Modern Psychology and Theology of the Will

[Mansizedtarget]

Early Christian theology is steeped in the tradition of Greek philosophy. This merging of “natural reason” and revelation allowed a synthesis which yielded such concepts as “hypostatic union” as well as the early Christian theology of grace and will.

It seems that the Catholic notion of free will needs to be revised or at least explained in light of recent developments. Much of this early Greek philosophy of human nature and will depended on particular views of natural science that have since been discredited. Aristotelian physics, for instance, was thoroughly discredited by Newtonian physics which, in turn, gave way to quantum physics.

For instance, we know the “mind” does not reside outside the body but what is ordinarily thought of as reason, emotion, will, decision-making, and the like are a product of the brain, and that problems in the brain yield a variety of bad and confusing behaviors that once upon a time would have been considered signs of demonic possession.

My question is how should Catholic theology evolve based on recent developments in neuroscience? In particular, we know that certain kinds of evils, emotional problems, compulsive behaviors, and even moral decision-making are controlled by particular parts of the brain that, when damaged, yield specific maladaptive behaviors.

To be blunt: as our understanding of the brain and neurosceince is expanding, isn’t the explanatory role of the non-material soul (itself long considered coextensive with reason) shrinking in a sense? That is, what do we think of as “soul” as a greater and greater percentage of matters once considered the domain of free will and the moral agent are now becoming more perfectly described by the structure of the brain and its chemistry.

I genuinely don’t know the answer here or how the latest developments of brain science can be fully reconciled with traditional Christian notions of the soul . . . notions that correspond with colloquial concepts of “the mind.”

I sometimes wonder if the solution may be found in the theology surrounding the heresy of Monothelitism that said Jesus only had one will but two natures. The Orthodox notion is that Jesus in fact had two natures and two corresponding wills. Do we too have a single nature (and will) but two parts: the body and the soul. Paul’s discussion of the “law of the flesh” certainly talks about human life in this way. In other words, we can have a defective human body (and brain to go with it) but still have a perfectable soul whose nature and manifestation may not be wholly apparent from our human vantage point. The role and quality of free will, however, still seems to be more complicated on account of the recent neuroscience developments.

 

[JimG]

For instance, we know the “mind” does not reside outside the body but what is ordinarily thought of as reason, emotion, will, decision-making, and the like are a product of the brain, and that problems in the brain yield a variety of bad and confusing behaviors that once upon a time would have been considered signs of demonic possession.

We “know” that the mind and will are products of the brain? If we know this for sure, that we ought to be revising criminal law as well as theology, since a mind and a will that are material products of the brain mean that people who break laws are not really culpable.

If we push the question further; do we assume that there is then nothing other than that which arises from the material? If so, then not only is the concept of the soul dead, so is the idea of the spiritual, and God as well, since God as a material being is no god at all.

 

[Mansizedtarget]

I realize that taken to far this is a potentially scandal-causing belief, but the mere fact that a scientific discovery endangers or requires rethinking another belief does not mean it is not true. We can’t bury our heads in the sand and pretend there is not some relationship between brain and behavior or brain and what’s ordinarily called mind. Where do you think decision-making, impulses, and the intelligence come from if not the (at least in part) the brain?

 

[KathleenElsie]

I think you are confusing “free-will” with “must-do”. There are many things that we are “wired” to do and yet have a choice to actually do them. There are some things we don’t have any control over, breathing is one of them and blinking is another.

The alcoholic might be “wired” to become addicted. But he/she has the ability to not drink.

All humans have a sex drive but not all humans have sex. Again “wired” for the desire. Yet this “genetic wiring” is able to be controlled when we want it to be.

 

[JimG]

We can’t bury our heads in the sand and pretend there is not some relationship between brain and behavior or brain and what’s ordinarily called mind.

“some relationship”–certainly. Catholic philosophy has always considered that the mind and body (or soul and body, to be more specific) are so closely united as to form a unity. But that’s far different than saying that mind and will are merely products of the brain. The brain could probably be considered the organ which integrates all sensory (name removed by moderator)ut. The mind, at least from the perspective of Catholic philosophy, is that faculty of the soul which uses sensory (name removed by moderator)ut to form abstract thought, and to make free decisions. Since we are creatures composed of both body and soul, matter and spirit, it is inevitable and expected that what affects our body will affect our perceptions and our mind.