PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Bruce G Charlton

Publications and source records attributed to Bruce G Charlton.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Alienation, recovered animism and altered states of consciousness.

Alienation is the feeling that life is 'meaningless', that we do not belong in the world. But alienation is not an inevitable part of the human condition: some people do feel at one with the world as a consequence of the animistic way of thinking which is shared by children and hunter-gatherers. Animism considers all significant entities to have 'minds', to be 'alive', to be sentient agents. The animistic thinker inhabits a world populated by personal powers including not just other human beings, but also important animals and plants, and significant aspects of physical landscape. Humans belong in this world because it is a web of social relationships. Animism is therefore spontaneous, the 'natural' way of thinking for humans: all humans began as animistic children and for most of human evolutionary history would have grown into animistic adults. It requires sustained, prolonged and pervasive formal education to 'overwrite' animistic thinking with the rationalistic objectivity typical of the modern world. It is this learned abstraction that creates alienation--humans are no longer embedded in a world of social relations but become estranged, adrift in a world of indifferent things. Methods used to cure alienation and recover animistic modes of thinking involve detachment from the social systems that tend to maintain objectivity and rationality: for example, solitude, leisure, unstructured time and direct contact with nature. Many people also achieve similar results by deliberately inducing altered states of consciousness. Animistic thinking may emerge in meditation or contemplation, lucid dreaming, from self-hypnosis, when drowsy, in 'trance states' induced by repetitious rhythm or light, or when delirious due to illness, brain injury, psychoses, or intoxication with 'entheogenic' drugs--which is probably one reason for the perennial popularity of inducing intoxicated states. However, intoxication will typically damage memory processes making it harder to learn from any spiritual experiences; and even mild states of cognitive impairment may be dangerous in situations where skilled or responsible behaviour is required. Despite these constraints and limitations, recovering animism through seeking altered states of consciousness could already be considered a major world spiritual practice.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Why there should be more science Nobel prizes and laureates - And why proportionate credit should be awarded to institutions.

The four science Nobel prizes (physics, chemistry, medicine/physiology and economics) have performed extremely well as a method of recognizing the highest level of achievement. The prizes exist primarily to honour individuals but also have a very important function in science generally. In particular, the institutions and nations which have educated, nurtured or supported many Nobel laureates can be identified as elite in world science. However, the limited range of subjects and a maximum of 12 laureates per year mean that many major scientific achievements remain un-recognized; and relatively few universities can gather sufficient Nobel-credits to enable a precise estimate of their different levels of quality. I advocate that the Nobel committee should expand the number of Nobel laureates and Prize categories as a service to world science. (1) There is a large surplus of high quality prize candidates deserving of recognition. (2) There has been a vast expansion of research with a proliferation of major sub-disciplines in the existing categories. (3) Especially, the massive growth of the bio-medical sciences has created a shortage of Nobel recognition in this area. (4) Whole new fields of major science have emerged. I therefore suggest that the maximum of three laureates per year should always be awarded in the categories of physics, chemistry and economics, even when these prizes are for diverse and un-related achievements; that the number of laureates in the 'biology' category of physiology or medicine should be increased to six or preferably nine per year; and that two new Prize categories should be introduced to recognize achievements in mathematics and computing science. Together, these measures could increase the science laureates from a maximum of 12 to a minimum of 24, and increase the range of scientific coverage. In future, the Nobel committee should also officially allocate proportionate credit to institutions for each laureate, and a historical task force could also award institutional credit for past prizes.

Chemical Phenomena↗
PubMed2006

From Nutty Professor to Buddy Love--Personality types in modern science.

People often suggest that scientists should have a specific personality type, usually conscientious and self-critical. But this is a mistake. Science as a social system needs to be conscientious and self-critical, but scientists as people do not necessarily have to conform to that stereotype. Since science works by a process of selection, it makes sense to have a wide range of personalities in science. It takes all types. However, the selection pressures within science have changed over recent decades. In the past, a successful scientist often resembled the white-coated, bespectacled and introverted Nutty Professor in Jerry Lewis's movie of that name. But the modern science superstar is more like the Nutty Professor's alter ego, nightclub singer 'Buddy Love': a sharp-suited, good-looking and charismatic charmer. While Nutty was dull but impartial, Buddy is compelling but self-seeking. Our attitude towards public scientific pronouncements should be adjusted accordingly.

Culture↗
PubMed2006

Mega-prizes in medicine: big cash awards may stimulate useful and rapid therapeutic innovation.

Following Horrobin's suggestion of 1986, I argue that offering very large prizes (tens of millions of US dollars, or more) for solving specific therapeutic problems, would be an excellent strategy for promoting the rapid development of effective new treatments. The two mainstream ways of paying for medical research are funding the process with grants or funding the outcome via patent protection. When grants are used to fund the process of research the result tends to be 'pure' science, guided by intrinsic scientific objectives. Practical results, such as useful therapeutic advances, are a by-product. Patent-seeking research, by contrast, is more focused on technology than science. It seeks practical results; and aims to pay for itself (and make a profit) in the long term by generating a patentable product or procedure. Prize-seeking research is subject to different incentives and applicable to different situations than either process-funded or patent-seeking research. Prize seeking researchers have a strong incentive to solve the specified problem as rapidly as possible, but the problem may be solved using old ideas that are scientifically mundane or unpatentable technologies and methods. Prizes therefore seem to generate solutions which are incremental extensions, new applications or novel combinations of already-existing technologies. The main use of mega-prizes in medicine would be to accelerate therapeutic progress in stagnant fields of research and to address urgent problems. For example, medical charities focused on specific diseases should consider accumulating their resources until they can offer a mega-prize for solving a clinical problem of special concern to their patients. Prize money should be big enough to pay for the research and development, the evaluation of the new treatment in a clinical trial, and with a large profit left-over to compensate for the intrinsic risk of competing. Sufficiently large amounts of money, and the prestige and publicity derived from winning a mega-prize, could rapidly mobilize research efforts to discover a whole range of scientifically un-glamorous but clinically-useful therapeutic breakthroughs.

Awards and Prizes↗
PubMed2006

Lectures are such an effective teaching method because they exploit evolved human psychology to improve learning.

Lectures are probably the best teaching method for many students in many circumstances; especially for communicating conceptual knowledge, and where there is a significant knowledge gap between lecturer and audience. However, the lack of a convincing rationale has been a factor in under-estimating the importance of lectures, and there are many who advocate their replacement with written communications or electronic media. I suggest that lectures are so effective because they exploit the spontaneous human aptitude for learning from spoken (rather than written) information. Literacy is a recent cultural artefact, and for most of their evolutionary history humans communicated by direct speech. By contrast with speech, all communication technologies--whether reading a book or a computer monitor--are artificial and unnatural. Furthermore, learning is easier during formal, quiet, real-time social events. The structure of a lecture artificially manipulates human psychology to increase vigilance, focus attention, and generate authority for the lecturer--all of which make communications more memorable for the student. Instead of trying to phase-out lectures, we should strive to make them better by understanding that lectures are essentially formal, spoken, social events.

Humans↗
PubMed2006

The rise of the boy-genius: psychological neoteny, science and modern life.

The mid-20th century saw the rise of the boy-genius, probably because a personality type characterized by prolonged youthfulness is advantageous both in science and modern life generally. This is the evolution of 'psychological neoteny', in which ever-more people retain for ever-longer the characteristic behaviours and attitudes of earlier developmental stages. Whereas traditional societies are characterized by initiation ceremonies marking the advent of adulthood, these have now dwindled and disappeared. In a psychological sense, some contemporary individuals never actually become adults. A child-like flexibility of attitudes, behaviours and knowledge is probably adaptive in modern society because people need repeatedly to change jobs, learn new skills, move to new places and make new friends. It seems that this adaptation is achieved by the expedient of postponing cognitive maturation - a process that could be termed psychological neoteny. ('Neoteny' refers to the biological phenomenon whereby development is delayed such that juvenile characteristics are retained into maturity.) Psychological neoteny is probably caused by the prolonged average duration of formal education, since students' minds are in a significant sense 'unfinished'. Since modern cultures favour cognitive flexibility, 'immature' people tend to thrive and succeed, and have set the tone of contemporary life: the greatest praise of an elderly person is to state that they retain the characteristics of youth. But the faults of youth are retained with well as its virtues: short attention span, sensation- and novelty-seeking, short cycles of arbitrary fashion and a sense of cultural shallowness. Nonetheless, as health gets better and cosmetic technologies improve, future humans may become somewhat like an axolotl - the cave-dwelling salamander which retains its larval form until death.

Beginning of Human Life↗
PubMed2006

The busy shall inherit the earth: the evolution from 'hard work' to 'busyness' in modern science and society.

Although 'hard work' and 'busyness' are somewhat similar terms, there seem to be significant differences in the way that they are used. While hard work has always been a feature of complex societies, modern society can be seen as evolving toward being dominated by jobs characterized by busyness. Busyness refers to multi-tasking - having many sequential jobs to perform and switching frequently between them on an externally-imposed schedule. Traditionally, the individual gifts of a successful scientist were mainly in terms of knowledge, theoretical or technical aptitude. But nowadays the successful scientist is often one who has been promoted from hard-work to busyness: an expert in synthesizing a sufficient degree of scientific ability with a broad range of managerial and political skills. It is psychologically tough to be busy, because busyness is a consequence of human beings being constrained by the functioning of abstract social systems. In a complex modern organization, individual psychology is subordinated to inflexible programs of being in specific places at specific times doing specific things - this is both tricky to do well and demanding to do at all. Since people are paid (mainly) to do difficult but necessary things they would prefer not to do, busyness has become a major reason why people are paid a premium salary. In the long-term, many straightforward jobs will be analyzed and routinized out of existence, with the narrowly-skilled worker being replaced by teams, machines or computers. But busy jobs are hard to eliminate because they are those in which it is optimal for a variety of disparate and unpredictable tasks to be done by a single person. Consequently, those individuals who can cope with, even thrive-upon, busyness are becoming indispensable. In future 'the busy shall inherit the earth' (or, at least, the most powerful and highest paid jobs), not just in science but in all major social domains.

Employment↗
PubMed2006

Despite their inevitable conflicts--science, religion and New Age spirituality are essentially compatible and complementary activities.

Until recently it seemed that the continued expansion of scientific ways of thinking was destined to render religion extinct and spirituality unfeasible. But the example of the United States disproves this, since America is the most successful scientific nation of this era, church-going remains strong and New Age spiritualities are thriving. Therefore, despite the obvious conflicts; science, religion and spirituality are essentially compatible. Future science will continue to win territory from religion since its validation procedures are more objective and reliable. However, churches can survive and grow by dropping those aspects of doctrine which clash with science, and expanding their social functions. The fast-growing US 'mega-church' movement shows the way - since these organizations are minimally dogmatic but instead provide a family-orientated and morally-cohesive social milieu. Like organized religion, New Age spirituality comes into conflict with science when it makes incredible or bizarre factual claims. However, in practice modern spirituality is based on subjective evaluations which do not clash with the procedures of science. Indeed, the reliance upon individual, emotion-based evaluations (e.g., 'my truth', 'whatever works for you') renders New Age spirituality 'science-proof', and has enabled it to expand massively in an age of science. Science, religion and spirituality perform different functions in the modern world, and their relationship is therefore one of mutual-dependence. Borderline disputes will inevitably occur, but as part of a broader context of complementarity. Science, 'social' churches and New Age spirituality all have a bright future.

Conflict, Psychological↗
PubMed2006

The paradox of the modern mass media: probably the major source of social cohesion in liberal democracies, even though its content is often socially divisive.

The modern mass media (MM) is often regarded a mixture between a trivial waste of time and resources, and a dangerously subversive system tending to promote social division and community breakdown. But these negative evaluations are difficult to square with the fact that those countries with the largest mass media include the most modernized and powerful nations. It seems more plausible that the MM is serving some useful - perhaps vital - function. I suggest that modern mass media function as the main source of social cohesion in liberal democracies. The paradox is that this cohesive function is sustained in a context of frequently divisive media content. This media function evolved because modern MM produce an excess of media communications in a context of consumer choice which generates competition for public attention both within- and between-media. Competition has led the media to become increasingly specialized at gaining and retaining public attention. Social cohesion is the consequence of the mass media continually drawing public attention to itself, and to the extremely large, internally complex and interconnected nature of the MM system. The means by which attention is attracted are almost arbitrary, encompassing both novelty and familiarity and evoking a wide range of emotions both positive and negative. Driven to seek competitive advantage, modern mass media produce a wide range of material to cater to a vast range of interests; thereby engaging a great variety of individuals and social groupings. The consequence is that media content is typically self-contradictory and includes content which is offensive and potentially divisive; since what grabs the interest of some may offend or repel others. For instance, young men must be socially engaged, since they are potentially the most violent social group, yet the interests of young men include material that the majority of the population would find excessively aggressive, disrespectful, subversive or sexual. If the mass media is effectively to perform its crucial function of enabling social cohesion among a diverse and differentiated population, then modern liberal democracies need a broad margin of toleration and a widespread psychological capacity to endure dissent and disagreement.

Communication↗
PubMed2006

Scientific life should be measured in seven year units.

Traditional wisdom and empirical observation unite in recommending a 7 year unit for measuring human life - including individual and institutional science. But, because of astronomy and the decimal system, things tend to be measured either in years, five years or in decades. A year is too short while a decade is too long to measure the trends and transitions of individual or institutional life. And the half decade, such as the 'five year plan' beloved by politicians and bureaucrats seems too short. Therefore, seven years should become the standard unit for tracking trends and measuring attainment. Precedents for using a seven year unit include the notorious Jesuit saying: 'Give me the child until he is seven, and I will show you the man'; and the 'ninth commandment' of Leo Szilard: 'Do your work for six years; but in the seventh, go into solitude or among strangers, so that the memory of your friends does not prevent you from being what you have become'. In a scientific career, seven years is approximately the time spent at high school, the time taken for a traditional basic scientific training of first degree and doctorate, and the period after the doctorate building the knowledge to become an expert specialist. There seems to be enough anecdotal evidence to support the idea that we should reconsider the universal but un-reflective use of decimal units in planning and evaluation. For instance, seven year fellowships and program grants might replace the current five year versions. A new - and previously unconsidered - field of research beckons.

Mathematics↗
PubMed2006

Science school and culture school: improving the efficiency of high school science teaching in a system of mass science education.

Educational expansion in western countries has been achieved mainly by adding years to full-time education; however, this process has probably reduced efficiency. Sooner or later, efficiency must improve, with a greater educational attainment per year. Future societies will probably wish more people to study science throughout high school (aged c. 11-19 years) and the first college degree. 'Science' may be defined as any abstract, systematic and research-based discipline: including mathematics, statistics and the natural sciences, economics, music theory, linguistics, and the conceptual or quantitative social sciences. Since formal teaching is usually necessary to learn science, science education should be regarded as the core function of high schools. One standard way to improve efficiency is the 'division of labour', with increased specialization of function. Modern schools are already specialized: teachers are specialized according to age-group taught, subject matter expertise, and administrative responsibilities. School students are stratified by age and academic aptitude. I propose a further institutional division of school function between science education, and cultural education (including education in arts, sports, ethics, social interaction and good citizenship). Existing schools might split into 'science school' and 'culture school', reflected in distinct buildings and zones, separate administrative structures, and the recruitment of differently-specialized teaching personnel. Science school would be distinguished by its focus on education in disciplines which promote abstract systematic cognition. All students would spend some part of each day (how much would depend on their aptitude and motivation) in the 'science school'; experiencing a traditional-style, didactic, disciplined and rigorous academic education. The remainder of the students' time at school would be spent in the cultural division, which would focus on broader aspects, and aim to generate a more rounded and social individual. For this to happen depends upon a recognition that science is relatively difficult to teach, requiring non-spontaneous and un-natural cognitive processes from students. Furthermore, it is much easier to learn science when young--if science is missed at school, it can be difficult or impossible to make up the ground later. Modern schools currently try to do too many things, and end-up doing none very well: the one big thing all schools should do for all students is to teach them science. For this to happen, schools need to specialize in their core function.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Medicine and the space odyssey.

Up to the mid-1960s, science and technology (including medicine) were generally regarded as exciting, beautiful and spiritually enthralling; and the space odyssey seemed a symbol of the optimistic future of humankind. The early seventies saw a growing disillusionment with space travel as part of a mood of cultural pessimism and anti-modernization - and this combined with a resurgence of therapeutic nihilism in medicine. But recent discussions of renewed space exploration and a Mars mission may be evidence of a changing zeitgeist, with Western culture moving towards a bolder and more optimistic attitude. The adventure of space travel, exploration and colonization could be seen as both a barometer of cultural optimism, and an enterprise which would feed-back into cultural optimism for many decades to come. Medical science could also be a beneficiary; since greater boldness and optimism would be likely to renew the goals of medicine to do positive good - as contrasted with the necessary, but relatively uninspiring, requirement to minimize risk and harm. In a modernizing society humankind needs to look outward as well as inward: we need a frontier, and we need to grow. A resurgent space odyssey may be the best way that this can be enacted.

Extraterrestrial Environment↗
PubMed2006

Globalization in science education: an inevitable and beneficial trend.

Globalization is one aspect of the larger phenomenon of modernization, which describes societies characterized by progressive growth in the complexity of communications. Despite its inevitable problems, globalization is a generally desirable phenomenon, since it enables increased efficiency, effectiveness and capability of societies and thereby, potentially benefits most people most of the time. Scientific research was one of the first global communication systems, especially at its most advanced levels. And high quality scientific education at the post-doctoral level is also now essentially global. The next steps will be for lower level science education - at doctoral, undergraduate, and even school teaching levels - to become progressively globalized. This phenomenon is already happening in the mathematical and quantitative sciences, and will probably spread to include other kinds of science. But to be efficient requires the development of a trading medium of internationally standardized and quantitative educational credits - for instance, standard certificates, objective comparative examinations, and a hierarchical qualifications structure (which will almost certainly be based on the United States system). Globalized education also requires a common language for organizational communications, which is already in place for the quantitative and mathematical sciences, and will be increasingly the case as competence in a simplified form of international scientific English becomes more universal. As such a global science education system grows there will be increased competition and migration of teachers and students. The law of comparative advantage suggests that such mobility will encourage societies to specialize in what they do best. For example, some countries (even among wealthy nations) may provide little advanced scientific education, and import the necessary expertise from abroad - this situation seems to be developing in Germany and France, who lack any top-quality research universities. Conversely, just a few countries may provide the bulk of advanced science education teaching - as well as applied and pure research personnel - for the rest of the world: potentially China and India might supply most of world's mathematical expertise. In conclusion, there are two complementary aspects to the globalization of science education: these are standardization and specialization. We anticipate a simultaneous trend towards international convergence of basic educational structures, certificates and English usage; with increasing national differentiation of specialist educational functions.

Forecasting↗
PubMed2005

Science as a general education: Conceptual science should constitute the compulsory core of multi-disciplinary undergraduate degrees.

It is plausible to assume that in the future science will form the compulsory core element both of school curricula and multi-disciplinary undergraduate degrees. But for this to happen entails a shift in the emphasis and methods of science teaching, away from the traditional concern with educating specialists and professionals. Traditional science teaching was essentially vocational, designed to provide precise and comprehensive scientific knowledge for practical application. By contrast, future science teaching will be a general education, hence primarily conceptual. Its aim should be to provide an education in flexible rationality. Vocational science teaching was focused on a single-discipline undergraduate degree, but a general education in abstract systematic thinking is best inculcated by studying several scientific disciplines. In this sense, 'science' is understood as mathematics and the natural sciences, but also the abstract and systematic aspects of disciplines such as economics, linguistics, music theory, history, sociology, political science and management science. Such a wide variety of science options in a multi-disciplinary degree will increase the possibility of student motivation and aptitude. Specialist vocational science education will progressively be shifted to post-graduate level, in Masters and Doctoral programs. A multi-disciplinary and conceptually-based science core curriculum should provide an appropriate preparation for dealing with the demands of modern societies; their complex and rapidly changing social systems; and the need for individual social and professional mobility. Training in rational conceptual thinking also has potential benefits to human health and happiness, since it allows people to over-ride inappropriate instincts, integrate conflicting desires and pursue long-term goals.

Curriculum↗
PubMed2005

Boom or bubble? Is medical research thriving or about to crash?

A recent issue of JAMA (2005; vol. 294) presented a portrait of medical research as a booming enterprise. By contrast I have suggested that medical research is a speculative bubble due to burst. How can two such different predictions be compatible? From inside the expanding world of medical research everything seems fine and getting better. But to people outside the system, it seems like there is an awful lot of money going in, and not much coming out. Professional criteria of success (publications, impact factors, citations, grant income, large teams, etc.) are not the same as the outsider's view of success. Outsiders want the medical research system to generate therapeutic progress as efficiently as possible: the most progress for the least resources. Medical research is not the only good way of spending money and is in competition with other social systems. As funding increases, diminishing returns will set-in, opportunity costs will begin to bite, and there will be more and more social benefit to be gained from spending the extra research money on something else. Therefore, future cuts in medical research will happen because of pressure from outside the system - specifically pressure from other powerful social systems which will press their alternative claims for funding. In the short term, there will be a quantitative decline of research production. But in the longer term the medical research system will re-grow in a more efficient form. After a 'golden age of therapeutic progress in the mid-20th century, recent decades have seen a 'silver age' of scholasticism which is due to end soon. Perhaps a renaissance of medical research lies not too many years in the future.

Biomedical Research↗
PubMed2005

If 'atypical' neuroleptics did not exist, it wouldn't be necessary to invent them: perverse incentives in drug development, research, marketing and clinical practice.

Perverse incentives in drug development, research, marketing and clinical usage can be illustrated by considering the example of the so-called 'atypical' neuroleptics which have grown to become a standard - indeed expanding - part of psychiatric practice despite their probable inferiority to older sedative agents. There is now ample evidence to suggest that neuroleptics (aka. anti-psychotics and major tranquillizers) are dangerous drugs, and patients' exposure to them should be minimized wherever possible. This clinical imperative applies whether neuroleptics are of the traditional type or atypical variety, albeit for different reasons since the traditional agents are neurotoxic, while atypicals are mainly metabolic poisons. Usage of traditional neuroleptics seems indeed to be declining progressively, but the opposite seems to be happening for 'atypicals', and new indications for these drugs are being promoted. Yet the atypical neuroleptics are a category of pharmaceuticals which are close to being un-necessary since there are safer, cheaper and pleasanter substitutes, such as benzodiazepines and the sedative antihistamines (e.g. promethazine). If 'atypical' neuroleptics did not exist, it would not be necessary to invent them. Analysis of how such expensive, dangerous and inferior drugs as the 'atypicals' have nevertheless come to dominate clinical practice casts light on the perverse incentives which now motivate the pharmaceutical industry in an era of massive state regulation. The lack of positive incentives to deploy off-patent drugs is longstanding, but there is a new disincentive in the widespread but erroneous belief that only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can provide valid 'evidence' of effectiveness. Consequently, those who control RCTs now control clinical practice. It sometimes makes commercial sense to develop and market new drugs that are inferior to existing agents, since new drugs are patent-protected and can be promoted on the back of a mass of new RCTs funded and 'owned' by the pharmaceutical corporations. The current regulatory and patenting situation, therefore, requires major reform if drug efficacy and patient safety are to become higher priorities. Given that psychiatric practice is apparently 'locked-in' to prescribing atypicals, and if (as seems likely) most informed individuals would wish to avoid neuroleptics for themselves and their loved-ones except as a last resort; then in the short-term it may be wise for patients and their families to explore the possibilities of increased self-management of psychiatric problems using over-the-counter drugs, such as the sedative antihistamines. In the long-term, there need to be legal reforms to change the regulatory and commercial framework of incentives relating to drug development. These might include new forms of short-term re-patenting of old drugs.

Antipsychotic Agents↗