see people who have trouble. there's something called the clinician's illusion which is a problem i have engaged in as well where we extrapolate too vigorously from the people we see in the clinic to people in the general universe. we saw this after 9/11. it was an assumption that new york city would be traumatized. the amount of money that went into mental health services was astounding and well-meaning and it turned out that if you were in the tower you could have had a severe psychiatric reaction. if you knew someone who died you were vulnerable but the vast majority of people were upset as hell but not pathological at all. people are resilient but that is not the people psychiatrists see. we see the people who have trouble coping. it is true, we see addicts who

don't recover on their own. so many do but that is not who we see and not who we research. that is not to say you don't come in for treatment if you are having trouble, you come in right away and wait for it to play out because you could get all kinds of things happen. then natural history for people to recover on their own. on that optimistic note i will stop. thank you. [applause] ♪ right no >> pleased to be joined by sally satel of the american enterprise institute, a lecturer at yale university, practicing and psychiatrists and somebody who

puts the word mindless and brainwashed in the title of youi most recent book. where are we going here? >> the other choice was 50 shades of gray matter. actually 50 shades of gray >> g matter and the subtitle speak to the concept of seduction and my co-author and i wrote this book and attempted to inject neuropathy into a conversation that was all too carried away often by oversinterpretation of re brain scans. brain scans are pretty much the signature of modern y were neuroscience. they are beautiful and a resting and play into people's sense ofy surprise that my goodness, my a thoughts are in my brain?? my math anxieties in the brain? wherwhe else would it be?be.

we are not endorsing a dualist view. but what comes what comes along with this notion that there are natural correlates to our thoughts and the motions, something is in the brain, then somehow that means we are not responsible for it, the behavior that emerges, these behavior's are in voluntary. clearly there are some kinds of behaviors and actions of people can't control. there is a defect or brain damage but the simple fact that we can see, you visualize increased mineral activity manifest as a lit up brain scan is not the same thing as saying a person could not control themselves. the implications for personal

responsibility in this age of neuroscience is interesting to us because it gets better and better at generating biological explanations of behavior. we are going to learn more and more about how the brain works, the mechanisms behind our impulses and decisions but we shouldn't call will be seduced into this notion that we can't control what happens because we are thinking about ourselves mechanistic we. it is not the same thing at all. trial lawyers love this idea which is why brain scans are becoming almost a requirement in capital cases. look, your honor, you can see this particular mineral signature shows my client couldn't control in kent, couldn't be deterred. there are people who can't form intent and can't reason because the brain pathology, but we

can't yet tell who those people are based on a brain scan. a lot of caution is needed in interpreting them. some people make careers out of what i would argue is misinterpreting them. we call them neural entrepreneur is. there is a company called know why am i which can supposedly tell whether you are telling the truth or not. it has not yet been admissible in court although some people use it and a lot of cheating spouse is use it bluesy, honey, i wasn't doing it, this brain scan said so. we have a chapter on lie detection. there are some interesting -- there are some interesting findings in detecting neural signatures of lies versus truth that they are done in a highly controlled experimental situations that cannot yet be

generalized to people in a forensic situation where they go into know why am i and are able to present that is true. >> host: you have a story about a retired addict in new york city who killed his wife, escape down the fire escape. and found a tumor. you save the tumor has nothing to do with this behavior. >> guest: is not my interpretation. is the interpretation of the neurologist who inspired him. that is an interesting case. this is one of the first cases of what is called 0 law. the idea of trying to show some manifestation of mineral defects. in this particular case, his nickname was herbert wine scene in the light 1980s and he threw

her out the window and hope to make it look like a suicide, he strangled her and threw her out the window and the police caught him on the way out. his defense team didn't know what to do. let's just do a brain scan. maybe something will come up and this was in the 80s only two years after a pet scanning had become popular and to their amazement they found he had actually had a benign brain tumor but the brain tumor was growing very slow, taken years to develop because if you have a physiological change that is rapid, it would be clinical manifestations, you would have a horrible headache, weakness, from plums with thinking and impulse control, if you had a bundle of problems, he had none of that, a bad temper. to make a long story short it

was a very dramatic brain scan that they showed and he did get off. he got a much reduced sentence. that is what happened. that example is structural narrow imaging. they showed this tumor. most of the narrow imaging we talk about in terms of trying to infer aspects of the mind from looking at the brain is functional neural imaging which measures blood flow or metabolic activity in the brain as various areas are engaged as a person thinks about a certain thing or feels a certain way. the brain scan worked the way it was supposed to work. to the extent it has great rhetorical power, the idea is again if it is in the brain, the person is less responsible.

we have very interesting data, many studies that converge on the same findings, the more you described of behavior in biological explanations, jeans or neurological problems versus a bad childhood or some other kind of psychological explanation people are more likely to -- punishment if it were a crime. if the behavior is explained in a biological way they are less likely to blame -- less intense punishment. interestingly the flip side is they are more pessimistic about the person's capacity to respond to treatment. they also think that the person is more dangerous and want to keep more social business. none of that is an argument for one explanation or another. we want to be as realistic as

possible but there are implications to the way we've described behavior. >> host: sally satel is the author of "brainwashed: the seductive appeal of mindless neuroscience". you heard a little bit about what she writes about in this book. let's take some calls. michigan, high, elaine. head. we are listening. >> i have read a little bit about differences in male and female brains, for instance this book about educating boys and girls. did you experience a little bit on differences between male brains and female brains. and the differences in a male brain and female brain but i understand how it is referred to. a little too much is made of

that. there are some differences that are male or female differences. i certainly believe that and manifest in the brain in certain ways. .. terms of teaching children these kind of differences are quite subtle and don't figure in at all. there are not even -- we have heard a lot about learning st e styles and even that is overblown. there is visual and odd tory and people that manipulate things. that is exaggerated. children learn by understanding the meaning and that is what educators need to focus on. some people may have different skills. some more

>> >> and how they picked bad brains out using hearing aids that it is more of a brain issue? >> host: i think we had trouble hearing that she was talking about but i am not exactly sure. >> i am not inexpert of hearing disorders i will do

a pass on that. >> host: you are a psychiatrist. >> that is an excellent point* in fact, the function of those scans are mainly research tools. there is some evidence now that certain signatures could see which depressed people might respond better to antidepressant some verses cognitive therapy but even that is not routinely used. but use imaging for that sort of thing but this kenyans are mainly limited

to the research realm but made e of marketing and they are not ready to do that. in fact, in my province -- prophesy work with the drug addicts mostly it is a very important concept of the book. the notion the brain is inevitably the most authentic and a truthful and objective way to understand the behavior. with alzheimer's? yes. but talk about drug addiction it is problematic to focus so much on one level of analysis because in treating addiction you have to take the whole person into account and you can

certainly talk about the biological addiction it does not mean biology but one day it will help us to formulate better treatments. like memories involved but when you work with an addict keep in mind there are reasons why people start to use a and reasons why they stop. you cannot think so we what is going on in their brain. also at its core it may sound counter intuitive but how voluntary that gets. the the behavior that could be influenced by consequences. so compared to alzheimer's disease. no question.

that is a position that cannot be modified by a consequence. if i tell you i will give you $1 million if your memory does not deteriorate it will not matter. but we have so many examples of so much research of people who are able to modify their addiction when they are in situations when something big is at stake. for example, my favorite example that refers to urine in the drug test. 1971 by president nixon who was so concerned about gis coming back from vietnam to the inner-city is addicted

as many as 20 percent were but two further blame the already the epidemic to say you are not leaving vietnam's so with the heroin addiction that will not matter. but almost all cleaned up and payback and were clean in one week and three years later after a steady those that had reestablished the addiction but the point of the addiction changes when the conflict changes in a war setting a lot of it is terrible boredom if not bored they're terrified. but that is less relevant in a different environment and

with different needs and availability so to take a environmental level and psychological and social not just the brain. >> host: the next call comes from georgia. >> caller: i am basically very pessimistic about the future of their science with the fact we could record the brain and brain activities in realtime. and if you do connect the brain and the network then you have real security problem where we cannot even control of our computer networks right now with the hackers. if you are willing to have your brain be connected in a

network setting like that totally exposed. i cannot imagine being able to secure that. that opens a lot of scary repercussions down the road into the future. >> those that are concerned about that right now that is the realm i did not hear the professor but he said the golden age of neuroscience is in the lab is not translated yet. right now we can infer settle a emotions or cognition by looking at e.g. or pet scans we cannot do that. we are so far from that in fact, but to work on

earthworms or in vertebrates it is a 1 mile journey scientists know that. it is 1 inch of the way in. one could really let the imagination give very flourish but don't worry about it. >> caller: it is a pleasure to talk to you. my young guest has a lot is mia m curious is the of the medical community making any strides towards a cheer? if they are united matt it is something genetic?

due to nature are reprieving it? is a of mercury in the air? in the food that we? have does that affect the autistic child? >> unfortunately there is no magic bullet in very generically you have heard this before certainly that vaccine very is there a and if you don't know his work from the university of pennsylvania look at it. i would rule out the back seat but weskits a friend and a serious brain conditions with that environmental dimension and

other kinds of situational content but there is no answers right now. >> host: what scares you the most about using the study of the brain? >> guest: what makes me the most nervous that is what i call the future of claim based on an article that was dedicated to him. but mostly it comes

epinephrine $0.6 but no question people with damaged brains clearly i am not arguing that but i am arguing that that technology we cannot use it. that people experience that impulse so that is the key difference but to interpret that basic human intuition and if we are confronted with the mechanics that we jump to the conclusion the behavior that grew from that it cannot be controlled that those that would be much more helpful to people.

and to really about science there are some narrow scientists -- neuroscience test the more we'll understand the brain we will understand there is no such thing as free will. is our topic but can there be moral accountability where the behavior is caused? said genetic components leads you to act a certain way. is it true those forces led to a point? frankly that is not testable

handed is circular but it is caused by a lot of influences. so with personal accountability? it is a philosophical question centuries old. if you believe you can have free will then you don't believe that. the reason the brains are intact you enough to liberate and change their mind that they need to be accountable.

with that target determinist view. they're all clockwork creatures the matter which one that you take in is not one that can be resolved the brain science will tell us the message behind how does the brain work behind the decision making process? and the brain is about mechanisms and the meaning that we make our thoughts

and emotions to plan and deliberate and for most people that is not reason to continue to have a criminal justice system that does indorse restaurant -- richer persian. there is no punishment just rehabilitation and containment anti-terrorist its. but a world without blame is hard to think about. so we think it is a legitimate world is one thing.

>> caller: i really appreciate your point of view i struggle with of family member who suffers from aspergers a 16 year-old boy emotionally and socially he is a - - eight years old chronologically and has been violent the last six years his mother has the view he is not responsible for his behavior so she does not punish him even though the violence is directed to her. as a bystander i feel helpless because i don't feel like i can do much. but she does not punish to the same degree as i would can you make recommendations

have you would handle that? >> host: we got the point. >> guest: i hope she sees an expert in this area but i would concede the way you might want to hold accountable a young man like that is not the same way you approach the child without aspergers and that is probably true but i have no reason to think no consequences is relevant. think of the awards as opposed to punishment. and to modify the behavior.

>> host: dr. sally satel and practicing psychologist thank you for being on booktv. live coverage of the national book festival at the washington convention center. we have several more authors of author paul in an defense. and then we have the civil-rights called it roundtable we will talk about it to them in square and also the bully pulpit with the carlyle group david rubin stain who was one of the sponsors of the national book festival. in just a few minutes we'll

talk to the author the most recent book of the politics of for -- more. the book is called the second act after that we will have the chat with sandra day o'connor this is booktv on c-span2. >> host: we are joined to be have are set former justice of the supreme court scienter day o'connor this is the fifth book with the history of the supreme