MyOOPS開放式課程
請加入會員以使用更多個人化功能
來自全球頂尖大學的開放式課程,現在由世界各國的數千名義工志工為您翻譯成中文。請免費享用!
課程來源:TED
     

 

Daniel Reisel 談修復式司法之神經科學

Daniel Reisel: The neuroscience of restorative justice

 

Photo of three lions hunting on the Serengeti.

講者:Daniel Reisel

2013年2月攝於TED2013

 

翻譯:洪曉慧

編輯:朱學恒

簡繁轉換:洪曉慧

後制:洪曉慧

字幕影片後制:謝旻均

 

影片請按此下載

MAC及手持裝置版本請按此下載

閱讀中文字幕純文字版本

 

關於這場演講

Daniel Reisel研究犯罪型病態人格者(及小鼠)的大腦。他提出一個大問題:與其囚禁這些罪犯,我們是否該利用我們對大腦的瞭解幫助他們改過自新?換句話說:如果大腦可在受傷後長出新的神經通路…我們是否能幫助大腦重建道德思想?

 

關於Daniel Reisel

Daniel Reisel探索人類道德之心理及生理根源。

 

為什麼要聽他演講

Daniel Reisel成長於挪威,但於1995年遷居英國。他於醫院擔任醫生,並於倫敦大學學院研究表觀遺傳學。他於2005年完成神經科學博士學位,研究如何藉由學習改變大腦。從那時起,他的研究著重於基因功能對生活事件的影響。Daniel目前正接受訓練,成為英國修復式司法委員會認可之修復式司法協調員。

 

Daniel Reisel的英語網上資料

danreisel.com

@danreisel

iris.ucl.ac.uk/

 

[TED科技‧娛樂‧設計]

已有中譯字幕的TED影片目錄(繁體)(簡體)。請注意繁簡目錄是不一樣的。

 

Daniel Reisel 談修復式司法之神經科學

 

我今天要談的是如何改變我們的大腦和社會。

 

這是Joe。Joe 現年32,是一位殺人犯。13年前,我在戒備森嚴的倫敦Wormwood Scrubs監獄無期徒刑區見到Joe。請大家想像一下這個地方。它看起來、感覺起來就像它的名稱:Wormwood Scrubs(充滿痛苦)。這座在維多利亞時代後期由囚犯們親手建築的監獄,是英國最危險犯人的囚禁之處。這些人都犯下令人髮指的罪行,我在那裡研究他們的大腦。我是倫敦大學學院研究團隊的一員,由英國國家衛生部資助。我的任務是研究一群經臨床診斷為病態人格的犯人,意味著他們是所有犯人中最冷酷、最具侵略性的一群。導致他們行為的根源為何?是否存在神經性因素導致這些症狀?如果存在神經性因素,我們能找到治療方法嗎?

 

因此我想談談變化,尤其是情緒變化。成長過程中,我一直對人的變化感興趣。我母親是臨床心理治療師,晚上偶爾會在家裡接待病人。她會關上通往客廳的門,我會想像那個房間裡發生神奇的事。五、六歲時,我會穿著睡衣悄悄爬到門邊,坐在門外,把耳朵貼在門上偷聽。不只一次地,我睡著了,他們不得不在診療結束後把我推開。

 

我想這就是我首次踏入Wormwood Scrubs監獄安全會客室的原因。Joe坐在一張鋼桌對面,面無表情地迎接我的到來。典獄長同樣面無表情地說:「有麻煩時,按那個紅色警報器,我們會儘快趕來。」(笑聲)

 

我坐下來,沉重的金屬門在我身後砰的一聲關上。我抬頭看著紅色警報器,它在Joe身後遠處那面牆上。(笑聲)

 

我看著Joe。也許察覺我的顧慮,他傾身向前,盡可能用安慰的語氣說:「啊,別擔心那個警報器,反正它已經壞了。」(笑聲)

 

接下來幾個月,我們測試Joe和他的獄友,特別觀察他們對顯示不同情緒照片的歸類能力。我們觀察他們對這些情緒的身體反應。因此,例如當大多數人看見這張某人看似悲傷的照片,我們隨即出現一個輕微的、可測量出的身體反應:心跳加速、皮膚出汗。雖然我們研究的病態人格患者能正確描述照片顯示的情緒,他們無法展現應有的情緒波動,他們無法展現任何身體反應。如同他們知道文字的意思,卻無法感同身受。因此我們想藉由MRI對他們的大腦影像進行深入觀察。事實上這並非簡單的任務。想像一下在交通高峰期,運送一群戴著腳鐐手銬的病態人格患者穿越倫敦市中心。為了將他們放入MRI掃描器,你得移除所有金屬物,包括腳鐐、手銬,還有我那時才知道的,所有身體穿環。

 

但過了一段時間,我們有了初步答案。這些人不僅是悲慘童年的受害者,還存在其他原因。像Joe這樣的人,大腦中所謂的杏仁核區域有所缺失。杏仁核是深藏在大腦兩個半球中的杏仁狀組織,它被認為是產生同理式體驗的關鍵。一般來說,一個人的同理心越強,他的杏仁核就越大、越活躍。我們所研究的囚犯具有杏仁核缺陷,可能導致他們缺乏同理心及展現不道德的行為。

 

因此我們退一步來看,一般來說,道德行為的養成是成長過程的一部分,如同學習說話。6個月大時,基本上每個人都能區分有生命及無生命的物體;12個月大時,大部分孩童可模仿他人有意識的動作。因此例如母親舉起雙手向外伸展,你會模仿她的行為。最初這還不是很完美。我記得我的姪女Sasha,當時她兩歲,正翻閱一本圖畫書。她舔一根手指,然後用另一隻手翻頁,舔一根手指、用另一隻手翻頁(笑聲)。漸漸地,我們為社會性大腦建立了基礎。因此當我們三、四歲時,大部分孩童-並非所有-具備瞭解他人意圖的能力,這是建立同理心的另一個先決條件。事實上這種發展過程具普遍性,無論你住在哪裡、受哪種文化薰陶。已有足夠證據顯示道德行為的基礎是與生俱來的。如果你有所懷疑,不妨試試我曾做過的:失信於一位四歲孩子。你將發現四歲孩子的大腦一點也不單純。它更像一把瑞士刀,具有在發展過程中經仔細琢磨的固定心智模式及強烈的公平意識。早期發展十分關鍵,其中似乎存在一絲機會,在掌控道德問題變得較困難之後,就像成年人學習一門外語。這並非意味著這是不可能的事。最近史丹佛大學一項相當棒的研究顯示,在虛擬實境遊戲中扮演樂於助人的超級英雄者,之後變得更樂於關懷及幫助他人。好,我並非建議我們應賦予罪犯超能力,我的建議是,我們需要找出使Joe和像他那樣的人改變大腦和行為的方法。為了他們的利益,也為了其他人的利益。

 

那麼大腦可以改變嗎?100多年來,神經解剖學家及後來的神經學家認為,在孩童時期的最初發展後,成人大腦無法再產生新的腦細胞,大腦只能進行有限程度的改變。這是過去的定論。但1990年代,許多研究開始顯示-在普林斯頓的Elizabeth Gould和其他人的領導下,研究開始顯示神經再生的證據。新的腦細胞在成年哺乳類動物大腦裡產生,首先出現在負責嗅覺的嗅球裡,然後出現在涉及短期記憶的海馬迴裡,最後出現在杏仁核裡。為了瞭解這個過程如何發展,我離開那些病態人格患者,加入牛津一間專門研究學習和發展的實驗室。我的研究對象從病態人格患者變成老鼠,因為許多不同種類的社會性動物呈現相同的大腦反應模式。因此如果你將一隻老鼠飼養在一般的籠子或鞋盒裡,鋪上棉花,讓牠獨自生活,不接受太多刺激,它不僅無法健康成長,通常還會出現奇怪、重複性的舉動。這種天生的社會性動物將失去與其他老鼠交流的能力,甚至在遇見牠們時出現侵略性。然而,飼養在所謂豐富環境裡的老鼠,與其他老鼠群居,有輪子、梯子及可探索的區域,顯示神經再生現象,長出新的大腦細胞。實驗證明,牠們在某些學習及記憶任務中也表現得較出色。當然,牠們不至於發展出替老邁老鼠提購物袋過街的道德行為,但牠們所處的良好環境導致健康的社會行為。相反地,飼養在一般籠子裡的老鼠-你或許會說,這跟監獄沒什麼差別-大腦產生的新神經細胞少得多。

 

顯然哺乳類動物的杏仁核,包括和我們一樣的靈長類,顯示神經再生的證據。大腦中某些區域超過20%細胞是新形成的。我們正開始瞭解這些細胞的確切功能,但這暗示了成年人的大腦可發生驚人變化。然而,我們的大腦對環境壓力也相當敏感。壓力荷爾蒙、糖皮質激素由大腦產生,抑制這些新細胞的生長。壓力越大,大腦發展越少,導致適應力降低及更大壓力。這是發生在我們眼前、先天與後天因素之間的交互作用。當你思考這一點,諷刺的是,我們目前處理具有杏仁核缺陷罪犯的方法是,把他們放在一個事實上不可能有任何成長機會的環境中。當然,監禁是刑事司法系統及保護社會的必要部分,我們的研究並非建議罪犯應提出MRI掃描結果當作法庭證據,逃脫牢獄之災,只因他們擁有具缺陷的杏仁核。實驗證據的涵意恰好相反。因為我們的大腦可以改變,我們必須對我們的行為負責,他們必須對自我的復原負責。其中一種復原方法或許能藉由修復式司法計畫達成。如果受害者選擇參與,可與加害者在安全、有序的情況下見面,鼓勵加害者對他們的行為負責。受害人在過程中扮演主動角色,在這種情境下,加害者可意識到-或許是第一次-受害人是活生生的人,擁有思想、感覺及真實情緒反應。這將刺激杏仁核,也許是比單純監禁更有效的復原練習。這個計畫不一定適用於所有人,但對許多人來說,這或許是打開心鎖的方法。

 

因此現在我們能做什麼?我們如何應用這些知識?我想與大家分享我學到的三件事。我學到的第一點是,我們需要改變想法。自從130年前Wormwood Scrubs監獄建立以來,社會幾乎在各方面都有進展,包括經營學校、醫院的方式。然而,當我們提起監獄時,彷彿回到狄更斯時代-如果不是中世紀的話。我認為,有太長時間,我們任由自己相信人性無法改變的錯誤觀點,這讓我們的社會付出極大代價。我們知道大腦可發生驚人變化,實現這一點的最佳方式是改變及調整我們的環境,即使對成人來說。

 

我學到的第二點是,我們需要將認為科學是造成社會變革不可或缺之方法的人組織起來。讓神經學家把一位重刑犯放入MRI掃描器十分簡單-好吧,事實上沒那麼容易-但最終我們想證明的是,我們是否有能力減少再犯率?為了回答像這樣的複雜問題,我們需要不同背景的人-實驗科學家和臨床醫生、社會工作者和政策制定者、慈善家和人權活動家攜手合作。

 

最後,我認為我們需要改變我們的杏仁核,因為-歸根究柢,問題不僅在於Joe是什麼樣的人,也在於我們是什麼樣的人。我們必須改變認為Joe是無可救藥之人的觀點。因為如果我們認為Joe無可救藥,他怎能以不同觀點看待自己?再過十年,Joe將從Wormwood Scrubs出獄。他將如70%的罪犯般再次犯罪,回到監獄嗎?難道不能採取更好的方法,讓Joe在服刑期間鍛煉他的杏仁核,刺激新腦細胞的生長及連接,使他出獄時能面對這個世界?毫無疑問,這對所有人都有利。

 

(掌聲)謝謝。(掌聲)

 

以下為系統擷取之英文原文

About this Talk

Daniel Reisel studies the brains of criminal psychopaths (and mice). And he asks a big question: Instead of warehousing these criminals, shouldn’t we be using what we know about the brain to help them rehabilitate? Put another way: If the brain can grow new neural pathways after an injury … could we help the brain re-grow morality?

About the Speaker

Daniel Reisel searches for the psychological and physical roots of human morality. Full bio

Transcript

I'd like to talk today about how we can change our brains and our society.

Meet Joe. Joe's 32 years old and a murderer. I met Joe 13 years ago on the lifer wing at Wormwood Scrubs high-security prison in London. I'd like you to imagine this place. It looks and feels like it sounds: Wormwood Scrubs. Built at the end of the Victorian Era by the inmates themselves, it is where England's most dangerous prisoners are kept. These individuals have committed acts of unspeakable evil. And I was there to study their brains. I was part of a team of researchers from University College London, on a grant from the U.K. department of health. My task was to study a group of inmates who had been clinically diagnosed as psychopaths. That meant they were the most callous and the most aggressive of the entire prison population. What lay at the root of their behavior? Was there a neurological cause for their condition? And if there was a neurological cause, could we find a cure?

So I'd like to speak about change, and especially about emotional change. Growing up, I was always intrigued by how people change. My mother, a clinical psychotherapist, would occasionally see patients at home in the evening. She would shut the door to the living room, and I imagined magical things happened in that room. At the age of five or six I would creep up in my pajamas and sit outside with my ear glued to the door. On more than one occasion, I fell asleep and they had to push me out of the way at the end of the session.

And I suppose that's how I found myself walking into the secure interview room on my first day at Wormwood Scrubs. Joe sat across a steel table and greeted me with this blank expression. The prison warden, looking equally indifferent, said, "Any trouble, just press the red buzzer, and we'll be around as soon as we can." (Laughter)

I sat down. The heavy metal door slammed shut behind me. I looked up at the red buzzer far behind Joe on the opposite wall. (Laughter)

I looked at Joe. Perhaps detecting my concern, he leaned forward, and said, as reassuringly as he could, "Ah, don't worry about the buzzer, it doesn't work anyway." (Laughter)

Over the subsequent months, we tested Joe and his fellow inmates, looking specifically at their ability to categorize different images of emotion. And we looked at their physical response to those emotions. So, for example, when most of us look at a picture like this of somebody looking sad, we instantly have a slight, measurable physical response: increased heart rate, sweating of the skin. Whilst the psychopaths in our study were able to describe the pictures accurately, they failed to show the emotions required. They failed to show a physical response. It was as though they knew the words but not the music of empathy. So we wanted to look closer at this to use MRI to image their brains. That turned out to be not such an easy task. Imagine transporting a collection of clinical psychopaths across central London in shackles and handcuffs in rush hour, and in order to place each of them in an MRI scanner, you have to remove all metal objects, including shackles and handcuffs, and, as I learned, all body piercings.

After some time, however, we had a tentative answer. These individuals were not just the victims of a troubled childhood. There was something else. People like Joe have a deficit in a brain area called the amygdala. The amygdala is an almond-shaped organ deep within each of the hemispheres of the brain. It is thought to be key to the experience of empathy. Normally, the more empathic a person is, the larger and more active their amygdala is. Our population of inmates had a deficient amygdala, which likely led to their lack of empathy and to their immoral behavior.

So let's take a step back. Normally, acquiring moral behavior is simply part of growing up, like learning to speak. At the age of six months, virtually every one of us is able to differentiate between animate and inanimate objects. At the age of 12 months, most children are able to imitate the purposeful actions of others. So for example, your mother raises her hands to stretch, and you imitate her behavior. At first, this isn't perfect. I remember my cousin Sasha, two years old at the time, looking through a picture book and licking one finger and flicking the page with the other hand, licking one finger and flicking the page with the other hand. (Laughter) Bit by bit, we build the foundations of the social brain so that by the time we're three, four years old, most children, not all, have acquired the ability to understand the intentions of others, another prerequisite for empathy. The fact that this developmental progression is universal, irrespective of where you live in the world or which culture you inhabit, strongly suggests that the foundations of moral behavior are inborn. If you doubt this, try, as I've done, to renege on a promise you've made to a four-year-old. You will find that the mind of a four-year old is not naïve in the slightest. It is more akin to a Swiss army knife with fixed mental modules finely honed during development and a sharp sense of fairness. The early years are crucial. There seems to be a window of opportunity, after which mastering moral questions becomes more difficult, like adults learning a foreign language. That's not to say it's impossible. A recent, wonderful study from Stanford University showed that people who have played a virtual reality game in which they took on the role of a good and helpful superhero actually became more caring and helpful towards others afterwards. Now I'm not suggesting we endow criminals with superpowers, but I am suggesting that we need to find ways to get Joe and people like him to change their brains and their behavior, for their benefit and for the benefit of the rest of us.

So can brains change? For over 100 years, neuroanatomists and later neuroscientists held the view that after initial development in childhood, no new brain cells could grow in the adult human brain. The brain could only change within certain set limits. That was the dogma. But then, in the 1990s, studies starting showing, following the lead of Elizabeth Gould at Princeton and others, studies started showing the evidence of neurogenesis, the birth of new brain cells in the adult mammalian brain, first in the olfactory bulb, which is responsible for our sense of smell, then in the hippocampus involving short-term memory, and finally in the amygdala itself. In order to understand how this process works, I left the psychopaths and joined a lab in Oxford specializing in learning and development. Instead of psychopaths, I studied mice, because the same pattern of brain responses appears across many different species of social animals. So if you rear a mouse in a standard cage, a shoebox, essentially, with cotton wool, alone and without much stimulation, not only does it not thrive, but it will often develop strange, repetitive behaviors. This naturally sociable animal will lose its ability to bond with other mice, even becoming aggressive when introduced to them. However, mice reared in what we called an enriched environment, a large habitation with other mice with wheels and ladders and areas to explore, demonstrate neurogenesis, the birth of new brain cells, and as we showed, they also perform better on a range of learning and memory tasks. Now, they don't develop morality to the point of carrying the shopping bags of little old mice across the street, but their improved environment results in healthy, sociable behavior. Mice reared in a standard cage, by contrast, not dissimilar, you might say, from a prison cell, have dramatically lower levels of new neurons in the brain.

It is now clear that the amygdala of mammals, including primates like us, can show neurogenesis. In some areas of the brain, more than 20 percent of cells are newly formed. We're just beginning to understand what exact function these cells have, but what it implies is that the brain is capable of extraordinary change way into adulthood. However, our brains are also exquisitely sensitive to stress in our environment. Stress hormones, glucocorticoids, released by the brain, suppress the growth of these new cells. The more stress, the less brain development, which in turn causes less adaptability and causes higher stress levels. This is the interplay between nature and nurture in real time in front of our eyes. When you think about it, it is ironic that our current solution for people with stressed amygdalae is to place them in an environment that actually inhibits any chance of further growth. Of course, imprisonment is a necessary part of the criminal justice system and of protecting society. Our research does not suggest that criminals should submit their MRI scans as evidence in court and get off the hook because they've got a faulty amygdala. The evidence is actually the other way. Because our brains are capable of change, we need to take responsibility for our actions, and they need to take responsibility for their rehabilitation. One way such rehabilitation might work is through restorative justice programs. Here victims, if they choose to participate, and perpetrators meet face to face in safe, structured encounters, and the perpetrator is encouraged to take responsibility for their actions, and the victim plays an active role in the process. In such a setting, the perpetrator can see, perhaps for the first time, the victim as a real person with thoughts and feelings and a genuine emotional response. This stimulates the amygdala and may be a more effective rehabilitative practice than simple incarceration. Such programs won't work for everyone, but for many, it could be a way to break the frozen sea within.

So what can we do now? How can we apply this knowledge? I'd like to leave you with three lessons that I learned. The first thing that I learned was that we need to change our mindset. Since Wormwood Scrubs was built 130 years ago, society has advanced in virtually every aspect, in the way we run our schools, our hospitals. Yet the moment we speak about prisons, it's as though we're back in Dickensian times, if not medieval times. For too long, I believe, we've allowed ourselves to be persuaded of the false notion that human nature cannot change, and as a society, it's costing us dearly. We know that the brain is capable of extraordinary change, and the best way to achieve that, even in adults, is to change and modulate our environment.

The second thing I have learned is that we need to create an alliance of people who believe that science is integral to bringing about social change. It's easy enough for a neuroscientist to place a high-security inmate in an MRI scanner. Well actually, that turns out not to be so easy, but ultimately what we want to show is whether we're able to reduce the reoffending rates. In order to answer complex questions like that, we need people of different backgrounds -- lab-based scientists and clinicians, social workers and policy makers, philanthropists and human rights activists — to work together.

Finally, I believe we need to change our own amygdalae, because this issue goes to the heart not just of who Joe is, but who we are. We need to change our view of Joe as someone wholly irredeemable, because if we see Joe as wholly irredeemable, how is he going to see himself as any different? In another decade, Joe will be released from Wormwood Scrubs. Will he be among the 70 percent of inmates who end up reoffending and returning to the prison system? Wouldn't it be better if, while serving his sentence, Joe was able to train his amygdala, which would stimulate the growth of new brain cells and connections, so that he will be able to face the world once he gets released? Surely, that would be in the interest of all of us.

(Applause) Thank you. (Applause)


留下您對本課程的評論
標題:
您目前為非會員,留言名稱將顯示「匿名非會員」
只能進行20字留言

留言內容:

驗證碼請輸入4 + 5 =

標籤

現有標籤:1
新增標籤:


有關本課程的討論

目前暫無評論,快來留言吧!

Creative Commons授權條款 本站一切著作係採用 Creative Commons 授權條款授權。
協助推廣單位: