also, going back to the issue of what is neuroethics, this work could obviously be seen as having neuroethical implications. But by the same token an incredibly large body of existing scholarship could be classed under the heading of neuroethics. I’m wondering if the use of such a “big tent” definition of neuroethics can’t help but to ultimately diminish the value of the term.
September 16th, 2009 at 7:47 am
Hi. Thanks so much for the insightful comment.
First, I would not say that the developing of self-regulative cognitive behaviors do not arise naturally, but must be developed. Some may have an easier go at such development, but in the end, we are talking about impulse control, inhibition, concentration and attention. Skill and training are needed to fully develop EF. I interpret mindfulness meditation as one way which adults are trying to further develop these skills. William James in his Talks to Teachers, has a chapter on habit in which he discusses not EF per se — but the importance in cultivating attention, will and discpline and how one “has to pay a little tax” every day.
Second, I am not saying that Ritalin is always bad. As an Aristotelian, and as student of the law who deeply respects the concept of equity, I subscribe to the principle that there are always circumstances in which it is wrong/unjust to apply the rule. Ritalin should be a ‘last resort’ after a sufficient amount of training and other natural cognitive exercises fail. But just as in psychology where cognitive behavioral therapy cannot cure all people, there are some who will probably need Ritalin. But students who are using it before exam time are not likely to be members of this class. I can say this with some confidence as I teach at a public university and have a good understanding of how students are spending their time — many of them are unfocused and wavering – distracted and easily tempted.
Third, I am not making the argument that Ritalin impairs EF development. Rather, I am making the argument that it is unnecessary b/c the brain has natural chemicals which enable the individual to focus. They just need to be awakened, used, like certain activity dependent genes, if you will (the work on memory by Eric Kandel is apt). I do not know of any research on whether Ritalin impairs EF. My point is that just as alcohol and drugs are used to stimulate the brain’s reward system, thereby often times creating dependence on these products, my fear is that Ritalin will be used in the same way — especially amongst college students — they will develop a habit of dependence on this thing instead of cultivating the habits to produce natural attention and flow. And of course, there is the point made in the article that there could be some harms caused by this drug and another harm that I mentioned is on self-perception. As one sees oneself habitually taking Ritalin to focus one could develop the belief that one needs it, start to feel ambivalent, etc. Also many students acquire these drugs illegally, without a prescription. That is not good for the self concept either.
Finally, for me, neuroethics is about the research on the brain that is relevant to human flourishing. This is because by “ethics” I take a virtue centric/eudaimonistic approach which focuses on flourishing. One question is ‘what is flourishing’? The other is, how does one develop the traits to attain it. Work on neuroplasticity and debates concerning it are of relevance to this, it seems to me.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
identifying negative and damaging thoughts that can lead to low self-esteem and even depression. With the help of a trained therapist, cognitive therapy can help stop the pattern of negative thoughts and can help you fight depression.