Meditation and the Code of Evolution

A few days ago I finished watching a wonderful Princeton University lecture course on Buddhism and Modern Psychology (Buddhism and Modern Psychology). I express my deep gratitude to my reader under the name CountAsylum for leading me to these lectures.

Lectures are led by Robert Wright, American journalist, author of The Evolution of God, Moral Animal, and other works on religion, evolution, game theory and other issues of science and culture.

In his course Buddhism and Modern Psychology, Wright talks about the intersections between Buddhism and meditation and recent developments in evolutionary psychology. The author tries to understand how the provisions of Buddhism correspond to modern scientific views. And he comes to a surprising conclusion. It turns out that the Indian prince Siddhartha Gautama, known as the Buddha, made those discoveries two and a half thousand years ago that modern science is only now beginning to approach.

(Note: Professor Wright’s lectures are not an attempt, by speculating on scientific facts and taking them out of context, to “fit” science to some postulates of religion. This is an attempt by a Western agnostic to find parallels between ancient practices and modern science, relying on scientific theories, which, despite the fact that they are not final and indisputable, still have the right to exist.The author does not position his own discoveries and discovered connections as the ultimate truth, but outlines a promising direction for the development of science in symbiosis with the discoveries of religious and philosophical schools He does not oppose Buddhism to science, but tries to find something in common between them.)

Robert Wright has a keen interest in the practice of meditation, which is central to the spiritual development of the Buddhist practitioner. He answers the question, does meditation really allow a person to come or at least get a little closer to the ideals of Buddhism: liberation from suffering, compassion, lack of selfishness, elimination of attachments, peace, happiness and perception of reality as it is?

People (scientists or spiritual people, and sometimes both in one person) and the achievements of evolutionary psychology help him answer this question. Human evolution, along with meditation, is central to Wright’s reasoning. The author addresses this problem more than once in his course.

What is the connection between evolution and Buddhism? Between enlightenment and modern theories of consciousness? Between meditation and reliable knowledge of reality? With the permission of Robert Wright, I publish here a summary of his lectures, in which you can find answers to these questions. I got great pleasure and interest from listening to this course. I discovered a lot of new myself and looked at many problems already known to me in a different way.

I will add some of the text with my notes. I will miss some points, I will focus on some other aspects of the content that I considered more important. In some places, my presentation will not coincide with the exact retelling, because somewhere my own thoughts and the ideas of the author of the lectures mixed up, in my mind, complementing one another.

Before proceeding to the presentation, I would like to say what is meant by Buddhism in the framework of this course. Mr. Wright, speaking about Buddhism, leaves outside the scope of his reasoning questions that go beyond the limits of human experience: reincarnation, creation of the world, karma, etc. He refers to Buddhism more as an applied teaching than a religious school and focuses exclusively on the practical aspects of this trend: the cessation of suffering and dissatisfaction, getting rid of illusions.

I must say that this approach, in my opinion, is not a big crime against Buddhism. This religion, in my opinion, is one of the most practical religions among the widespread religious traditions on the globe. The Buddha himself spoke of the meaninglessness of purely theoretical questions about how the world came into being or where we go after death, whether there is a God (Buddhism is not a theistic religion, that is, it lacks an almighty creator God), etc. This knowledge will not lead people to enlightenment. The Buddha said, “I have taught one thing and one thing only, and that is the doctrine of suffering and the cessation of suffering.”

Feelings and illusions

In the very first lecture, Wright asks a question. Can a person see things as they really are? Robert comes to the conclusion that human emotions make a significant distortion in the perception of reality. He cites the results of a series of psychological experiments that were aimed at revealing how emotions affect the perception of the world.

For example, in one of these experiments, the first group of subjects was shown a horror movie, the second group was shown a light melodrama. After that, the representatives of both groups were given pictures of human faces and asked to describe the expressions depicted on different faces. Those people who were shown the “horror” saw that some faces looked menacing, expressing anger and aggression. Although, the expressions of some of these faces were actually ordinary, neutral. This effect was not observed among the representatives of the second group, who saw a love story with a happy ending on the screen. Their faces did not seem threatening.

This and other experiments have confirmed the fact that we do not see the world objectively and our perception depends on the state of our psyche.

Wright addresses the findings of the science of evolutionary psychology (he will refer to them more than once later). From the point of view of this science, the human psyche has become what it is for a reason. Those of her qualities that were beneficial for human survival many millions of years ago (or at least did not interfere with survival), were selected and fixed in his psychology. And what interfered with survival was “screened out.”

I’ll give you an example I used in my article How to stop arguing . This example will help explain the principle of evolution and why, in fact, our mind makes mistakes in interpreting the surrounding reality.

Let’s ask why we are so desperate to defend our own opinion, to prove ourselves right in disputes, even if it does not benefit us in any way? Because at the dawn of mankind, our social existence was limited to a practically closed society, one community. In this community, it was important to maintain one’s status, to defend one’s views and opinions. Moreover, at that time they concerned things directly related to survival, for example, with the direction of movement of animals that can be hunted. Then no one argued on the Internet about what is better than Mercedes or BMW. Every word, every other person’s assessment could have been decisive for an ancient person.

Now think, when you’re in the heat of an argument, do you really see reality for what it is? You do not notice the arguments of your opponent, but you recognize the absolute rightness of yourself. You are ready to see your opponent as a scoundrel, just because he did not agree with you, even if he is a good person. In short, in these moments your mind has delusions about reality. And hI eat more emotions, irritation, anger in you, the more delusions.

Wright concludes that it was not at all “beneficial” to the principle of human survival at the dawn of mankind that people perceive the world independently of the emotions that distort it. Evolution has made it so that people protect their friends and do not notice their bad qualities, even if these qualities are. So that they feel hatred for their enemies, blaming them for all the troubles, even if these enemies are good people in themselves. So that they, in the end, position themselves as good people and do not notice their own shortcomings. All this, perhaps, once contributed to gaining a high status in a closed human community and helped to pass on their genes to the next generations.

What does Buddhism and meditation have to do with it? Looking ahead, I will say that in his last lectures, Wright says that at first, doing research work, he devoted a lot of time to studying why human perception is not free from addictions, illusions, delusions. And he wondered if something could be done about it? How to learn to see the world as it is, and not as our perception paints it? And he turned to the experience of world religions. I will not rush to tell everything at once. You will learn about everything yourself from the article. We will return to the topic of perception and illusions later. But first, let’s turn to the very foundations of Buddhism.

First Noble Truth

Wright begins his account of Buddhism with the Four Noble Truths, which are the philosophical foundation of Buddhism. The four truths are:

1. There is suffering
2. The cause of suffering is attachment, desire
3. There is an end to suffering
4. The path to the cessation of suffering is the Eightfold Path: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Conduct, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration (Note. These last two components of the Eightfold Path imply meditation) )

(Note. You can say this in other words. To get rid of suffering, you need to engage in spiritual self-improvement, including meditation. Note that I was not the first to suggest eliminating depression through meditation. True, the word “suffering” refers not only to depression.)

Despite the many different branches of Buddhism, the four noble truths are adhered to by all schools of this religion. According to Buddhist tradition, the first sermon of the Buddha after he attained enlightenment included precisely the doctrine of the four noble truths.

In these four truths you will not find a call to worship God, you will not see there the proclamation of the absolute truth about the appearance of the world, you will not meet with a description of an afterlife existence and you will not encounter rigid imperatives and strict religious prohibitions. All you’ll see is a diagnosis (“there is suffering”) and a recipe, a prescription (“there is a way to end suffering”). Therefore, the Buddha is often compared to a doctor who tells you about your illness and writes you a prescription to get rid of it.

Diagnosis

In the opening lectures, Wright talks about “diagnosis.” He tries to answer the question, what does suffering mean in the Buddhist sense of the word? The word “suffering” is not an accurate translation of the Pali term “dukkha” (Note: I will use this term later on. I hope no one will mind my inflecting it), which used by the Buddha in his sermon. Dukkha has a wider meaning than just suffering. You can supplement this term with the words “anxiety”, “dissatisfaction”, “inability to achieve satisfaction”, “stress”, “intolerance”, “inconstancy”. All this is Dukkha.

Robert in his lecture speaks mainly of Dukkha as “the impossibility of attaining final satisfaction by man.”

What does that mean? According to Wright, this principle was embodied in one of the most famous songs of the Rolling Stones – I can’t get no satisfaction. When Mick Jagger sings “I can’t get satisfaction (satisfaction)” he, according to Wright, comes close to understanding dukkha.
The principle of the impossibility of final satisfaction determines many human quests. While we are striving for something, it seems to us that achieving the goal will bring long-awaited happiness. But when we achieve this, we do not get the expected satisfaction.

Everyone knows the feeling of sweet anticipation of the reward when a goal is achieved. But often, we are faced with disappointment when a goal is achieved (for example, we have achieved a certain level of financial wealth). Instead of the pleasure we were waiting for, new desires and needs come.

(Note. I would like to add an example from Russian culture to the words of Mick Jaeger. Leo Tolstoy asked himself: “Well, well, you will have 6,000 acres in the Samara province – 300 heads of horses, and then?”; “Well, well , you will be more glorious than Gogol, Pushkin, Shakespeare, Molière, all the writers in the world—so what!” I don’t know if the great Russian writer was familiar with Buddhism at that time, but he really described the element of Dukkha very well. , he did not deceive himself about what would await him at the end. He understood that there would be no happiness there. And this horrified him.)

It turns out that our perception gives us a false expectation of satisfaction that will never come. I think many of you are aware of this effect in everyday life. But what does the science say about this? And Mr. Wright moves from Buddhist principles to the achievements of modern human science.

Dopamine

The neurotransmitter dopamine is involved in the formation of our desires and in anticipation of the pleasure associated with the satisfaction of these desires.

In order to understand the logic of the biochemical processes associated with dopamine, tests were carried out on monkeys. The primates were shown some kind of reward, such as a banana, but were not given it in their hands. The level of dopamine in those moments when the monkey “wanted” a banana, but did not yet possess it, was high enough, which indicated a strong desire. But then an unexpected, from the point of worldly logic, thing happened. When the monkey received the object of his desire, the level of dopamine dropped sharply.

The animal did not receive the “promised” happiness by its brain from achieving the goal. In some of these experiments, the level of dopamine when acquiring the desired reward decreased so much that for some time there was a lack of dopamine in the brain! That is, the award not only did not bring satisfaction, but, on the contrary, caused dissatisfaction.

I’ve already read about dopamine in The Willpower Instinct. But in a lecture by Robert Wright, this natural biological process received a completely different light. It marks the drama of human existence, which is based on movement without a reward, but only with the illusion of this reward!

Thus, the principle of the impossibility of final satisfaction is supported by a biochemical justification.

(Note: Although Wright gives brilliant examples and reinforces the point of dissatisfaction with scientific research, you should understand that what Wright is talking about is only one part of dukkha. Talking about dukkha is only in this sense, this means narrowing down the meaning of this term. I won’t go into detail here on the subject of “suffering”, since this topic is quite extensive. I will say briefly that dukkha is not only dissatisfaction. Dukkha expresses itself in depression, in fear of loss, in fear of death, in dependence, in anger, in envy, in physical and mental pain… Dukkha is not only “pure” suffering, it can contain elements of pleasure (for example, drug addiction))

Wright revisits evolutionary psychology and asks why did evolution make us the way we are? And he comes to the conclusion that at the dawn of the emergence of mankind, such a mechanism was beneficial for the survival of our species. Eternal dissatisfaction and anticipation of happiness that will not come true stimulated a person to constantly search for new types of food, new sexual partners, new ways of status self-assertion. Dissatisfaction made the ancient man “move”, so nature did not make him initially happy and self-sufficient. Human happiness was not beneficial to evolution.

(Note: Wright several times emphasizes that when he says “evolution did”, “nature created”, he simply uses the usual figures of speech, he does not at all want to endow nature with some kind of animated entity, consciousness. I want the same reservation do me too.

Evolution does not construct species from the outset in the form that will best meet the principles of survival. She does not design a prototype, her lot is a cruel selection. Natural selection. It works by trial and error. Those members of the species who possess the qualities that make it possible to survive pass on their genes in which these qualities are “encoded” to the next generations. And maladjusted individuals die before they have time to pass on their genes to their offspring. Animal traits that are advantageous for evolution are, roughly speaking, selected by testing in real conditions within a large statistical sample. In order for our species to become the way it has become, it took a huge number of individuals to be killed, as a result of “errors of nature”, individuals.)

It turns out that suffering, dissatisfaction – these are the properties inherent in our species and determined its survival in a certain era. And when the teaching of Buddhism states: “The world is dukkha,” it does not set itself the goal of being a pessimistic teaching. It speaks of the real property of the world and man, that is, it can be said that in this sense it is realistic, and not pessimistic.

The Second Noble Truth

Before moving on to the next chapter of the article, I would like to talk a little about attachments. Attachments, desires according to the second noble truth, are the cause of suffering, dukkha.

Why is this happening? One of the main reasons for this is the impermanence of all things. Everything has a beginning and an end: our emotions, the things we have, the lives of the people we love, and our own lives. Attachment to these things causes us to experience grief when we lose them. And at the time when we have them, we cannot enjoy it to the fullest, as we are afraid of losing them.

I must say that this is a fairly short and simple explanation of the mechanism of attachments, which is not always clear at first glance.

(Note. I would like to note that the provisions about dukkha, about attachments are not always accessible to intellectual understanding. These things need to be experienced.)

The reality is much more complex, and attachments can manifest themselves in many different ways. Attachment can be manifested not only in relation to material things, but also relate to ideas, beliefs, plans, goals, feelings.

The path of the Buddhist involves liberation from attachments.

While talking about the Second Noble Truth, Robert interrupts himself with a possible question that most likely popped into the minds of many listeners: “Wait! But I do not consider my life full of suffering, dissatisfaction. I am happy with what I have. My attachments do not prevent me from enjoying life.”

Wright says that dukkha is an extreme teaching. Therefore, Robert does not answer this. I want to answer this, but not now. I would like to refrain in this chapter from my detailed comments on this statement of Robert and give them after I have presented the lectures. I do this in order not to interrupt Wright’s lectures with my reasoning.

That’s all about attachments for now. Do not worry if you do not understand this position very well, I will definitely return to it. Or you can experience this truth through meditation.
Now let’s get back to the connection between Buddhism and evolution.

Rebellion Against Evolution

Let’s go back to the sections “Feelings and Illusions” and “The First Noble Truth” and highlight two important qualities that evolution has endowed us with.

1. Evolution did not intend the original happiness of all people. Nature has made us eternally dissatisfied
2. We don’t see reality as it is. Our emotions distort perception

But what does Buddhism want to do? Buddhism wants to save a person from suffering, he wants to change the order of things that has existed for many millions of years! And through the practice of meditation, a practicing Buddhist wants to get rid of addictions and observe reality in its original form, independent of our perception (I will talk about this in more detail in the next paragraph).

Wright calls Buddha a rebel who rebelled against evolution. The Buddhist teaching seems to say:
“I am not satisfied with the way man was created: eternally dissatisfied and deluded in the nature of reality. So I’ll make my man with “blackjack and whores”!

(Note: It was I who decided to use here these famous words of the robot Bender from the cartoon “Futurama”. Professor Wright would not use such rude expressions. This phrase means: “I will do as I want, I will not depend on anyone, no one will not a decree, and what I can do will be better than yours!”.)

Buddhism rebels against the design of the creator of man, whoever or whatever he may be. In all common religions there is a position on the spiritual self-improvement of a person and bringing himself in accordance with the moral requirements of his faith. But in Buddhism, the spiritual transformation of a person is central.

(Note. Buddhism does not focus on how to properly worship God, what rituals to perform, what prayers to say. It first of all talks about how a person can become better, happier, and what needs to be done for this! )

What is the means of this transformation? If you remember the fourth noble truth, then this is the eightfold path. Wright’s lectures focus only on the two components of this eightfold path. This is right concentration and right mindfulness (although I would translate this as right “mindfulness”). Both of these things are meditation in its various aspects.

I don’t think Wright oversimplifies by not taking the time for the other six components of the Eightfold Path. I believe that meditation is the core element of spiritual development and everything else (right behavior and right action) comes to a person through the experience of meditation.

Recipe: Meditation

Robert talks about two types of meditation, each referring to one of the stages of the Eightfold Path above. These are concentration mediation and mindfulness meditation. According to Wright, these two meditations differ in that in the first case, a person completely retains concentration on one thing (mantra, breath), and in the second, he tries to observe his mind. Wright, according to him, in his lectures will talk mainly about mindfulness meditation.

(Note. I must say that such a division of meditation into concentration and awareness is not accurate enough. According to some meditation teachers, concentration and awareness are two parts of the same thing. This is one meditation, just different stages of it. In order, to achieve mindfulness, you must first achieve good concentration.I myself am of this opinion and I think that Wright’s division is not entirely correct.Although I tend to allow a milder formulation.It is probably still possible to divide the types of meditation into awareness and concentration.But then concentration meditation is only concentration, and mindfulness meditation is both concentration and awareness.(Wright seems to agree with the latter) And mindfulness meditation does not exclude concentration on the breath at all.)

To better understand what meditation is and what it does for a person, Wright cites his online conversations with experts in the field of meditation practice and the results of research on the brains of meditators. In addition, Robert also has his own practice experience, without which it is very difficult to talk about this topic at all.

In my opinion, Robert and his interlocutors do an excellent job of conveying the essence of meditation in a short and clear wording. “Meditation allows you to observe your feelings, internal discomfort, as if remaining on the sidelines, not getting involved in these experiences, without showing any reaction,” they say. As a result of this observation, emotions lose their power, cease to have such a significant impact not only on your behavior, but also on perception, clearing it of addictions and feelings.

Many people who are not familiar with meditation or those who are just starting to meditate often associate meditation solely with a relaxation technique that brings peace and relief from stress. But Wright and his “colleagues” speak of meditation primarily as a technique that develops awareness, the ability to detach from external and internal reality and, therefore, come to a more reliable understanding of reality than the understanding that our emotions give us. And I like this approach.

Wright even touches on the idea that the main task of meditation is to learn to see the world as it is. And everything else follows from this vision: calmness, happiness, equanimity, kindness, self-control. I think we will discuss this point in more detail later, but for now let’s get back to emotions.

As we remember from the chapter “Feelings and Illusions”, our emotions are not reliable indicators of the surrounding reality. They often mislead us. Nature needed to somehow regulate the behavior of a not too intelligent ancient man who did not yet understand with his mind what to strive for and what to avoid. Emotions, instincts have become unconscious regulators of our behavior. Pleasant emotions directed a person to what is needed for survival, and unpleasant emotions led away from what interfered with this survival. But since they saved man many millions of years ago, why do we want to intervene in this process with the help of meditation?

This really looks like an attempt at rebellion against what evolution has laid in us. As one of the scientists, a colleague of Robert Wright, says, trying not to respond to your emotions, not to obey them is a very anti-Darwinian thing in the sense of not submitting to evolution. Because evolution wants us to obey emotions, otherwise why did it create them?

But everything changes. The environment in which we live, our culture and customs have changed dramatically since early man. What saved us then is already causing difficulties now. Wright gives several examples.

Why are we drawn to all sorts of sweet “poison” like Coca-Cola, Snickers, etc. Why do many people have such an acute addiction to sweets? Robert explains this by the fact that many millions of years ago sweet foods were mostly healthy (fruits). There was no Snickers back then. And nature provided man with a mechanism that attracted him to sweets.

Another example is anger. Remember I said that the desire to fiercely prove one’s case could give a person a status advantage many millions of years ago? In fact, having just reviewed the lecture, I realized that I had not heard of the scientific interpretation of this issue. Wright spoke of anger as serving some sort of status interest within a closed community. And when we encounter strangers on a daily basis, anger loses its useful function and often only creates problems.

I’ve unknowingly extrapolated Wright’s judgment to a tendency to argue, I apologize. But, probably, my generalization has the right to life. Since fierce disputes take place in an atmosphere of anger, and the biological prerequisites for the formation of both feelings may be similar.

Wright also gives an example of the nervousness people experience when speaking in public. According to his findings, this feeling is due to the fact that we were not created for mass performances among strangers, as it has already been said, our society has long been limited to a small group of familiar individuals.

(Note: This cannot justify your fears and worries. It only says that you need to change something in yourself, and not leave it as it is given “by default”.)

It turns out that meditation, having given a person the opportunity to choose which emotions to obey and which not, allowed, firstly, to decide which emotions should be listened to and which should not. Secondly, to rid your perception of distortions born of momentary feelings and addictions.

With the help of meditation, a person can reprogram himself in accordance with his own plan and stop being a puppet of natural mechanisms that have lost their relevance. Meditation can change the code of evolution!

Let me conclude the first part of Robert Wright’s lectures with this. In the next part (and maybe in parts) we will talk about why, when our brain is not busy with any particular work, it is distracted by random thoughts? How does meditation affect this process? Is there what we call our Self? What are consciousness modules? What is self-control? And the most interesting question is what is Buddhist enlightenment? How does a person who has reached this state feel?

You will find answers to some of these questions in the second part of the article.