by Sharon J. Proctor, Ph.D.
Photography by James Labounty

From autism to cloning, Kathleen Atkins' thoughts have far reaching consequences

A tall, slim young woman with short brown hair and a friendly, open face is in her campus office, sitting at a table by the window. Her view is the magnificent, lush green forests and valleys of Indian Arm. It's a typical faculty office - except for the floor. The floor is painted green. And it's covered with a rug that has a red, blue, and grey diamond pattern. If you look down, the effect is cozy yet somehow primitive. Meet Kathleen Akins. She looks like she ought to be out playing basketball today, or hiking in the wilderness. Her mind, however, is on philosophy. She's curious about how our brains think.

Imagine, for instance, being in a supermarket. You see a woman trying to choose a green pepper and a man reading the labels on different bottles of salad dressing. Observing them, you intuitively understand what they're doing and why. "It's easy," you say. "I've done it myself many times. I know what they're going through." That would settle the matter for most of us. But for Akins, it brings up an intriguing question: How is it that you can understand what those two people in the store are thinking and feeling even though you've never met them?

The SFU philosophy professor wants to know the specific brain action or mechanism involved, the one that enables us to perceive what amounts to the inner lives of other people. "When you see people in the grocery store, you don't see random, meaningless movements. You see their movements as patterned, orderly behaviours - as intentional actions performed by people. We do this so automatically that we're not aware of this mechanism until it breaks down. Autistic individuals, for instance, don't have it.

"Imagine being dropped into the world and not understanding what those around you are doing. People with autism are stuck in their own world, unable to perceive the emotions, thoughts, and actions of other people. This makes it very difficult for them to establish normal human connections with family or friends. One of philosophy's questions is, How do our minds perceive other minds? Scientists ask, What neuromechanism is involved? Or, to put it another way, What would an autistic person need in order to perceive other people as we do?"

Combining philosophy and neuroscience

Akins is one of many modern philosophers who think philosophy and science must collaborate on traditional philosophical questions. "We need the resources of neuroscience," she says, "to help us explain why we perceive the world the way we do." The James S. McDonnell Foundation agrees. In 1999, it awarded her a US$1 million fellowship to oversee a project that marries the two disciplines. It involves 18 philosophers - all under 40 years old and all with a neuroscience background. The fellowship gives them the resources to work on various philosophical problems using scientific methodologies.

It's a good fit, too! Philosophy deals with the complex pictures and ideas that appear in our minds, of both real or imagined things. It seeks to know the basis of our most fundamental beliefs about ourselves and the world. Neuroscience, on the other hand, concerns the biology of the nervous system (brain, nerves, and sense organs). Through neuropsychology, neurophysiology, neuroanatomy, and neurochemistry, it explores how the human mind and nervous system work.

In essence, the McDonnell project philosophers are re-uniting two disciplines that were once just one. Centuries ago there was only "natural philosophy." It dealt with the causes of things, why things behave in a certain way and other such issues. Thus, astronomical discoveries like those of Galileo and Kepler were called "new philosophy." It was only in the 20th century that science and philosophy became separate specialties. But science never strayed far from its philosophical roots. Einstein's theory of relativity, cosmology (think "big bang"), evolutionary theory, and scientific discoveries have continued to have major philosophical implications. And, after all, a postgraduate degree in science is still called a doctor of philosophy.

Her interest in philosophy began during high school

"I was 17, growing up in Winnipeg. My brother would bring his philosophy books home from the university, and I'd read them. Then, when I went to university I signed up for a course. The instructor was Patricia Churchland, author of many books and papers on philosophy - she wrote the first contemporary book on neurophilosophy." Akins became totally hooked.

Heading the million-dollar McDonnell project is the perfect outlet for her. It touches on all sorts of things she likes to think about. "When I look at a picture of the Eiffel Tower, I think about an object, a specific structure that exists in Paris. When I recall the smell of roses, I recall a property these flowers have. Somehow or other, my thoughts are linked to properties and objects in the real world. Yet, I don't have to have been to Paris. And I may not have smelled roses for many years. I'd like to know how certain brain states are tied to the objects they represent.

"And what about self-identity? We each have one, but what makes this possible? Why do you continue throughout your life as a single mental entity? What brain mechanism creates this Ôself'? How are the body and memories and psychological states involved?"

Akins' own research is on how and why we see things in colour. "People with cerebral achromatopsia," she notes, "are colour-blind, due to an injury to the brain's ventral occipital cortex. Their world appears grey and dull. However, under certain circumstances, they do see some colour." She questions current ideas about colour vision. For instance, she suspects some colour-blind people "see" colour, but lack the brain mechanism needed to recognize it as such.

Why should the rest of us care about philosophy?

"Philosophy shows us the complexity of the world," she replies. "It helps us understand what is going on around us - including the consequences of science and technology. Take cloning. What most people are worried about is human intervention in the reproductive process. After all, twins are Ôclones' but no one thinks it's immoral to have twins. So the question is, Why does intervention matter? The usual reply is, It's not natural. But we do all sorts of unnatural things, such as kidney dialysis, blood pressure therapy, and triple bypass heart surgery. Why are these okay, but cloning is not? Philosophy helps us understand our motives and deal with complex issues."

The fact is, some important rules we live by are rapidly crumbling in the wake of science and technology advances. Our traditional reference points are disappearing. We're less certain of what to do. Thus, more than ever before we need to understand ourselves and know why we do what we do. Can philosophy evolve as an integral part of science and technology? Can it regain its position in science's "inner circle"? Kathleen Akins' work is a good start in this direction. aq

print this story
top of page