November 9, 2023 • 36 mins
Season 2 reaches its conclusion in Episode 6, where Dan interviews Sofia Carozza on the role of love and relationship in brain development.
Sofia, a postdoctoral research fellow at Harvard Medical School, specializes in computational modeling and focuses on the impact of adversity on the development of the human brain. Her research enriches this ever-evolving field of study.
Have your call in questions be featured on the podcast:
Leave a voicemail at 949-257-2436
Learn more and read articles:
https://www.magiscenter.com/purposeful-lab
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to Purposeful Lab and Lodges Center podcast.
I'm Catherine Hadre with Dr DanKebler.
Here we are at the end ofseason two.
Already it's flown by it's beenan exciting season.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
It's some great guests we've had on and we still
have another great guest forour last episode.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
We're going to be speaking with a neuroscientist,
all about how behavior affectsthe brain, truly rewires the
brain.
Dr Sophia Carosa is a renownedCatholic neuroscientist.
She earned a degree inneuroscience and theology, which
is, I think, a perfect blendfor our purposes.
Yes, from the University ofNotre Dame, she graduated as the
valedictorian in 2019.
(00:37):
So she's very young as well andimpressive.
Let's get to it with ourinterview with Dr Sophia Carosa.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Sophia, thanks for taking the time to sit down with
us.
I appreciate it.
Thanks for having me, yeah,great.
So just before we get into sortof what your talk was here at
the meeting, why don't you tellus a little bit about the
research you did for your PhD,which you just finished?
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Sure, yeah, just submitted a couple of weeks ago.
So my thesis was on the effectof abuse and neglect on child
brain development andspecifically applying the
methods of network science tothis question of how it is that
children adapt to earlyexperiences of adversity.
So I reconstructed thestructural brain networks of
lots of different children andthen used computational models
(01:21):
to try to understand how theymight differ and why, based on
experiences of deprivation andthreatening experiences early in
life.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Okay, so looking to see how do they adapt to that,
or how the brain tries to sortof overcome developmental.
Speaker 3 (01:40):
Yeah, how it shapes the brain exactly in a way that
then might account for somepsychological and psychiatric
outcomes that we see later inlife.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, it was interesting you talk.
One of the things that I reallystruck me was you're talking
about how the brain is arelational organ.
Yes, and I think that there'sbiological and theological stuff
underneath that unpack, butwhat do you mean from a
biological perspective?
(02:10):
How do you see the brain as arelational organ?
Yeah, how does that work here?
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Yeah, it's really one of the most beautiful facts of
the brain, I think, the brain asa relational organ.
When I use that phrase, what Imean is that over the course of
childhood, even embryonicdevelopment, the primary driver
of the emergence of thestructured function of the human
brain is loving relationship,first with the mother, and then
(02:36):
with the mother and father, andthen a broader community, and
it's especially, you see this inthe postnatal period.
So after birth, the factor thatshapes which connections are
kept in the brain and which onesare eliminated, and how neural
circuits are organized tosupport behavior, the factor
that drives all of that is theinteractional landscape.
(02:56):
So the kinds of socialexchanges that babies have with
their parents, of talking andgazing at objects together and
touch is so important.
And all of these provide thesensory information that, from
the outside to within, shapes,shapes brain structure and,
again, in a way that sets thefoundation for a lifetime of
(03:18):
cognition and emotionalregulation and behavior and
health.
And so, yeah, so you can'tunderstand the brain or anything
that the brain supportsthroughout the lifespan without
looking at the developmentalhistory of the brain.
And when we're looking at thechild's, you can't understand a
child's behaviors or abilitieswithout an understanding of what
(03:43):
that child has been through andwhere that child has come from.
Specifically, when it comes torelationships and I find this
really beautiful as youmentioned, there's a lot of
theological resonances with whatit means to be made in the
image of God and yeah, and alsoit's such an occasion for
compassion as we encounterothers who might be exhibiting
behaviors or suffering in waysthat we don't understand.
(04:04):
To ask what might have happenedto this person.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Yeah, what relationships have been deprived
?
Exactly, and so because lookingat psychology, you see these
stages of development, and so ifyou don't have the proper
relationships at one stage, it'shard for them.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
So it's not just child, the brain development,
but it's throughout your life.
There's a Exactly Arelationship.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
There's an expectation of relationship.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Yeah, and that's the foundation upon which we have to
build, yeah, and from atheological perspective, because
obviously we're not disembodiedbrains right, right, we are.
Right, we are not disembodiedin our body but we are one.
We are relational organisms.
Not just a relational Brain isvery indicative of how
(04:49):
relationships affect us, but weare relational organisms in a
way.
And how do you see that sort ofresonating with, say, a
theological understanding of ahuman person from an
anthropological sense, of thefirst anthropology?
Speaker 3 (05:09):
Yeah, yeah.
So I always think of it in termsof the first creation narrative
in Genesis, and when the Lordmakes the human person in his
image and likeness, and this isa God who's revealed himself to
be Trinity and so to be arelationship of love amongst
these three persons, and thatall of creation, but most
(05:29):
especially the human person, isthe outpouring of that
Trinitarian life.
And so the human person'sdestiny, origin and destiny is
in this Trinitarian love, and soto most flourish as a human
being is to become relational,more relational, to embrace
interdependence and to findone's fulfillment in these
relationships of love.
(05:50):
And I think it's beautiful tosee not just a reflection of
that in our biology but actuallythe means through which that's
achieved on the physical level.
In our biology it's in allowingourselves to be shaped and
nourished by others and thenproviding that for them in turn.
That's what constitutes ourflourishing on the biological
(06:12):
level.
And I think that's beautifulthat at every level we see
there's a unity to the humanperson, the unity to our calling
, our vocation, that can be sucha source of esteem for the
dignity of what's given to usand like our ordinary family
interactions, yeah, it makes yousee people, I think, in a
different light, absolutely.
Speaker 2 (06:33):
And I think that's a culture where and again I call
victim to this all the timethinking of I'm a self-made
person, I'm autonomous, I can dowhat I want.
I wouldn't achieve what I want,and that it's listen to me,
you're talking, thinking itthrough that it's kind of
productive to our ownflourishing.
It is, I think, that way rightit is.
Yeah, you see yourself as theobligations almost you have to
(06:59):
other people to help themflourish in relation.
So the brain development,they're normal.
That's the way we're meant tobe, exactly yeah.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
And how all reality like you said, the truth, all
reality is relational, so it'shard to nothing exists in
isolation, in isolation exactly.
Yeah, that's great.
You know one of the things thatoften you know in brain science
.
Typically, you know, people seethat as a way to understand the
(07:32):
brain.
If we understand the brain, weunderstand what fires in in
Sophie is in the, we know what'sgoing on.
We can reduce you to yourneural.
So if we do imaging of yourbrain and see this area is
active, you know, we'veunderstand, you know your
behavior and so forth and youknow, certainly, understanding
(07:54):
what's going on in the brain isimportant for understanding the
embodied person, right, but thelimitations, yeah.
So you talked about what to besort of the expectations that
you should have, what neuralscience can deliver and what it
can't deliver.
Right, because I think there'sthis danger that people think
neural science can explain allthere is to know about who you
(08:14):
are, who I am, right, right, soanything that lies beyond that
limit must not exist.
Speaker 3 (08:20):
Yeah, so neural science is as you said an
important and beautiful windowinto reality and obviously, as a
neuroscientist, I have aserious deal with this.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
So having that I would absolutely affirm that
they're also very narrow limitswhen it comes to what
neuroscience can tell us aboutthe human person.
So to take your example oflooking at the activity of a,
particular brain region andtrying to relate that to a
behavior.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Use it to explain a behavior.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Now let's take the example of reasoning right, so
like trying to problem solve.
If we understand what the brainis doing during problem solving
, we might have a better accountof the particular steps that
are being taken, we might have abetter understanding of how, on
the biological level, thestructure of your brain is
(09:16):
supporting the functions thatare necessary for that cognitive
process to happen.
So can you be valuable to lookat the brain, but what it can't
tell you is the content or themeaning of your reasoning.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
And it can't give you a picture of the significance
or the moral value of youraction or the context in which
it's taking place.
It's a very narrow, mechanistic, procedural look at that
particular behavior.
So it can't tell you whatsomething is.
Speaker 1 (09:47):
It can tell you how it's being realized on the
biological level, but it's notgoing to answer questions of
meaning or value or substance oressence in any way.
Speaker 3 (09:59):
And so, yes, that doesn't mean it's useless, but
it does mean that, just becausewe can locate something in the
brain doesn't mean it doesn'talso exist on higher levels of
reality that can't be reduced tobiology, but because we're not
a soul and body as two separatethings but embodied souls are in
the soul bodies, and so ofcourse we would expect to see
(10:22):
brain activity during somethinglike reasoning or emotions or in
love, and that's perfectlyconsistent.
Speaker 1 (10:31):
I'd be surprised, shocked, a little scared, If we
could find no trace of thenervousness of any activity
happening we'd be fell in love.
But yeah, but it's completelyunreasonable to think that just
because there's neural activitydoesn't mean that there's also a
reality above that.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
That can't be reduced to it.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
Yeah, yeah, so they usually do.
Well, this is the God area ofthe brain.
So when that's active, thenyou're just imagining God.
But God is going to interactwith us.
We're embodied people.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
Well, my brain shouldn't be active when I'm
interacting with God.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
But it does help us understand mental defects, and
there are people that are unableto have proper or flourishing
relationships because of so.
There is a usefulness of thatand also usefulness of knowing
what areas of the brain seem tobe more active when you do
(11:25):
certain things.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
Yeah, and how they interact and what can support
this process that we'reinterested in, whatever it is,
on the neurological level so noteven considering those who
might have difficulties ordisorders, but even in what we
would call quote unquotenormative population, we can
really understand what makes forhumans flourishing on the
(11:47):
biological level and so supportthose higher level realities
that we're interested in.
And so, yes, I think it's avery useful tool for that, but
it depends upon priorcommitments and understandings
and concepts that you have thatdon't come from the science
itself, and I think that'sreally important.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
So, yeah, great, what are those prior commitments?
And maybe two extreme examplesSure, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (12:12):
So, for example, there are common studies of free
will where researchers will askparticipants to flex their
finger at any time that theydesire and they're measuring
brain activity and trying tofind a pattern of brain activity
that precedes the flexion ofthe finger and reliably detect
(12:34):
this in a way that can make thempredict when this participant
will flex their finger.
And they ask the participantsat what point did you decide to
flex your finger?
And they show that we canmeasure brain activity before
the participant reports having aconscious decision to flex
their finger.
So what this seems to say iswell, based on my readout of
your brain, I can predict whatyou're going to do next, or your
(12:57):
idea of freedom is actually anillusion.
So this is one extreme exampleof how this is weaponized
ideologically the study of thebrain.
But what's very important tounderstand here is, even beyond
some of the methodologicallimits of these studies of free
will is that it's presupposing aparticular conception of free
(13:17):
will that is thenoperationalized in the study and
informs how the research isdesigned and interpreted.
So in this case, the idea offree will that's being
operationalized.
Loosely speaking, I don'tembrace this, so they might
correct me, but what it seems tobe is an assumption that free
will is the perfect capacity toalways and always consciously
(13:45):
decide the details of whenyou're going to act on urges for
motor movement.
So to give you, that's a lot ofjargon.
So it'd be basically the ideathat free will is the perfect
capacity to, to understand whatyou're doing and to control when
you're doing it, when you dosomething like suppress a cough.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Right.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
Now, I don't know any philosopher who would say, yeah
, that's a great definition offree will break.
And so.
So it's really important tothink like when you're
confronted with experiments likethese, how are they
conceptualizing the concept atplay, whether it's love or free
will, or the experience of Godor fear or whatever it is, and
(14:28):
to really scrutinize that.
Because, yeah, I don't denythat you can predict when I'm
going to suppress a cough basedon my, my brain activity, but I
don't think that's at allincompatible with free will,
which I understand to take placeon A longer time span and to
not always mean that I haveperfect freedom, and because I
am constrained and limited, andand I don't always have
(14:49):
conscious awareness of myfreedom, because of the way that
habits and the virtues form usand things.
So so that's one extremeexample.
I don't know if that answersyour question.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Yeah, exactly because you're, you're, you're what.
When you try to define freewill in an experimental fashion,
you often reduce it tosomething you can measure, you
can't know what you need to do,I would measure your free will
as you think about exactly whatyou're going to do with the rest
of your life.
Yeah, you don't make a real,you're not going to.
It's something you can'tmeasure in, right?
Speaker 3 (15:17):
It has to be a discrete decision that's
measurable and standardizedacross individuals, which is
another really important thing,so flexing a finger is
relatively you know, but yeahit's.
You have to narrow so much toto be able to measure something
in the laboratory.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
So Well, this isn't you talk about.
You know how, yeah, we talkabout.
You know humans have free will,but you're also constrained by
habits in your your say.
And it was something you talkedabout.
You talk about neuroplasticity,which is the ability of neurons
to change their, their, theirspeed of firing, their
(15:55):
connections and so forth.
So your brain will change basedon what you do over time.
So I want to talk a little bitabout how that might, how that
resonates with sort of virtueand habit formation.
Yeah, and how that, rather thanexplain away our free Wilson.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Exalts it, I would say absolutely yeah, so it's.
It's really beautiful.
The fact of neuroplasticity,the change of the brain over
time, through it really variesbased on what part of the brain
you're looking at, what capacityyou're looking at, what scale
you're looking at, but a varietyof different biological
mechanisms that mean that thebrain is not set in stone and
(16:34):
that are every experience.
If you go away from thisconversation remembering
anything that we've talked about, it will entail a change in
your brain, which is remarkablethat there were constantly.
Edith Stein has this wonderfulline about human beings that
we're beings in a state ofbecoming, and I think I see that
in the brain in this, in thiscase, and, as you mentioned,
when it comes to virtue.
I think this is particularlyimportant because the choice of
(16:58):
the good makes us grow in ourcapacity to choose the good, and
so we can participate in thisway in in becoming more of who
we we want to be, in our made tobe, and how you see this in the
brain is is, for example, in inchoice of behaviors,
consolidating neural circuitsthat support those behaviors,
(17:21):
and so your choice, to take avery simple example to smile at
your family members first thingin the morning.
If you make that, what mightfeel like a heroic sacrifice, if
you're not a morning person, ifyou make that choice repeatedly
and consistently over time,what's going to happen in your
brain is the formation of newconnections in the strengthening
(17:43):
and myelination of existingconnections.
that makes it easier for you tochoose that good, which doesn't
mean your freedoms are involvedlater but, it becomes more of a
habit, broadly understood, foryou to greet people with with
charity and cheerfulness in themorning, and that if we had a
transparent picture of yourbrain structure, it would show
(18:03):
that that's what.
That's what you've done.
You've become someone whosmiles at people in the morning,
and I think that's reallybeautiful.
And it gives us a sense of thedignity and importance of
attending to our actions and andchoosing intentionally those
actions that do align with whatwe most desire, with who we're
most called to be, and it givesus a sense to the gravity of our
(18:28):
capacity for sin, that we areturning ourselves in our act of
sin into someone who sins more,who is further from the Lord.
So, yeah, so it's beautiful tosee this realized through our
materiality because, again, it'snot like the souls over there,
some like ghostly substancethat's that's acting through,
like my body is a puppet, butit's, it's the organization in
(18:50):
the form of the body, and so inmy body it reflects that I have
freedom and I have the capacityto shape who it is that I become
.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
I mean, it's a wonder , it's a drama, it's a wonderful
existence yeah, because itreally does, because it seems
often you think oh, you are your, your, your choices right, and
it's a esoteric sense.
But yeah, here it is.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
Your choices are actually in the flesh, flesh,
yeah really a wonderful, richidea.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
So you know, I think you talked about how
neuroscience can help illuminateand we get on this illuminate
what it means to be human.
Yeah, I think you know you'vehit on a few of these things, I
think, a lot of times.
You know we, as we talked aboutneuroscience, people think it
illuminates that humans arenothing more than a brain.
(19:41):
But if you were to try to sortof counter that, that argument
about hey, this is what I seefrom neuroscience and how it
shows that I'm much more than abrain, or I'm much more how, how
would you?
Speaker 3 (19:55):
Corrected, correct that yeah, yeah advance a
positive account, I would say.
Neuroscience More than anything, neuroscience shows me that the
human person is a mystery.
Okay, very far from providing acomprehensive and exhaustive
account of the nature of thehuman person, neuroscience shows
that the human person is amystery and we see this.
I mean any number of ways.
(20:16):
To give one example, there'sthis fact of Multiple
realizability.
So this is the idea, very wellsubstantiated with scientific
evidence, that for the vastmajority of our Not just
abstract thoughts but behaviors,there are many different
configurations of neuralactivity that can provide
(20:38):
biological Substrates for thatbehavior.
So there are multiple realstates that can realize what we
see the same thing that we seeon the cognitive or behavioral
level, and so, observing someonefrom the outside, you, you
don't know what's happening intheir brain, and the implication
by reverse is that you can havevastly different patterns of
(20:59):
brain activity that you'remeasuring and you don't know
what behavior they would besupporting.
Or someone in the natural, inthe real world, you know, and so
there's.
It's very far from the in thepopular mentality there's this
idea that there's a one-to-onecorrelation between some brain
activity and some higher levelbehavior.
Right, and so you, if you canread someone's mind, you know
(21:20):
they're thinking and or you canknow what they're gonna do, and
and that's not true at allthere's across individuals and
within individuals, over timeit's, it's remarkably
heterogeneous, and so you alwaysneed to look at the context
that a person's in, thesubjective experience of that
person, and what their reportingis going on in their interior
(21:40):
life.
Without these things you can'tunderstand the meaning of human
action.
It's irreducible to To biology.
So that's one place I see thatthe human person is a mystery,
but there are any number ofthings that no matter.
No matter how much you knowabout a person's early life, you
don't know what is going tohappen to them later you can't
say for sure they're gonnadevelop this mental illness so
that they're, you know, gonnahave this IQ or anything like
(22:03):
that that there's, there's humanfreedom there, or I mean you
name it, that you point to anydomain in neuroscience and we
see the human person's a mystery.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
Yeah, you know not.
I think that resonates with andnot only seem a person a
mystery, but a whole universe isa mystery, right yeah, I'm a
cell biologist.
They study cells.
All those are simple things weshouldn't know, but the more we
study them, the more we realizewe can't predict.
Yeah, what they're going to todo, unless you look at like
whole populations of cells, likeone at a time.
(22:32):
It's sort of stochastic, whichis kind of like what happens
with nerves.
Exactly stochastic nature, butyou'll get enough room.
There's a pattern there, butit's still not enough to.
Yes, If you look at one or two,they might be yeah.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
I'm so glad you brought this up.
I've been thinking aboutstochasticity and developments a
lot more lately.
I think it's sounderappreciated within
neuroscience as a contributorand To me I mean it's so
beautiful because it it leavesso much room for the
unpredictable and surprise.
Yeah in the, in the dynamic ofhuman life, and I think it's,
yeah, very important and wellsubstantiated, as you said, from
(23:07):
from the very Neuronal scaleall the way up to macroscopic
brain developments.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
Yeah, yeah, so you are just finishing your PhD and
then you're heading on to do apostdoc.
So if you want, yeah, youshould share what your Research
is gonna be and you're youendeavors sure.
Speaker 3 (23:26):
So I'm moving on to a postdoc, continuing to look at
the effect of early adversity onthe brain.
But I'm taking additionalcomputational models to look
both at human brain evolutionand then trying to bridge
Biological and artificial neuralnetworks.
(23:47):
So I'm gonna look at howadverse environmental exposures
and human sociality might haveshaped the evolution of the
brain over recent Evolutionaryhistory of our species.
That will be the first half ofthe project and then the second
half will be taking thebiological neural networks of a
(24:07):
large group of children, turningthem into artificial neural
networks and then training themon various tasks to see whether
or not adversity in their earlylife Changes these statistical
properties of the artificialneural networks, changes their
capacities for learning ormemory in ways that might
correspond To human cognition.
So I'm not sure if I'll findanything.
(24:28):
Maybe the answer will be itdoes it at all, and I'm very
open to that, very, very open tonull results.
But I but I'm excited to beable to sort of push the bounds
of what people are doingComputationally in the study of
early adversity.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
Yeah, so this is an interdiscipline.
Speaker 3 (24:43):
Disciplinary.
Yes, I'm very grateful to havethe the support of an
interdisciplinary lab.
We've got a philosopher,sociologist, neurologist, some
good statisticians, so I'm ingood hands, that's wonderful.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I think it's good to see because I think science and
it has been moving in thisdirection, I think the last 20
years and instead of a.
It's been so siloed and now toanswer some of these bigger
questions.
I realized no, we need to.
Mathematicians need to talk to,biologists need to talk to yes,
you're all that it's Blindspots we have.
What I appreciate sitting downand talking.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
Yeah, thank you, it's been a joy yeah and best of
luck is you start your.
Post, I shoot it.
Thank you Thanks.
Speaker 1 (25:29):
Well, dan, that was a fascinating conversation.
I'm jealous I couldn't be theremyself and I'm hopeful and I
think we'll have her on infuture seasons, I'm sure Just
because there's so much tounpack there and the fields of
neuroscience is just fascinating.
What stood out to you the mostfrom your conversation?
Speaker 2 (25:48):
Yeah, I think you know, and I can't wait to have
her back on and have a longerdiscussion on any one of these
topics that we hit upon in theinterview.
But I think the relationalityof the brain, how the brain is a
relational organ and how thatreflects how humans are to
(26:09):
flourish as a human beingrequires right relationships.
And how, from the verybeginning, you know your brain
is shaped by your relationshipswith everyone you interact with,
particularly during development.
It goes against the counter tothe sort of culture idea of how
I'm autonomous, I create my ownreality.
It's like no, from the verybeginning, in utero, in the womb
(26:31):
, your brain is forming and it'sdependent upon the choices of
another person and what thatperson, which your mother, does
affects how your brain develops.
And then you know, in the firstfew years of life, you know the
way the brain wires up dependsupon your proper interactions
with other people and itcontinues throughout life.
And for us to flourish, it'show interdependent we are.
We don't create ourselves,we're created, you know, by our
(26:55):
relations.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Even just this aspect of like, we are dependent on
one another.
It reminds me, it harkens backto our season one finale with
Father Spitzer, who talked aboutthe four levels of happiness
and for our human flourishing weare dependent on others to get
outside of ourselves, to loveand serve others.
That actually were designedthat way and that's what leads
to our purpose and ourflourishing and our happiness.
(27:18):
So it's fascinating to speakwith these different experts in
various fields and get to thesame conclusion right about how
we are relational beings truly,and that's reflected in our body
.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Yeah, and it's reflected in our.
It's interesting how you havethis feedback loop where that's
reflected in our choices.
But our choices because ourbrain, as she talked about, has
this neuroplasticity right.
So our choices affect.
You know how our brain changesover time and the way our brain
changes then affects our choices.
And so this habit formation andvirtue formation or vice
(27:53):
formation that you know, whenyou do certain things, certain
habits, it affects how yourbrain is structured, which then
makes it easier or harder toovercome those vices or easier
to practice those virtues.
And it's just very sobering torealize like how much what we
choose affects what we become.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
And that we can, you know, change our habits and
virtues and what have you.
But that was so fascinating andagain, I think she offers this
unique perspective as bothneuroscientists, but she has
this theology background as well.
Melded together, I think, agreat way to end season two.
Speaker 2 (28:32):
Yeah, yeah, no, and it shows.
You know particularly, you knowthe relationship between faith
and science and how you know onedoesn't overcome the other, but
they complement the other andyou have this danger of thinking
, oh, the brain can explain allof my behavior that fails.
And then you know faith.
Well, the faith, you know thebrain has nothing to do with my
behavior and you know everythingis just.
(28:54):
You know some spiritualstruggle.
Well, we do have a biology, ourbrain, and that does affect,
you know, our choices and ourhabits and so forth, but we do
have the ability to modify thoseto some extent.
Speaker 1 (30:17):
And we are now at the Office Hours segment of
Purposeful Lab Podcast, where weget to ask Dr Dan Kebler all
types of questions and get yourquestions answered.
All right, dan, I have thisfirst question I have for you,
for Office Hours is somethingI'm personally curious about.
I'm going to throw this yourway.
I want to get your take onsomething that is surging and
popularity and that is coldsplunging.
Speaker 2 (30:40):
I don't know if you've heard of this, or?
Speaker 1 (30:41):
if you've seen this online and social media.
I've never done it.
I don't think I couldpersonally handle it.
But it involves fullysubmersing the body in cold
water, like a bathtub or a tankor a different body of water,
and many claim it relievesmuscle soreness, it aids
recovery, it reducesinflammation, boosts immunity.
But what's your take on this?
(31:03):
Is this something smart to dofor your health, or is this
dangerous to just constantlysubmers your body in freezing
water?
Speaker 2 (31:10):
Yeah, it's a very interesting phenomenon.
It's the exact opposite of whatyou think you would want to do
with your body.
Plunging yourself into coldwater particularly can cause a
lot of stress on the heart andthe heart arrhythmia.
So it's not something that youwant to do.
If you've got poor health orwhatever, you certainly talk to
your doctor before you do that.
But there is some sciencebehind it that maybe it would
(31:31):
have some benefits Because, justlike with exercise, you stress
your body and it gives you somebenefit.
But putting your body insubmersing in cold will stress
your body and if you stress,you're sort of a mild stress
around the body can lead to sortof benefits long term.
Just like if you exercise toomuch, it could damage your body.
Just like if you get into coldwater for too long and you could
(31:53):
really damage your body.
So that's why it's kind ofconcerning People that just do
it and I'm going to jump in andso forth, but there's not many
good high quality studies onthis.
There could be other factors.
So it's known that people thatswim in cold water have certain
health benefits but could justbe because of the exercise and
they're often adapted to that.
(32:13):
It doesn't in animal models.
When they do cold stress onanimals, it increases certain
genes that are associated withhealth and longevity.
So it does seem to have there'ssome biological basis behind it
.
But a lot of the things thatpeople promise and so forth,
they overhype and have justcautioned.
So it's something you want tojust throw your body into and
(32:36):
particularly if you have anyheart conditions, because it is
a stress on you the older youget.
If I threw myself in cold water, I don't think it would be
beneficial.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
It's so individualized, but that's
interesting because you're anathlete as well, so it's
interesting to hear yourperspective on that and just
don't just put yourself in coldwater for an indefinite period
of time.
There is an impact on the body?
Speaker 2 (32:56):
Definitely yeah, yeah .
An athlete's always like I'mgoing to jump in a cold ice bath
and so forth afterwards.
That can reduce swelling andinflammation, but it also can do
some damage too, so you've gotto be very careful.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
You heard it from here.
Well, this next question, Ithink, is right up our alley
when it comes to purposeful labs.
So Angelus News conducted arecent interview with brother
guy console Mogno, who is knownas the Pope's astronomer.
He's the director of theVatican Observatory and
president of the VaticanObservatory Foundation, and this
interview was all about howfaith informs science.
(33:29):
So again, right up our alley.
And brother guy said he reallysees the universe as quote the
second greatest story ever toldand compared scientists to what
inspired authors of the Bibledid, that they convey the truths
about God and his creation.
What did you make of thatcomparison and what brother guy
(33:49):
had to say in that interview?
Speaker 2 (33:51):
Yeah, I think it was great because he hits on, you
know, sort of a tradition in theCatholic world of the two great
books, the book of Scriptureand the book of nature, right,
and I think he's hitting on thattruth that you see over and
over again, that if you can readthe book of nature, and not
according to what you want it tosay, but to actually learn from
(34:11):
the natural world and themystery and the beauty and the
order in the natural world, thatit reveals something about the
Creator.
So in a sense, you know, justlike the author of Scripture is
revealing something about God,the you know the scientists who
sort of telling us about how thenatural world is structured,
reveals something about theCreator.
Just like you know an author,you know read a Flannery
(34:32):
O'Connor novel.
It reveals something aboutFlannery O'Connor and her you
know sort of ideas about howhumans are fallen and need grace
, so you can pick up on herstories, something about her.
Just like you get informationabout the natural world and it
reveals something about theCreator, right?
So I think, just like ignorance, I think Saint Jerome says
(34:55):
ignorance of Scripture isignorance of Christ, I think
ignorance of the natural worldis ignorance of God, you know,
because you're not appreciatingand fully understanding his
handiwork.
Speaker 1 (35:05):
That's really well said.
There is something that struckme in the interview.
You know, brother Guy, is thisJesuit brother?
He has this collar and he sayshe loves you know to see
people's reaction where here'sthis man who's in a collar and
he has a ring from MIT that yes,both can go together and I
think you know his work is awitness in and of itself to
combining.
Speaker 2 (35:25):
Yeah, that unity, and , as you know, I'm on the board
of the Society of CatholicSciences.
We gave him the Saint AlbertAward a few years ago because he
embodies this sort of the unityof science and faith.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
Yeah, and I love seeing this topic in the
spotlight and in Catholic news.
So that was great, exactly, andlike getting your reaction from
it as well.
I want to remind our listenersthat we are taking questions for
season three of Purposeful Laband there's a few ways to do
that.
Go to ModjaCentercom.
You can see all the informationthere and you can now call us
and leave an audio message withyour question, which maybe Dr
(36:01):
Dan Keeber will answer righthere on the podcast.
That phone number we're puttingon the screen for you We'll put
in the show notes, but thatphone number is 949-257-2436.
949-257-2436.
We want to hear from you andmaybe again we'll see what
questions we get.
We'll see what you'll have totackle in the next season, dan.
(36:24):
You know, as we wrap up seasontwo, again what a joy Again
blown away by all the expertsthat we've spoken to this season
.
Speaker 2 (36:33):
Yeah, and I think when you delve into science, it
opens up even more questions.
So, having you know, Dr Croza,it opens all these questions
about neuroscience that I wantto bring other guests on to talk
about.
It, bring her back to talkabout.
Speaker 1 (36:45):
So big questions that we're going to continue to ask
and tackle.
And again I want to remind youmake sure to download and find
the podcast on your favoritepodcast platform and go to
ModraCentercom for moreinformation.
That's a wrap on season two.
We'll see you next time you.
Welcome to Purposeful Lab and Lodges Center podcast.
I'm Catherine Hadre with Dr DanKebler.
Here we are at the end ofseason two.
Already it's flown by it's beenan exciting season.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
It's some great guests we've had on and we still
have another great guest forour last episode.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
We're going to be speaking with a neuroscientist,
all about how behavior affectsthe brain, truly rewires the
brain.
Dr Sophia Carosa is a renownedCatholic neuroscientist.
She earned a degree inneuroscience and theology, which
is, I think, a perfect blendfor our purposes.
Yes, from the University ofNotre Dame, she graduated as the
valedictorian in 2019.
(00:37):
So she's very young as well andimpressive.
Let's get to it with ourinterview with Dr Sophia Carosa.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Sophia, thanks for taking the time to sit down with
us.
I appreciate it.
Thanks for having me, yeah,great.
So just before we get into sortof what your talk was here at
the meeting, why don't you tellus a little bit about the
research you did for your PhD,which you just finished?
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Sure, yeah, just submitted a couple of weeks ago.
So my thesis was on the effectof abuse and neglect on child
brain development andspecifically applying the
methods of network science tothis question of how it is that
children adapt to earlyexperiences of adversity.
So I reconstructed thestructural brain networks of
lots of different children andthen used computational models
(01:21):
to try to understand how theymight differ and why, based on
experiences of deprivation andthreatening experiences early in
life.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Okay, so looking to see how do they adapt to that,
or how the brain tries to sortof overcome developmental.
Speaker 3 (01:40):
Yeah, how it shapes the brain exactly in a way that
then might account for somepsychological and psychiatric
outcomes that we see later inlife.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, it was interesting you talk.
One of the things that I reallystruck me was you're talking
about how the brain is arelational organ.
Yes, and I think that there'sbiological and theological stuff
underneath that unpack, butwhat do you mean from a
biological perspective?
(02:10):
How do you see the brain as arelational organ?
Yeah, how does that work here?
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Yeah, it's really one of the most beautiful facts of
the brain, I think, the brain asa relational organ.
When I use that phrase, what Imean is that over the course of
childhood, even embryonicdevelopment, the primary driver
of the emergence of thestructured function of the human
brain is loving relationship,first with the mother, and then
(02:36):
with the mother and father, andthen a broader community, and
it's especially, you see this inthe postnatal period.
So after birth, the factor thatshapes which connections are
kept in the brain and which onesare eliminated, and how neural
circuits are organized tosupport behavior, the factor
that drives all of that is theinteractional landscape.
(02:56):
So the kinds of socialexchanges that babies have with
their parents, of talking andgazing at objects together and
touch is so important.
And all of these provide thesensory information that, from
the outside to within, shapes,shapes brain structure and,
again, in a way that sets thefoundation for a lifetime of
(03:18):
cognition and emotionalregulation and behavior and
health.
And so, yeah, so you can'tunderstand the brain or anything
that the brain supportsthroughout the lifespan without
looking at the developmentalhistory of the brain.
And when we're looking at thechild's, you can't understand a
child's behaviors or abilitieswithout an understanding of what
(03:43):
that child has been through andwhere that child has come from.
Specifically, when it comes torelationships and I find this
really beautiful as youmentioned, there's a lot of
theological resonances with whatit means to be made in the
image of God and yeah, and alsoit's such an occasion for
compassion as we encounterothers who might be exhibiting
behaviors or suffering in waysthat we don't understand.
(04:04):
To ask what might have happenedto this person.
Speaker 2 (04:07):
Yeah, what relationships have been deprived
?
Exactly, and so because lookingat psychology, you see these
stages of development, and so ifyou don't have the proper
relationships at one stage, it'shard for them.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
So it's not just child, the brain development,
but it's throughout your life.
There's a Exactly Arelationship.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
There's an expectation of relationship.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Yeah, and that's the foundation upon which we have to
build, yeah, and from atheological perspective, because
obviously we're not disembodiedbrains right, right, we are.
Right, we are not disembodiedin our body but we are one.
We are relational organisms.
Not just a relational Brain isvery indicative of how
(04:49):
relationships affect us, but weare relational organisms in a
way.
And how do you see that sort ofresonating with, say, a
theological understanding of ahuman person from an
anthropological sense, of thefirst anthropology?
Speaker 3 (05:09):
Yeah, yeah.
So I always think of it in termsof the first creation narrative
in Genesis, and when the Lordmakes the human person in his
image and likeness, and this isa God who's revealed himself to
be Trinity and so to be arelationship of love amongst
these three persons, and thatall of creation, but most
(05:29):
especially the human person, isthe outpouring of that
Trinitarian life.
And so the human person'sdestiny, origin and destiny is
in this Trinitarian love, and soto most flourish as a human
being is to become relational,more relational, to embrace
interdependence and to findone's fulfillment in these
relationships of love.
(05:50):
And I think it's beautiful tosee not just a reflection of
that in our biology but actuallythe means through which that's
achieved on the physical level.
In our biology it's in allowingourselves to be shaped and
nourished by others and thenproviding that for them in turn.
That's what constitutes ourflourishing on the biological
(06:12):
level.
And I think that's beautifulthat at every level we see
there's a unity to the humanperson, the unity to our calling
, our vocation, that can be sucha source of esteem for the
dignity of what's given to usand like our ordinary family
interactions, yeah, it makes yousee people, I think, in a
different light, absolutely.
Speaker 2 (06:33):
And I think that's a culture where and again I call
victim to this all the timethinking of I'm a self-made
person, I'm autonomous, I can dowhat I want.
I wouldn't achieve what I want,and that it's listen to me,
you're talking, thinking itthrough that it's kind of
productive to our ownflourishing.
It is, I think, that way rightit is.
Yeah, you see yourself as theobligations almost you have to
(06:59):
other people to help themflourish in relation.
So the brain development,they're normal.
That's the way we're meant tobe, exactly yeah.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
And how all reality like you said, the truth, all
reality is relational, so it'shard to nothing exists in
isolation, in isolation exactly.
Yeah, that's great.
You know one of the things thatoften you know in brain science
.
Typically, you know, people seethat as a way to understand the
(07:32):
brain.
If we understand the brain, weunderstand what fires in in
Sophie is in the, we know what'sgoing on.
We can reduce you to yourneural.
So if we do imaging of yourbrain and see this area is
active, you know, we'veunderstand, you know your
behavior and so forth and youknow, certainly, understanding
(07:54):
what's going on in the brain isimportant for understanding the
embodied person, right, but thelimitations, yeah.
So you talked about what to besort of the expectations that
you should have, what neuralscience can deliver and what it
can't deliver.
Right, because I think there'sthis danger that people think
neural science can explain allthere is to know about who you
(08:14):
are, who I am, right, right, soanything that lies beyond that
limit must not exist.
Speaker 3 (08:20):
Yeah, so neural science is as you said an
important and beautiful windowinto reality and obviously, as a
neuroscientist, I have aserious deal with this.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
So having that I would absolutely affirm that
they're also very narrow limitswhen it comes to what
neuroscience can tell us aboutthe human person.
So to take your example oflooking at the activity of a,
particular brain region andtrying to relate that to a
behavior.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Use it to explain a behavior.
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Now let's take the example of reasoning right, so
like trying to problem solve.
If we understand what the brainis doing during problem solving
, we might have a better accountof the particular steps that
are being taken, we might have abetter understanding of how, on
the biological level, thestructure of your brain is
(09:16):
supporting the functions thatare necessary for that cognitive
process to happen.
So can you be valuable to lookat the brain, but what it can't
tell you is the content or themeaning of your reasoning.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
And it can't give you a picture of the significance
or the moral value of youraction or the context in which
it's taking place.
It's a very narrow, mechanistic, procedural look at that
particular behavior.
So it can't tell you whatsomething is.
Speaker 1 (09:47):
It can tell you how it's being realized on the
biological level, but it's notgoing to answer questions of
meaning or value or substance oressence in any way.
Speaker 3 (09:59):
And so, yes, that doesn't mean it's useless, but
it does mean that, just becausewe can locate something in the
brain doesn't mean it doesn'talso exist on higher levels of
reality that can't be reduced tobiology, but because we're not
a soul and body as two separatethings but embodied souls are in
the soul bodies, and so ofcourse we would expect to see
(10:22):
brain activity during somethinglike reasoning or emotions or in
love, and that's perfectlyconsistent.
Speaker 1 (10:31):
I'd be surprised, shocked, a little scared, If we
could find no trace of thenervousness of any activity
happening we'd be fell in love.
But yeah, but it's completelyunreasonable to think that just
because there's neural activitydoesn't mean that there's also a
reality above that.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
That can't be reduced to it.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
Yeah, yeah, so they usually do.
Well, this is the God area ofthe brain.
So when that's active, thenyou're just imagining God.
But God is going to interactwith us.
We're embodied people.
Speaker 1 (10:57):
Well, my brain shouldn't be active when I'm
interacting with God.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
But it does help us understand mental defects, and
there are people that are unableto have proper or flourishing
relationships because of so.
There is a usefulness of thatand also usefulness of knowing
what areas of the brain seem tobe more active when you do
(11:25):
certain things.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
Yeah, and how they interact and what can support
this process that we'reinterested in, whatever it is,
on the neurological level so noteven considering those who
might have difficulties ordisorders, but even in what we
would call quote unquotenormative population, we can
really understand what makes forhumans flourishing on the
(11:47):
biological level and so supportthose higher level realities
that we're interested in.
And so, yes, I think it's avery useful tool for that, but
it depends upon priorcommitments and understandings
and concepts that you have thatdon't come from the science
itself, and I think that'sreally important.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
So, yeah, great, what are those prior commitments?
And maybe two extreme examplesSure, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3 (12:12):
So, for example, there are common studies of free
will where researchers will askparticipants to flex their
finger at any time that theydesire and they're measuring
brain activity and trying tofind a pattern of brain activity
that precedes the flexion ofthe finger and reliably detect
(12:34):
this in a way that can make thempredict when this participant
will flex their finger.
And they ask the participantsat what point did you decide to
flex your finger?
And they show that we canmeasure brain activity before
the participant reports having aconscious decision to flex
their finger.
So what this seems to say iswell, based on my readout of
your brain, I can predict whatyou're going to do next, or your
(12:57):
idea of freedom is actually anillusion.
So this is one extreme exampleof how this is weaponized
ideologically the study of thebrain.
But what's very important tounderstand here is, even beyond
some of the methodologicallimits of these studies of free
will is that it's presupposing aparticular conception of free
(13:17):
will that is thenoperationalized in the study and
informs how the research isdesigned and interpreted.
So in this case, the idea offree will that's being
operationalized.
Loosely speaking, I don'tembrace this, so they might
correct me, but what it seems tobe is an assumption that free
will is the perfect capacity toalways and always consciously
(13:45):
decide the details of whenyou're going to act on urges for
motor movement.
So to give you, that's a lot ofjargon.
So it'd be basically the ideathat free will is the perfect
capacity to, to understand whatyou're doing and to control when
you're doing it, when you dosomething like suppress a cough.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Right.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
Now, I don't know any philosopher who would say, yeah
, that's a great definition offree will break.
And so.
So it's really important tothink like when you're
confronted with experiments likethese, how are they
conceptualizing the concept atplay, whether it's love or free
will, or the experience of Godor fear or whatever it is, and
(14:28):
to really scrutinize that.
Because, yeah, I don't denythat you can predict when I'm
going to suppress a cough basedon my, my brain activity, but I
don't think that's at allincompatible with free will,
which I understand to take placeon A longer time span and to
not always mean that I haveperfect freedom, and because I
am constrained and limited, andand I don't always have
(14:49):
conscious awareness of myfreedom, because of the way that
habits and the virtues form usand things.
So so that's one extremeexample.
I don't know if that answersyour question.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Yeah, exactly because you're, you're, you're what.
When you try to define freewill in an experimental fashion,
you often reduce it tosomething you can measure, you
can't know what you need to do,I would measure your free will
as you think about exactly whatyou're going to do with the rest
of your life.
Yeah, you don't make a real,you're not going to.
It's something you can'tmeasure in, right?
Speaker 3 (15:17):
It has to be a discrete decision that's
measurable and standardizedacross individuals, which is
another really important thing,so flexing a finger is
relatively you know, but yeahit's.
You have to narrow so much toto be able to measure something
in the laboratory.
Speaker 2 (15:33):
So Well, this isn't you talk about.
You know how, yeah, we talkabout.
You know humans have free will,but you're also constrained by
habits in your your say.
And it was something you talkedabout.
You talk about neuroplasticity,which is the ability of neurons
to change their, their, theirspeed of firing, their
(15:55):
connections and so forth.
So your brain will change basedon what you do over time.
So I want to talk a little bitabout how that might, how that
resonates with sort of virtueand habit formation.
Yeah, and how that, rather thanexplain away our free Wilson.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Exalts it, I would say absolutely yeah, so it's.
It's really beautiful.
The fact of neuroplasticity,the change of the brain over
time, through it really variesbased on what part of the brain
you're looking at, what capacityyou're looking at, what scale
you're looking at, but a varietyof different biological
mechanisms that mean that thebrain is not set in stone and
(16:34):
that are every experience.
If you go away from thisconversation remembering
anything that we've talked about, it will entail a change in
your brain, which is remarkablethat there were constantly.
Edith Stein has this wonderfulline about human beings that
we're beings in a state ofbecoming, and I think I see that
in the brain in this, in thiscase, and, as you mentioned,
when it comes to virtue.
I think this is particularlyimportant because the choice of
(16:58):
the good makes us grow in ourcapacity to choose the good, and
so we can participate in thisway in in becoming more of who
we we want to be, in our made tobe, and how you see this in the
brain is is, for example, in inchoice of behaviors,
consolidating neural circuitsthat support those behaviors,
(17:21):
and so your choice, to take avery simple example to smile at
your family members first thingin the morning.
If you make that, what mightfeel like a heroic sacrifice, if
you're not a morning person, ifyou make that choice repeatedly
and consistently over time,what's going to happen in your
brain is the formation of newconnections in the strengthening
(17:43):
and myelination of existingconnections.
that makes it easier for you tochoose that good, which doesn't
mean your freedoms are involvedlater but, it becomes more of a
habit, broadly understood, foryou to greet people with with
charity and cheerfulness in themorning, and that if we had a
transparent picture of yourbrain structure, it would show
(18:03):
that that's what.
That's what you've done.
You've become someone whosmiles at people in the morning,
and I think that's reallybeautiful.
And it gives us a sense of thedignity and importance of
attending to our actions and andchoosing intentionally those
actions that do align with whatwe most desire, with who we're
most called to be, and it givesus a sense to the gravity of our
(18:28):
capacity for sin, that we areturning ourselves in our act of
sin into someone who sins more,who is further from the Lord.
So, yeah, so it's beautiful tosee this realized through our
materiality because, again, it'snot like the souls over there,
some like ghostly substancethat's that's acting through,
like my body is a puppet, butit's, it's the organization in
(18:50):
the form of the body, and so inmy body it reflects that I have
freedom and I have the capacityto shape who it is that I become
.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
I mean, it's a wonder , it's a drama, it's a wonderful
existence yeah, because itreally does, because it seems
often you think oh, you are your, your, your choices right, and
it's a esoteric sense.
But yeah, here it is.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
Your choices are actually in the flesh, flesh,
yeah really a wonderful, richidea.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
So you know, I think you talked about how
neuroscience can help illuminateand we get on this illuminate
what it means to be human.
Yeah, I think you know you'vehit on a few of these things, I
think, a lot of times.
You know we, as we talked aboutneuroscience, people think it
illuminates that humans arenothing more than a brain.
(19:41):
But if you were to try to sortof counter that, that argument
about hey, this is what I seefrom neuroscience and how it
shows that I'm much more than abrain, or I'm much more how, how
would you?
Speaker 3 (19:55):
Corrected, correct that yeah, yeah advance a
positive account, I would say.
Neuroscience More than anything, neuroscience shows me that the
human person is a mystery.
Okay, very far from providing acomprehensive and exhaustive
account of the nature of thehuman person, neuroscience shows
that the human person is amystery and we see this.
I mean any number of ways.
(20:16):
To give one example, there'sthis fact of Multiple
realizability.
So this is the idea, very wellsubstantiated with scientific
evidence, that for the vastmajority of our Not just
abstract thoughts but behaviors,there are many different
configurations of neuralactivity that can provide
(20:38):
biological Substrates for thatbehavior.
So there are multiple realstates that can realize what we
see the same thing that we seeon the cognitive or behavioral
level, and so, observing someonefrom the outside, you, you
don't know what's happening intheir brain, and the implication
by reverse is that you can havevastly different patterns of
(20:59):
brain activity that you'remeasuring and you don't know
what behavior they would besupporting.
Or someone in the natural, inthe real world, you know, and so
there's.
It's very far from the in thepopular mentality there's this
idea that there's a one-to-onecorrelation between some brain
activity and some higher levelbehavior.
Right, and so you, if you canread someone's mind, you know
(21:20):
they're thinking and or you canknow what they're gonna do, and
and that's not true at allthere's across individuals and
within individuals, over timeit's, it's remarkably
heterogeneous, and so you alwaysneed to look at the context
that a person's in, thesubjective experience of that
person, and what their reportingis going on in their interior
(21:40):
life.
Without these things you can'tunderstand the meaning of human
action.
It's irreducible to To biology.
So that's one place I see thatthe human person is a mystery,
but there are any number ofthings that no matter.
No matter how much you knowabout a person's early life, you
don't know what is going tohappen to them later you can't
say for sure they're gonnadevelop this mental illness so
that they're, you know, gonnahave this IQ or anything like
(22:03):
that that there's, there's humanfreedom there, or I mean you
name it, that you point to anydomain in neuroscience and we
see the human person's a mystery.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
Yeah, you know not.
I think that resonates with andnot only seem a person a
mystery, but a whole universe isa mystery, right yeah, I'm a
cell biologist.
They study cells.
All those are simple things weshouldn't know, but the more we
study them, the more we realizewe can't predict.
Yeah, what they're going to todo, unless you look at like
whole populations of cells, likeone at a time.
(22:32):
It's sort of stochastic, whichis kind of like what happens
with nerves.
Exactly stochastic nature, butyou'll get enough room.
There's a pattern there, butit's still not enough to.
Yes, If you look at one or two,they might be yeah.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
I'm so glad you brought this up.
I've been thinking aboutstochasticity and developments a
lot more lately.
I think it's sounderappreciated within
neuroscience as a contributorand To me I mean it's so
beautiful because it it leavesso much room for the
unpredictable and surprise.
Yeah in the, in the dynamic ofhuman life, and I think it's,
yeah, very important and wellsubstantiated, as you said, from
(23:07):
from the very Neuronal scaleall the way up to macroscopic
brain developments.
Speaker 2 (23:11):
Yeah, yeah, so you are just finishing your PhD and
then you're heading on to do apostdoc.
So if you want, yeah, youshould share what your Research
is gonna be and you're youendeavors sure.
Speaker 3 (23:26):
So I'm moving on to a postdoc, continuing to look at
the effect of early adversity onthe brain.
But I'm taking additionalcomputational models to look
both at human brain evolutionand then trying to bridge
Biological and artificial neuralnetworks.
(23:47):
So I'm gonna look at howadverse environmental exposures
and human sociality might haveshaped the evolution of the
brain over recent Evolutionaryhistory of our species.
That will be the first half ofthe project and then the second
half will be taking thebiological neural networks of a
(24:07):
large group of children, turningthem into artificial neural
networks and then training themon various tasks to see whether
or not adversity in their earlylife Changes these statistical
properties of the artificialneural networks, changes their
capacities for learning ormemory in ways that might
correspond To human cognition.
So I'm not sure if I'll findanything.
(24:28):
Maybe the answer will be itdoes it at all, and I'm very
open to that, very, very open tonull results.
But I but I'm excited to beable to sort of push the bounds
of what people are doingComputationally in the study of
early adversity.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
Yeah, so this is an interdiscipline.
Speaker 3 (24:43):
Disciplinary.
Yes, I'm very grateful to havethe the support of an
interdisciplinary lab.
We've got a philosopher,sociologist, neurologist, some
good statisticians, so I'm ingood hands, that's wonderful.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I think it's good to see because I think science and
it has been moving in thisdirection, I think the last 20
years and instead of a.
It's been so siloed and now toanswer some of these bigger
questions.
I realized no, we need to.
Mathematicians need to talk to,biologists need to talk to yes,
you're all that it's Blindspots we have.
What I appreciate sitting downand talking.
Speaker 3 (25:20):
Yeah, thank you, it's been a joy yeah and best of
luck is you start your.
Post, I shoot it.
Thank you Thanks.
Speaker 1 (25:29):
Well, dan, that was a fascinating conversation.
I'm jealous I couldn't be theremyself and I'm hopeful and I
think we'll have her on infuture seasons, I'm sure Just
because there's so much tounpack there and the fields of
neuroscience is just fascinating.
What stood out to you the mostfrom your conversation?
Speaker 2 (25:48):
Yeah, I think you know, and I can't wait to have
her back on and have a longerdiscussion on any one of these
topics that we hit upon in theinterview.
But I think the relationalityof the brain, how the brain is a
relational organ and how thatreflects how humans are to
(26:09):
flourish as a human beingrequires right relationships.
And how, from the verybeginning, you know your brain
is shaped by your relationshipswith everyone you interact with,
particularly during development.
It goes against the counter tothe sort of culture idea of how
I'm autonomous, I create my ownreality.
It's like no, from the verybeginning, in utero, in the womb
(26:31):
, your brain is forming and it'sdependent upon the choices of
another person and what thatperson, which your mother, does
affects how your brain develops.
And then you know, in the firstfew years of life, you know the
way the brain wires up dependsupon your proper interactions
with other people and itcontinues throughout life.
And for us to flourish, it'show interdependent we are.
We don't create ourselves,we're created, you know, by our
(26:55):
relations.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Even just this aspect of like, we are dependent on
one another.
It reminds me, it harkens backto our season one finale with
Father Spitzer, who talked aboutthe four levels of happiness
and for our human flourishing weare dependent on others to get
outside of ourselves, to loveand serve others.
That actually were designedthat way and that's what leads
to our purpose and ourflourishing and our happiness.
(27:18):
So it's fascinating to speakwith these different experts in
various fields and get to thesame conclusion right about how
we are relational beings truly,and that's reflected in our body
.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Yeah, and it's reflected in our.
It's interesting how you havethis feedback loop where that's
reflected in our choices.
But our choices because ourbrain, as she talked about, has
this neuroplasticity right.
So our choices affect.
You know how our brain changesover time and the way our brain
changes then affects our choices.
And so this habit formation andvirtue formation or vice
(27:53):
formation that you know, whenyou do certain things, certain
habits, it affects how yourbrain is structured, which then
makes it easier or harder toovercome those vices or easier
to practice those virtues.
And it's just very sobering torealize like how much what we
choose affects what we become.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
And that we can, you know, change our habits and
virtues and what have you.
But that was so fascinating andagain, I think she offers this
unique perspective as bothneuroscientists, but she has
this theology background as well.
Melded together, I think, agreat way to end season two.
Speaker 2 (28:32):
Yeah, yeah, no, and it shows.
You know particularly, you knowthe relationship between faith
and science and how you know onedoesn't overcome the other, but
they complement the other andyou have this danger of thinking
, oh, the brain can explain allof my behavior that fails.
And then you know faith.
Well, the faith, you know thebrain has nothing to do with my
behavior and you know everythingis just.
(28:54):
You know some spiritualstruggle.
Well, we do have a biology, ourbrain, and that does affect,
you know, our choices and ourhabits and so forth, but we do
have the ability to modify thoseto some extent.
Speaker 1 (30:17):
And we are now at the Office Hours segment of
Purposeful Lab Podcast, where weget to ask Dr Dan Kebler all
types of questions and get yourquestions answered.
All right, dan, I have thisfirst question I have for you,
for Office Hours is somethingI'm personally curious about.
I'm going to throw this yourway.
I want to get your take onsomething that is surging and
popularity and that is coldsplunging.
Speaker 2 (30:40):
I don't know if you've heard of this, or?
Speaker 1 (30:41):
if you've seen this online and social media.
I've never done it.
I don't think I couldpersonally handle it.
But it involves fullysubmersing the body in cold
water, like a bathtub or a tankor a different body of water,
and many claim it relievesmuscle soreness, it aids
recovery, it reducesinflammation, boosts immunity.
But what's your take on this?
(31:03):
Is this something smart to dofor your health, or is this
dangerous to just constantlysubmers your body in freezing
water?
Speaker 2 (31:10):
Yeah, it's a very interesting phenomenon.
It's the exact opposite of whatyou think you would want to do
with your body.
Plunging yourself into coldwater particularly can cause a
lot of stress on the heart andthe heart arrhythmia.
So it's not something that youwant to do.
If you've got poor health orwhatever, you certainly talk to
your doctor before you do that.
But there is some sciencebehind it that maybe it would
(31:31):
have some benefits Because, justlike with exercise, you stress
your body and it gives you somebenefit.
But putting your body insubmersing in cold will stress
your body and if you stress,you're sort of a mild stress
around the body can lead to sortof benefits long term.
Just like if you exercise toomuch, it could damage your body.
Just like if you get into coldwater for too long and you could
(31:53):
really damage your body.
So that's why it's kind ofconcerning People that just do
it and I'm going to jump in andso forth, but there's not many
good high quality studies onthis.
There could be other factors.
So it's known that people thatswim in cold water have certain
health benefits but could justbe because of the exercise and
they're often adapted to that.
(32:13):
It doesn't in animal models.
When they do cold stress onanimals, it increases certain
genes that are associated withhealth and longevity.
So it does seem to have there'ssome biological basis behind it
.
But a lot of the things thatpeople promise and so forth,
they overhype and have justcautioned.
So it's something you want tojust throw your body into and
(32:36):
particularly if you have anyheart conditions, because it is
a stress on you the older youget.
If I threw myself in cold water, I don't think it would be
beneficial.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
It's so individualized, but that's
interesting because you're anathlete as well, so it's
interesting to hear yourperspective on that and just
don't just put yourself in coldwater for an indefinite period
of time.
There is an impact on the body?
Speaker 2 (32:56):
Definitely yeah, yeah .
An athlete's always like I'mgoing to jump in a cold ice bath
and so forth afterwards.
That can reduce swelling andinflammation, but it also can do
some damage too, so you've gotto be very careful.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
You heard it from here.
Well, this next question, Ithink, is right up our alley
when it comes to purposeful labs.
So Angelus News conducted arecent interview with brother
guy console Mogno, who is knownas the Pope's astronomer.
He's the director of theVatican Observatory and
president of the VaticanObservatory Foundation, and this
interview was all about howfaith informs science.
(33:29):
So again, right up our alley.
And brother guy said he reallysees the universe as quote the
second greatest story ever toldand compared scientists to what
inspired authors of the Bibledid, that they convey the truths
about God and his creation.
What did you make of thatcomparison and what brother guy
(33:49):
had to say in that interview?
Speaker 2 (33:51):
Yeah, I think it was great because he hits on, you
know, sort of a tradition in theCatholic world of the two great
books, the book of Scriptureand the book of nature, right,
and I think he's hitting on thattruth that you see over and
over again, that if you can readthe book of nature, and not
according to what you want it tosay, but to actually learn from
(34:11):
the natural world and themystery and the beauty and the
order in the natural world, thatit reveals something about the
Creator.
So in a sense, you know, justlike the author of Scripture is
revealing something about God,the you know the scientists who
sort of telling us about how thenatural world is structured,
reveals something about theCreator.
Just like you know an author,you know read a Flannery
(34:32):
O'Connor novel.
It reveals something aboutFlannery O'Connor and her you
know sort of ideas about howhumans are fallen and need grace
, so you can pick up on herstories, something about her.
Just like you get informationabout the natural world and it
reveals something about theCreator, right?
So I think, just like ignorance, I think Saint Jerome says
(34:55):
ignorance of Scripture isignorance of Christ, I think
ignorance of the natural worldis ignorance of God, you know,
because you're not appreciatingand fully understanding his
handiwork.
Speaker 1 (35:05):
That's really well said.
There is something that struckme in the interview.
You know, brother Guy, is thisJesuit brother?
He has this collar and he sayshe loves you know to see
people's reaction where here'sthis man who's in a collar and
he has a ring from MIT that yes,both can go together and I
think you know his work is awitness in and of itself to
combining.
Speaker 2 (35:25):
Yeah, that unity, and , as you know, I'm on the board
of the Society of CatholicSciences.
We gave him the Saint AlbertAward a few years ago because he
embodies this sort of the unityof science and faith.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
Yeah, and I love seeing this topic in the
spotlight and in Catholic news.
So that was great, exactly, andlike getting your reaction from
it as well.
I want to remind our listenersthat we are taking questions for
season three of Purposeful Laband there's a few ways to do
that.
Go to ModjaCentercom.
You can see all the informationthere and you can now call us
and leave an audio message withyour question, which maybe Dr
(36:01):
Dan Keeber will answer righthere on the podcast.
That phone number we're puttingon the screen for you We'll put
in the show notes, but thatphone number is 949-257-2436.
949-257-2436.
We want to hear from you andmaybe again we'll see what
questions we get.
We'll see what you'll have totackle in the next season, dan.
(36:24):
You know, as we wrap up seasontwo, again what a joy Again
blown away by all the expertsthat we've spoken to this season
.
Speaker 2 (36:33):
Yeah, and I think when you delve into science, it
opens up even more questions.
So, having you know, Dr Croza,it opens all these questions
about neuroscience that I wantto bring other guests on to talk
about.
It, bring her back to talkabout.
Speaker 1 (36:45):
So big questions that we're going to continue to ask
and tackle.
And again I want to remind youmake sure to download and find
the podcast on your favoritepodcast platform and go to
ModraCentercom for moreinformation.
That's a wrap on season two.
We'll see you next time you.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com