快猫短视频

IF YOU struggle to define your innermost feelings of love, lust, anger and jealousy, you are not alone 鈥� scientists are especially sloppy, sometimes referring to emotions as feelings, at other times referring to internal states or behaviours.

Which is just one of the reasons why Ralph Adolphs and David Anderson have created a new framework for the study of emotion across species. In The Neuroscience of Emotion, the two Caltech professors sift through current studies of emotion, and provide a road map for the future.

Their analysis is authoritative and unsurpassed in its intricate examination of the field. It is also fluent, but don鈥檛 expect a frolic: this is a commanding textbook for scientists and students. The book may interest lay readers, but most will struggle 鈥� unless multivariate analyses or representational geometry are your thing.

The early chapters are about what we don鈥檛 know and what we consistently get wrong, an in-depth view of our ignorance in which the authors imply we know almost nothing about how the brain produces emotion. This criticism continues throughout the book. I can imagine scientists despairing, overcome by the futility of their past work and the enormity of future endeavours.

鈥淎 science of emotion must be cumulative since we don鈥檛 know the best level at which to understand it鈥�

Light relief comes through famous historical cases, including Phineas Gage, the railroad worker whose behaviour changed after an iron pole was blasted through his brain, and SM, a woman whose rare brain lesion left her with little or no capacity to experience fear.

As the book progresses, it gets easier to read, with Adolphs and Anderson moving from how to understand the basic properties of emotion to the tools used to study animals and humans. It ends by evaluating current theories and running through the questions still to be answered.

It is clear that understanding emotions will take a group effort. Emotion is an emergent property of a complex system of molecules, cells, circuits, networks and entire brains, say the authors. Since we don鈥檛 yet know the best level at which to understand it, a science of emotion must be cumulative, with all levels studied in parallel.

Part of the problem is that emotions are not material phenomena. The amygdala, for example, is often associated with fear: we can cut it out and impair some forms of fear. But put one in a dish, stimulate it as much as you like 鈥� and it would still be absurd to claim you are causing a state of fear. As the authors say: 鈥淚nsofar as the amygdala generates fear, it can do so only within a complex network of other brain structures.鈥�

The book is at its best with thought experiments. Try decoupling the word 鈥渆motion鈥� from the 鈥渃onscious experience of emotion鈥�. Our everyday usage assumes conscious experience, but the science of emotion need not: is non-conscious emotion possible, in animals, humans, even robots?

Antonio Damasio, one of the foremost scientists in the field, calls this an 鈥渋ndispensable book鈥�. For students and scientists willing to invest serious effort, I agree. But readers who want to learn how we use feelings to construct ourselves might feel more at home with Damasio鈥檚 book, The Strange Order of Things.

This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淓motional beings鈥�