动机不是意志力：Masud Husain 解释拖延、冷漠与开始行动的脑回路

先把「不想做」拆开

冷漠的人卡在低奖励处

拖延可能先发生在「开始之前」

四个低风险的行为实验

1. 把任务拆到下一步就能开始。 三个月的项目会像一座山；先只做一次资料检索、列出三个问题，启动成本会变小。任务拆分也让人更早获得完成一小步的反馈。
2. 提前规划。 如果每天临时决定下一件事，大脑要反复支付选择成本。提前规划一天或一周，把重复判断集中完成，可以减少每次启动时的摩擦。
3. 改变奖励的形式。 Huberman 讲过一个短剧：一个人一直不愿意把画挂到墙上，伴侣改问「你能不能教我怎么挂」，他立刻开始行动。任务没有变，奖励从「挂画」变成了「教别人」，启动障碍随之下降。对读者来说，这类奖励可以是看见进展、帮助别人、完成一个可展示的小成果，而不只是金钱。
4. 为开始设置 if-then 条件。 把「等我有动力再做」改成「如果我坐到桌前，就先做五分钟」。这不是用一句口号制造动力，而是减少每次都要重新谈判的机会。

动机既负责启动，也负责坚持

失败要归因到具体领域

自我可以改变，但改变有结构

好奇心和社会关系，可能是认知韧性的一部分

注意力是一种有限资源

ADHD、无聊和注意力训练的边界

结尾：选择值得做的事，也给普通生活留位置

节目资料

完整双语逐字稿

时间轴｜00:00:00

Almost every drug of addiction, whether we go from nicotine to alcohol to heroin to cocaine to amphetamine, almost every drug of addiction hijacks that dopamine system we were talking about. We find when that circuitry is not working that you can get profound loss of motivation, apathy. When that circuitry is on overdrive because it's been hijacked by these drugs, you get states of hyper motivation. So, of course, this is going to be overly simplistic to think dopamine levels are the only factor that affect our motivation, but it certainly turns out to be a very important factor in graduating the level of motivation we have to seek particular outcomes. >> Welcome to the Huberman Lab podcast, where we discuss [music] science and science-based tools for everyday life. >> [music] >> I'm Andrew Huberman and I'm a professor of neurobiology and opthalmology at Stanford School of Medicine. My guest today is Dr. Massud Hussein who is a neurologist and neuroscientist at Oxford making key discoveries about the relationship between motivation and pleasure. Today we discuss what really determines our level of drive and determination to do everything from getting up to go to school or work to pursuing long hard challenges that last many years. We start off by talking about the opposite of motivation, which of course is apathy. And as you'll learn, perhaps surprisingly, apathy is separate from one's desire for something. We also discuss something very useful, which is how you can change your own perception of your own effort level. Today's discussion really gets to the heart of motivation and procrastination and how anyone, healthy or otherwise, can leverage that understanding to their benefit. As you'll soon hear, Dr. from Massud Hussein is a remarkable scientist, neurologist, and communicator. Indeed, he's the author of a spectacular book. I've read it. It's entitled Our Brain, Ourselves, and it's a terrific read if you want to learn more about how your brain works, how it can change over time, and how it makes you who you are. Before we begin, I'd like to emphasize that this podcast is separate from my teaching and research roles at Stanford. It is, however, part of my desire and effort to bring zero cost to consumer information about science and science related tools to the general public. In keeping with that theme, today's episode does include sponsors. And now for my discussion with Dr. Massud Hussein. >> Dr. Massud Hussein, welcome. Thank you for having me. You've worked on a huge variety of topics. Alzheimer's, attention, apathy. We're definitely going to talk about apathy. Spatial neglect, which I'm guessing most of our audience probably doesn't know exactly what that is. I'd like to start with the one that sounds like a bit of a downer, but as a window into understanding motivation and these states of excitement that most of us would like to be in, but let's talk about and really define through your lens what is apathy? How does the brain bring about this thing that we call apathy? And is apathy just a lack of motivation? Yeah, I mean these are big questions and I think the way we've approached them is somewhat serendipitous in the sense that you [snorts] know 15 years ago I wasn't studying apathy or motivation like many people I might think someone's lazy or they're highly motivated but that's a sort of psychological state it's a personality and it was only about 15 years ago I started beginning to be aware that there may be a an important biology underlying motivation and when that biology goes wrong, it can lead to loss of motivation and even pathological apathy. And the way this happened was completely out of the blue. Uh I was then working in London at the National Hospital for Neurology in Queens Square at UCL. And we received

几乎每一种成瘾药物，无论是尼古丁、酒精、海洛因、可卡因还是安非他明，几乎每一种成瘾药物都会劫持我们所说的多巴胺系统。我们发现，当该电路无法正常工作时，您可能会严重丧失动力、变得冷漠。当该电路因被这些药物劫持而超速运转时，您就会处于过度激励的状态。因此，当然，认为多巴胺水平是影响我们动机的唯一因素就过于简单化了，但事实证明，它确实是我们追求特定结果的动机水平的一个非常重要的因素。 >> 欢迎来到 Huberman Lab 播客，我们在这里讨论[音乐]科学和基于科学的日常生活工具。 >> [音乐] >> 我是安德鲁·休伯曼 (Andrew Huberman)，我是斯坦福大学医学院的神经生物学和眼科教授。今天我的嘉宾是马苏德·侯赛因博士，他是牛津大学的神经学家和神经科学家，在动机和快乐之间的关系方面做出了重要发现。今天，我们讨论什么真正决定了我们做一切事情的动力和决心，从起床上学或工作到追求持续多年的长期艰巨挑战。我们首先讨论动机的反面，当然就是冷漠。也许令人惊讶的是，正如您将了解到的那样，冷漠与一个人对某事的渴望是分开的。我们还讨论了一些非常有用的事情，那就是如何改变你对自己努力水平的看法。今天的讨论真正触及了动机和拖延的核心，以及任何人，无论健康与否，都可以如何利用这种理解为自己谋取利益。您很快就会听说，马苏德·侯赛因 (Massud Hussein) 博士是一位杰出的科学家、神经学家和传播者。事实上，他是一本精彩的书的作者。我读过。这本书的标题是《我们的大脑，我们自己》，如果你想更多地了解你的大脑如何工作、它如何随着时间的推移而变化，以及它如何塑造你，这本书是一本很棒的读物。在开始之前，我想强调一下，这个播客与我在斯坦福大学的教学和研究角色是分开的。然而，我的愿望和努力的一部分是向公众提供有关科学和科学相关工具的零成本消费者信息。为了与这个主题保持一致，今天的节目确实有赞助商。现在我与马苏德·侯赛因博士进行了讨论。 >> 马苏德·侯赛因博士，欢迎光临。谢谢你有我。您研究过各种各样的主题。阿尔茨海默氏症、注意力集中、冷漠。我们肯定会谈论冷漠。空间忽视，我猜我们大多数观众可能并不确切知道那是什么。我想从听起来有点令人沮丧的一个开始，但作为理解动机和我们大多数人都希望处于的兴奋状态的一个窗口，但让我们通过你的镜头来讨论并真正定义什么是冷漠？大脑是如何产生我们所说的冷漠的？冷漠只是缺乏动力吗？是的，我的意思是这些都是大问题，我认为我们处理这些问题的方式有点偶然，你[哼哼]知道 15 年前我并没有像很多人那样研究冷漠或动机，我可能认为某人很懒或他们很有动力，但这是一种心理状态，它是一种个性，直到大约 15 年前我才开始意识到动机可能有一个重要的生物学基础，当这种生物学出错时，它就会发生变化。会导致失去动力，甚至病态冷漠。而这件事发生的方式完全出乎意料。呃，当时我在伦敦大学学院皇后广场的国家神经病学医院工作。我们收到了

a letter from a doctor describing a guy in his 30s. And this guy had been a highly productive person. He was in finance. He was also really liked socially, had a wide network of friends. But suddenly he had become completely different from being highly motivated. He went to I'm not interested. I can't be bothered. And that was both at work as well as with his friends. So people began to think this is something really different in this guy David. What's happening? They wondered if he had become depressed. That's why he wasn't really functioning. and he went to see his doctor who started him on an anti-depressant but it made no difference. He was still the same. So he lost his job. He got fired because he had lost motivation and he was so apathetic that he couldn't be bothered to get social security benefit. So his friends said, "Okay, come and stay with us." And they regretted it almost immediately because David did nothing. He just sat there in a chair all day long waiting for his friends to come back, do the cooking, clean. They needed to prompt him to have a shower because he literally just sat there. His level of motivation was almost zero. When we got to see him, and it was difficult because he'd never come to his appointments. We I had to phone him up to say, "Look, I am going to be here tomorrow. Please come." and he grudgingly said, "Okay, I'll I'll try and make it." And he was, of course, late. Um, he came and there was this very sad guy. He, you know, he was disheveled, really not looking after himself, stains on his shirt. But the one thing he wasn't was unhappy. He was absolutely happy about life, right? Which was the perplexing thing. He'd lost his job. He'd lost his apartment because he wasn't paying the rent. Couldn't be bothered to get social security. But there he was really happy about what was happening in life, looking forward to something that he didn't know what, but he was still looking forward to good things in life. So when I asked him, why aren't you doing anything when you're at home? What would you what would you normally do? I would listen to some music. So why aren't you listening to music? Because it would take me some time to put my music system together. How long would it take? 5 minutes. So this was really sort of revelatory for me. The effort of putting the cables together for his music system. Taking out the loudspeakers was too much in terms of the pleasure he could obtain from listening to music. It turned out that David had a very unusual neurological problem. His MRI brain scans revealed that he had two tiny little strokes in the basil ganglia. These are deep nuclei in the brain which are evolutionally wellconserved. They go back to the earliest vertebrate that we still have the lampay 360 million years old. And the key thing that we've discovered from the neurohysiology of the lampay is the basil ganglia are important in linking motivation signals to action. Some people call it motivation to act. So in an organism like the lamprey, motivation signals might be hunger or sex that lead to action to fulfill those goals. In David, these strokes in the vententral stratum, what what's called the nucleus encumbent in in animals led to no motivation signals leading to action. Nothing happened. But if you prompted him, go take a shower, come on, he would do it. But of his own valition, he wasn't motivated to act. And that was really something that was extraordinary for us because here was a man who had been highly motivated and that motivation had been extinguished by these two tiny little strokes which didn't affect him physically but affected his behavior. And the studies that we performed with David to try and understand this led us to the concept that we might be able to deconstruct this nebulous

一封来自医生的信，描述了一名 30 多岁的男子。这个人是一个非常有生产力的人。他从事金融工作。他在社交上也很受欢迎，拥有广泛的朋友网络。但突然之间，他就变得完全不像以前那么干劲十足了。他去我没兴趣。我不能被打扰。这既是在工作中，也是在与朋友相处时。所以人们开始认为大卫这个人确实与众不同。发生什么事了？他们想知道他是否变得抑郁了。这就是为什么他没有真正发挥作用。他去看了医生，医生给他开了抗抑郁药，但没有效果。他还是一样。于是他丢了工作。他被解雇是因为他失去了动力，而且态度冷漠，懒得去领取社会保障福利。于是他的朋友们说：“好吧，来和我们一起住吧。”他们几乎立刻就后悔了，因为大卫什么也没做。他整天坐在椅子上等待他的朋友回来，做饭，打扫卫生。他们需要提示他去洗澡，因为他实际上只是坐在那里。他的积极性几乎为零。当我们见到他时，情况很困难，因为他从来没有来过他的约会。我们不得不打电话给他说：“听着，我明天会在这里。请过来。”他勉强地说：“好吧，我会尽力的。”当然，他迟到了。嗯，他来了，有一个非常悲伤的人。他，你知道，他衣冠不整，真的不照顾自己，衬衫上有污渍。但他唯一不高兴的是。他对生活绝对感到高兴，对吧？这是令人困惑的事情。他丢了工作。他因为没有付房租而失去了公寓。懒得去领取社会保障。但在那里他真的很高兴生活中发生的事情，期待着一些他不知道是什么的事情，但他仍然期待着生活中美好的事情。所以当我问他，你在家的时候为什么不做点什么？你通常会做什么？我会听一些音乐。那你为什么不听音乐呢？因为我需要一些时间来组装我的音乐系统。需要多长时间？ 5 分钟。所以这对我来说确实是一种启示。为他的音乐系统组装电缆的努力。拿掉扩音器对于他听音乐所获得的乐趣来说实在是太过分了。事实证明，大卫患有一种非常不寻常的神经系统问题。他的脑部核磁共振扫描显示，他的罗勒神经节有两次轻微的中风。这些是大脑深处的核，在进化上得到了很好的保存。它们可以追溯到最早的脊椎动物，即我们现在还拥有的 3.6 亿年前的蜥蜴。我们从兰佩的神经生理学中发现的关键是，罗勒神经节在将动机信号与行动联系起来方面非常重要。有些人称之为行动动机。因此，在像七鳃鳗这样的生物体中，动机信号可能是饥饿或性，从而导致采取行动来实现这些目标。在大卫身上，腹侧层的这些中风，即动物体内所谓的核，不会导致任何导致行动的动机信号。什么也没发生。但如果你提示他，去洗澡，来吧，他就会这么做。但出于他自己的勇气，他并没有采取行动的动力。这对我们来说确实是一件非同寻常的事情，因为这是一个非常有动力的人，而这种动力已经被这两次微小的中风所浇灭了，这并没有影响他的身体，但影响了他的行为。我们与大卫一起进行的研究试图理解这一点，这使我们产生了这样一个概念：我们也许能够解构这个模糊的概念。

thing called motivation. >> May I ask a question? It's fascinating. Um, and I'm sure everyone including myself is also wondering what became of David. But before you tell us, was it the case that he would feel overwhelmed? Like I want to listen to music, but that five minutes feels like a huge effort. That's a long effort. Or was it the case that he didn't really want it either? Because the way you've described these lesions is a is a severing of the wanting from the engagement in the process to have. Yeah. >> But of course, as you and I know, neural circuits are never that simple. >> No, of course not. Yeah. And he never expressed it unless we asked him. But he would say that it's too much effort to put this system together. So [snorts] even if he was asked, "What would you like to do?" He might say, "I'd like to listen to music." Why aren't you doing it? Because it's too much effort to do it. Right? And that became a real insight into how our brains work when we make decisions about is this potential action worth the effort in terms of the reward that will arise from it. Because [clears throat] it turns out that if we look at apathy across many different neurological disorders, one common trait that we found when we ask people is this particular option worth the reward if it was requiring this much physical effort. We find that everyone is willing to work for high rewards. But the difference between motivated people and apathetic people is at the level of the low rewards. Apathetic people are more inclined to say, "Nah, I don't think this is worth the effort, so I won't do that option." That's a really interesting signature that we found when people make that decisions. But in someone extreme like David, almost nothing incentivized him to put in effort to act unless he was prompted to do so. But going back to what happened to him, one of the things we've learned from the neuroscience of the basil ganglia and motivation to act is that dopamine is a key neurotransmitter, a key chemical in the brain which is important in the neural circuitry. And that's when we thought okay is there anything we can do for this guy to improve his motivation. So initially we tried Leodopa L-dopa which is the drug that Oliver Saxs describes in Awakenings and many people have seen the film and it's used a lot in Parkinson's disease for treatment. We slowly ramped up that drug but seemed to make absolutely no difference behaviorally to David or on

叫做动机的东西。 >> 我可以问一个问题吗？这很有趣。嗯，我相信包括我自己在内的每个人都想知道大卫后来怎么样了。但在你告诉我们之前，他会感到不知所措吗？就像我想听音乐一样，但这五分钟感觉像是一个巨大的努力。这是一个长期的努力。还是说他其实也并不想要？因为你所描述的这些损伤的方式是从参与的过程中分离出想要的东西。是的。 >> 但当然，正如你和我所知，神经回路从来没有那么简单。 >> 不，当然不是。是的。除非我们问他，否则他从来不会表达出来。但他会说，建立这个系统需要花费太多精力。所以[哼哼]即使他被问到，“你想做什么？”他可能会说：“我想听音乐。”你为什么不做呢？因为做起来太费力了。正确的？当我们做出决定时，这成为我们大脑如何工作的真正洞察力，从由此产生的回报来看，这种潜在的行动是否值得付出努力。因为[清嗓子]事实证明，如果我们观察许多不同的神经系统疾病的冷漠现象，当我们询问人们时，我们发现的一个共同特征是，如果这个特定的选择需要这么多的体力努力，那么它值得奖励。我们发现每个人都愿意为高回报而工作。但积极的人和冷漠的人之间的区别在于低回报的水平。冷漠的人更倾向于说：“不，我认为这不值得付出努力，所以我不会做这个选择。”当人们做出决定时，我们发现这是一个非常有趣的签名。但对于像大卫这样极端的人来说，除非有人提示他，否则几乎没有什么能激励他努力采取行动。但回到他身上发生的事情，我们从罗勒神经节和行动动机的神经科学中学到的一件事是，多巴胺是一种关键的神经递质，是大脑中的一种关键化学物质，对神经回路很重要。就在那时我们想，我们可以为这个人做些什么来提高他的积极性。所以最初我们尝试了 Leodopa L-dopa，这是 Oliver Saxs 在《觉醒》中描述的药物，很多人都看过这部电影，它被大量用于治疗帕金森病。我们慢慢地增加了这种药物的剂量，但似乎对大卫或其他人的行为完全没有影响。

时间轴｜00:10:00

our tests of reward sensitivity. We we developed some ways of measuring that. So we were about to give up and then I suddenly thought look let's use the other drug that we use for the dopamine system and that class of drugs acts directly on dopamine D2 and D3 receptors rather than being a precursor to making dopamine in the brain like leodopa and this drug rapinroll latches onto dopamine receptors directly and stimulates the dopamine circuitry. So we slowly ramped up this drug thinking is it going to be any different or not? But 3 months after we started this medication, he came back, David came back to see us and I did not recognize this guy in the waiting room because first of all, he'd had a shower, he'd had a haircut, he was wearing a suit, he had a new job, and most impressively, he had a new girlfriend because in the state he'd been in, he was seeing nobody. but he'd obviously been motivated to get out there and, you know, see if he could find a new partner. I was absolutely delighted for him, but so astonished that we could go in a human biological system where someone has tiny lesions in the bas ganglia and has their motivation [clears throat] extinguished. We could go from that to recovering motivation by using a drug that we already have that affects the dopamine circuitry. And of course, David is really rare. This kind of bilateral in both sides of the basil ganglia being affected tiny little strokes. This this is extremely rare. It's reported and it leads to pathological apathy. But it turns out that apathy is really common across neurological disorders. And the way we thought about it is if a pathological process whether it's a stroke or whether it's Alzheimer's disease or whether it's Parkinson's disease or even some inflammatory disorder affecting the nervous system like multiple scerosis. If that pathological process is affecting this circuitry it can lead to loss of motivation. And that's what we're really interested in is to think about the circuits that are affected and also trying to deconstruct motivation in terms of [clears throat] what's actually going on in the brain. What does this circuit really doing for us that leads to this behavior we call motivated behavior? >> I'd like to take a quick break to acknowledge one of our sponsors, David. David makes protein bars unlike any other. Their newest bar, the Bronze Bar, has 20 gram of protein, only 150 calories, and zero gram of sugar. I have to say, these are the best tasting protein bars I've ever had, and I've tried a lot of protein bars over the years. These new David bars have a marshmallow base and they're covered in chocolate coating and they're absolutely incredible. I of course eat regular whole foods. I eat meat, chicken, fish, eggs, fruits, vegetables, etc. But I also make it a point to eat one or two David bars per day as a snack, which makes it easy to hit my protein goal of 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight. And that allows me to take in the protein I need without consuming excess calories. I love all the David Bronze Bar flavors, including cookie dough, caramel chocolate, double chocolate, peanut butter chocolate. They all actually taste like candy bars. Again, they're amazing. But again, they have no sugar and they have 20 grams of protein with just 150 calories. If you'd like to try David, you can go to davidprotein.com/huberman. Right now, David is offering a deal where if you buy four cartons, you get the fifth carton for free. You can also find David on Amazon or in stores such as Target, Walmart, and Kroger. Again, to get the fifth carton for free, go to davidproin.com/huberman. Today's episode is also brought to us by BetterHelp. BetterHelp offers professional therapy with a licensed therapist carried out entirely online. I've

我们的奖励敏感性测试。我们开发了一些衡量这一点的方法。所以我们准备放弃，然后我突然想到让我们使用另一种用于多巴胺系统的药物，这类药物直接作用于多巴胺 D2 和 D3 受体，而不是像利多巴那样在大脑中产生多巴胺的前体，而这种药物 rapinroll 直接锁定多巴胺受体并刺激多巴胺回路。所以我们慢慢地加大了这种药物的用量，思考它是否会有所不同？但我们开始服用这种药物三个月后，他回来了，大卫回来看我们，我在候诊室里没有认出这个人，因为首先，他洗了个澡，理了发，穿了西装，找到了一份新工作，最令人印象深刻的是，他有了一个新女朋友，因为在他所处的状态下，他没有和任何人见面。但他显然有动力走出去，看看他是否能找到新的合作伙伴。我为他感到非常高兴，但令我惊讶的是，我们可以进入人类生物系统，其中有人的基底神经节有微小病变，并且他们的动机[清喉咙]消失了。我们可以通过使用我们已有的影响多巴胺回路的药物来恢复动力。当然，大卫确实很罕见。这种双侧的罗勒神经节两侧受到影响的微小中风。这这，是极为罕见的。据报道，它会导致病态的冷漠。但事实证明，冷漠在神经系统疾病中确实很常见。我们思考的方式是，是否是一种病理过程，无论是中风还是阿尔茨海默氏病或帕金森氏病，甚至是影响神经系统的某种炎症性疾病，如多发性硬化症。如果这种病理过程正在影响该回路，则可能会导致动力丧失。我们真正感兴趣的是思考受影响的回路，并尝试根据[清嗓子]大脑中实际发生的情况来解构动机。这个回路到底对我们做了什么，导致了我们称之为动机行为的行为？ >> 我想稍微休息一下，向我们的赞助商之一大卫表示感谢。大卫制作的蛋白质棒与众不同。他们最新的 Bronze Bar 含有 20 克蛋白质，仅 150 卡路里，零克糖。我不得不说，这些是我吃过的味道最好的蛋白质棒，多年来我尝试过很多蛋白质棒。这些新的大卫棒有一个棉花糖底座，上面覆盖着巧克力涂层，它们绝对令人难以置信。我当然吃普通的天然食品。我吃肉、鸡肉、鱼、鸡蛋、水果、蔬菜等。但我也强调每天吃一两块大卫棒作为零食，这样很容易达到我每磅体重 1 克蛋白质的蛋白质目标。这使我能够摄入所需的蛋白质，而不会消耗过多的热量。我喜欢大卫青铜棒的所有口味，包括饼干面团、焦糖巧克力、双层巧克力、花生酱巧克力。它们实际上尝起来都像棒棒糖。再说一次，他们太棒了。但同样，它们不含糖，含有 20 克蛋白质，只有 150 卡路里热量。如果您想尝试 David，可以访问 david Protein.com/huberman。现在，大卫正在提供一项优惠，如果您购买四箱，您可以免费获得第五箱。您还可以在亚马逊或 Target、沃尔玛和克罗格等商店找到 David。同样，要免费获得第五箱，请访问 davidproin.com/huberman。今天的节目也是由 BetterHelp 为我们带来的。 BetterHelp 提供由持证治疗师完全在线进行的专业治疗。我已经

been doing therapy for a long time. And while it's not always easy, every time I do a therapy session, I come away feeling better and knowing that the time was well spent. And that's because whenever I finish a therapy session, I come away with a valuable insight or new perspective on something I'm working through, whether that's with work, with relationships in my personal life, or with my relationship to myself. With Better Help, they make it extremely easy to find an expert therapist who can help provide the benefits that come through effective therapy. They have a short questionnaire that helps match you to a therapist. And while BetterHelp has an industryleading match rate, if you aren't happy with your match, you can switch to a different therapist at any time. Also, because BetterHelp is done entirely online, it's extremely timeefficient. There's no driving to a therapist's office, looking for parking, etc. If you would like to try BetterHelp, go to betterhelp.com/huberman to get 10% off your first month. Again, that's betterhelp.com/huberman. like to drill into motivated behavior and the dopamine system. And thank you for sharing what became of David because uh always nice when medicine can deliver a a victory story. >> Absolutely. Yeah. >> Because as some people may recall that L-dopa for the treatment of Parkinson's had these transient improvements that sometimes can be dismaying for people, right? People get better and then they get worse again. And I'm sure there's additional progress being made there. We still need to do an episode all about Parkinson's, but we'll reserve that for another time. >> In thinking about motivation and the fact that there's really one system for most types of motivation, this is kind of what the David story suggests, right? That these basil ganglia, nuclei, nucleus encumbent are underlying all sorts of motivations to listen to music, to shower, to find a romantic partner, to work, to take care of oneself as opposed to distributed networks for motivation. Yeah, >> that's interesting in its own right, I think. But many people are probably familiar with feeling really motivated to do certain things but not others. Even if there isn't a pain point associated with doing, I don't know, maybe somebody likes arithmetic but they don't like literature or vice versa. Putting aside individual variation based on family history, psychology, traumatic experiences, is it true that certain people by virtue of the way that their dopamine system is kind of tuned up like how willing these neurons are to fire or not fire in different circumstances are just motivated people. I mean, you see this sometimes like >> you know, I've had two different bulldogs. The first one is like let's go and it's like and you have to really [clears throat] coax them along. The other one, let's go, okay, and just go. Some people are like this. Hey, like let's go. They pop up, they go. other people more reluctant, but I think most of us are somewhere in between. So, clinically and outside of the clinic, do you think that some people's dopamineergic neurons are just more willing to fire in response to everyday activities, novel activities, and the super exciting stuff? And I have a very specific reason for asking this, but I'll I'll keep it quiet for now because I really want to understand is there a continuum of motivation? And if so, can it exist both between individuals and within individuals? >> So, taking your first question, it turns out that this circuitry we're talking about, it's called the misolyic circuitry that links the basil ganglia to the frontal loes, is almost like a final common pathway for motivation signals to engage with the action systems of the brain. So, it could be hunger, it could be thirst, it could be sex.

已经做了很长时间的治疗。虽然这并不总是那么容易，但每次我进行治疗时，我都会感觉更好，并且知道时间花得很值。这是因为每当我完成治疗课程时，我都会对我正在经历的事情产生宝贵的见解或新的视角，无论是工作、个人生活中的关系还是我与自己的关系。通过“更好的帮助”，他们可以非常轻松地找到可以帮助提供有效治疗所带来的好处的专家治疗师。他们有一份简短的调查问卷，可以帮助您与治疗师匹配。虽然 BetterHelp 拥有行业领先的匹配率，但如果您对匹配不满意，您可以随时更换为其他治疗师。此外，由于 BetterHelp 完全在线完成，因此非常省时。无需开车前往治疗师办公室、寻找停车位等。如果您想尝试 BetterHelp，请访问 betterhelp.com/huberman，第一个月可享受 10% 的折扣。再说一次，这是 betterhelp.com/huberman。喜欢深入研究动机行为和多巴胺系统。感谢您分享大卫的遭遇，因为当医学可以提供胜利的故事时，总是很好。 >> 绝对。是的。 >> 因为有些人可能还记得，左旋多巴在治疗帕金森病方面取得了这些短暂的改善，有时可能会让人们感到沮丧，对吧？人们变得更好，然后又变得更糟。我确信那里正在取得更多进展。我们仍然需要制作一个关于帕金森氏症的剧集，但我们会保留到另一个时间。 >> 在思考动机以及大多数类型的动机确实有一个系统这一事实时，这就是大卫的故事所暗示的，对吧？这些罗勒神经节、细胞核、现任核是听音乐、洗澡、寻找浪漫伴侣、工作、照顾自己的各种动机的基础，而不是分布式网络的动机。是的，我认为这本身就很有趣。但很多人可能都熟悉这种感觉：真正有动力去做某些事情，而不是做其他事情。即使没有与做相关的痛点，我也不知道，也许有人喜欢算术，但他们不喜欢文学，反之亦然。抛开基于家族史、心理、创伤经历的个体差异，某些人确实是因为他们的多巴胺系统的调节方式，比如这些神经元在不同情况下是否愿意放电，而只是有动机的人。我的意思是，你有时会看到这样的情况>>你知道，我养过两只不同的斗牛犬。第一个就像我们走吧，就像你必须真正[清嗓子]哄他们一起走。另一个，我们走吧，好吧，就走吧。有些人就是这样。嘿，就像我们走吧。他们突然出现，他们走了。其他人更不愿意，但我认为我们大多数人都介于两者之间。那么，在临床和诊所之外，您是否认为某些人的多巴胺能神经元更愿意对日常活动、新奇活动和超级令人兴奋的东西做出反应？我问这个问题有一个非常具体的原因，但我现在会保持安静，因为我真的想了解是否存在连续的动机？如果是这样，它是否可以同时存在于个体之间和个体内部？ >> 所以，回答你的第一个问题，事实证明我们正在谈论的这个电路，它被称为连接罗勒神经节和额叶的米索电路，几乎就像动机信号与大脑动作系统结合的最终共同路径。所以，可能是饥饿，可能是口渴，也可能是性。

These are primary motivation signals that many animals have. But as you said, there are other motivating signals that we may also want to engage with. We may have other goals, whether it's arithmetic or to learn a new language or to go out into the park, whatever it is. Now how those different types of motivation signals are weighted or valued within our brains to engage or not engage this circuitry to lead to action is actually a very very interesting area. So one thing that we've learned is even apathy might be in different domains. The research in this area started with behavioral apathy. What we can measure is someone inert or are they active doing something? Then other kinds of work suggested there might also be social apathy. You know we might know colleagues who seem to be very very motivated to work but they don't want to engage with other people or do things like go to a party or something like that. They may also be emotional apathy. So there are people who seem to have very blunted responses to things that you and I might either find, you know, something that we want to congratulate people for or feel sad about if they had an issue. These people seem to not have that kind of range of motivational responses. And some people argued that there's also cognitive apathy. So whereas someone might be apathetic to do something physical, they might not necessarily be apathetic for doing something cognitive, being curious about the world, reading the newspaper, finding out what's going on in the world. And there may be dissociations. So someone could be socially apathetic, but you know, cognitively very highly motivated. So how does that happen? How do these different domains vary if there's one final con system? And of course this is where we have to think about the fact that brain circuits are complicated. And the kinds of signals that are being developed for behavior, cognition, social interaction or emotion are being formulated in different parts of the brain even though they might funnel through this basil ganglia system to engage the action systems in the frontal lobe. And even more granular if we want to get to that, you know, whether you want to learn a new language or you want to do arithmetic or go to the park or whatever it is, how do you weight these different motivation signals? So, one way we've thought about this is, you know, let's imagine today it's a beautiful day out there. What are the things you could do?

这些是许多动物都具有的主要动机信号。但正如您所说，我们可能还想参与其他激励信号。我们可能还有其他目标，无论是算术、学习一门新语言还是去公园，无论是什么。现在，如何在我们的大脑中对这些不同类型的动机信号进行加权或评估，以参与或不参与该电路以导致行动，这实际上是一个非常非常有趣的领域。所以我们了解到的一件事是，冷漠也可能存在于不同的领域。该领域的研究始于行为冷漠。我们可以衡量的是某人是惰性的还是积极地做某事？然后其他类型的研究表明也可能存在社交冷漠。您知道，我们可能认识一些同事，他们似乎非常有动力工作，但他们不想与其他人交往或做诸如参加聚会之类的事情。他们也可能是情感冷漠。因此，有些人似乎对你和我可能会发现的事情反应非常迟钝，你知道，我们想要祝贺人们，或者如果他们遇到问题则感到悲伤。这些人似乎没有那种广泛的动机反应。有些人认为还有认知冷漠。因此，尽管有人可能对做一些体力活动漠不关心，但他们不一定对做一些认知活动、对世界感到好奇、阅读报纸、了解世界上正在发生的事情漠不关心。并且可能会出现分裂。因此，某人可能在社交方面表现冷漠，但你知道，在认知方面却非常积极主动。那么这是怎么发生的呢？如果有一个最终的骗局系统，这些不同的领域有何不同？当然，这就是我们必须考虑大脑回路复杂这一事实的地方。为行为、认知、社交互动或情感而开发的各种信号正在大脑的不同部分中形成，尽管它们可能会通过这个罗勒神经节系统来参与额叶的行动系统。如果我们想更具体地了解这一点，你知道，无论你是想学习一门新语言还是想做算术或去公园或其他什么，你如何权衡这些不同的动机信号？所以，我们思考这个问题的一种方式是，你知道，让我们想象一下今天是美好的一天。你可以做哪些事情？

时间轴｜00:20:00

And I'm sure Andrew, you could give me 20 things you could do, but you can't do them all at once. So somehow you have to prioritize what's the thing that you value most. And the way we conceive of this is a sort of a neuroeconomic decision-m where you look at those 20 things and you go okay how rewarding do I think each of these things are and then you also think well how effortful is that going to be and it could be physical effort it could be cognitive effort social effort emotional effort whatever it is and out of that kind of system where you do a calculation you will find the thing for you that you will value most given the level of effort required and that's what emerges as your motivated behavior at that time. >> Do you think people do that computation consciously? >> I don't think they have to do it. We could do it consciously, right? If I >> because I don't wake up I look at my schedule and I have to do this, this, and this. I actually schedule my workouts. I schedule time with others and things, but it's sort of the the constellation of things in my life. I'm not doing a very conscious waiting of this versus that. Although occasionally when there's a conflict in scheduling, I have to select this is more valuable to me than that. But it's not something that I generally sit back and think and I probably should. We probably all should sit back and think, okay, what is the best use of my time? Effort, reward, payoff, but we we sort of just go about life. >> Yeah. And I think what you're really getting me towards discussing is the fact that each behavior has a kind of activation hill that we have to cross to think, yeah, I could start this. So for some people, let's say learning a new language is a mountain. That's a huge kind of effort to put in. Whereas for other people, it's barely a mount. You know, I I don't think of that as a big burden, a big activation hill that I've got to cross before I get there. So there's the activation barrier before I even think of starting. And these things are not necessarily consciously being considered. It's just you have these biases because you've got experiences. The fact, hey, I wasn't that good at learning Spanish. Do I really want to spend a lot of energy in learning French? Those biases add up and affect the way you do that calculation. We were talking about reward versus effort. And essentially that's a very important way I think that we make a decision. Much of that could be subconscious. >> I'll tell two brief anecdotes if if I may to set the texture for the next uh question. >> Years ago I was at a PhD thesis at Stanford, a student, I'll just name her because she did a wonderful job in her thesis. Her name was Lauren Casease. She was not my student. I attended because she was working on neural regeneration and she had screened an enormous number of molecules for their ability to inhibit or promote neural regeneration. Super important problem as you and I both know that still hasn't been solved. Yeah. >> And it was really striking how many molecules she had evaluated. And I'll never forget her advisor's introduction. He said one of the best things about Lauren >> is that she has very low activation energy. Meaning there's the opportunity to do an experiment. she'd get up and do the experiment and say, "Ah, that was an interesting molecule. Move to the next one." And it occurred to me then that having low activation energy, provided the thing that you do doesn't get you injured or killed, is really a spectacular thing in life because you just get a lot more life out of days lived. So, you kind of wonder about the Lauren cases of the world. Are these the people where somebody says, "Hey, you know, uh, we need to do this thing like like take out the recycle and it's a ton with the

我确信安德鲁，你可以给我 20 件你能做的事情，但你不能一次全部做完。因此，你必须以某种方式优先考虑你最看重的事情。我们的构想是一种神经经济学决策，你看着这 20 件事，你会想，我认为每件事都有多大回报，然后你也会很好地思考这将是多么努力，这可能是体力努力，也可能是认知努力、社交努力、情感努力，无论是什么，在这种系统中，你进行计算，你会找到你最看重的东西，考虑到所需的努力水平，这就是你的动机行为那个时候。 >> 你认为人们有意识地进行计算吗？ >> 我认为他们不必这样做。我们可以有意识地做到这一点，对吗？如果我>>因为我没有醒来，我会查看我的日程安排，我必须做这个、这个、这个。我实际上安排了我的锻炼。我安排与他人和事物相处的时间，但这就是我生活中的事物星座。我并没有非常有意识地等待这个与那个。虽然偶尔当日程安排发生冲突时，我必须选择这个对我来说比那个更有价值。但这不是我通常应该坐下来思考的事情。我们或许都应该坐下来想一想，好吧，我的时间的最佳利用方式是什么？努力、奖励、回报，但我们只是过着生活。 >> 是的。我认为你真正让我讨论的是这样一个事实，即每种行为都有一种激活山，我们必须跨越它才能思考，是的，我可以开始这个。因此，对于某些人来说，学习一门新语言是一座大山。这是一项巨大的努力。而对于其他人来说，这只是小事一桩。你知道，我不认为这是一个很大的负担，在我到达那里之前我必须跨越一个大的激活山。所以在我想开始之前就存在激活障碍。而这些事情并不一定是有意识地被考虑到的。只是你有这些偏见，因为你有经验。事实上，嘿，我不太擅长学习西班牙语。我真的要花很多精力学习法语吗？这些偏差加起来会影响你的计算方式。我们正在谈论奖励与努力。从本质上讲，我认为这是我们做出决定的一个非常重要的方式。其中大部分可能是潜意识的。 >> 如果我可以为下一个呃问题设置纹理，我将讲述两个简短的轶事。 >> 几年前，我在斯坦福大学读博士论文，当时我还是一名学生，我只是简单地提到她的名字，因为她的论文做得非常出色。她的名字叫劳伦·凯斯。她不是我的学生。我参加是因为她正在研究神经再生，并且她筛选了大量分子抑制或促进神经再生的能力。你我都知道这个非常重要的问题仍然没有得到解决。是的。 >> 她评估的分子数量之多确实令人震惊。我永远不会忘记她导师的介绍。他说劳伦>>最好的事情之一是她的激活能非常低。这意味着有机会做实验。她会站起来做实验并说：“啊，这是一个有趣的分子。转向下一个。”然后我突然想到，如果你所做的事情不会让你受伤或死亡，那么拥有低激活能确实是生活中一件了不起的事情，因为你会在生活中获得更多的生命。所以，你有点想知道世界各地的劳伦案例。有人会说：“嘿，你知道，呃，我们需要做这样的事情，比如拿出回收品，这需要大量的资源。”

roommate something back when, you know, and it's like, okay, I'll do that later." There's so much energy lost in the deliberation in the feeling like the effort reward trade-off. You don't want to waste your time doing things, but you also don't want to waste your time thinking about whether or not you're wasting your time. So let me take you up on that because after seeing David we thought about exactly this problem and we got a bunch of Oxford students and believe it or not at Oxford just like Stanford I'm sure there's a whole range of motivation amongst the students there are people who are highly motivated the Laurens and then there are people who are actually surprisingly apathetic they might be very smart people but they have high activation energy levels they need to cross that barrier to do something and we put them into the MRI scanner and we looked at their brain activity when they were given these choices. Is this option with this much reward worth this much physical effort? You just say yes or no. Would you do it or not? We could then look across this neuroeconomic space by parametrically changing the level of reward that we're offering and parametrically changing the level of effort. And it turned out just as we'd found in patients, the apathetic students were all willing to work for high rewards, but they weren't willing to work for low rewards. Interesting. >> Now in the brain, what we find is that the vententral parts of the basil ganglia, vententral stratum nucleus encumbent is active as well as the parts medial frontal areas, frontal lobe areas in these healthy students when they're simply making the decision. is this option worth the reward for this much effort? So they're not doing anything. They're just thinking about it. And we thought great, this is really fantastic because now we have convergence from the stroke patient that we saw with the basil ganglia lesions who lost motivation and now we can see that healthy individuals when they're having to make this decision show activation in the same area that was lost in David as well as the frontal loes. But the paradox here was that we found greater activity in those regions in the students who were apathetic compared to the students who are motivated. And we were not expecting that. We thought if you lack motivation, your brain activity when you're being asked to do this would just be lower. So the way we have resolved this problem is to think actually this is showing us something very important. It's showing us that apathetic people use more brain energy when they're making this decision. They have a bigger activation energy barrier to overcome because when they're making that decision, the brain is consuming more energy. It's consuming more glucose when it's doing that. Now, of course, in the scanner, in this sort of experimental situation, everyone's willing to do the task. They're making those decisions. But imagine these people at home if you're confronted with, "Oh my goodness, I'm going to have to work hard just to decide whether I should do this option or not. Maybe I would just won't do it." And that's, I think, a really important insight into what you might do to energize motivation in people who might be apathetic because it's showing us that that activation barrier that I was talking about in a way exists in the brain. Physiologically you can show that these people are working harder to make the same decision compared to motivated people. >> Fascinating experiment by the way. So elegant in its simplicity, but the paradoxical piece of more activity in these dopamineergic circuits in the apathetic folks tells me, and correct me if I'm wrong, that there's a cost to thinking about the effort required plus the cost of the actual effort required that

你知道，然后就好像，好吧，我稍后再做。”在努力回报权衡的深思熟虑中，你浪费了太多的精力。你不想浪费时间做事，但你也不想浪费时间思考你是否在浪费时间。所以让我来谈谈这个问题，因为在见到大卫之后，我们思考了这个问题，我们有一群牛津大学的学生，信不信由你。就像斯坦福大学一样，我确信学生们有各种各样的动机，有些人非常积极，有些人实际上非常冷漠，他们可能是非常聪明的人，但他们需要跨越障碍才能做某事，我们将他们放入核磁共振扫描仪中，当他们做出这些选择时，我们会观察他们的大脑活动，这个选择是否值得这么多的体力努力？通过参数化地改变我们提供的奖励水平和参数化地改变努力程度，结果就像我们在患者中发现的那样，冷漠的学生都愿意为高回报而工作，但他们不愿意为低回报而工作>>现在，在大脑中，我们发现罗勒神经节的腹侧部分以及额叶内侧部分都活跃。当这些健康的学生只是做出决定时，他们的额叶区域值得付出如此多的努力吗？他们只是在思考，这真是太棒了，因为现在我们看到了失去动力的中风患者，现在我们可以看到，健康的人在做出这个决定时，在大卫和额叶中都表现出了激活。这里的悖论是，我们发现，与积极主动的学生相比，冷漠的学生的大脑活动会更加活跃。我们没想到，如果你被要求这样做，你的大脑活动就会降低。所以我们解决这个问题的方法是，这实际上向我们展示了一些非常重要的事情：冷漠的人在做出决定时会使用更多的大脑能量，因为他们在做决定时需要克服更大的激活能量障碍。当然，在扫描仪中，在这种实验情况下，每个人都愿意做这些决定，但想象一下，如果你面临这样的情况，“天哪，我将不得不努力决定是否应该做这个选择。也许我不会这样做。”我认为，这是一个非常重要的见解，可以帮助你了解如何激发那些可能冷漠的人的积极性，因为它向我们展示了我所说的激活障碍在某种程度上存在于大脑中。从生理学上来说，你可以表明，与有积极性的人相比，这些人正在更加努力地做出相同的决定。>>顺便说一句，这是一个令人着迷的实验。它的简单性如此优雅，但在这些过程中却有更多的活动，这是自相矛盾的。冷漠者的多巴胺能回路告诉我，如果我错了，请纠正我，考虑所需的努力以及所需的实际努力的成本是有成本的。

compounds and puts some people out of the game. >> Exactly. So, you know, the Lauren, the the student you were talking about, has low activation energy. She obviously doesn't need to burn a lot of brain fuel in terms of thinking I I can do this. I'm going to do it. And you know she reminds me of something that happened to me when I was a PhD student. I was in Oxford and we would sit around having tea thinking about great studies we could do. nothing really happened and then I came to be a posttock at MIT and was surrounded by these highly motivated people and I can remember we disc had the same kind of discussion and then one of them would go yeah well let's do that tonight and I'd go tonight and that was the level of difference it just blew my mind that there were people who could just go right let's do it [clears throat] >> and I think that's been a real lesson for me that you can achieve things if you if you think in this way. >> Well, the other anecdote, I'll keep this brief, is a is a slightly humorous one, but it's designed to illustrate a point, which is I try not to spend too much time on social media unless I'm actively learning on there because I do find things that are really interesting and educate me sometimes just for entertainment. But there's a a post I came across um it's a little parody skit where uh a woman walks into the room and her uh husband or boyfriend is playing a video game and she says, "Hey, do you mind um hanging up those pictures that are in the hall? They've been there for a few days." He's like, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah." And she walks out. She like shakes her head and she has an idea. She walks back in and she says, "Hey, do you mind showing me how to hang those pictures in the hallway? I'd love to learn how." And he's like, "Boom." And it like, you know, he launches into, you know, so she's tapped into a component of his motivational circuitry where the opportunity to to teach clear literally gets him around this uh this activation energy thing like all of a sudden the activation energy required to do the same thing just drops to zero. And it's a very good example because you know one thing you got to think about is how can you change that barrier for people. Either you make the effort less. Let's say you got a part task to do. You could break it down into subcomponents so the activation level doesn't seem quite so formidable. Or you could change the incentive. And this is what happened in your

复合并使一些人退出游戏。 >> 正是如此。所以，你知道，劳伦，你所说的那个学生，激活能很低。显然，她不需要消耗大量的大脑燃料来思考我可以做到这一点。我会去做的。你知道她让我想起了我还是一名博士生时发生在我身上的事情。我当时在牛津，我们会坐在一起喝茶，思考我们可以做的伟大研究。一切都没有发生，然后我成为了麻省理工学院的一名博士后，周围都是这些积极主动的人，我记得我们的光盘进行了同样的讨论，然后其中一个人会说，是的，让我们今晚就这样做，我今晚就去，这就是差异的程度，它让我震惊，有人可以直接让我们开始做[清嗓子] >> 我认为这对我来说是一个真正的教训，如果你以这种方式思考，你就可以实现目标。 >> 好吧，我会简短地讲另一件轶事，是一个有点幽默的故事，但它旨在说明一点，那就是我尽量不要在社交媒体上花太多时间，除非我在那里积极学习，因为我确实发现了一些真正有趣的东西，有时只是为了娱乐而教育我。但我看到一篇帖子，嗯，这是一个滑稽的小品，一个女人走进房间，她的丈夫或男朋友正在玩电子游戏，她说，“嘿，你介意把大厅里的那些照片挂起来吗？他们已经在那里呆了几天了。”他就像是，“是啊，是啊，是啊，是啊。”然后她走了出去。她喜欢摇头，她有一个想法。她走回来说道：“嘿，你介意教我如何把这些照片挂在走廊上吗？我很想学怎么做。”他就像，“繁荣”。就像，你知道，他开始进入，你知道，所以她进入了他动机回路的一个组成部分，在那里清晰地教导的机会实际上让他绕过了这个呃这个激活能量的事情，就像突然间做同样的事情所需的激活能量降到了零。这是一个非常好的例子，因为你知道你必须考虑的一件事是如何改变人们的障碍。要么你减少努力。假设您有一项部分任务要做。您可以将其分解为子组件，这样激活级别就不会显得那么强大。或者你可以改变激励措施。这就是你发生的事情

时间轴｜00:30:00

example, right? The incentives change because now the guy is thinking ah now the the reward here is to show her how I do this. That's the thing I will get the pleasure from, the reward from. Right? So I think that's the other insight we got is how do you change people's motivation in a practical way? Well, you have to think if this is really happening in the brain that you're making decisions about whether this reward is worth the effort. You can either increase the reward or change it in some way in terms of something that's meaningful for the person or you change the effort required to accomplish maybe part of the task or perhaps start you know just initiate the task and often starting can be a huge motivational pull. You know, this gets to um some uh sticky territory around the actual versus the perceived utility of lots of things that are on the internet including in the health and dare I say wellness space which is the following. There's this idea that if you do for instance a hard run or a hard workout that you are teaching yourself how to do hard things that can translate to doing hard things in other domains. So as psychologists, neuroscientists, we talk clinicians, we talk about the domain specificity, but that's just nerdy speak for like does one thing translate to another circumstance. Are you teaching yourself an algorithm of I did a hard thing this morning, you know, I did the cold shower I don't like. I did the workout I may or may not have wanted to do, but so now I'm more empowered or and I've thought about this quite a bit or do we have a finite amount of energy and the most rational approach is to is to think okay what's actually going to provide me the most benefit today? Like, can we really get momentum and understanding of our underlying motivational circuitries? Or is it the case that we're diluting ourselves? I'm not attempting to undercut a lot of content I've done previously, but I've had plenty of um hard workouts and then gotten to the other thing I needed to do and went like, I don't want to do this. I'm tired from that workout this morning. [laughter and clears throat] But we are also familiar with the fact that if something really intriguing or exciting to us is presented to us, suddenly it's like we're a different human being. It's a complete state change. So, I'm I'm curious. I'm not asking you to editorialize about the health and wellness space, but more globally, can we teach ourselves to lower our activation energy in a way that can serve us well across the board? I think we can because it turns out obviously some of these things that people use psychologically to improve their motivation can be framed in exactly the way I put it to you that the what we're doing here is trying to either increase the reward or change the nature of the incentive you know if it's something novel and salient that you think ah this is really interesting it's rewarding for me or we reduce the effort so just using these simp this simple principle might be enough for someone to think about how to do it. You know, planning out your day or week in advance for some people makes life better because every time they're having to make a decision on the fly if they're just doing it without planning it out means that the it's costing, right? Every decision has a cost in terms as we've seen the brain having to put in invest fuel to make that decision. So if you're having to do that every time you make a decision, that can seem very burdensome. Whereas if you did it once in a big way where you planned it out for the day or the week, maybe the costs in terms of the activation energy required for the brain is much lower for you if you do that. So it's a simple thing to do. Dividing up a task, let's say you're given a project by your

例子，对吗？激励措施发生了变化，因为现在这个人在想啊，现在这里的奖励是向她展示我是如何做到这一点的。这就是我将得到的快乐、回报。正确的？所以我认为我们得到的另一个见解是如何以实际的方式改变人们的动机？好吧，你必须考虑这是否真的发生在你正在决定这个奖励是否值得付出努力的大脑中。你可以增加奖励，或者以某种方式改变它，使之变得对人有意义，或者你改变完成部分任务所需的努力，或者开始你知道只是启动任务，而且通常开始可以产生巨大的动力。你知道，这涉及到互联网上许多东西的实际效用与感知效用之间的一些棘手领域，包括健康领域，我敢说健康空间如下。有一种观点认为，如果你进行艰苦的跑步或艰苦的锻炼，那么你就是在教自己如何做困难的事情，这些事情可以转化为在其他领域做困难的事情。因此，作为心理学家、神经科学家，我们谈论临床医生，我们谈论领域特异性，但这只是书呆子的说法，就像一件事转化为另一种情况一样。你是在教自己一个算法吗，我今天早上做了一件困难的事情，你知道，我洗了我不喜欢的冷水澡。我做了我可能想做也可能不想做的锻炼，但现在我更有能力了，或者我已经思考了很多这个问题，或者我们的能量是否有限，最理性的方法是思考今天实际上会给我带来最大好处的是什么？比如，我们真的能获得动力并理解我们潜在的动机回路吗？还是我们正在稀释自己？我并不是想削弱我之前做过的很多内容，但我已经进行了大量的艰苦训练，然后开始做我需要做的另一件事，然后就想，我不想这样做。今天早上的锻炼让我很累。 [笑声并清嗓子]但我们也熟悉这样一个事实：如果我们看到一些真正有趣或令人兴奋的东西，突然间我们就像是一个不同的人。这是一个彻底的状态改变。所以，我很好奇。我并不是要求您发表有关健康和保健领域的社论，但在全球范围内，我们能否教会自己以一种能够全面服务于我们的方式降低我们的激活能量？我认为我们可以，因为事实证明，人们在心理上用来提高动机的一些东西显然可以按照我向你介绍的方式来构建，我们在这里所做的就是试图增加奖励或改变激励的性质，你知道，如果它是你认为的新颖和突出的东西，这真的很有趣，它对我来说是有回报的，或者我们减少努力，所以仅仅使用这些简单的这个简单的原则可能就足以让人们思考如何去做。你知道，对某些人来说，提前计划好一天或一周会让生活变得更好，因为每次他们都必须匆忙做出决定，如果他们只是在没有计划好的情况下做决定，那就意味着要付出代价，对吗？每个决定都有成本，因为我们已经看到大脑必须投入燃料才能做出决定。因此，如果您每次做出决定时都必须这样做，那可能会显得非常繁重。然而，如果你在一天或一周内计划好一次，那么，如果你这样做的话，大脑所需的激活能量的成本可能会低得多。所以这是一件简单的事情。分配任务，假设您的同事给了您一个项目

manager, it's going to take you three months to accomplish from it. seems absolutely formidable because you have no idea of where to start. What if you could break it down into smaller tasks which bring down that mountain the activation energy required to get that small thing done. Let's say first of all let's research one area of this and get a handle on that and if we get that done this is a sort of if then kind of construct if we get that done we can then move on to a second piece of work. It would also help if your manager said, "Well done for getting that bit done." Right? That's that's also a motivation pull to think, "Yeah, actually I don't need to get the whole piece done to get the reward of somebody identified that as a positive thing to have done." I would love to see an experiment done where the perception of one's effort to do something can be separated from the actual effort and really get to the meat of whether overthinking or even thinking at all about the effort takes us away from having more quote unquote motivation or even better performance. And I haven't had time to think this through, but as you were describing David and his transformation and this experiment on the undergraduates of valuing different outcomes, I wonder if you could put somebody on a stationary bike and put them in a virtual environment >> and measure the effort required to climb a hill and you could adjust the difficulty, >> but you change the perception of how steep that hill is, right? If we could translate that to the real world like to to learn something to learn how to tango for instance you know I have Argentine relatives it'd be nice to learn how to tango that's pretty cool skill right there's a lot required you had to go to the class you got to drive there find the teacher you if you're the one who's supposed to lead then it's like especially embarrassing if you can't do it so there >> sounds like you've already started >> yeah started this process but that's very different than the actual work involved in doing it which in most cases turns out to be much lower than the perceived effort Yeah. >> So is there a way to tease these things apart? >> I think not in exactly the way you suggested about the treadmill and the and changing the perception of the gradient, let's say, that's coming. But that wouldn't that be interesting because what we then get is subjective value of effort versus the real effort the physiological effort whatever it is you know oxygen consumption the glucose required the lactic acid that's building up all of those parameters and seeing how that diverges but I bet you we would find that there's a huge variation in subjective valuation >> and it could go either way it could >> we have a good friend Ken Ry out who's like a very famous within the marathoning community like endurance athlete and he does this mind game on his opponents when he runs and he wins races in the Gobi Desert at like age 50 plus he'll run up next to his competitors an actual event and he'll take his earbuds out and he'll say I don't know what it is I never get tired and then he wins >> and these are guys that he couldn't catch up to >> barely until then and he dominates them so there's a psychological thing happening in both of them right and I think he does as much for himself as he does for them. And many competitive athletes have talked about when they see a great competitor starting to fail, how it gives them this sense that they have like a booster pack. Y >> and it's not the nicest example because I'm not big on motivating through competition, per se, but it says something about our perceived effort of our own, whether or not we're overcoming the challenge. And if we see someone else falling into a psychological trap like that, presumably

经理，你需要三个月的时间才能完成这个任务。看起来绝对令人畏惧，因为你不知道从哪里开始。如果你能把它分解成更小的任务，从而降低完成小事所需的激活能量，会怎么样？让我们说，首先让我们研究这个领域的一个领域并掌握它，如果我们完成了这个领域，这是一种“如果那么”的结构，如果我们完成了这个领域，我们就可以继续进行第二项工作。如果你的经理说：“干得好，完成了这一点，也会有帮助。”正确的？这也是一种思考的动力，“是的，实际上我不需要完成整件事才能获得某人认为这是一件积极的事情的奖励。”我很想看到这样一个实验：对一个人做某事的努力的看法可以与实际的努力分开，并真正了解过度思考甚至完全思考努力是否会让我们失去更多的动机或什至更好的表现。我还没有时间思考这一点，但当你描述大卫和他的转变以及对本科生重视不同结果的实验时，我想知道你是否可以让某人骑上固定自行车并将他们置于虚拟环境中>>并测量爬山所需的努力，然后你可以调整难度>>但你改变了对那座山有多陡的看法，对吧？如果我们可以将其转化为现实世界，比如学习一些东西来学习如何跳探戈，例如，你知道我有阿根廷亲戚，那么学习如何跳探戈就好了，这是相当酷的技能，有很多要求你必须去上课，你必须开车去那里找到老师，如果你是应该领导的人，那么如果你不能做到这一点，那会特别尴尬，所以>>听起来你已经开始了>>是的，开始了这个过程，但是这与执行此操作所涉及的实际工作有很大不同，在大多数情况下，实际工作量远低于感知的工作量是的。 >> 那么有没有办法把这些东西分开呢？ >> 我认为并不完全按照您建议的跑步机和梯度感知的方式，可以说，这即将到来。但这不会很有趣，因为我们然后得到的是努力的主观价值与真正的努力，生理努力，无论是什么，你知道耗氧量，葡萄糖，需要乳酸，这些参数建立在所有这些参数上，看看它们是如何变化的，但我敢打赌，我们会发现主观评价存在巨大差异>>而且它可能会发生任何一种情况>>我们有一个好朋友肯·瑞（Ken Ry），他是马拉松界非常有名的耐力运动员，他在他的身上做这个心理游戏当他在戈壁沙漠跑步时，他在 50 岁左右赢得了比赛，而且他会在一场真正的比赛中跑到他的竞争对手旁边，他会拿出耳机，他会说我不知道这是什么，我永远不会疲倦，然后他赢了>>这些都是他直到那时才无法赶上的人>>并且他统治了他们，所以他们俩身上都发生了一种心理上的事情，我认为他为自己所做的和为他们所做的一样多。许多竞技运动员都谈到，当他们看到一个伟大的竞争对手开始失败时，这如何给他们一种感觉，他们就像一个补充包。 Y >> 这不是最好的例子，因为我本身并不热衷于通过竞争来激励，但它说明了我们自己的感知努力，无论我们是否克服了挑战。如果我们看到其他人陷入这样的心理陷阱，大概

it allows us to access the inverse of that psychological trap. It's like we get a boost. >> Yeah. And I think what you've said is within the individual, you can change your subject evaluation of the same effort you're running on the Gobi Desert, right? It's the same effort you've been putting in for miles and miles. And suddenly you have subjectively valued this thing as less effort >> and you're going to now, you know, get the booster. >> Wild, right? >> Well, >> it shouldn't work in terms of the the the laws of physics and chemistry and biology. The hill is the hill. >> Yeah. >> And of course, it speaks to the brain's critical role. It suggests that there's a cost all along that you weren't acknowledging, right? like you're removing some additional effort as opposed to like getting more >> energy from you know from the sky. >> Yeah. You're not going to get that. So it is also the way you framed it for yourself right the activation energy required to do this to get that little bit more uh from this. So I think you know this simple principle actually takes us quite a long way. >> You had a book that was tremendously successful. We'll put a link to it in the show notes captions. And it was tremendously successful because it's an awesome book. Tons of learning there. Super interesting. First book of its kind in a long while to really educate people on the brain and its workings. There have been others, but yours really did spectacularly well for its content, but you also won a big award for this, right? Do you ever think about that in terms of how hitting the pinnacle of something impacts our perception of the next effort and the next potential outcome? I mean, we think of this as quote unquote reward prediction error, but this has broad implications for whether constant scrolling on social media is actually adjusting dopamine circuits in a way that makes rewards in the real world less enticing, or whether success in one domain truly leads to confidence and success and lower activation energy in another domain, or whether or not it puts a certain pressure on us because, you know, the rewards might not feel as great. I'm not trying to undercut any of your own relationship to this book, but what is the relationship between prior rewards or failures, memory and motivation? >> So, we've talked about this calculation about reward and effort. We've gone into that in some detail. Once the behavior is initiated, it's not just initiation,

它使我们能够进入心理陷阱的反面。就好像我们得到了提升。 >> 是的。我认为你所说的是在个人内部，你可以改变你对在戈壁沙漠上跑步的同样努力的主体评价，对吧？这与您多年来付出的努力是一样的。突然间，你主观上认为这件事更省力>>，你知道，你现在要得到助推器。 >> 狂野，对吗？ >> 嗯，>> 根据物理、化学和生物学定律，它不应该起作用。山就是山。 >> 是的。 >> 当然，它说明了大脑的关键作用。这表明存在着您一直没有承认的成本，对吗？就像你正在消除一些额外的努力，而不是像从天空中获得更多>>能量一样。 >> 是的。你不会明白的。所以这也是你为自己构建它所需的激活能量的方式，以便从中获得更多的呃。所以我想你知道这个简单的原则实际上让我们走了很长的路。 >> 你的书非常成功。我们将在节目注释标题中放置指向它的链接。它取得了巨大的成功，因为它是一本很棒的书。那里有大量的学习内容。超级有趣。这是很长一段时间以来第一本真正教育人们了解大脑及其运作原理的书。还有其他的，但是你的内容确实做得非常好，而且你也因此获得了大奖，对吧？你有没有想过，达到某件事的顶峰会如何影响我们对下一步努力和下一个潜在结果的看法？我的意思是，我们认为这是引用未引用的奖励预测错误，但这对于社交媒体上的持续滚动是否实际上是在调整多巴胺回路，从而使现实世界中的奖励不那么有吸引力，或者一个领域的成功是否真正导致另一个领域的信心和成功以及较低的激活能量，或者它是否给我们带来一定的压力，因为，你知道，奖励可能感觉不那么好，有广泛的影响。我并不是想削弱你与这本书的关系，但是之前的奖励或失败、记忆和动机之间有什么关系？ >> 所以，我们已经讨论了关于奖励和努力的计算。我们已经对此进行了一些详细讨论。一旦行为开始，它就不仅仅是开始，

时间轴｜00:40:00

it's also persevering to make sure we get to the end. And then at the end, if we get to the outcome of what we wanted to achieve, we can have a hedonic pleasureful experience. That's what we wanted. Or we could have an aversive response. You know, we put all this effort in and actually it turned out it was an apt terrible decision. And we've all made those, right? >> Oh, yeah. [laughter] >> Not me. I understand. Oh, of course. Yeah. >> And the outcome, you know, whether it's a great pleasureful hedonic response or whether it turned out to be absolutely awful and very aversive obviously is graded. But that graded outcome is important for learning. What neuroscientists call reinforcement learning. And that learning comes back to affect the way we make that decision I was talking about. Which of the 20 things I could do today do I prioritize? Because if it turned out that I prioritized one which turned out to be absolutely awful, next time it's coming up in my menu of things I could do, I am going to devalue that. So my subjective evaluation of that particular choice would be much lower. The learning mechanism is really important for choices in the future. You were talking about how previous experiences affect your motivation to do things. Well, my motivation to do that terrible thing is really going to be low next time it comes up. So, I might pick something completely new, perhaps something which gives me something novel and salient that I haven't experienced before. It might turn out to be a bad thing, but I don't know. I'm going to give it a go. So, I think learning is a really important mechanism in motivation. And of course, guess what? The evidence suggests that dopamine is not only important in in terms of this decision- making about whether this is worth the effort or not. It's also very important in the human brain and in animal brains for learning from previous actions. I'd like to take a quick break and acknowledge our sponsor AG1. I'm excited to share that AG1 has just launched their newest formulation AG1 Pro. AG1 Pro takes the clinically backed AG1 formula, which is a blend of vitamins, minerals, probiotics, and adaptogens, and adds three important new ingredients: creatine monohydrate, calcium HMBB, and zinc carnosine. Each serving has 5 grams of creatine monohydrate to support muscle strength and performance, as well as brain health. Calcium HMBB to support muscle recovery and reduce muscle breakdown, and zinc carnosine to support and improve the lining of your gut. All three of these ingredients have compelling science to support them, and therefore, I love seeing them added to the existing AG1 formula. As most of you know, I've been taking AG1 every day for nearly 14 years now. I started taking it long before I even knew what a podcast was. It's a great product, and it's now made even better with the new AG1 Pro formula. If you would like to try AG1 Pro, you can go to drinkag1.com/huberman to get a special offer. AG1 is giving away a free bottle of Omega-3 co-enzyme Q10 with your first subscription. Again, go to drinkag1.com/huberman to get a free bottle of omega-3 co-enzyme Q10 with your first AG1 subscription. Today's episode is also brought to us byleep. 8LE makes smart mattress covers with cooling, heating, and sleep tracking capacity. One of the best ways to ensure you get a great night's sleep is to make sure that the temperature of your sleeping environment is correct. And that's because in order to fall asleep and stay deeply asleep, your body temperature actually has to drop by about 1 to 3°. And in order to wake up feeling refreshed and energized, your body temperature actually has to increase by about 1 to 3°. Eight automatically regulates the temperature of your bed throughout the night according to

它还坚持不懈以确保我们到达终点。最后，如果我们达到了我们想要达到的结果，我们就能获得享乐的愉悦体验。这就是我们想要的。或者我们可能会产生厌恶的反应。你知道，我们付出了所有的努力，但事实证明这是一个糟糕的决定。我们都做到了，对吧？ >> 哦，是的。 [笑声] >> 不是我。我明白。哦，当然。是的。 >> 结果，你知道，无论是一个非常愉快的享乐反应，还是结果是绝对可怕和非常令人厌恶，显然都是分级的。但分级结果对于学习很重要。神经科学家称之为强化学习。这种学习又会影响我们做出我所说的决定的方式。今天我可以做的 20 件事中，我优先考虑哪一件？因为如果我优先考虑了一件绝对糟糕的事情，那么下次它出现在我可以做的事情菜单中时，我就会贬低它的价值。所以我对那个特定选择的主观评价会低得多。学习机制对于以后的选择确实很重要。您正在谈论以前的经历如何影响您做事的动力。好吧，下次再出现那件可怕的事情时，我做这件事的动力真的会很低。所以，我可能会选择一些全新的东西，也许能给我一些我以前从未经历过的新颖和突出的东西。这可能会是一件坏事，但我不知道。我要尝试一下。所以，我认为学习是一个非常重要的激励机制。当然，你猜怎么着？有证据表明，多巴胺不仅在决定是否值得付出努力方面很重要。对于人类大脑和动物大脑来说，从之前的行为中学习也非常重要。我想稍微休息一下并感谢我们的赞助商 AG1。我很高兴地告诉大家，AG1 刚刚推出了他们最新的配方 AG1 Pro。 AG1 Pro 采用经过临床支持的 AG1 配方，该配方是维生素、矿物质、益生菌和适应原的混合物，并添加了三种重要的新成分：一水肌酸、HMBB 钙和肌肽锌。每份含有 5 克一水肌酸，可支持肌肉力量和性能以及大脑健康。 HMBB 钙可支持肌肉恢复并减少肌肉分解，肌肽锌可支持和改善肠道内壁。所有这三种成分都有令人信服的科学支持，因此，我喜欢看到它们添加到现有的 AG1 配方中。正如你们大多数人所知，我每天服用 AG1 已有近 14 年了。早在我知道什么是播客之前我就开始服用它了。这是一款很棒的产品，现在新的 AG1 Pro 配方让它变得更好。如果您想尝试 AG1 Pro，可以访问 Drinkag1.com/huberman 获取特别优惠。 AG1 首次订阅即可免费赠送一瓶 Omega-3 辅酶 Q10。同样，请访问 Drinkag1.com/huberman，首次订阅 AG1 即可免费获得一瓶 omega-3 辅酶 Q10。今天的节目也是 byleep 给我们带来的。 8LE 生产具有制冷、加热和睡眠跟踪功能的智能床垫套。确保您睡个好觉的最佳方法之一是确保睡眠环境的温度正确。这是因为为了入睡并保持深度睡眠，您的体温实际上必须下降约 1 至 3°。为了醒来时感觉神清气爽、精力充沛，您的体温实际上必须升高约 1 至 3°。八根据情况自动调节整个晚上的床温

your unique needs. I've been sleeping on an eightle mattress cover for nearly 5 years now, and it has completely transformed and improved the quality of my sleep. The latest EightLe model is the Pod 5. This is what I'm now sleeping on, and I absolutely love it. It has so many incredible features. For instance, the Pod 5 has a feature called autopilot, which is an AI engine that learns your sleep patterns and then adjusts the temperature of your sleeping environment across different sleep stages. It'll even elevate your head if you're snoring, and it makes other shifts to optimize your sleep. If you'd like to try eight, go to eight.com/huberman to get up to $350 off the new Pod 5. Eightlee ships to many countries worldwide, including Mexico and the UAE. Again, that's eight.com/huberman to save up to $350. Seems to me that the most advantageous approach would be to have a lot of generalizability about the process of overcoming activation energy and just getting into action toward a goal. >> Like if you do the hard workout that morning or maybe you write a certain passage, let's take it out of exercise. exercise always. It's kind of a cliche example by now. You know, you're trying to learn violin or you're trying to learn a language and it's hard, but you do a little bit of that before going to work that it does set you up to be able to engage in effortful things throughout the day. Some things you like to do, some things you don't want to do. Okay, let's let's assume that one could achieve that. But in terms of failures, you want a ton of domain specificity because if the person says, you know what, I'm going to go after this athletic goal or cognitive goal or scholastic goal and they fail. >> If they attach the effort process and not the specific goal to their memory in some broad way, then it could be I try things and I fail. Things being like everything, right? And that's how you described David. So I'm struck by the potential for an asymmetry in the way that this reward motivation circuitry works. On the one hand, it's very generic. On the other hand, we have a lot of ability to say, well, I'm put in a ton of work, and I'm talking about myself now, to try and learn a musical instrument as a kid. Total failure. Dogs howled, parents cringed, everyone cringed. I was happy to put it away. >> But I've put effort towards other things, and it's worked out fabulously. It's good to know that it wasn't just effort. >> Yeah. >> Right. But if you don't obey punishment and failure, you're also setting yourself up for a very hard life. No one wants to be the person with low activation energy who's kind of an idiot because they're always trying things and they never work out. That's I think what keeps a lot of people in the chair, so to speak, wondering if they should put effort towards this or that. And that's why they, dare I say, watch too many videos about motivation. Right? you want to watch the right ones. But you know, you get the point. >> Yeah. So, this is generic in the sense that this pathway we've been talking about is a, if you like, a final common pathway where all of these signals converge. So, in David, it took out this final common pathway. The strokes took out the final common pathway and therefore we saw no motivation signal really was prompting him in any way of his own accord valitionally to do something. Now the other point you make about the fact that you don't want this to be something that generalizes to all kinds of decision-m otherwise you'd think you're a failure if every time you did something and it didn't work you'd say oh I generalized to everything so it doesn't seem to be like that and we can understand that if it's if this is the final common pathway there the signals for decisions about playing violin

您的独特需求。我已经睡在八层床罩上近五年了，它彻底改变并改善了我的睡眠质量。最新的 EightLe 型号是 Pod 5。这就是我现在睡觉的地方，我非常喜欢它。它有很多令人难以置信的功能。例如，Pod 5 有一个名为“自动驾驶”的功能，这是一个人工智能引擎，可以学习你的睡眠模式，然后在不同的睡眠阶段调整你的睡眠环境温度。如果您打鼾，它甚至会抬高您的头部，并进行其他转换以优化您的睡眠。如果您想尝试 8 台，请访问 even.com/huberman，新款 Pod 5 最高可享受 350 美元优惠。Eightlee 向全球许多国家发货，包括墨西哥和阿联酋。同样，访问 8.com/huberman 最多可节省 350 美元。在我看来，最有利的方法是对克服活化能并采取行动实现目标的过程具有很大的概括性。 >> 就像如果你那天早上进行了艰苦的锻炼，或者你写了一段特定的文章，让我们把它从锻炼中解放出来。经常锻炼。现在这已经是一个陈词滥调的例子了。你知道，你正在尝试学习小提琴或你正在尝试学习一门语言，这很困难，但是你在上班之前做了一点，它确实让你能够全天从事艰苦的事情。有些事你喜欢做，有些事你不想做。好吧，让我们假设一个人可以实现这一目标。但就失败而言，你需要大量的领域特异性，因为如果这个人说，你知道吗，我要追求这个运动目标或认知目标或学术目标，但他们会失败。 >> 如果他们以某种广泛的方式将努力过程而不是具体目标附加到他们的记忆中，那么我可能会尝试一些事情，但我会失败。事情就像一切一样，对吗？这就是你描述大卫的方式。因此，我对这种奖励激励电路的工作方式可能存在的不对称性感到震惊。一方面，它非常通用。另一方面，我们有很多能力说，好吧，我投入了大量的工作，我现在正在谈论我自己，尝试在小时候学习乐器。彻底失败。狗嚎叫，父母畏缩，每个人都畏缩。我很高兴把它收起来。 >> 但我已经在其他事情上付出了努力，而且效果非常好。很高兴知道这不仅仅是努力。 >> 是的。 >> 对。但如果你不服从惩罚和失败，你也会让自己过上非常艰难的生活。没有人愿意成为激活能量低的人，就像个白痴，因为他们总是在尝试一些事情，但从来没有成功。我认为这就是让很多人坐在椅子上的原因，可以这么说，想知道他们是否应该为此或那个付出努力。我敢说，这就是为什么他们观看太多有关动机的视频。正确的？你想看正确的。但你知道，你明白这一点。 >> 是的。因此，从某种意义上说，这是通用的，如果您愿意的话，我们一直在谈论的这条路径是所有这些信号汇聚的最终共同路径。所以，在大卫身上，它去掉了这条最后的共同途径。中风消除了最后的共同路径，因此我们没有看到任何动机信号真正促使他以任何方式自愿地去做某事。现在，你提出的另一点是，你不希望这成为所有类型决策的普遍化，否则，如果每次你做了某件事但不起作用，你就会说，哦，我概括了所有事情，所以它似乎不是那样的，我们可以理解，如果这是最终的共同路径，那么你就会认为自己是一个失败，关于拉小提琴的决策的信号

learning a new language whatever it is are being computed elsewhere in the brain to engage this system. This is just the final common pathway to get you that vigorous energy over the activation energy barrier to initiate the action. And then of course, you're not going to be any good at the violin or salsa dancing or tango if you don't persevere. You have to persevere. And that's the other really important part of motivation. You know, we know a lot of people who start things and then we also know the non-competers, the people who are always so energetic but actually don't finish, right? So, it's almost as important to be able to finish and complete as initiate actions. Perhaps it should be required learning to do some things that you're very passionate about, but intentionally do things that you maybe even loathe just a little bit even if provided they're not damaging to sell for others or something because there's a real value in just what I call chop wood carry water where you just >> and I have this mode sometimes where I just really don't want to do something and I say like all right chop wood carry water I'm doing it just to do it and you finish and you feel pretty good about the effort and the thing you're kind of like h all right got it done I'm just glad to have it done but to be a functional human being generally you need both and and I'm asking this on behalf of many many questions I get about motivation or how do you find your passion and I always say well you find your passion by getting good at effort in things that you're not passionate about so that when you eventually find your passion you can just get there much faster you can't just sit around waiting to be passionate >> and that's sort of what David was doing and it wasn't pulling him forward for it. Exactly. No, that's right. And uh you know, obviously there are different ways of getting your passion, but as you say, if you're just waiting for it to happen, it may not happen. The other thing that was important about what we were just speaking about is if you do for some reason generalize maladaptively to thinking this didn't work and I tried this, this didn't work, and I tried this and I'm really bad at this. That can lead not only to loss of motivation, but what we might call clinical depression. Because one of the things that happens in depression is you think you're not good at anything. Even though you know that might be an unreliable objective measure of

学习一门新语言，无论它是什么，都会在大脑的其他地方进行计算，以参与该系统。这只是让你获得旺盛的能量越过激活能量屏障以启动行动的最终常见途径。当然，如果你不坚持下去，你就不会擅长小提琴、萨尔萨舞或探戈。你必须坚持下去。这是动机的另一个非常重要的部分。你知道，我们认识很多开始做事的人，然后我们也认识一些非竞争者，那些总是充满活力但实际上没有完成的人，对吧？因此，能够完成和完成几乎与发起行动一样重要。也许应该需要学习做一些你非常热衷的事情，但故意做一些你可能甚至有点讨厌的事情，即使它们不会损害他人或其他东西，因为我所说的砍柴挑水有真正的价值，你只是>>有时我有这种模式，我只是真的不想做某事，我说好吧，砍柴挑水我只是为了做它，你完成了，你对努力和成果感觉很好你喜欢的事情，好吧，完成了，我很高兴完成它，但要成为一个正常的人，一般来说，你需要两者，我问这个代表了我得到的很多关于动机或如何找到你的激情的问题，我总是说，你可以通过在你不热衷的事情上做好努力来找到你的激情，这样当你最终找到你的激情时，你可以更快地到达那里，你不能只是坐在那里等待激情>>这就是大卫正在做的事情这并没有推动他前进。确切地。不，没错。呃，你知道，显然有不同的方式来激发你的激情，但正如你所说，如果你只是等待它发生，它可能不会发生。关于我们刚才谈论的另一件重要的事情是，如果你出于某种原因不适应地概括为认为这不起作用，我尝试了这个，这不起作用，我尝试了这个，但我真的很糟糕。这不仅会导致失去动力，还会导致我们所谓的临床抑郁症。因为抑郁症中发生的事情之一就是你认为自己不擅长任何事情。即使您知道这可能是一个不可靠的客观衡量标准

时间轴｜00:50:00

your performance. Everything you do seems bad. It hadn't been a terrible outcome. And one of the areas that we're really getting into is trying to work out the difference between depression and apathy. And it turns out it's quite complicated. But there are some people who have pure apathy, no depression like David. And there are other people who can be depressed, they can be sad, they can be hopeless about the future, but they don't necessarily lose motivation. They can have pure depression. And to make life really complicated, there are people who would fulfill the criteria for both apathy and depression. They fit in the overlap between those two syndromes. And trying to understand the biology of what separates depression from loss of motivation as we see in apathy is is one of the important areas of research at the moment. >> None of us want to be the person who just doesn't motivate to do anything. None of us want to be the person who motivates to do everything. And none of us want to be the person who invests lots and lots of time and energy in lots of things and underneath it all doesn't really want the things they're going after. This sort of the tapestry of the internet self-help motivation. And there's so much I really have to say this. I've wanted to say this for a long time and it's the appropriate time. I think there's so much BS about oh is something pulling you forward or are you pushing yourself to it? You should do things out of love. No, you should do things to serve others. both wonderful in in principle and practice, but there's this idea and I think it's a false idea that there's some specific thing working on behalf of others, knowing what the purpose of what you're doing that that is somehow going to unlock this circuitry. >> What I'm realizing today is the circuitry is the same. The learning about what engages that circuitry >> is based on our historical understanding and probably the messages that we hear in our family, etc. This is a worthwhile pursuit. It's hard. keep going. Trust me, it's going to work out in the end, even if it doesn't work out the way you think. Exactly. Those are very valuable messages to hear. But my question is this. >> For any of us, we've also seen the person who is very very excited to try everything. Every idea is something that they take action on and they seem resilient to the fact that it never really goes anywhere. It's almost like their self-concept is divorced from the outcomes. Other people have it in the opposite direction where like you said they're trying things, they're getting a reasonable amount of success certainly against the backdrop of averages, but maybe they have one big failure or a couple and then suddenly their whole self-perception is altered. >> Where does self-perception come into all of this? Like one's beliefs about themselves. >> Yeah. and their ability to do hard things both for reward and just for the sake of getting good at hard work seems like an immensely valuable feature of the human psyche and I don't think we have a name for that but like the self-concept piece yeah >> in my mind is really important >> I don't [clears throat] think we have a mechanistic explanation for the differences you've just suggested you know psychologically we could think there are many reasons for that some people don't have high ambitions they're happy to sit at the 50% level maybe 51% 52% in terms of where they sit in the population and other people are not happy with that. That's not what they were brought up in this world to do. They want to be at the top 2% if possible at the 1%. I don't think we have at the moment a good idea of the neuroscience that distinguishes between those two types of individuals >> of ambition. >> Of ambition. Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't know

你的表现。你所做的一切看起来都很糟糕。这并不是一个可怕的结果。我们真正进入的领域之一是试图找出抑郁症和冷漠之间的区别。事实证明它相当复杂。但也有一些人像大卫一样有纯粹的冷漠，没有抑郁。还有一些人可能会感到沮丧、悲伤、对未来感到绝望，但他们并不一定会失去动力。他们可能患有纯粹的抑郁症。让生活变得非常复杂的是，有些人同时满足冷漠和抑郁的标准。它们符合这两种综合症之间的重叠。试图理解抑郁症与冷漠中的动力丧失之间的生物学区别是目前重要的研究领域之一。 >> 我们谁都不想成为一个没有动力做任何事情的人。我们谁都不想成为做每件事都充满动力的人。我们谁都不想成为一个在很多事情上投入大量时间和精力的人，而在这一切的背后，并不是真正想要他们所追求的东西。这就是互联网自助动机的挂毯。我真的有很多话要说。我想说这句话很久了，现在正是时候。我觉得这里面有很多废话，到底是有什么东西在推动你前进，还是你在强迫自己去做？你应该出于爱而做事。不，你应该做一些为他人服务的事情。在原则和实践上都很棒，但是有这样的想法，我认为这是一个错误的想法，即有一些特定的东西在代表其他人工作，知道你正在做的事情的目的是什么，以某种方式解锁这个电路。 >> 我今天意识到电路是相同的。了解该电路的作用>>是基于我们的历史理解以及我们在家庭中听到的信息等。这是一个值得追求的目标。这很难。继续前进。相信我，即使事情不像你想象的那样，最终也会成功。确切地。这些都是非常有价值的信息。但我的问题是这样的。 >> 对于我们任何人来说，我们也见过非常非常兴奋地尝试一切的人。他们对每一个想法都会采取行动，而且他们似乎对这个想法永远不会真正实现这一事实有弹性。就好像他们的自我概念与结果脱节了。其他人的情况恰恰相反，就像你说的，他们正在尝试一些事情，在平均水平的背景下，他们确实取得了相当大的成功，但也许他们经历了一次或几次重大失败，然后突然他们的整个自我认知发生了改变。 >> 自我认知在这一切中从何而来？就像一个人对自己的信念一样。 >> 是的。他们为了奖励和努力工作而做困难事情的能力似乎是人类心理的一个非常有价值的特征，我不认为我们有一个名字，但就像自我概念一样，是的>>在我看来非常重要>>我不[清嗓子]认为我们对你刚才建议的差异有一个机械的解释，你从心理上我们知道，我们可以认为有很多原因导致有些人没有远大的抱负，他们乐于坐下来在 50% 的水平上，就他们在人口中的位置而言，可能是 51% 52%，而其他人对此并不满意。这不是他们在这个世界上长大的目的。他们希望成为前 2%（如果可能的话）成为 1% 的人。我认为我们目前对区分这两类个体的神经科学还没有很好的了解>>野心。 >> 野心。是的。 >> 是的。我不知道

why I'm obsessing about this at the moment. I feel like a lot of the pain of the world is about people trying to understand what they should strive for. A friend long ago, she said to me something. She goes, "Flo, don't fight." And I was like, "What do you mean?" She's like, "Everything with you was like this like intense pursuit." And I said, "But I'm in I'm in love with the things I'm doing." And she said, "Well, it's just a lot." I thought, and then I realized like, oh, yeah, she really flows through life. She's accomplished, but it's just kind of in flow. Like there isn't this push energy. And you know in Eastern medicine and philosophy they talk about like it gets interesting right at the level of neuro anatomy they talk about sort of like whether or not you're pushing yourself from the back of your body versus being pulled from the front. I mean it's mystical and vague to somebody like me trained in western science but I think they're on to something >> like whether or not you're expending extra energy kind of forcing yourself to do things. Yeah. >> In your undergraduate students your patients >> I'm assuming you see the full range. >> I do. Yeah. >> If you were to editorialize a little bit, what do you think is the the key to both satisfaction from work, satisfaction, realistic satisfaction from outcomes and and kind of uh peace like a good life? >> Well, it's interesting, isn't it? Because there and there is some research on this. you know, the Harvard U study of aging looked at these people, these men who I think were in their late teens um and followed them up uh to their 60s and 70s. And my recollection of that data is really interesting that there are some people who lived a kind of average life and they had a average family, they had average income, they had an average house. And then there were other people who really looked like they were going to soar and something happened to those people along the way. They didn't saw, they they fell. And then finally there was another group who actually did saw and were right up here. But when they looked at the happiness levels of these people, it was the average person who actually would self-report the highest levels of happiness. So ambition doesn't necessarily equate with happiness, which I think many people would agree with with that. But on the other hand, it seems to be such an important thing for humans, right? For so many humans, it's not sufficient just to be at the 50%. We really want to propel ourselves, whether we're pushed or pulled, whatever it is. We want to get there. So, it would be a great area of research, wouldn't it? To find out how ambition is encoded in the brain and how does it work, you know, because there's also the question of realistic ambition. So, if someone had told me when I was younger, don't be stupid, be realistic. You're never going to get to Oxford as an undergraduate. And you're never going to have a career where you're going to be doing clinical neurology as a clinically qualified person doing neuroscience research, editing a journal, writing a book. That's not going to happen. If I had thought in those ways, it probably wouldn't have happened. I just didn't think that we should have these boundaries to what you can do. >> Yeah. The early messaging is key. >> I think it is. Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm the son of a scientist and I was born and raised in Silicon Valley and I realize only now that it completely shaped my brain in terms of like you want to do something you go try it and there's a good chance you can succeed and I mean even friends that went the way of athletics if they didn't succeed there they started companies that succeeded and and some crashed and burned mind you in all these domains in academia too we see it right ambition

为什么我现在对此很着迷。我觉得世界上很多痛苦都是因为人们试图理解他们应该争取什么。很久以前，一个朋友对我说了一些话。她说：“弗洛，别打架。”我当时想，“你是什么意思？”她说：“和你在一起的一切就像是强烈的追求。”我说：“但我热爱我正在做的事情。”她说：“好吧，只是很多。”我想，然后我意识到，哦，是的，她真的在生活中流动。她已经取得了成就，但还只是顺其自然。就像没有这种推动能量一样。你知道，在东方医学和哲学中，他们谈论的神经解剖学层面上的事情很有趣，他们谈论的有点像你是从身体的后部推自己还是从前部拉自己。我的意思是，对于像我这样受过西方科学训练的人来说，这是神秘而模糊的，但我认为他们正在了解一些事情>>比如你是否花费额外的精力强迫自己做事。是的。 >> 在你的本科生中，你的病人中 >> 我假设你看到了全部范围。 >> 我愿意。是的。 >> 如果你要发表一点社论，你认为工作满意度、结果满意度、结果的现实满意度以及美好生活等呃平静的关键是什么？ >> 嗯，这很有趣，不是吗？因为现在有一些这方面的研究。你知道，哈佛大学的衰老研究观察了这些人，这些人我认为是十几岁的人，然后跟踪他们直到 60 多岁和 70 多岁。我对这些数据的回忆真的很有趣，有些人过着普通的生活，他们有一个普通的家庭，他们有平均的收入，他们有一个普通的房子。还有一些人看起来真的要飞升了，但一路上这些人发生了一些事情。他们没有看到，他们就跌倒了。最后还有另一组人确实看到了并且就在这里。但当他们观察这些人的幸福水平时，发现实际上自我报告幸福水平最高的是普通人。所以野心并不一定等于幸福，我想很多人都会同意这一点。但从另一方面来说，这对于人类来说似乎又是一件多么重要的事情吧？对于很多人来说，仅仅处于 50% 是不够的。我们真的想推动自己前进，无论我们是被推还是被拉，无论是什么。我们想要到达那里。那么，这将是一个很好的研究领域，不是吗？要了解野心是如何在大脑中编码的以及它是如何运作的，你知道，因为还有现实野心的问题。所以，如果有人在我年轻的时候告诉我，请不要犯傻，要现实一点。作为一名本科生，你永远不可能进入牛津大学。而且你永远不会有这样的职业：你将作为一个临床合格的人从事神经科学研究、编辑期刊、写书，从事临床神经病学。那不会发生。如果我当时这么想的话，这件事可能就不会发生了。我只是认为我们不应该对你能做的事情有这些界限。 >> 是的。早期的消息传递是关键。 >> 我认为是的。是的。 >> 是的。我是一名科学家的儿子，我在硅谷出生和长大，直到现在我才意识到，它完全塑造了我的大脑，就像你想做某件事，你去尝试一下，你很有可能成功，我的意思是，即使是那些走上体育道路的朋友，如果他们在那里没有成功，他们也会创办成功的公司，有些人会在学术界的所有这些领域崩溃和烧伤，我们也看到了正确的野心。

doesn't protect against disease or poor judgment in a lot of times either But it is fascinating and and maybe our species needs a distribution of kind of motivational circuitries in the way you describe certainly developing new technologies that transform medicine. Yeah, >> someone needs to do that. They can't be happy with just the scalpel and the current surgical mask and the current questionnaire that you ask patients in psychiatry. I mean, we need tool builders and that takes a vision of something that doesn't exist or kind of sense that there's something else. >> Absolutely. And so, you know, God bless the the people that do that, but also >> it's nice to have members of society that are just happy living their lives because otherwise, what else is all that technology [laughter] for, right? >> Yeah. No, I'm not making any judgments here. I'm just saying it's a really intriguing thing if you could get any kind of handle on what what makes this happen, this range of ambition. I didn't think we were going to discuss psychedelics and we don't have to if if if you don't want to. But these days there's growing interest in what are essentially and let's talk about classic psychedelics. Let's forget MDMA is not a psychedelic folks. It's an impathogen. Ketamine is not a psychedelic. It's a dissociative anesthetic. So people lump these things together and we'll move ibain and LSD and the those are different in the realm of psychedelics. Psilocybin is one that's increasingly being used in clinical trials and >> it's not a cure all but many people who do who are in these clinical trials come through talking about a kind of a more connected sense of self to the world and you know it seems to um take the edge off of the hyper ambitious miserable person. >> That's my observation anyway. And it also seems to take some people with major depression to a place of like oh I actually could change. I could get a different outcome which is [clears throat] simply plasticity. >> Yeah. >> So what is your thought about our ability to radically change our self-perception right >> in terms of our ability to do things in the world accomplish things in the world because that's really what getting over depression is about. It's about imagining a different outcome for oneself. >> Yeah. It's a very important question and I'm not an expert on psychedelics but I think there is some emerging research on the effect of psychedelics on what is called anhidonia lack

很多时候也不能预防疾病或判断失误，但这很有趣，也许我们的物种需要一种激励回路的分布，就像你所描述的那样，肯定会开发改变医学的新技术。是的，>>需要有人这样做。他们不能仅仅满足于手术刀和当前的手术口罩以及当前向精神病学患者询问的问卷。我的意思是，我们需要工具构建者，他们需要看到不存在的东西，或者感觉到还有其他东西。 >> 绝对。所以，你知道，上帝保佑那些这样做的人，但也>>让社会成员快乐地过着自己的生活真是太好了，否则，所有这些技术[笑声]还有什么用，对吧？ >> 是的。不，我不会在这里做出任何判断。我只是说，如果你能以某种方式了解是什么导致了这种情况的发生，那么这真是一件有趣的事情。我不认为我们会讨论迷幻药，如果你不想的话，我们也没有必要讨论。但现在人们对迷幻药的本质越来越感兴趣，让我们来谈谈经典的迷幻药。让我们忘记 MDMA 并不是迷幻药。这是一种非致病菌。氯胺酮不是迷幻药。这是一种解离麻醉剂。因此，人们将这些东西混为一谈，我们将转移伊班和 LSD，而这些在致幻剂领域是不同的。赛洛西宾是一种越来越多地被用于临床试验的药物，>>它并不是一种包治百病的药物，但许多参与这些临床试验的人都通过谈论一种与世界更紧密的自我意识而你知道，它似乎让那些野心勃勃、悲惨的人失去了优势。 >> 无论如何，这就是我的观察。这似乎也让一些患有重度抑郁症的人感到“哦，我实际上可以改变”。我可以得到一个不同的结果，即[清嗓子]只是可塑性。 >> 是的。 >>那么，您对我们从根本上改变自我认知的能力有何看法？>>就我们在世界上做事、完成世界上的事情的能力而言，因为这才是克服抑郁症的真正意义所在。这是为自己想象不同的结果。 >> 是的。这是一个非常重要的问题，我不是迷幻药方面的专家，但我认为有一些关于迷幻药对所谓的无尼多尼亚缺乏的影响的新兴研究

时间轴｜01:00:00

of pleasure that you could get from something. So you know we talked about changing effort but it could be that one variable that happens in people with low mood is that they devalue the reward. Everything seems bland. It doesn't seem pleasureful anymore. So psychedelics seem to have an effect on the self. That principle is really interesting because the kind of patients that I study, the kind of patients that I describe in the book are people in whom there was a change in the self. There was a change in the way they portrayed themselves to the world, their social identity, but also in their personal identity. And this is a really big area. I mean, what what makes the self? But the key thing here is that the self can change. The self is not set in stone. We talked about psychedelics, but even even simple things like if you have too much thyroxine, thyroid hormone floating around in your body and you're in hypothyroid state, people might be surprised to hear that that can cause not only irritability but cognitive impacts on your processing. It can also be the same. You know, sometimes if you have lack thyroxine, if you're hypo thyroid, your cognitive functions may go so low that sometimes people wonder if you're developing dementia. It can be that bad. Now, most people wouldn't think thyroxine, why would that affect the self? It's a hormone that affects metabolism, for example. But of course, thyroxine also affects neurons. And I'm just using this as an example to show that something that seems as simple as having too much or too less of a particular hormone that we all need can alter the self. The way that the self is in people with brain disorders from stroke, from Alzheimer's disease, from Parkinson's disease, from traumatic brain injury, the self can change remarkably. And what I try to illustrate in the book is that you can have one domain of cognitive function affected. It could be memory. It could be perception. It could be attention. It could be your understanding of concepts. It could you be your representation of your body or the way you control your behavior. Someone may become very impulsive. Each of those domains in and of themselves contribute to our perception of the self. I mean Marvin Minsky, one of the pioneers of AI, called this the society of mind. You know the self emerges from the interplay and the activity of this society of mind. If we take one of the modules out of that society, memory, attention, language, whatever it is, the self is changed. It's not that you've deleted the self. The self has changed and it's observable. You know, someone's personal identity can change, their social identity can change. So, I think the key point here is the self is not immutable. It's something that can change. People might think my personality is this way. It can never change. Well, your personality is the product of your society of mind. The cognitive processes that are going on all the time, of which we are consciously aware of only a fraction under the hood. 95% of the stuff is going on without us consciously being aware of these processes. >> It seems and I'm not trying to play psychologist here that fulfilling roles in our [clears throat] daily lives is an important part of our self-concept. You know, I'm a student, I'm a teacher, I'm a husband, I'm a wife, I'm a whatever it happens to be feeds back heavily on our notions of self. Yeah. >> Are we fulfilling this role well or less well? But there's another piece and I know this exists more in Eastern philosophy and I am not versed in that where we wake up each day and we know who we are. We don't forget who we are. >> We're carrying our prior life experience to that day. And I love the idea that we can change ourselves at the level of like optimism or anything. To

你能从某事中得到的快乐。所以你知道我们谈到了改变努力，但情绪低落的人可能会出现一个变量，那就是他们贬低了奖励。一切都显得平淡无奇。看起来不再那么愉快了。所以迷幻药似乎对自我有影响。这个原则真的很有趣，因为我研究的那种患者，我在书中描述的那种患者是自我发生变化的人。他们向世界描绘自己的方式、他们的社会身份以及他们的个人身份都发生了变化。这是一个非常大的区域。我的意思是，什么构成了自我？但这里的关键是自我是可以改变的。自我并不是一成不变的。我们谈论了致幻剂，但即使是简单的事情，比如如果你体内漂浮着过多的甲状腺素、甲状腺激素，并且你处于甲状腺功能减退状态，人们可能会惊讶地发现，这不仅会导致烦躁，还会对你的处理过程产生认知影响。也可以是一样的。你知道，有时如果你缺乏甲状腺素，如果你甲状腺功能减退，你的认知功能可能会很低，有时人们会怀疑你是否患有痴呆症。事情可能有那么糟糕。现在，大多数人不会想到甲状腺素为什么会影响自我？例如，它是一种影响新陈代谢的激素。当然，甲状腺素也会影响神经元。我只是用这个例子来说明，看似简单的事情，比如我们都需要的某种特定激素过多或过少，就可以改变自我。患有中风、阿尔茨海默病、帕金森病、脑外伤等脑部疾病的人的自我方式会发生显着变化。我在书中试图说明的是，你的认知功能的一个领域可能会受到影响。这可能是记忆。这可能是感知。这可能是关注。这可能是你对概念的理解。它可以是你身体的代表，也可以是你控制行为的方式。有些人可能会变得非常冲动。每个领域本身都有助于我们对自我的认知。我的意思是，人工智能先驱之一马文·明斯基（Marvin Minsky）将其称为“心灵社会”。你知道自我是从这个心灵社会的相互作用和活动中产生的。如果我们从那个社会中取出其中一个模块，记忆、注意力、语言，无论是什么，自我就会改变。并不是你删除了自我。自我已经改变，并且是可以观察到的。你知道，一个人的个人身份可以改变，他们的社会身份可以改变。所以，我认为这里的关键点是自我并不是一成不变的。这是可以改变的。人们可能会认为我的性格就是这样。它永远不会改变。好吧，你的个性是你的思想社会的产物。这些认知过程一直在进行，但我们有意识地只意识到其中的一小部分。 95% 的事情是在我们没有意识到这些过程的情况下发生的。 >> 看来，我并不是想在这里扮演心理学家，在我们的[清喉咙]日常生活中履行角色是我们自我概念的重要组成部分。你知道，我是一个学生，我是一个老师，我是一个丈夫，我是一个妻子，我是一个很大程度上依赖于我们的自我概念的人。是的。 >> 我们是否很好地履行了这一职责？但还有另一件事，我知道这更多地存在于东方哲学中，但我不熟悉我们每天醒来就知道自己是谁的问题。我们不会忘记我们是谁。 >> 我们将之前的生活经历带到了那一天。我喜欢这样的想法：我们可以在乐观或其他方面改变自己。到

me, that's like the apex of neuroplasticity. >> But of course, we want to hold on to something consistent. We don't want to wake up and not know where we are or who we are. That's super scary, too. >> So, is it the case that when we take on a new role that we are fundamentally changing? And it also seems that unless we're very young, most people don't add new roles over time. I mean, they might become a parent or a grandparent, have some friends, but you sort of have a limited number of roles in life. And so, it seems like doing new things could actually change the self. And that [snorts] seems exciting. And I think it's not a depressing thought to me that many [clears throat] people probably would like to change themselves somewhat or a lot. They want to feel like a different person, >> but not so different that they lose touch with the prior person so they can look at the the Is that is that catching? >> Yeah, I understand where you're coming from. So on the one hand, of course, our ideas of who we are, ourselves rely on our embodied self. We occupy a body. >> Mhm. >> My body, the one I occupy, is different from yours. And so we have different physical identities in that respect. But we also have different perspectives, experiences, and those experiences give us our firsterson experiences. You know, if I put my hand in the fire, I'm the one who's going to feel the pain. If I pick up this cup, I have agency of what I do. Those are my first person experiences. and the physical identity in terms of both the body that I occupy and the first person experiences that I have stretch back over time and therefore I have more confidence that this is me. >> Mhm. >> I've occupied this body. It's grown up. It's also aging and I've had these experiences that make me me. I've made these choices. I made these decisions. I had these memories. That's what contributes to my personal identity. And the other bit you mentioned was really relates to social identity, my roles. When someone asks you, who are you? Tell me a little bit about yourself. It's inevitable that we'd say, well, I I grew up in San Francisco in the Bay Bay Area. I did this. I went to as an undergraduate to here. I had these experiences. If you're religious, you might say this is my faith. If you follow a particular sporting team, you might say, "I'm a big fan of this particular team." If you were influenced by some very important people in your field, you might say, I am part of that school of thinking in this way that defines your social identity and that's a really important part of who you are. So there's the personal identity, the body, the first person experiences and there's a social identity. And again, social identity over time is is very very important to change from these things which we have grown up with these identities is possible. As we've said, it's possible through something hormonal like changes in thyroxine. It's possible through brain disorders. But these principles suggest that it's possible through what we do. >> And interestingly, I think there is an evidence base for this. So, as we grow older, for example, as you're coming to retirement, your network of friends, your social connections often shrinks. People may have moved away. You're going to no longer have the colleagues that you interacted with because you're going to retire. Your family is now old. your children have moved away, the network is shrinking. But it turns out that the data show across many studies that people who keep relationships increase or maintain the number of social relationships they have, they have a far less risk of developing dementia than those who don't. If we correct for all other confounding factors, people who have a sense of curiosity, who are open-minded, want to engage in

对我来说，这就像神经可塑性的顶峰。 >> 但当然，我们希望坚持一些一致的东西。我们不想醒来时不知道自己在哪里，也不知道自己是谁。这也太可怕了吧>> 那么，当我们承担新的角色时，我们是否正在发生根本性的改变呢？而且，除非我们非常年轻，否则大多数人似乎都不会随着时间的推移添加新的角色。我的意思是，他们可能会成为父母或祖父母，有一些朋友，但你在生活中扮演的角色数量有限。因此，似乎做新事物实际上可以改变自我。这[哼哼]看起来很令人兴奋。我认为，对我来说，许多[清嗓子]人可能想稍微或很大地改变自己，这并不是一个令人沮丧的想法。他们想要感觉自己像一个不同的人，>>但又不能太不同，以至于他们与之前的人失去联系，这样他们就可以看到“这就是吸引人的地方吗？” >> 是的，我明白你来自哪里。因此，一方面，我们对自己是谁、我们自己的看法当然依赖于我们的具体自我。我们占据一个身体。 >> 嗯。 >> 我的身体，我所占据的身体，与你的不同。因此，我们在这方面有不同的身体特征。但我们也有不同的观点、经历，这些经历给了我们第一人称的经历。你知道，如果我把手放进火里，我就会感受到痛苦。如果我拿起这个杯子，我就可以代理我所做的事情。这些是我的第一人称经历。以及我所占据的身体和我随着时间的推移所经历的第一人称体验的物理身份，因此我更有信心这就是我。 >> 嗯。 >> 我已经占据了这个身体。它长大了。它也在变老，我经历过的这些经历让我成为了我。我已经做出了这些选择。我做出了这些决定。我有这些回忆。这就是我个人身份的贡献。你提到的另一点确实与社会身份、我的角色有关。当有人问你，你是谁？告诉我一些关于你自己的事。我们不可避免地会说，好吧，我在旧金山湾区长大。我这样做了。我作为一名本科生来到这里。我有过这些经历。如果你有宗教信仰，你可能会说这是我的信仰。如果您关注一支特定的运动队，您可能会说：“我是这支特定球队的忠实粉丝。”如果你受到你所在领域中一些非常重要的人的影响，你可能会说，我是那个思想流派的一部分，它定义了你的社会身份，这是你是谁的一个非常重要的部分。所以有个人身份、身体、第一人称体验和社会身份。再说一次，随着时间的推移，社会身份是非常非常重要的，改变我们伴随着这些身份长大的这些事情是可能的。正如我们所说，这可能是通过激素的变化（例如甲状腺素的变化）实现的。这是可能通过大脑疾病实现的。但这些原则表明，通过我们的努力，这是可能的。 >> 有趣的是，我认为这是有证据基础的。因此，随着我们年龄的增长，例如，当你即将退休时，你的朋友网络、你的社交关系往往会缩小。人们可能已经搬走了。因为你即将退休，你将不再拥有与你互动的同事。你的家人现在都老了。你的孩子已经搬走了，网络正在缩小。但事实证明，许多研究的数据表明，保持人际关系的人增加或维持了他们所拥有的社会关系的数量，他们患痴呆症的风险远低于那些不保持人际关系的人。如果我们纠正所有其他混杂因素，那些有好奇心、思想开放的人会想要参与其中

something new, perhaps a new hobby, a new pursuit, whatever it is, they also have a far lower risk of developing dementia. And you mentioned this term sense of purpose. So, you know, that's used or misused in various ways in different places. But if we take sense of purpose as thinking you know I get up in the morning with a sense of I need to do this I have a purpose in life those people who say that are also more resilient to cognitive decline over time >> which is a remarkable thing. >> It's incredible. Yeah. >> And it makes me wonder if the key to evolving the self is about verbs not labels. >> Mhm. which sounds like a very California newagy like let's be about verbs not labels but I mean it because if you're a scientist like people will say like I'm a scientist okay so you get a degree in science awesome as an undergraduate somebody does that means they learned a lot of science but if you're a doctor a physician you're a physician and a scientist and many other things too it's really about the things that you did and do in those roles that really shape your brain just having a PhD D I can promise you doesn't do anything for you and no one really cares after a short while. But the things you learn, the failures, the the your strivings, your successes, like those really shape your self-concept. Goes back to what we were talking about before about they shape our thinking about what we could do or potentially not do if we were to strive, which raises a very specific question. What does David now think about apathetic David? And what does David now think about David before he became apathetic? His memory of self is as interesting to me as the transformation. Although the transformation is clinically like remarkable and awesome and I just want to tip my hat to it again. I mean you saved a life basically. It's so cool and physicians do this. This is my admiration for physicians. But what does he think? Is he like, "Oh yeah, I was in a state, you know, I need more dopamine. I take this drug. I have more dopamine and now I'm good." And how has that evolved over time? No, I think after he improved, he certainly looked back on the situation he was in and could not believe that he couldn't create that effort that >> disbelief. >> Yeah. >> Like a disconnect like how could that >> how could I not have done that because all he had to do is put the cables together to, you know, listen to music, right? It's such a simple thing. He didn't

新的东西，也许是新的爱好，新的追求，无论是什么，他们患痴呆症的风险也低得多。你提到了“使命感”这个词。所以，你知道，它在不同的地方以不同的方式被使用或滥用。但如果我们把目的感视为认为你知道我早上起床时有一种感觉，我需要这样做，我的人生有一个目标，那些说随着时间的推移认知能力下降也更有弹性的人>>这是一件了不起的事情。 >> 太不可思议了。是的。 >> 这让我想知道自我进化的关键是否在于动词而不是标签。 >> 嗯。这听起来像是加州的新风潮，就像我们关注动词而不是标签，但我是认真的，因为如果你是一名科学家，人们会说我是一名科学家，好吧，所以你作为本科生获得了很棒的科学学位，有人这样做，这意味着他们学到了很多科学知识，但如果你是一名医生，你是一名医生和一名科学家，还有很多其他事情，这实际上是关于你在那些真正塑造你的大脑的角色中所做的事情和所做的事情，只是拥有博士学位，我可以保证你不会为你做任何事，但不久之后就没有人真正关心你了。但你学到的东西、失败、你的努力、你的成功，这些确实塑造了你的自我概念。回到我们之前讨论的话题，它们塑造了我们的想法，即如果我们要努力的话，我们可以做什么或不可以做什么，这提出了一个非常具体的问题。大卫现在对冷漠的大卫有何看法？在大卫变得冷漠之前，大卫现在对他有何看法？我对他的自我记忆和转变一样感兴趣。尽管这种转变在临床上是显着且令人敬畏的，但我只想再次向它致敬。我的意思是你基本上拯救了一条生命。这太酷了，医生都这样做。这是我对医生的敬佩。但他怎么想？他是不是会说，“哦，是的，我当时处于一种状态，你知道，我需要更多的多巴胺。我服用这种药物。我有更多的多巴胺，现在我很好。”随着时间的推移，这种情况是如何演变的？不，我认为在他进步之后，他肯定会回顾自己所处的情况，并且无法相信他无法做出>>令人难以置信的努力。 >> 是的。 >> 就像断线一样 >> 我怎么可能不这样做，因为他所要做的就是将电缆放在一起，你知道，听音乐，对吧？就是这么简单的事情。他没有

时间轴｜01:10:00

have to do a huge amount. But this is like somebody who has a skill telling somebody else like, "Hey, you just like dunked the basketball and you're like, [laughter] "Yeah, but >> but if it's you telling yourself, how can how can I how could I be like that?" >> Because obviously he has memories of what he used to be like before those strokes hit him that he was this highly productive, very socially engaged person. So, I guess you can see it afterwards, but at the time you you can't necessarily have you don't necessarily have the inside. It's interesting this week I was reading that um Carly Simon uh was speaking about the fact she's developed Parkinson's disease, but she mentioned that one of the biggest problems is her apathy. She can't believe that she's become apathetic. Now, she obviously has insight into the problem that she's developed apathy, but nevertheless can't necessarily change that because, you know, there's if circuits that affect motivation are not firing as they should be. No matter what you think, you're not necessarily going to be able to change things. >> Yeah. That's like if anyone has ever had transranial magnetic stimulation, it it's like they can inhibit your ability to move a finger and it's like you can >> will that finger to move with everything you've got >> and it doesn't move and then they take the coil off your head and it just you can tap your finger. It's it's a remarkable thing to feel that it's painful in in a psychological way. Very painful. We've all heard of mania. I'm not an expert in mania, but seems that when people are manic, they have tons of energy, tons of motivation. Yeah. To do everything, everything is a good idea. >> And it's mostly about them, you know. Same if you see people on methamphetamines, it's not a very empathic state. It's not about like what can I do for society with all this extra energy. It's a very me state. You see this cocaine, empetamines, manic states. It's every idea is a great one and there's billions of ideas. So much so that people are doing trivial things thinking it's interesting or even damaging themselves or others. Are all of those hyperdopamineergic states? >> Is it just this motivational circuitry just gasp pedal to the floor? >> And what does it tell us about motivational states? Because I do think the extremes are are interesting. So, I don't know much about mania, but it turns out um when I was having to prov present a lecture on motivational disorders, I thought I would dip in to the neuroscience of addiction. I'm not an addiction expert. And to my surprise, almost every drug of addiction, whether we go from nicotine to alcohol to heroin to cocaine to amphetamine, almost every drug of addiction hijacks that dopamine system. when we were talking about this circuitry that goes from the basil ganglia to the frontal loes and I don't think that's a coincidence that we find when that circuitry is not working as in David that you can get profound loss of motivation apathy when that circuitry is on overdrive because it's been hijacked by these drugs you get states of hyper motivation so of course this is going to be overly simplistic to think dopamine levels are the only factor that affect our motivation. But it certainly turns out to be a very important factor in the sort of graduating the level of motivation we have to seek particular outcomes. And of course in the drug addiction literature that's really become what do you find incentively salient to act in order to try and get that outcome. But it's the same circuitry. And isn't that an amazing thing that neuroscience has stumbled on? People who study apathy like me would not necessarily study the addiction literature. But when you do, you find that there's absolute convergence between this circuitry on

必须做大量的事情。但这就像一个有技巧的人告诉别人，“嘿，你喜欢扣篮，然后你会说，[笑声]“是的，但是>>但是如果是你告诉自己，我怎么可能会变成那样？”>>因为显然他记得在那些击球击中他之前他曾经是什么样子，他是一个非常有生产力，非常热衷于社会的人。所以，我想你可以在事后看到它，但当你你你的时候有趣的是，本周我读到卡莉·西蒙（Carly Simon）谈到她患有帕金森病，但她提到最大的问题之一是她的冷漠。她不敢相信自己已经变得冷漠了。现在，她显然已经了解了自己冷漠的问题，但仍然无法改变这一点，因为，你知道，影响动机的回路没有启动。不管你怎么想，你都不一定能够改变事情。 >> 是的，就像他们可以抑制你移动手指的能力一样，就像你可以让那根手指随着你所拥有的一切移动，然后他们把线圈从你的头上取下来，这是一件了不起的事情，感觉它很痛苦。非常痛苦。我不是躁狂症专家，但似乎当人们躁狂时，他们有大量的精力，做任何事情都是一个好主意，你知道，这不是一种非常同情的状态。你看，每一个想法都是伟大的，而且有数十亿的想法，以至于人们都在做一些琐碎的事情，认为它是有趣的，甚至是伤害自己或他人的。 >> 这只是激励电路吗？ >> 它告诉我们关于激励状态的什么？关于躁狂症，但事实证明，当我必须证明有关动机障碍的讲座时，我想我应该深入研究成瘾的神经科学，而令我惊讶的是，几乎所有成瘾药物，无论是尼古丁、酒精、海洛因、可卡因还是安非他命，当我们谈论从罗勒神经节到额叶的回路时，几乎所有成瘾药物都会劫持多巴胺系统。我不认为这是巧合，我们发现，当该电路像大卫那样工作时，当该电路处于超速状态时，您会严重丧失动机冷漠，因为它已被这些药物劫持，您会处于过度动机状态，因此，认为多巴胺水平是影响我们动机的唯一因素的想法过于简单化，但事实证明，它确实是我们必须寻求特定结果的动机水平的一个非常重要的因素。当然，在药物成瘾文献中，你发现为了获得这种结果而采取行动确实很重要，但这不是神经科学偶然发现的一件令人惊奇的事情吗？像我这样研究冷漠的人不一定会研究成瘾文献。

the one hand being hypoactive and leading to apathy, on the other hand being hyperactive and leading to addictive states. There's a lot that's been said about, you know, are we constantly getting dopamine hits with online behavior? And there's, you know, platforms are incentivized to keep us scrolling. This is certainly true. >> It seems almost compulsive >> more than it feels rewarding. I mean, it's a interesting thing to observe oneself engaging in a behavior where the reward is gone. The subjective sense of the reward is gone, but we proceverate. >> There are two things here. One is yes, I agree with you that this sort of behavior, doom scrolling, etc. occurs, but I think the evidence that there are dopamine hits when you're doing this isn't really very strong. >> I agree and I'm grateful that you said that because people say, "I'm doing this for dopamine. I'm doing this for dopamine." >> Certain platforms and certain content does take us into drama and high arousal. >> I don't know if there's dopamine associated with it. We could explore that perhaps. It's an area I'm very interested in. But a lot of it is sort of, >> if I may, mindless numbing out type behavior. It doesn't feel good. It doesn't feel bad. >> People do often report that when they put the thing away, they're like, "Oh my god, I wasted some more time." But they're not really so down in the trough that they don't do it again. >> So, there must be something somewhere in between. I agree. I don't think of it as like dopamine hits. It's something else. >> It can be something else. But the second point that you're making here is you may not actually like it what you're doing. You may even be aware that you don't like it. And of course in drug addiction that's also sometimes a paradox that addicts seek this thing they want but they don't necessarily like it. They don't necessarily get pleasure from it if they consume it. And of course there is this dissociation in the neuroscience literature between wanting the motivation to go and try and find that rewarding outcome versus liking the hedonic pleasure from getting it. And the evidence suggests that wanting pursuit of a goal is mediated or modulated at least by dopamine whereas actually the liking the pleasure you might get from an outcome is not that seems to be related to uh opioid neurotransmitters in the brain. I think there's quite a lot of nice work by Kent Buridge and his colleagues on this in rodent models but the principles still apply. There can be a dissociation between wanting to do something and actually liking it. >> You're the first person to say that, you know, online scrolling probably doesn't lead to a ton of dopamine release. It seems the experiment should be done. It's not hard to get people to scroll while in a scanner, look at nucleus, and adjust the content. So there was an old experiment and it was done with a PET scanner many years ago in the Hammersmith Hospital in in London when the original scanning experiments were being done. And they used uh a dopamine receptor liant, something that will light up when this dopamine receptor drug attaches to dopamine receptors. And in an indirect way, you can work out how much binding of dopamine receptors is occurring endogenously with this with this technique. And they found that when someone was playing a video game, there was evidence that there was certainly more dopamine release in the vententral stratum in the basil ganglia. But the pausing out, the sort of deconstructing whether that dopamine release is due to the motivation you're getting when you're playing that game versus the liking that you're getting, the pleasure you're getting is not so straightforward, especially with pet, you know, which doesn't have the sort of temporal resolution of

一方面是活动不足并导致冷漠，另一方面是活动过度并导致成瘾状态。人们已经谈论了很多，你知道，我们是否不断地通过在线行为获得多巴胺的刺激？而且，你知道，平台会激励我们继续滚动。这当然是真的。 >> 这看起来几乎是一种强迫性的>>，而不是感觉上的回报。我的意思是，观察自己从事一种奖励消失的行为是一件很有趣的事情。奖励的主观感觉消失了，但我们继续努力。 >> 这里有两件事。一是是的，我同意你的观点，这种行为、厄运滚动等都会发生，但我认为当你这样做时会产生多巴胺的证据并不是很强。 >> 我同意并且我很感激你这么说，因为人们说，“我这样做是为了多巴胺。我这样做是为了多巴胺。” >> 某些平台和某些内容确实会让我们陷入戏剧性和高度兴奋。 >> 我不知道是否与多巴胺有关。也许我们可以探讨一下。这是我非常感兴趣的领域。但其中很多都是，>>如果可以的话，无意识的麻木类型行为。感觉不太好。感觉还不错。 >> 人们确实经常报告说，当他们把东西收起来时，他们会说，“天哪，我又浪费了一些时间。”但他们并没有真正陷入低谷，以至于不再这样做。 >> 所以，一定有介于两者之间的东西。我同意。我不认为这就像多巴胺的刺激。这是另一回事。 >> 也可以是别的东西。但你在这里提出的第二点是，你可能实际上并不喜欢你正在做的事情。您甚至可能意识到自己不喜欢它。当然，在毒瘾中，有时也会出现一个悖论：成瘾者寻求他们想要的东西，但他们不一定喜欢它。如果他们食用它，他们不一定会从中得到乐趣。当然，在神经科学文献中，想要有动力去尝试寻找有益的结果与喜欢获得结果所带来的享乐之间存在着分离。有证据表明，想要追求一个目标至少是由多巴胺介导或调节的，而实际上，你对结果可能获得的快乐似乎与大脑中的阿片类神经递质无关。我认为 Kent Burridge 和他的同事在啮齿类动物模型中做了很多出色的工作，但这些原则仍然适用。想做某事和真正喜欢它之间可能存在脱节。 >> 你是第一个这么说的人，你知道，在线滚动可能不会导致大量多巴胺释放。看来这个实验应该做一下。让人们在扫描仪中滚动、查看核心并调整内容并不难。所以有一个古老的实验，是多年前在伦敦哈默史密斯医院用 PET 扫描仪完成的，当时正在进行最初的扫描实验。他们使用了一种多巴胺受体依赖物，当这种多巴胺受体药物附着在多巴胺受体上时，这种物质就会发光。通过这种技术，您可以间接地计算出多巴胺受体的内源性结合量。他们发现，当有人玩电子游戏时，有证据表明罗勒神经节的腹侧层肯定会释放更多的多巴胺。但是暂停，解构多巴胺的释放是否是由于你在玩游戏时获得的动机与你获得的喜好、你获得的快乐并不那么简单，尤其是对于宠物，你知道，它没有那种时间分辨率

doing this. So in some ways it sounds straightforward to do the experiment but actually the subjective experience of liking and pleasure you're getting has to be temporarily dissociated >> from the motivation to act. Uh and that's not so straightforward. >> I'd like to take a quick break and acknowledge our sponsor function. Function provides over 160 advanced lab tests to give you a clear snapshot of your bodily health. This snapshot gives you insights into your heart health, your hormone health, autoimmune function, nutrient levels, and much more. They've also recently added access to advanced MRI and CT scans. Function not only provides testing of over 160 biomarkers key to your physical and mental health, it also analyzes these results and provides recommendations for improving your health from top doctors. For example, in a recent test with function, I learned that some of my blood lipids were slightly out of range. As a result, I decided to start supplementing with nattokinise, which can naturally help reduce LDL cholesterol, and it did. In a follow-up test, I could confirm that this strategy worked. My blood lipids are now back exactly where I want them. Comprehensive lab testing of the sort that function offers is just so important for health. I mean, how else are you going to know what's going on under the hood? And while I've been doing blood work for years, it used to be timeconuming, complicated, and expensive. In fact, I used to spend thousands of dollars per year trying to get this kind of data. and the data frankly were not all that good. But now with Function, it's extremely easy and affordable. A Function membership is only a dollar a day, $365 a year. And if you think about the information it provides and the health challenges it helps you avoid and the proactive things that it can do for you to enhance your health, I truly look at it as a savings. To learn more, visit functionhealth.com/huberman and use the code hubberman for a $50 credit towards your membership. Again, that's functionhealth.com/huberman. I think of dopamine, of course, being involved in movement, >> which is why when it's depleted, yeah, >> people get Parkinson's or Parkinsonian like symptoms. >> But also, it seems that dopamine in an indirect or a direct way is involved in thought movement. Like, it's involved in moving thoughts and ideas forward, which is sort of a piece of motivation. Yeah, >> it's not the whole thing, but and so in these

做这个。因此，在某些方面，做实验听起来很简单，但实际上，你所获得的喜欢和快乐的主观体验必须暂时与行动的动机分离。呃，那不是那么简单。 >> 我想稍微休息一下并感谢我们的赞助商职能。功能提供超过 160 项高级实验室测试，让您清晰了解自己的身体健康状况。通过此快照，您可以深入了解心脏健康状况、激素健康状况、自身免疫功能、营养水平等。他们最近还增加了先进的 MRI 和 CT 扫描的访问权限。 Function 不仅提供对您身心健康至关重要的 160 多种生物标记物的测试，还分析这些结果并提供顶级医生改善您健康的建议。例如，在最近的一次功能测试中，我发现我的一些血脂稍微超出了范围。因此，我决定开始补充纳豆激酶，它自然可以帮助降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇，而且确实如此。在后续测试中，我可以确认这个策略是有效的。我的血脂现在完全回到了我想要的水平。功能提供的全面实验室测试对于健康非常重要。我的意思是，你还怎么知道幕后发生了什么？虽然我从事血液检查已有多年，但它曾经非常耗时、复杂且昂贵。事实上，我过去每年花费数千美元试图获取此类数据。坦率地说，数据并不那么好。但现在有了 Function，它变得非常简单且经济实惠。 Function 会员每天仅需 1 美元，每年 365 美元。如果您考虑一下它提供的信息、它可以帮助您避免的健康挑战以及它可以为您增强健康所做的积极主动的事情，我确实将其视为一种节省。要了解更多信息，请访问 functionhealth.com/huberman 并使用代码 hubberman 获得 50 美元的会员积分。同样，这是 functionhealth.com/huberman。当然，我想到多巴胺参与运动，>>这就是为什么当它耗尽时，是的，>>人们会出现帕金森病或帕金森病样症状。 >> 而且，多巴胺似乎以间接或直接的方式参与思想运动。就像，它涉及推动思想和想法向前发展，这是一种动力。是的，>>这不是全部，但是在这些中

时间轴｜01:20:00

hyperdopamineergic states like people take empetamines or they're manic. It's like everything is about the future. It's from now forward. I don't know if people reflect on the past at all in those states, but >> yeah, >> having seen never I've never tried methamphetamine. I've never fortunately I don't have mania, but it seems like people are all about what could happen next. Yeah, >> that's where they get themselves into trouble is it's kind of a fire hose of that stuff. >> Social media is an interesting one because you're constantly updating the stimulus. You're giving likes, you might be receiving likes, you can make comments. And so if you think about it, it's like the perfect video game that goes in a infinite loop. >> You just keep going and going and going and you're never going anywhere. >> But all the proper bells and whistles are getting tapped on. At least when I go to Vegas, which I do from time to time. Yeah. >> I like gambling a little bit. M like you could walk out with some or a lot more money or you could lose some or a lot of money. >> I generally break even or win a little bit like most people cuz I'm tempered in it. But at least there's a potential outcome you can take elsewhere, >> right? So I think about this all the time like what video game are you playing on social media? Not as a creator but as a consumer. >> What game are you playing? >> I mean what video game are we playing in reality in this? >> That's the big one. Yeah. Well, you're from Oxford. I'm from California. [laughter] So, you asked the big questions. >> No, but just coming back to some of the points you made. Dopamine depletion >> of course can lead to Parkinson's disease. But interestingly, a lot of researchers are thinking, is it really just action or is it motivation to action? So, you know, the classical thing they describe is if a Parkinson's patient is in a house and they've just realized it's burning, they will be able to run out of that house. >> Is that right? >> Yeah. So that's what they will say is that the motivation signal has suddenly ramped up to a level where it engages the action system. So it's a different way of framing why is there a reduction of action? Why is there bradicynesia, a slowing of movement in people with Parkinson's disease? That's really interesting. It doesn't just have to be about motor control. It could be the motivation to act just as we said with David, right? Because the Parkinson's pathology affects the basil ganglia. Basil ganglia is important for action, but it also has these motivation signals that link those motivations like there's a burning house here. I've got to run out to action to the outcome. And the second piece you mentioned, I think brings up the other question. Dopamine in the human brain isn't all about motivation to action. There's dopamine in other parts of the brain. We know from some really classical work by Patricia Goldman Rakit, for example, that dopamine is important for working memory, short-term memory. It's important for holding memories in mind. And it's probably very important for executive function, the kinds of things that we might think of as either initiating action or stopping it, inhibiting it. You know, stopping our impulsive thoughts from getting out. You know, we might think someone is addressed inappropriately, but you and I wouldn't say that to them. But someone who might have a change in their dopamine system affecting let's say the frontal lobe can somehow lose that control and become disinhibited. So initiation of action, stopping action, possibly switching from one goal to another and also those higher order things, you know, planning ahead, being able to think about planning ahead. Dopamine might also be important for those aspects of executive control. So I

多巴胺能亢进状态，例如人们服用安培他明或躁狂。仿佛一切都与未来有关。就是从现在开始。我不知道这些州的人们是否会反思过去，但是>>是的，>>我从未见过我从未尝试过甲基苯丙胺。幸运的是，我从来都没有躁狂症，但似乎人们都关心接下来会发生什么。是的，>>这就是他们给自己带来麻烦的地方，因为它就像是那种东西的消防水带。 >> 社交媒体是一个有趣的媒体，因为你可以不断更新刺激。您正在点赞，您可能会收到点赞，您可以发表评论。所以如果你仔细想想，它就像一个无限循环的完美视频游戏。 >> 你只是一直走啊走啊走，你永远不会去任何地方。 >> 但所有适当的花里胡哨的东西都被利用了。至少当我去维加斯的时候是这样，我时常会去。是的。 >> 我有点喜欢赌博。我想你可能会带着一些或更多的钱离开，或者你可能会损失一些或很多钱。 >> 像大多数人一样，我通常会收支平衡或获胜，因为我对此有所锻炼。但至少你可以在其他地方得到一个潜在的结果，>>对吧？所以我一直在思考这个问题，比如你在社交媒体上玩什么视频游戏？不是作为创造者，而是作为消费者。 >> 你在玩什么游戏？ >> 我的意思是我们在现实中玩的是什么视频游戏？ >> 这才是最重要的。是的。嗯，你来自牛津。我来自加利福尼亚州。 [笑声] 所以，你问了一些大问题。 >> 不，只是回到您提出的一些观点。多巴胺耗竭>>当然会导致帕金森病。但有趣的是，很多研究人员都在思考，这真的只是行动还是行动的动机？所以，你知道，他们描述的经典事情是，如果帕金森病患者在一所房子里，他们刚刚意识到房子着火了，他们将能够跑出那所房子。 >> 是这样吗？ >> 是的。所以他们会说，动机信号突然上升到了参与行动系统的水平。那么，这是一种不同的框架方式，为什么行动会减少？为什么帕金森病患者会出现运动迟缓？这真的很有趣。它不仅仅涉及电机控制。这可能是我们像大卫所说的那样行动的动机，对吧？因为帕金森病的病理影响罗勒神经节。罗勒神经节对于行动很重要，但它也有这些动机信号，将这些动机联系起来，就像这里有一座着火的房子一样。我必须全力以赴，采取行动才能得到结果。你提到的第二件事，我认为提出了另一个问题。人脑中的多巴胺并不完全与行动动机有关。大脑的其他部分也有多巴胺。例如，我们从帕特里夏·戈德曼·拉基特（Patricia Goldman Rakit）的一些非常经典的著作中知道，多巴胺对于工作记忆和短期记忆很重要。记住记忆很重要。它对于执行功能可能非常重要，我们可能认为执行功能是启动行动或停止行动、抑制行动。你知道，阻止我们冲动的想法外流。你知道，我们可能认为某人的称呼不恰当，但你和我不会对他们这么说。但是，如果一个人的多巴胺系统发生变化，影响额叶，那么他可能会以某种方式失去这种控制并变得不受抑制。因此，开始行动、停止行动、可能从一个目标切换到另一个目标，以及那些更高阶的事情，你知道，提前计划，能够提前考虑计划。多巴胺对于执行控制的这些方面也可能很重要。所以我

wouldn't want your audience to think all that dopamine does is this motivation to action. There's a lot of evidence it does other stuff. >> The Parkinson's person in the burning home is a remarkable result. >> Remarkable result >> completely changes the conceptual framework around Parkinson's and what it is at a circuit level. We've also done some more I guess constrained experimental studies, research studies in Parkinson's disease where my colleague Sanjay Manahar and I were looking at eye movements. And eye movements are very ballistic. They're they're pre-programmed. You know, they have a particular velocity. And what we've managed to show is if you increase the incentive, the reward you get if you make a rapid eye movement, you can find that the velocity of eye movements in Parkinson's disease can increase just as it can increase in you and me. But if you add dopamine to to a patient with Parkinson's disease, that velocity increases even further. you've increased the vigor of a simple thing like an eye movement. So that goes along with this idea that it's not just inaction, you need incentives for action and dopamine is important for those incentives. In some sense, the the person with mild Parkinson's, while we wouldn't wish this on anybody, >> um, is hyperrational, like they're not going to initiate action unless it's there's really a potential payoff. I mean, many people have an excess of energy, so they can afford to like move about and do all sorts of things and pick things up and put them down and a lot of wasted energy out there. I'm not saying that people should give themselves Parkinson's by any stretch, but there does seem to be a kind of built-in feature slashflaw of this dopamineergic system that it's so subject to learning. >> So, prior experience can really bias us towards or away from things. That's good and bad, right? But also, you know, that the person with Parkinson's, just the mere fact that they need an elevated motivation to hit some threshold for action, I think it reveals a lot about people without Parkinson's. Like, we're we're wasting a lot of energy all day long. >> You might say it'd be efficient just to do nothing. Maybe David was very efficient. You know, he didn't do anything. >> His roommates definitely took care of a lot. It sounds like it's not it's not functional for an adult to be like that after a while, but society sort of operates on this. Yeah, >> there's largely been made some room for people who are just not going to contribute and other people who overcontribute and then it's a distribution >> and sort of what allows us to to function >> at risk of going into really um high high level territory here. You said something you said you know what game are we playing here after all? >> It's an important one I think to ask. We don't want to go down that rabbit hole too often or too deeply because we can get lost. We have our roles to carry out in life after all. But I think about this a lot. You know, I do think the first third to half of one's life, assuming people live somewhere between 70 and 100 years of age, is about learning all these contingencies, developing social skills, what works, what doesn't work, hopefully avoiding traumas, but if you have some, eventually overcoming those, seeing that not everything has to end that way in that domain. And you know, and then you hit the middle of your life and you do a few more rounds of learning and extending oneself and building oneself and family and culture and but then there does seem to be something that happens to all humans is they they start reflecting a little or a lot >> like what game are we playing here? Were we just leveraged by all these evolutionarily constrained circuits and drives >> or is there something that we're >>

不希望你的观众认为多巴胺所做的一切就是这种行动动机。有很多证据表明它还有其他作用。 >> 帕金森氏症患者在着火的房子里是一个了不起的结果。 >> 显着的结果>> 彻底改变了帕金森病的概念框架及其在电路层面的含义。我们还做了更多我猜想的受限实验研究，我和同事桑杰·马纳哈（Sanjay Manahar）正在研究帕金森病的眼球运动。而且眼球运动非常剧烈。它们是预先编程好的。你知道，它们有特定的速度。我们已经成功地证明，如果你增加激励，即你进行快速眼球运动时获得的奖励，你会发现帕金森病患者的眼球运动速度会增加，就像你我的眼球运动速度会增加一样。但如果你给帕金森病患者添加多巴胺，这个速度会进一步增加。你增加了像眼球运动这样简单的事情的活力。因此，这与这样的想法是一致的：不仅仅是不作为，你需要采取行动的激励，而多巴胺对于这些激励很重要。从某种意义上说，患有轻度帕金森氏症的人，虽然我们不希望这种情况发生在任何人身上，>>嗯，但他们是过度理性的，就像他们不会采取行动，除非确实有潜在的回报。我的意思是，很多人都有多余的精力，所以他们有能力四处走动，做各种各样的事情，拿起东西，放下东西，浪费很多精力。我并不是说人们无论如何都应该患上帕金森氏症，但这种多巴胺能系统似乎确实存在一种内置的功能缺陷，以至于它非常需要学习。 >> 因此，先前的经验确实会让我们对事物产生偏见或偏见。这有好有坏，对吧？而且，你知道，患有帕金森氏症的人，仅仅因为他们需要更高的动力来达到某种行动的门槛，我认为这揭示了很多关于没有帕金森氏症的人的信息。就像，我们一整天都在浪费大量能量。 >> 您可能会说，什么都不做会更有效率。也许大卫非常有效率。你知道，他什么也没做。 >> 他的室友确实照顾了很多。听起来，对于成年人来说，一段时间后变得这样并不是没有用的，但社会在某种程度上是以此为基础运作的。是的，>>很大程度上为那些不打算贡献的人和其他贡献过度的人留出了一些空间，然后这是一种分配>>并且可以让我们发挥作用>>冒着进入这里真正的高水平领域的风险。你说了你说你知道我们到底在玩什么游戏吗？ >> 我认为这是一个重要的问题。我们不想经常或太深地陷入那个兔子洞，因为我们可能会迷路。毕竟，我们在生活中还有自己的角色要履行。但我对此思考了很多。你知道，我确实认为，假设人们生活在 70 岁到 100 岁之间，人生的前三分之一到一半的时间就是学习所有这些偶然事件，发展社交技能，什么有效，什么无效，希望避免创伤，但如果你有一些创伤，最终克服这些创伤，看到在那个领域并不是所有事情都必须以这种方式结束。你知道，然后你到了人生的中年，你又进行了几轮学习、扩展自己、建立自己、家庭和文化，但似乎所有人类都会发生一些事情，他们开始或多或少地反思>>就像我们在这里玩什么游戏？我们是否只是被所有这些进化受限的电路和驱动器所利用>>还是有什么东西我们正在>>

supposed to focus on or aspire to? And then I think most people just shove it. It's just way too much to think about. It's really heavy to think like maybe there is really no purpose in this. And then it's also fun and and can really lift you up to things like oh this is cool. Like this this game we call life is actually a really amazing gift. >> Yeah. >> Which is sort of where I live these days. Like >> think I'm so grateful my parents made me like that alone. Like I have no gripes about anything else anymore because they made me like I'm here. So many people didn't make it here. It's it's a great place to start. Yeah. You know, one's day and then you have to go do stuff. So, how do you conceptualize like what we're going after and and for each of us, I think it is important to step back and ask these highle questions, especially after age about 35, 40 because the early part you really are just trying to acquire the skills to navigate life. >> Yeah. I think your background makes a huge difference and as you were speaking I was thinking of course this also speaks to culture, right? The culture in which you grew up also defines some of the goals, the aspirations, the ambitions you have. It could be the larger culture growing up in the United States versus growing up in the culture of your family as well. Those are obviously important aspects. So when you are growing up, I think a lot of it is dominated by the environment. You call them contingencies, the culture in which you're growing up. But in a way, of course, as we're growing up, we are also contributing to that culture. You know, if we have kids, we are also transmitting this information. And perhaps the one of the most important things that people do between generations is transmit the culture, the culture, the local culture of the home, the domestic home, the wider culture in terms of the values shared by the tribe you happen to be a member of. All of those things shape what we do. And perhaps a generation ago, even a generation or two ago, people didn't have the luxury of reflecting back on what on earth are we doing this for. They were surviving. They were just surviving. And of course, there are many people in the world today who are also surviving. They're going, you know, what are you on about? You know, I just have to survive. This is not a game of anything else. We've got to a point as humans though where we have the luxury some of us that we can have time to even

应该关注或渴望什么？然后我想大多数人都会把它推下去。实在是太多了，需要思考。想想这真的很沉重，也许这真的没有任何目的。而且它也很有趣，并且可以真正提升你的能力，比如“哦，这太酷了”。就像这个我们称之为生命的游戏实际上是一个非常了不起的礼物。 >> 是的。 >> 这就是我这些天住的地方。喜欢>> 我很感激我的父母让我独自这样。就像我不再对其他任何事情抱怨一样，因为他们让我觉得我在这里。这么多人没能来到这里。这是一个很好的起点。是的。你知道，一天结束后你就必须去做一些事情。所以，你如何概念化我们正在追求的东西，对于我们每个人来说，我认为重要的是退后一步，问这些崇高的问题，特别是在 35 岁、40 岁左右之后，因为早期你实际上只是想获得驾驭生活的技能。 >> 是的。我认为你的背景有很大的不同，当你说话时，我在想这当然也与文化有关，对吧？你成长的文化也决定了你的一些目标、愿望和抱负。这可能是在美国成长的更大的文化与在你的家庭文化中成长的关系。这些显然是重要的方面。所以在你成长的过程中，我觉得很多都是受到环境的影响。你称它们为偶然事件，即你成长的文化。但在某种程度上，当然，随着我们的成长，我们也在为这种文化做出贡献。你知道，如果我们有孩子，我们也会传输这些信息。也许人们在代际之间做的最重要的事情之一就是传播文化，文化，家庭的当地文化，家庭的文化，以及你碰巧所属的部落所共享的价值观的更广泛的文化。所有这些都影响了我们的工作。也许一代人之前，甚至一两代人之前，人们还没有机会反思我们这样做到底是为了什么。他们幸存下来。他们只是生存而已。当然，当今世界上还有很多人幸存下来。他们要走了，你知道，你在说什么？你知道，我只需要生存下去。这不是其他任何游戏。作为人类，我们已经到了一个地步，尽管我们中的一些人可以有时间去平衡

时间轴｜01:30:00

consider what this is all about. And one of those things I think is where our culture is going. That's really important. It's a very big question in the US at the moment in terms of what is the culture? What are the values we consider to be part of the tribe? How big is the tribe actually? How many tribes are there? That's so important, I think, in influencing my answer to that question is thinking, yeah, what game are we playing? Well, we're playing a game that's been played for centuries and generations, and that has led to human culture as we know it, highly successful in so many ways, but also capable of dysfunctional activity as we know. as a physician. Um I'm sure there are many reasons you go to work each day, but just you personally if if you're willing, uh where does your mind go when you reflect on your career, past, present, and future? Do you think about making a specific type or size of contribution? Like what's deeply satisfying for you? I've got to the point where if [snorts] I have to make decisions or choices about things to do, I am going to make what I would call my deathbed decision here. I want to think that when I am passing away on my deathbed, I can look back on this decision and think that was a valuable thing to do for me. I take pride in it. I did something useful. It could be for me. It could be for my family. It could be for somebody else. But I can look back on that and think that was worth it. So if someone gives me an option of doing something that I would say no that really would not be something I would be proud of or value in any way esteem, I just say no. So the juice for me is do only the things if you can if you have that option do only the things that you think will be valuable in time to come. That's I think I've got to that point where I can think like that. And obviously there are some things we just cannot avoid. What did you call it? Wood. Wood. What was your >> Oh, chop wood. Carry water. >> Chop wood. Chop wood. Carry water. >> Yeah, that's a friend of mine who came from a blueco collar background and now he's an academic and a clinician. And he just said, you know, there's some things just like you just when you grow up on a in a farmish community. He wasn't like farm per se, but you know, it's like rural community. You know, there's certain times a year where you just chop wood, carry water. It's no fun. like you don't necessarily want to do it but the pleasure at the end of the day is in having chopped a lot of wood and carried a lot of water. >> Yeah. And sometimes as you said you got to do that >> to make the other things happen. So I understand that. I'm just giving you the extreme view. So for me the juice is try and focus such that you do the stuff you you really think is valuable. That's really important to me. I understand that that may not be an option for many people. Well, I think almost everybody, not everyone, but almost everybody has the option to read book A or book B, listen to podcast A or B or episode A or B. And and I don't think we put quite as much thought into the decision-m around those these days. I try and do more of it. And um I [clears throat] appreciate your answer because >> I think for people who hear conversations with folks like you who are very accomplished, they assume that they're just sort of on a locomotive of achievement. work, achieve, work, achieve, and you had all this. Right. Exactly. But I know based on the short time we've had the opportunity to interact and the way you answer your questions >> that you think carefully about what to work on next because it's a huge investment to work on a David versus you could work on anything. You're a neurologist. You could quit neurology probably and just write. You could do any number of different

考虑一下这到底是怎么回事。我认为其中一件事就是我们的文化的发展方向。这真的很重要。目前在美国，这是一个非常大的问题，文化是什么？我们认为作为部落一部分的价值观是什么？部落到底有多大？有多少个部落？我认为，影响我对这个问题的回答的重要因素是思考，是的，我们在玩什么游戏？好吧，我们正在玩一个已经玩了几个世纪、几代人的游戏，它导致了我们所知的人类文化，在很多方面都取得了巨大的成功，但也可能导致我们所知道的功能失调的活动。作为一名医生。嗯，我确信你每天上班的原因有很多，但就你个人而言，如果你愿意的话，呃，当你反思你的职业生涯、过去、现在和未来时，你的思绪会去哪里？您是否考虑做出特定类型或规模的贡献？比如什么让你深深满足？我已经到了这样的地步：如果[哼哼]我必须对要做的事情做出决定或选择，我将在这里做出我所谓的临终决定。我想，当我在临终时去世时，我可以回顾这个决定，并认为这对我来说是一件有价值的事情。我为此感到自豪。我做了一些有用的事情。这可能适合我。这可能是为了我的家人。它可能是给别人的。但我可以回顾一下，并认为这是值得的。因此，如果有人让我选择做某件事，我会说不，而这确实不是我会感到自豪或以任何方式重视的事情，我只会说不。所以对我来说，如果你有选择的话，只做你认为在未来有价值的事情。我想我已经到了可以这样思考的地步了。显然，有些事情我们无法避免。你叫它什么？木头。木头。你是什么>>哦，砍柴。带水。 >> 砍木头。砍木头。带水。 >> 是的，这是我的一个朋友，他来自蓝领背景，现在他是一名学者和临床医生。他只是说，你知道，当你在农村社区长大时，有些事情就像你一样。他本身并不像农场，但你知道，这就像农村社区。你知道，一年中的某些时候你只是砍柴、挑水。这并不好玩。就像你不一定想这样做，但一天结束时的乐趣在于砍了很多木头并运了很多水。 >> 是的。有时正如你所说，你必须这样做>>才能使其他事情发生。所以我明白了。我只是给你极端的观点。所以对我来说，最重要的是尝试并专注，这样你就可以做你真正认为有价值的事情。这对我来说真的很重要。我知道这对很多人来说可能不是一个选择。好吧，我认为几乎每个人，不是每个人，但几乎每个人都可以选择阅读书 A 或书 B，听播客 A 或 B 或剧集 A 或 B。而且我认为我们现在并没有对这些方面的决策投入太多考虑。我尝试做更多这样的事情。嗯，我[清清嗓子]感谢你的回答，因为>>我认为，对于那些听到与像你这样非常有成就的人交谈的人来说，他们认为自己只是在取得成就的火车头上。工作、成就、工作、成就，你就拥有了这一切。正确的。确切地。但我知道，基于我们有机会互动的时间很短，以及你回答问题的方式>>，你会仔细考虑下一步要做什么，因为与你可以做任何事情相比，在大卫身上工作是一项巨大的投资。你是一名神经科医生。你可能可以放弃神经病学而直接写作。你可以做任意数量的不同的

things. So as you have more skills and more agency that the choice-making process becomes increasingly important, not less. Y >> I'd like to talk a bit about your work on the way we sometimes can get dissociated from our environment but not necessarily dissociative disorders >> but [laughter] if we could do a little experiment with the audience you know I think everyone is familiar with the idea of closing their eyes and being inside of themselves then opening their eyes and still feeling yourself but also sensing the outside world >> and then moving through the world in a way where you're they're kind of going back and forth quickly you're sort of out there, but in here, out there. Of course, we're always in here. It's all an ab an abstract construction in our brain, >> but you've studied patients where they're not seeing big swaths of the outside world. Maybe you could explain what that's called and what it is and how it changes their perception of experience on the inside because this is something that I hope I'll never truly understand. Although, maybe you have an experiment where I can shut down some stuff and do it. But this is a really important aspect of being a human that we've never discussed on this podcast and hardly anyone talks about. We can go in here, we can be out there, but usually we're somewhere in between. How does all this stuff work? >> So the way many people would think about this is either internal attention or external attention. I mean attention is just a term we use and most of the audience will be very familiar with the idea of attention to things in the outside world. Why do we have a system for attention? And the way that many neuroscientists would put this is that the brain has limited capacity, right? It doesn't have capacity to process all the information in the outside world. It's coming at us in our eyes. It's coming at us in our ears. It's coming at us in our touch receptors in our skin. So if we were to upload all that information which is coming at a millisecond basis, it would be storing terabytes of information every minute or so. We don't have that capacity. Nor should we because we don't want to have neural space devoted to stuff that isn't important. Do you remember Google glasses? They were supposed to record everything that you saw through the day. They weren't successful when they came out because most people realize that actually most of the things that are happening during the day are boring. They're not very interesting. They shouldn't be things we pay attention to. So the first point is the brain has limited capacity. So some process has to be there to select the stuff that is important for you. And that process we call attention. And how does that work? Right? One way that many people think that works for the external deployment of attention is that items are competing for the selection of processing. That sounds a bit of a nebulous thing, but imagine you're walking down the street and suddenly you see a bit of a building is falling off and coming towards you. That grabs your attention. And neuroscientists call that, you know, bottomup attention, right? It's a sensory stimulus that's really important. It's grabbed your attention. You got to move. But you can also have goal directed top- down attention. You go to a busy railway station, you're going to meet a friend and she said, "I'm going to be wearing a red dress." So you can filter out everything else apart from all the people who are wearing something red and that gets you to a faster state of finding the person you're going to meet. So we've got bottom up attention, we've got top down goal- directed attention. But where do we normally deploy this? I mean, so if there's something very important bottom up, like a bit of a

事物。因此，当你拥有更多的技能和更多的代理权时，选择过程就会变得越来越重要，而不是变得越来越重要。 Y>>我想谈谈你的工作，我们有时会与环境分离，但不一定是分离性障碍>>但是[笑声]如果我们可以对观众做一个小实验，你知道我想每个人都熟悉这样的想法：闭上眼睛，进入自己的内心，然后睁开眼睛，仍然感觉自己，但也感知外部世界>>然后以一种你在的方式在世界中移动，他们有点快速来回，你有点在外面，但在这里，在那里。当然，我们一直都在这里。这都是我们大脑中的抽象结构，>>但是你研究过的患者，他们看不到外面世界的大片区域。也许你可以解释一下这叫什么，它是什么，以及它如何改变他们对内部体验的看法，因为这是我希望我永远不会真正理解的东西。不过，也许你有一个实验，我可以关闭一些东西并完成它。但这是人类的一个非常重要的方面，我们从未在这个播客上讨论过，也几乎没有人谈论过。我们可以进去，也可以出去，但通常介于两者之间。所有这些东西是如何工作的？ >> 所以很多人思考这个问题的方式要么是内部关注，要么是外部关注。我的意思是，注意力只是我们使用的一个术语，大多数观众都会非常熟悉关注外部世界事物的想法。为什么我们有一个注意力系统？许多神经科学家的说法是大脑的能力有限，对吧？它没有能力处理外界的所有信息。它正向我们袭来，出现在我们的眼前。它正传到我们耳边。它通过皮肤的触觉感受器向我们袭来。因此，如果我们要上传以毫秒为单位的所有信息，那么大约每分钟就会存储数 TB 的信息。我们没有这个能力。我们也不应该这样做，因为我们不想让神经空间专门用于不重要的事情。你还记得谷歌眼镜吗？他们应该记录你这一天所看到的一切。他们出来时并不成功，因为大多数人意识到实际上白天发生的大多数事情都很无聊。它们不是很有趣。它们不应该是我们关注的事情。所以第一点是大脑的能力是有限的。因此，必须有一些流程来选择对您来说重要的东西。这个过程我们称之为关注。这是如何运作的？正确的？许多人认为对注意力的外部部署有效的一种方式是项目竞争处理的选择。这听起来有点模糊，但想象一下你正走在街上，突然你看到一座建筑物正在倒塌并向你而来。这会吸引你的注意力。神经科学家称之为自下而上的注意力，对吗？这是一种非常重要的感官刺激。它吸引了你的注意力。你必须行动起来。但你也可以有目标导向的自上而下的关注。你去一个繁忙的火车站，你会遇到一个朋友，她说：“我要穿一件红色的裙子。”因此，您可以过滤掉除所有穿着红色衣服的人之外的所有其他人，这可以让您更快地找到您要见到的人。所以我们有自下而上的注意力，我们有自上而下的目标导向的注意力。但我们通常在哪里部署它呢？我的意思是，如果有一些自下而上非常重要的事情，比如

building falling towards you, that will grab your attention because the system is designed, our systems are designed to devote all the resources that we have to that very important threat. Now, in terms of goal directed attention, that might also in include internal thoughts. So if I'm in a lecture and I'm listening to somebody, I may fade in and out of attending externally and then I might be captured by internal thoughts. I might be thinking, yeah, I should have really made some plans for this evening because I haven't really done that. How can I what can I do this evening? Right? Should I make a booking for a restaurant or something like that? I should have done that earlier. I'm now thinking my attention is captured by these internal thoughts. So one way that we have tried to understand this stuff is that items are competing for our attention. Either external items or internal thoughts are competing for where we are focusing our resources. So attention is really just a way of explaining the fact that we're devoting our brain resources to this particular location in space or this thought. So closing your eyes thinking internally is really just an extreme form of putting all your resources into a particular thought. But that happens as I said even with your eyes open you can be distracted by this thought in your head even though your eyes are open and there are things going at them because in this competition for selection at that moment that thought has captured your neural processing and that's happening because the brain has limited capacity. Things are competing for selection because of that limited capacity. So you can only focus your processing on a small number of items at a time, perhaps even just one. >> I think if you pulled most people, they would say that they experience too much inner what's been called chatter. We had Ethan Cross on the podcast. He's a psychologist at University of Michigan and he wrote a book about chatter. And people would love to turn off their thoughts because most of what people report as their inner chatter is not pleasant. It's not necessarily unpleasant. It's not like you're a terrible person. You're what are you doing with yourself? Or it's just it's a nuisance. I do think that some of the more effective people I've known in life have low activation energy and they seem to think, make a decision. Once they make the decision and there could be some contemplative time first to be fair. They make

建筑物向您坠落，这会引起您的注意，因为系统经过设计，我们的系统旨在将我们拥有的所有资源投入到这一非常重要的威胁中。现在，就目标导向的注意力而言，这可能还包括内部想法。因此，如果我在听某人演讲，我可能会逐渐淡出外部参与，然后我可能会被内部思想所捕获。我可能会想，是的，我应该为今晚制定一些计划，因为我还没有真正做到这一点。今天晚上我能做什么呢？正确的？我应该预订餐厅或类似的地方吗？我应该早点这么做的。我现在认为我的注意力被这些内心的想法吸引了。因此，我们试图理解这些东西的一种方式是，项目正在争夺我们的注意力。外部事物或内部思想都在争夺我们的资源集中位置。因此，注意力实际上只是解释我们将大脑资源投入到空间中的这个特定位置或这个想法这一事实的一种方式。因此，闭上眼睛进行内心思考实际上只是将所有资源投入到特定想法中的一种极端形式。但正如我所说，即使你睁着眼睛，你也可能会被头脑中的这种想法分散注意力，即使你的眼睛是睁着的，并且有一些事情正在发生，因为在那一刻的选择竞争中，这种想法已经捕获了你的神经处理，而这种情况的发生是因为大脑的能力有限。由于容量有限，事物正在竞争选择。因此，您一次只能将处理集中在少量项目上，甚至可能只有一个。 >> 我想如果你拉大多数人的话，他们会说他们经历了太多内心的所谓的喋喋不休。我们的播客中有伊森·克罗斯（Ethan Cross）。他是密歇根大学的心理学家，写了一本关于聊天的书。人们很乐意关掉自己的想法，因为大多数人所说的内心喋喋不休都是不愉快的。这不一定是不愉快的。你并不是一个可怕的人。你自己到底在搞什么啊？或者只是觉得很麻烦。我确实认为，我在生活中认识的一些效率较高的人的激活能量较低，他们似乎会思考、做出决定。一旦他们做出决定，为了公平起见，可能会先有一些沉思的时间。他们让

时间轴｜01:40:00

a decision and then they are able to be fully engaged in the thing and they're able to turn down the volume on their inner landscape. Their attention drifts out. Maybe it's in themselves only in so far as it's required to do the thing really well. I actually think this might be the flow state >> is you know dare I say flow is a whole thing as you know and it gets bastardized a lot and I don't want to do that but >> there's a real cost an energetic cost to being in a conversation and being somewhat in one's head except if you're me only as required to you know think about where we could go next this kind of thing it's it's just not helpful to be in one's head very often unless you're contemplating or making decisions It's great to just like turn that stuff off. I think most people would feel that way. >> It must vary an an awful lot, I think, cuz we're usually so attentive to external cues, events, right? Whether it's an appointment, something coming in email, text, or conversation, whatever. Sometimes we also do need that space. I think that there's an a hypothesis we could wager would be that one of the things that's [snorts] so enticing about um high arousal media or social media >> is that it takes people out of their heads. >> Y >> I'm just throwing this out there for sake of discussion. Maybe it's not about what they're seeing as much as what they're not having to think about. >> Mhm. >> Like [clears throat] I know a lot of people that listen to audiobooks. I have a friend, she tells me that she has to be really careful that she doesn't like listen to certain types of audio books. She'll just >> use that as a way to detach from a bunch of other stuff that she just doesn't want to think about. >> Right. Okay. >> There's a whole market for distraction and numbing and and arousal and um thinking in a structured way internally is not easy. >> I was about to say it's hard, right? It's hard. >> So, it's like this thing we were talking about, making a decision can be hard for some people. thinking through a problem and the potential solutions. I mean, you know, there are some people who love it. They love the permutations. Here's the problem. How many ways could I solve it? And they'll go down one route and think, you know, branching tree. Ah, yeah. If you go down this route, you could do A, B, or C. On the other hand, if you go down this route, you could do D, E, and F. And they love that. They love the fact that there are these permutations. Whereas for me, I'd rather narrow it down very quickly and go down this is my favorite route and okay, there are one or two choices to be made here. So there are different styles of thinking in your head, you know, and maybe for some people who don't necessarily love the permutations, but end up thinking there are so many permutations. That's a big thing to do. There's there are too many choices here. So I'd rather just listen to the, you know, the audio book. >> I have a colleague at Stanford. I'm sure you've heard of him, Carl Daiserov, psychiatrist, developer, co-developer with several others of optogenetics. And when he came on the podcast, he was actually our first guest. >> He said that he spends time every night after his then young kids went to sleep. And now still he'll spend an hour or two just forcing himself to think in complete sentences. >> That's no small task. >> What discipline, >> right? I think most of us who like to think and think about permutations will often write and do flowcharts because it's it's a little bit out there. It's a little easier than structuring everything in here. >> Well, you have to have such a great working memory system if you've got it all in here. And as we know, the more you put into that working memory system, the bigger the burden, right?

做出决定，然后他们就能够全身心投入到事情中，并且能够降低内心景观的音量。他们的注意力分散了。也许只有在需要真正做好事情的情况下，它本身才有效。我实际上认为这可能是心流状态 >> 你知道吗，我敢说心流是一个完整的东西，正如你所知，它被混了很多，我不想这样做，但是 >> 进行对话并在某种程度上处于一个人的头脑中确实需要付出精力成本，除非你是我，只有在你知道的时候想想我们下一步可以去哪里这种事情，除非你正在思考或做出决定，否则经常处于一个人的头脑中是没有帮助的把这些东西关掉真是太好了。我想大多数人都会有这样的感觉。 >> 我想，它的变化一定很大，因为我们通常非常关注外部线索、事件，对吗？无论是约会、电子邮件、短信还是对话等。有时我们也确实需要那个空间。我认为我们可以打赌的一个假设是，高唤醒媒体或社交媒体的[嗤之以鼻]如此诱人的事情之一就是它让人们失去了理智。 >> Y >> 我只是为了讨论而把它扔在那里。也许重要的不是他们看到了什么，而是他们不必思考什么。 >> 嗯。 >> 就像[清喉咙]我认识很多人听有声读物。我有一个朋友，她告诉我她必须非常小心，因为她不喜欢听某些类型的有声读物。她只会>>用它来摆脱其他她不想去想的事情。 >> 对。好的。 >> 分散注意力、麻木和唤醒有一个完整的市场，嗯，在内部以结构化的方式思考并不容易。 >> 我想说这很难吧？这很难。 >> 所以，就像我们正在谈论的这件事一样，对于某些人来说做出决定可能很困难。思考问题和潜在的解决方案。我的意思是，你知道，有些人喜欢它。他们喜欢排列。问题就在这里。有多少种方法可以解决？他们会沿着一条路线思考，你知道，树的分支。啊，是的。如果你沿着这条路线走下去，你可以做 A、B 或 C。另一方面，如果你沿着这条路线走下去，你可以做 D、E 和 F。他们喜欢这样。他们喜欢这些排列。而对我来说，我宁愿很快缩小范围，然后沿着这是我最喜欢的路线走下去，好吧，这里可以做出一两个选择。因此，你的头脑中有不同的思维方式，你知道，也许对于某些不一定喜欢排列的人来说，但最终会认为排列有这么多。这是一件大事。这里的选择太多了。所以我宁愿听有声读物。 >> 我在斯坦福大学有一位同事。我相信你听说过他，Carl Daiserov，精神病学家、开发者、与其他几位光遗传学专家的共同开发者。当他出现在播客上时，他实际上是我们的第一位客人。 >> 他说他每天晚上都会在孩子们入睡后度过。现在他仍然会花一两个小时强迫自己用完整的句子来思考。 >> 这不是一项小任务。 >> 什么学科，>> 对吗？我认为我们大多数喜欢思考和思考排列的人经常会编写和制作流程图，因为它有点不存在。这比在这里构建所有内容要容易一些。 >> 好吧，如果你已经拥有了这一切，那么你必须拥有如此出色的工作记忆系统。我们知道，你投入工作记忆系统的越多，负担就越大，对吗？

Capacity limits mean that you can't hold, most of us can't hold lots and lots of permutations. We may be limited. And maybe that's what I'm expressing in myself is I I like to keep it really focused and have two or three alternatives in my working memory system. Whereas if you're confronted with 15 20 possible solutions, that's quite a hard thing for the working memory system to hold on to. And our our own work in memory has suggested the quality of the information you have for for the stuff you hold is diluted. the more you add into the working memory system, the quality with which you remember each bit of information is reduced. So there is also a cost from holding everything in mind. I don't know if these studies still hold, but my last read of the studies on working memory and dopamine suggested that some people have a low, others medium, and others quote unquote high level of baseline dopamine. This is a tricky term and our science colleagues they're going to go ahead and you know might roll their eyes a little bit at the way I'm describing it but for sake of discussion low medium or high baseline dopamine and that if you give somebody a drug to increase the amount of dopamine in their system and they are in the low or medium baseline group they experience a boost in working memory their ability to keep thoughts online for short periods of time make use of that information. But that somebody who's already sealinged out, yeah, on dopamine doesn't afford them a benefit, maybe even degrades their their ability. I find those studies fascinating, especially given the fact that so many people take stimulants. >> Yeah. >> You know, whereas a few years ago there were some people taking Adderall, Rolin, and most every 90% of adults drink caffeine worldwide. I mean, it's incredible. Now, nicotine is everywhere. oral nicotine use in women, men, young people, and dopamine is a big part of the nicotine story. I mean, acetylcholine as well. >> Yeah. >> So, these people who are now addicted to nicotine, I don't care what people say. It's a you're not necessarily robbing people to get money for your pouches of nicotine, but tell them to stop and then it's like, I'm not gonna stop. They go from one pouch to three to eight >> to a canister every couple of days or even day. This is like >> happening. I'm not judging it, but chances are they're not getting a cognitive benefit, right? That they're just able to hang in there with their normal baseline. >> My reading of that literature, the psychopharmarmacology literature in terms of cognitive enhancement is absolutely what you said. If you start from a low baseline of performance, you might get some positive boost. It's quite small, but you might get it. But if you are actually quite a high performer, then you risk getting worse. with this is called the inverse U-shaped curve. I don't mean and so I tell the students that I teach, you know, about this sort of stuff, you're probably not going to be in that low baseline state given where you you're here at this university. Uh so just think twice about taking some stimulant that you want to get a better grade because actually the evidence would be that you might get worse from doing it. So yeah, you have to be very careful with this. There seem to be real individual differences which depend on our intrinsic uh chemistry, neurochemistry. The history of nicotine is fascinating. It's almost as if ever since humans discovered it, they find some way to get it into their system. And once they figure out that that way is really bad for them, like it can kill them from lung cancer. Takes a couple of years and they figure out another way. And then it's almost like humans love to eat and consume plant alkaloids. Like they just have to do it. They just got to

容量限制意味着你无法容纳，我们大多数人都无法容纳很多很多的排列。我们可能能力有限。也许这就是我自己所表达的，我喜欢保持真正的专注，并在我的工作记忆系统中拥有两到三个替代方案。然而，如果你面临 15-20 种可能的解决方案，这对于工作记忆系统来说是一件很难坚持的事情。我们自己的记忆研究表明，你所掌握的信息的质量被稀释了。您向工作记忆系统添加的内容越多，您记住每一位信息的质量就会降低。因此，把一切都牢记在心也是有代价的。我不知道这些研究是否仍然成立，但我上次读到的关于工作记忆和多巴胺的研究表明，有些人的基线多巴胺水平较低，其他人中等，还有一些人引用了高水平的基线多巴胺。这是一个棘手的术语，我们的科学同事们将继续下去，你知道可能会对我所描述的方式翻白眼，但为了讨论低中或高基线多巴胺，如果你给某人一种药物来增加他们系统中的多巴胺含量，而他们处于低或中基线组，他们会体验到工作记忆的增强，他们在短时间内保持思想在线的能力利用这些信息。但是，那些已经封锁了多巴胺的人不会给他们带来任何好处，甚至可能会降低他们的能力。我发现这些研究很有趣，特别是考虑到这么多人服用兴奋剂。 >> 是的。 >> 你知道，几年前有人服用 Adderall、Rolin，而全世界几乎每 90% 的成年人都喝咖啡因。我的意思是，这太不可思议了。现在，尼古丁无处不在。女性、男性、年轻人都使用口服尼古丁，而多巴胺是尼古丁故事的重要组成部分。我的意思是，还有乙酰胆碱。 >> 是的。 >> 所以，这些现在对尼古丁上瘾的人，我不在乎人们怎么说。你不一定要抢劫别人来为你的尼古丁袋赚钱，但告诉他们停止，然后就像，我不会停止。每隔几天甚至一天，它们就会从一个袋子变成三到八个>>到一个罐子里。这就像 >> 正在发生。我不是在评判它，但他们很可能没有获得认知上的好处，对吧？他们能够以正常的基线坚持下去。 >>我读到的那篇文献，关于认知增强方面的精神药理学文献绝对是你说的。如果你从较低的绩效基线开始，你可能会得到一些积极的提升。它很小，但你可能会得到它。但如果你实际上是一个表现相当出色的人，那么你就有可能变得更糟。这被称为倒 U 形曲线。我的意思不是，所以我告诉学生，我教的这类东西，鉴于你在这所大学的位置，你可能不会处于那种低基线状态。嗯，所以在服用一些你想要获得更好成绩的兴奋剂时要三思而后行，因为实际上有证据表明你可能会因为这样做而变得更糟。所以是的，你必须非常小心这一点。似乎存在真正的个体差异，这取决于我们内在的呃化学，神经化学。尼古丁的历史非常有趣。就好像自从人类发现它以来，他们就找到了某种方法将其输入到他们的系统中。一旦他们发现这种方式对他们来说真的很糟糕，就像它会导致他们死于肺癌一样。花了几年时间，他们找到了另一种方法。这几乎就像人类喜欢吃和消耗植物生物碱一样。就像他们必须这样做一样。他们只需要做

feel different than their their natural chemistry will allow them to. >> I mean, this is our culture, right? That's what's happened over years. I mean, as you say, if we look back, let's say in South America, the cultures of how people use stimulants in various ways that goes back, you know, thousands of years. It's not something new. So, this is what our brains are used to in terms of stimulation in some way. and many of the drugs of addiction okay not the not the more modern things but have that propensity have been around because the culture has allowed that to happen in some way. So this is really important I think in terms of how our neurochemistry sort of interfaces with our cultures. I have to imagine that given you work on attention and you work on motivation and apathy that you get a lot of emails from parents or even kids and young people about ADHD >> and many people think that they have attentional issues. Do you think there are a lot of people that don't necessarily have attentional issues? They just haven't figured out how to stop and think and make a decision about what to do next. I'm not trying to be disparaging here. I think that as each of the psychiatric disorders has become kind of more in the public discussion like people will say OCD they'll say oh on the spectrum they'll say >> you know I have ADHD and these are real clinical issues but I think >> there's kind of a feedback where people start to notice their lack of attention maybe I have ADHD maybe I should take stimulants you know do you get a lot of questions about ADHD and do you think it's a real thing for for many adults, for many kids, or do you think there's kind of a perception that we have an issue that we don't necessarily have? It's just lack of good old discipline. >> I do get a lot of questions. I think it is a real issue for some people. Interestingly, you know, the number of people who remain with the diagnosis of ADHD into adulthood if they had it as children can reduce actually the numbers reduce in terms of people who continue to have adulthood. So, that's interesting that there is some plasticity in the brain. But I also think that this is not mutually incompatible with the view that there's also overdiagnosis. And I think we need very careful ways of making diagnosis because the conventional way is you take a history from a person about what the problem is. You may then do some degree of cognitive testing and that degree of cognitive

感觉与他们的自然化学反应所允许的不同。 >> 我的意思是，这就是我们的文化，对吧？这就是多年来发生的事情。我的意思是，正如你所说，如果我们回顾过去，比如说在南美洲，人们如何以各种方式使用兴奋剂的文化可以追溯到几千年前。这不是什么新鲜事。所以，这就是我们的大脑在某种程度上习惯于接受刺激的方式。许多成瘾药物并不是更现代的东西，而是有这种倾向，因为文化以某种方式允许这种情况发生。因此，我认为这对于我们的神经化学如何与我们的文化相互作用非常重要。我必须想象，如果你努力提高注意力，努力提高动机和冷漠，你会收到很多来自父母甚至孩子和年轻人的关于多动症的电子邮件>>并且许多人认为他们有注意力问题。您认为有很多人不一定有注意力问题吗？他们只是不知道如何停下来思考并决定下一步该做什么。我并不是想在这里贬低。我认为，随着每种精神疾病越来越多地出现在公众讨论中，就像人们会说强迫症一样，他们会说哦，他们会说>>你知道我患有多动症，这些都是真正的临床问题，但我认为>>有一种反馈，人们开始注意到他们缺乏关注，也许我患有多动症，也许我应该服用兴奋剂，你知道，你有很多关于多动症的问题吗？你认为这对许多成年人来说是真实的吗？孩子们，或者你认为我们有一种看法，认为我们有一个不一定有的问题？这只是缺乏良好的旧纪律。 >> 我确实收到了很多问题。我认为这对某些人来说是一个真正的问题。有趣的是，你知道，如果小时候患有多动症，那么成年后仍被诊断为多动症的人数可能会减少，实际上，成年后继续患有多动症的人数会减少。有趣的是，大脑具有一定的可塑性。但我也认为这与过度诊断的观点并不矛盾。我认为我们需要非常仔细的诊断方法，因为传统的方法是从一个人的病史中了解问题所在。然后，您可以进行某种程度的认知测试以及该程度的认知测试

时间轴｜01:50:00

testing varies enormously between different specialists. And then you have to decide where is normality. Essentially that's what you're asking cuz you and I also get attention lapses from time to time. We also don't always perform well. Uh we have difficulty in sustaining attention. So where do we put that marker of normality? It will always be a continuum. Right? So we're going to have to place this marker in terms of diagnosis at some point. And often that might be a point where you think it's actually having a detrimental functional effect on somebody's performance whether it's scholastic or whether it's in social ways or whatever it is. And then it becomes more difficult because you know you that's that's a much more subjective thing to decide. You've got your cognitive test but now you have to make a decision about whether this is subjectively something that's having an impact on their everyday lives. That might be one of the places where some of the fuzziness in diagnosis comes. >> Long ago, we had a guest on the podcast who's an expert in ADHD who shared that kids and adults with ADHD actually can focus quite intensely on things they really >> enjoy and are curious about. >> Reminds me of the Parkinson's patient running out of the house. And it raises the question of whether we should train to have better levels of attention, longer duration attention by doing boring stuff >> as opposed to trying to find the thing that hooks us all the time. That too, but maybe we should do more chop wood, carry water stuff. [laughter] You know, >> you know, in the Second World War, there were these studies in Britain uh for radar operators because they would look at this screen. It's a very boring screen and they're looking out for German fighter planes or bombers coming over the channel. Most of the time there isn't anything, but they could have false positives. They could push the button because they think they saw a blip or they might drift off, which was more the worry is that they were drifting off. Their sustained attention was drifting off and therefore they would miss a really important event on their radar screens. And it turns out that there is something we call a vigilance decrement. Over time, if you're doing something boring and dull, healthy brains, you will find a reduction in your ability to detect these boring, very infrequent events. You can measure it. And one of the problems that's been found in ADHD is there can be a difficulty in sustaining attention over time. Not necessarily because they miss things, but also the variability in response is something that's become a signature of people with ADHD. They're far more variable than people who are not giving that diagnosis if we believe the diagnosis was made correctly at that time. And I think that's telling us something really important about this because that variability might reduce if the motivation to do this was better. So you mentioned intrinsic motivation in the sense that if they're doing something they're really interested in, they might be more focused in in order to do that. And the neuroscience, I'm not a specialist in ADHD, but the neuroscience that I have read about suggests that it's not only the parietal and frontal regions of the brain which are important in deploying attention to the external world. There may also be dysfunction in the basil ganglia in people with ADHD. that's been referred to in some ways as being involved in working memory, but it can also probably be involved in motivation. So, we're bringing these themes together here that attention might also be related to motivation because you're more likely to pay attention to something that you think is intrinsically rewarding to you. Maybe we could drill just a little bit further into the

不同专家之间的测试差异很大。然后你必须决定哪里是正常的。本质上这就是你要问的，因为你和我也会时不时地注意力不集中。我们也并不总是表现良好。呃，我们很难保持注意力。那么我们把正常的标记放在哪里呢？它永远是一个连续体。正确的？因此，我们必须在某个时候将这个标记放在诊断中。通常，您可能会认为这实际上对某人的表现产生了有害的功能影响，无论是学术方面还是社交方面或其他方面。然后它就会变得更加困难，因为你知道你自己，这是一个更主观的决定。您已经完成了认知测试，但现在您必须做出决定，以确定这是否是主观上对他们的日常生活产生影响的事情。这可能是诊断中出现一些模糊之处的地方之一。 >> 很久以前，我们的播客上有一位嘉宾，他是多动症专家，他分享说，患有多动症的儿童和成人实际上可以非常专注于他们真正>>喜欢和好奇的事情。 >> 让我想起帕金森病患者跑出家门的情景。这就提出了一个问题：我们是否应该通过做无聊的事情来训练更高水平的注意力、更长时间的注意力，而不是试图找到一直吸引我们的事情。那也是，但也许我们应该多砍柴、运水。 [笑声]你知道，>>你知道，在第二次世界大战期间，英国对雷达操作员进行了这些研究，因为他们会看这个屏幕。这是一个非常无聊的屏幕，他们正在寻找来自英吉利海峡的德国战斗机或轰炸机。大多数时候什么都没有，但他们可能会出现误报。他们可以按下按钮，因为他们认为自己看到了一个光点，或者他们可能会睡着，更担心的是他们睡着了。他们持续的注意力逐渐分散，因此他们会错过雷达屏幕上真正重要的事件。事实证明，存在一种我们称之为警惕性降低的现象。随着时间的推移，如果你在做一些无聊、沉闷、健康的大脑，你会发现你发现这些无聊、非常罕见的事件的能力下降了。你可以测量一下。在多动症中发现的问题之一是随着时间的推移很难保持注意力。不一定是因为他们错过了一些事情，而且反应的可变性已经成为多动症患者的标志。如果我们相信当时的诊断是正确的，那么他们比那些没有做出诊断的人的变化要大得多。我认为这告诉我们一些非常重要的事情，因为如果这样做的动机更好，那么可变性可能会减少。所以你提到的内在动机是指，如果他们正在做他们真正感兴趣的事情，他们可能会更加专注于做到这一点。在神经科学方面，我不是多动症方面的专家，但我读过的神经科学表明，不仅大脑的顶叶和额叶区域对于将注意力集中到外部世界很重要。多动症患者的罗勒神经节也可能存在功能障碍。这在某些方面被称为与工作记忆有关，但它也可能与动机有关。因此，我们在这里将这些主题结合在一起，即注意力也可能与动机有关，因为你更有可能关注那些你认为本质上对你有益的事情。也许我们可以更深入地研究一下

nucleus encumbent and this basil ganglia circuitry because I think most everyone is familiar with the fact that some goals are very short-term. I'm going to make a cup of coffee. I'm going to drink the coffee. Some are long-term. I always say, you know, if nothing else, you know, get a PhD because you'll teach yourself that you can work on things for long periods of time, sustain a lot of effort and uncertainty and it >> provided you complete it and I trust you will, you get something at the end and say there you have this ability to say, well, I can do hard things, uncertain things over four to six years. >> I mean, that's not alone a reason to do it. Hopefully, you're interested in what you're doing. It really helps. But do you think there are ways that this circuitry learns different time contingencies that it must, right? I mean, if the same circuitry is involved in motivating to make a cup of coffee because it feels worth it to me to get the caffeine and the taste that's responsible for trudging through something over several years, an endeavor or relationship of any kind. And it's the same circuitry that suggests there's a really robust and dynamic dial on on how it integrates time, right? I mean I mean it's a totally different game. In one case it's like a slot machine >> that has a high probability of success like making the coffee, right? It's almost every time you actually get the coffee. And in the other one it's like we're talking years. So the same neurons, they're clocking over vastly different time scales. How does that work? >> So I think most of the studies that have been done are over very short time scales. They're what you're talking about, you know, the slot machine type of study. We've also done some studies recently looking at perseverance, but again, they're not over years that we normally have to think about when we're making long-term goals. I don't think it's necessarily timekeeping in the basil ganglia that's the issue here. I think these are much higher level goals and plans that you might think are being constructed in the cortex, particularly the frontal cortex. You know, we talked about executive control and planning. Planning has not been studied in great detail except for some relatively simple problem solving tasks that patients are given to do which usually can be done within a few minutes. But this [clears throat] extended long-term planning and perseverance, I don't think that's something that the basil gang do. Those networks are there from the lamprey, right, to solve >> getting my motivation signal to action. But this extended motivation to do something over years for a a long-term goal, I think must be something which is different from what's going on just in the basil ganglia. And of course then it also brings into this issue about what's called temporal discounting. So if I say to someone you will get this great rewarding outcome but you have to persevere for one year or I say to them you'll get this sort of mediocre outcome and you'll get it within a week. People will differ in which ones they'll choose. >> What are the current data on that? Does it divide in some sort of like two marshmallow experiment kind of way? [laughter] Still, you know, >> the marshmallow experiments have obviously become very controversial in terms of >> I heard they were debunked. Then someone came on the podcast who works on these and said the debunk was debunked. >> Yeah, I'm not an expert on those studies, but I think the key thing I'm just trying to explain is that also people differ in their levels of how they will discount the reward that they're willing to take >> with time. >> And that varies enormously between people. So, what is it that allows someone to say, "I'm going to wait for the bigger reward

核心和这个罗勒神经节电路，因为我认为大多数人都熟悉这样一个事实，即有些目标是非常短期的。我要去煮一杯咖啡。我要去喝咖啡了。有些是长期的。我总是说，你知道，如果没有别的事，你知道，获得博士学位，因为你会告诉自己，你可以长时间从事某件事，承受大量的努力和不确定性，并且>>只要你完成它，我相信你会的，你最后会得到一些东西，并说你有能力说，好吧，我可以在四到六年内做困难的事情，不确定的事情。 >> 我的意思是，这并不是这样做的唯一理由。希望您对自己正在做的事情感兴趣。这确实有帮助。但是你认为这个电路有办法学习它必须学习的不同的时间偶发事件吗？我的意思是，如果同样的电路参与了冲一杯咖啡的动机，因为对我来说，获得咖啡因和味道是值得的，而这种味道可以让我在几年的时间里艰难地经历某件事、任何一种努力或关系。同样的电路表明它在整合时间方面有一个非常强大和动态的旋钮，对吗？我的意思是我的意思是这是一个完全不同的游戏。在一种情况下，它就像一台老虎机>>，成功的可能性很高，就像煮咖啡一样，对吗？几乎每次你真正喝咖啡的时候都是这样。而在另一件事中，我们就像谈论了很多年。因此，相同的神经元在截然不同的时间尺度上进行计时。这是如何运作的？ >> 所以我认为大多数已经完成的研究都是在很短的时间内完成的。它们就是你所说的老虎机类型的研究。我们最近还做了一些关于毅力的研究，但同样，当我们制定长期目标时，我们通常需要考虑的并不是多年。我认为问题并不一定是罗勒神经节的计时问题。我认为这些是更高层次的目标和计划，你可能认为它们是在大脑皮层，特别是额叶皮层中构建的。你知道，我们讨论了执行控制和规划。除了一些相对简单的问题解决任务外，计划尚未得到详细研究，这些任务通常可以在几分钟内完成。但这种[清嗓子]延伸的长期规划和坚持，我不认为那是罗勒帮会做的事情。这些网络来自七鳃鳗，对吧，解决>>让我的动机信号付诸行动。但我认为，这种为了长期目标而持续多年做某事的动力，一定与罗勒神经节中发生的情况有所不同。当然，这也带来了所谓的时间折扣的问题。因此，如果我对某人说，你会得到这种巨大的回报，但你必须坚持一年，或者我对他们说，你会得到这种平庸的结果，你会在一周内得到它。人们的选择会有所不同。 >> 目前这方面的数据是什么？它是否以某种类似两个棉花糖实验的方式划分？ [笑声] 尽管如此，你知道，>>棉花糖实验显然已经变得非常有争议，>>我听说它们被揭穿了。然后有人出现在播客上从事这些工作，并说这个谎言已经被揭穿了。 >> 是的，我不是这些研究的专家，但我认为我想解释的关键是，随着时间的推移，人们在如何折扣他们愿意接受的奖励方面也存在不同程度。 >> 人与人之间的差异很大。那么，是什么让一个人能够说“我要等待更大的回报”

after a year rather than take this mediocre reward in a week." I don't think we've we've really got the neuroscience of that. Now, it's tempting to say that to pursue long-term goals, you know, you want to break it up into short-term goals and >> but I always think about these asymmetries like if you if we said that we said, okay, you know, you have a five-year goal and in order to get there, you're going to use the same reward circuitry and motivation circuitry, but you're really going to pay attention to the small wins along the way, the incremental wins. >> The risk is that you also pay attention to the failures along the way, right? Because in the end, it's binary. you either get the thing or you don't in most cases certainly with a degree. >> But with wins and losses, they're graded as we say, you know, like they're not zero or one, they're 0 to 10. And it's very subjective. And so I feel like perseverance for me has a lot to do with making the pain a shorter experience than the win. Like like carrying forward our wins and our memories of being motivated. Like if we kind of allow those to seep into our self-concept a little bit more, then it's sort of like, oh yeah, you can do hard things, but it's it's a little bit of self-d delusion, but it's a functional self-d delusion, right? >> Of course. Of course. >> You know, I don't know how one could get a medical degree without engaging in some amount of functional self-d delusion. >> Yeah. I mean, it's tough. >> Yeah. [laughter] You've worked on, as I mentioned earlier, a huge number of issues. I don't expect us to go into all of them today, but I know many people are interested in Alzheimer's disease >> and uh the loss of memory due to aging. What in your mind are some of the more interesting findings of past, present, and maybe anything that you did in particular that changed your notions of memory and and Alzheimer's? >> I think one of the most interesting things that much of the audience would not be aware of is Alzheimer's disease does not necessarily equal dementia. people can have Alzheimer's disease and not get dementia. So, we found this out from post-mortem studies. People have been followed as they age. Uh they've donated their brains and it turns out that perhaps 20 to 30% of these individuals who never had dementia have Alzheimer pathology. What do we mean by that? We mean that when we look down under the microscope, you can see the signature of Alzheimer's disease.

“我认为我们还没有真正掌握这方面的神经科学知识。现在，人们很容易说，要追求长期目标，你知道，你想将其分解为短期目标，>>但我总是会考虑这些不对称性，就像我们说，好吧，你知道，你有一个五年目标，为了实现目标，你将使用相同的奖励电路和动机电路，但你确实会关注一路上的小胜利，渐进的胜利。 >> 风险是你也会注意一路上的失败，对吧？因为最终，它是二元的。在大多数情况下，你肯定不会得到东西。 >> 但是，正如我们所说，它们不是零或一，而是非常主观的。所以我觉得坚持对我来说有很大关系，让痛苦比胜利更短暂。就像延续我们的胜利和我们的激励记忆一样，如果我们允许这些更多地渗透到我们的自我概念中，那么这就有点像，哦，是的，你可以做困难的事情，但这只是一点点自我妄想，但这是一种功能性的自我妄想，对吧？ >> 你知道，我不知道如何在不进行一定程度的自我妄想的情况下获得医学学位>> 是的，这很困难>> 是的，正如我之前提到的，我不希望我们今天讨论所有这些问题，但我知道很多人对老年痴呆症感兴趣>> 以及你认为过去的一些更有趣的发现。或许你所做的任何事情特别改变了你对记忆和阿尔茨海默氏症的看法？ >> 我认为大多数观众都没有意识到的最有趣的事情之一是，阿尔茨海默氏症并不一定等于患有阿尔茨海默氏症，但不会患上痴呆症。因此，我们从尸检研究中发现，随着年龄的增长，他们中可能有 20% 到 30% 的人捐献了自己的大脑。从未患有痴呆症 患有阿尔茨海默病是什么意思？我们的意思是，当我们在显微镜下观察时，您可以看到阿尔茨海默病的特征。

时间轴｜02:00:00

You can see plaques which are made up of this protein amaloid which has been deposited in the brain. You can see tangles which are made out of this protein towel. And you can see that also perhaps some of the neurons have uh suffered. They've died in these brains and yet the person never developed dementia. So the first point I think is really important is Alzheimer's disease can increase in the brain as we age but it doesn't necessarily have to lead to dementia which is a really important point. So what's the difference between the people who can cope with this burden of pathology in their brain and remain cognitively relatively intact? Why do they have this cognitive resilience? And a lot of people are investing uh funds to try and work out what's the difference between these people. Of course, there might be biological differences and lifestyle differences. It could be, you know, the people who can be resilient are the ones who've had a routine of physical exercise. They made sure their blood pressure never got too high. They've made sure that, you know, they don't have pre-diabetes or diabetes or they check for it. Their cholesterol is under control. They're not drinking too much alcohol. they're not smoking. All of those things can be important. But it turns out that actually there are other factors that can be just as important. You know, we talked a little bit about these. Those include that having that sense of purpose, making sure that you have a network of people, that you're socially connected as your age, and also remaining curious, open to new ideas. Those factors turn out to be almost as important as some of the physical things we do. And we're just scratching the surface of trying to understand how those factors affect the biology. How is it that having a sense of purpose makes a difference to how you cope with this burden of pathology in your brain? But in a way, that's a really interesting optimistic thing to learn about Alzheimer's disease that it doesn't necessarily always lead to dementia. And by the way, I should also just explain for the audience that although Alzheimer's disease is the leading cause of dementia, there are many many causes of dementia. So again, Alzheimer's disease is not the only thing that can cause dementia. In terms of our own work, one of the things that we've really tried to do is extend the kind of work we were talking about with loss of motivation and apathy [snorts] into people who develop Alzheimer's disease. And in fact, perhaps even before we're aware they've developed [snorts] it. A lot of studies in the last few years have shown that if we just study healthy aging people, they don't have dementia, they don't have any diagnosis of a neurological disorder. What we find is that those individuals who score highly on just self-reported questionnaires for motivation, if they score highly for apathy, they have twice the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease than people who don't. And the conclusion that is emerging is that Alzheimer's disease is not necessarily just about cognitive impairment. It can also lead to behavioral changes long before you develop any sign of cognitive impairment. And one of those behavioral changes happens to be apathy, loss of motivation. So if you can pick that up at an early stage, could you potentially do something about it? Because the evidence suggests that these pathologies in Alzheimer's disease, the amaloid and the tow that's being laid down in the brain, that can be more than 10 years, perhaps more than 15 years before somebody presents to a doctor with cognitive complaints. So we've got this huge window maybe 10 to 15 years before someone comes along and has a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. So if we could detect this at the earliest stages maybe

您可以看到由沉积在大脑中的这种蛋白质类蛋白组成的斑块。您可以看到由这种蛋白质毛巾制成的缠结。你可以看到，也许一些神经元也受到了影响。他们的大脑已经死亡，但这个人从未患上痴呆症。因此，我认为非常重要的第一点是，随着年龄的增长，阿尔茨海默病会在大脑中增加，但它不一定会导致痴呆，这是非常重要的一点。那么，那些能够应对大脑病理负担并保持认知相对完整的人之间有什么区别呢？为什么他们有这种认知弹性？很多人都投入呃资金来尝试找出这些人之间的区别。当然，可能存在生物学差异和生活方式差异。你知道，有弹性的人可能是那些经常进行体育锻炼的人。他们确保自己的血压永远不会太高。他们已经确保，你知道，他们没有糖尿病前期或糖尿病，或者他们进行了检查。他们的胆固醇得到控制。他们没有喝太多酒。他们不吸烟。所有这些事情都很重要。但事实证明，实际上还有其他因素同样重要。你知道，我们谈过一些这些。这些包括有目标感，确保你有一个人际网络，随着年龄的增长你有社交联系，并且保持好奇心，对新想法持开放态度。事实证明，这些因素几乎与我们所做的一些身体活动一样重要。我们只是触及了表面，试图了解这些因素如何影响生物学。拥有使命感对你应对大脑病理负担的方式有何影响？但在某种程度上，了解阿尔茨海默病是一件非常有趣的乐观事情，因为它并不一定总是导致痴呆。顺便说一句，我还应该向观众解释一下，虽然阿尔茨海默病是导致痴呆症的主要原因，但引起痴呆症的原因有很多。再说一次，阿尔茨海默病并不是唯一可能导致痴呆的疾病。就我们自己的工作而言，我们真正尝试做的事情之一就是将我们正在谈论的那种失去动力和冷漠的工作扩展到患有阿尔茨海默病的人身上。事实上，也许甚至在我们意识到他们已经开发出它之前。过去几年的大量研究表明，如果我们只研究健康的老年人，他们不会患有痴呆症，也不会被诊断出患有神经系统疾病。我们发现，那些在自我报告的动机问卷中得分很高的人，如果他们在冷漠方面得分很高，那么他们患阿尔茨海默病的风险是其他人的两倍。正在出现的结论是，阿尔茨海默病不一定只是认知障碍。它还可能在您出现任何认知障碍迹象之前就导致行为改变。这些行为变化之一就是冷漠、失去动力。因此，如果您能在早期阶段发现这一点，您是否可以采取一些措施？因为有证据表明，阿尔茨海默病中的这些病理现象、类蛋白和沉积在大脑中的丝束，可能需要 10 多年，甚至可能超过 15 年，才会有人向医生提出认知问题。因此，在有人被诊断出患有阿尔茨海默病之前，我们可能有 10 到 15 年的时间。所以如果我们能在最早阶段发现这一点也许

the drug therapies that have developed and shown very small changes the monoconal antibodies that mop up amaloid have shown that even in established early Alzheimer's disease they can make a small difference to the trajectory of the illness. Maybe those monoconal antibodies could make a difference if you could do something 15 years before someone develops Alzheimer's disease if we could detect it in the brains. So I guess these are perhaps some of the most interesting things that I think um I've been stimulated by in the last few years. >> I wasn't aware that one could have plaques and tangles so-called Alzheimer's characteristic signs of Alzheimer's and yet not have dementia. Sounds like certain people by virtue of having sense of purpose engaging in the world and who knows maybe even the reflection back onto who they are sense of self being reinforced I'm making up that portion of the story but I like the idea uh no basis for it but uh no direct data for it rather are resilient to their own internal landscape. It's an interesting way of thinking about neurodeenerative disease because we think about exercise, crossword puzzle, social connection, Mediterranean diet and all these things, you know, and good cardiovascular health in general buffering us against the uh pressures of the outside world. But the idea that our thoughts, our self-concept, our emotions could buffer us against our internal neural landscape, that's pretty exciting because that's something that, as you mentioned, if you could start early enough >> Yeah. Well, it would benefit us anyway. Why wouldn't we do it? Of course. >> Right. It's just good for us across the board. >> What's the harm in doing that? >> Right. >> Yeah. But that is an exciting new development. Uh but of course that has all sorts of implications. Um would you tell someone they have Alzheimer pathology in their brain when they weren't going to develop dementia? >> You're spoiling spoiling the party here, right? >> That's a tough one. You know, these days there's a lot of interest in whole body MRI. friend of mine who's a neurosurgeon says that he gets people in his clinic all the time who spotted things in a you know they paid to go get their own MRI and it saved their life but he gets a lot of calls from people that are concerned about white spots on the brain or growths in the brain that are basically of no concern clinically and it's a tough call and there's a financial piece where some people can afford to do this and some people can't and so it's become a point of contention but >> this This is how we used to talk about genetic data in the late 80s, early 90s. I remember the discussion like, would you want your genome? >> And some people say, well, if I'm going to get Huntington's, well, wait, no, maybe I wouldn't want to know. And other people say, oh, I would absolutely want to know. It's it's a very complicated issue. >> Yeah. And you need informed choice. So, you need to have enough information before you make that choice. And of course, as you said, maybe some people are financially able to do this sort of stuff and others aren't. So, it has huge implications going forward. But again, you know, there's so much excitement in brain diseases that we we couldn't potentially think about treating years ago. For example, the landscape in multiple sclerosis. When I was a junior neurologist, all we had was steroids, corticosteroids to give to people who had relapses of multiple scerosis. Now, there are a huge range of immune therapies for multiple scerosis, which has transformed the lives of people with that diagnosis. and the disability in that condition. You can't be a general neurologist in you know looking after multiple sclerosis patients. You have to be a real hypers specialist because

已经开发出的药物疗法并显示出非常小的变化，清除 amaloid 的单锥抗体表明，即使在已确诊的早期阿尔茨海默病中，它们也可以对疾病的发展轨迹产生微小的影响。如果我们能够在某人患上阿尔茨海默病之前 15 年做一些事情，如果我们能够在大脑中检测到这种疾病，那么这些单锥抗体可能会产生影响。所以我想这些可能是我认为在过去几年中受到刺激的最有趣的事情。 >> 我不知道一个人可能会出现阿尔茨海默病的斑块和缠结（阿尔茨海默病的特征性症状），但不会患有痴呆症。听起来有些人凭借着参与世界的使命感，谁知道甚至可能会反思他们是谁，自我意识得到加强，我正在编造故事的这一部分，但我喜欢这个想法，呃，没有任何基础，但呃，没有直接的数据，而是对他们自己的内部景观有弹性。这是思考神经退行性疾病的一种有趣的方式，因为我们会想到锻炼、填字游戏、社会联系、地中海饮食以及所有这些事情，你知道，良好的心血管健康总体上可以缓冲我们抵御外界的压力。但是，我们的思想、我们的自我概念、我们的情绪可以缓冲我们对内部神经景观的影响，这是非常令人兴奋的，因为正如你提到的，如果你能尽早开始>>是的。好吧，无论如何这对我们都有好处。我们为什么不这样做呢？当然。 >> 对。这对我们整体来说都是有好处的。 >> 这样做有什么坏处？ >> 对。 >> 是的。但这是一个令人兴奋的新发展。呃，但这当然有各种各样的含义。嗯，你会告诉某人他们的大脑中患有阿尔茨海默病，而他们不会患上痴呆症吗？ >> 你在破坏这里的聚会，对吧？ >> 这是一项艰巨的任务。您知道，现在人们对全身 MRI 很感兴趣。我的一位神经外科医生朋友说，他的诊所里经常有人发现东西，你知道他们花钱去做核磁共振检查，这救了他们的命，但他接到很多人打来的电话，担心大脑上的白斑或大脑中的生长物，这些在临床上基本上不关心，这是一个艰难的决定，而且有一个财务问题，有些人能负担得起，有些人则不能，所以这成为了一个争论点，但是>>这个这就是我们在 80 年代末、90 年代初谈论基因数据的方式。我记得这样的讨论，你想要你的基因组吗？ >> 有些人说，好吧，如果我要患亨廷顿舞蹈症，好吧，等等，不，也许我不想知道。其他人说，哦，我绝对想知道。这是一个非常复杂的问题。 >> 是的。您需要明智的选择。因此，在做出选择之前，您需要获得足够的信息。当然，正如你所说，也许有些人在经济上有能力做这类事情，而另一些人却没有。因此，它对未来有着巨大的影响。但同样，你知道，脑部疾病有如此多的令人兴奋的地方，我们几年前根本无法考虑治疗这些疾病。例如，多发性硬化症中的风景。当我还是一名初级神经科医生时，我们只有类固醇、皮质类固醇来给多发性硬化症复发的人服用。现在，针对多发性硬化症有多种免疫疗法，这改变了患有这种疾病的人的生活。以及这种情况下的残疾。你不可能成为一名普通神经科医生来照顾多发性硬化症患者。你必须是一个真正的超级专家，因为

there are so many therapeutic possibilities and for neurodeenerative diseases it's a tough call as well but so much has happened in a condition which was thought pretty untreatable 30 years ago apart from giving steroids. So I think this is an area that's become really exciting. it's a good time to become a neurologist if anyone's thinking about it. Whereas maybe a few years back I had a more depressing view of neurology. It sounds like things are really on the upswing in terms of tools and approaches for treatment. Again, 30 years ago, deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease was just being introduced. And I used to think what are these guys doing? They're putting these patients through this terrible surgery. There's risks of infection, hemorrhage, all these kind of things. Now I look back and I think you have to take those pioneering steps, take the risks because there are patients with Parkinson's disease who have had their lives transformed by this sort of radical treatment where you have deep brain stimulation of the basil ganglia. I mean that's an incredible achievement and so if you could have that why can't you have deep brain stimulation in other neurodeenerative diseases provided you found the targets for that stimulation well and why can't you have focal neuropharmacological uh treatment which would mean that you wouldn't necessarily get any of the toxic side effects or or unwanted side effects of drugs that you might give systemically or introvenously in some I I think these things are coming. >> I think so, too. I'm excited about intersectional methods like giving a drug that potentially could increase dopamine everywhere, but you give another compound that directs it specifically to the components of the brain that you're interested in and so you relieve side effects. That that stuff is being done in animal models and we're not quite there. I feel like we're getting there. >> That's right. and and some of my colleagues in Oxford and elsewhere in the world are, you know, using focused ultrasound to open up the bloodb brain barrier, the zip that covers the brain so that it's focally opened up at the location you want to deliver the drug. >> Oh, that's cool. >> I mean, that's, you know, >> very cool. >> Fantastic if you can achieve it. >> I'm excited and encouraged by these MS results. Um, we have a colleague here that has MS and, um, we haven't done an episode about it yet. uh we need to but that's super

治疗的可能性有很多，对于神经退行性疾病来说，这也是一个艰难的决定，但在 30 年前，除了给予类固醇之外，这种疾病被认为是无法治愈的，但已经发生了很多事情。所以我认为这是一个非常令人兴奋的领域。如果有人正在考虑成为一名神经科医生，那么现在正是成为一名神经科医生的好时机。而也许几年前，我对神经病学的看法更加令人沮丧。听起来治疗工具和方法确实在不断进步。 30 年前，针对帕金森病的深部脑刺激技术刚刚被引入。我曾经想这些人在做什么？他们正在让这些病人经历这个可怕的手术。存在感染、出血等各种风险。现在我回想起来，我认为你必须采取这些开创性的步骤，承担风险，因为有些帕金森病患者的生活已经通过这种对罗勒神经节进行深层脑部刺激的激进治疗而改变。我的意思是，这是一项令人难以置信的成就，所以如果你能做到这一点，为什么你不能在其他神经退行性疾病中进行深层脑刺激，只要你很好地找到了刺激的目标，为什么你不能进行局部神经药理学呃治疗，这意味着你不一定会得到任何药物的毒副作用或不需要的副作用，我认为这些事情即将到来。 >> 我也这么认为。我对交叉方法感到兴奋，比如给予一种可能会增加各处多巴胺的药物，但你给予另一种化合物，将其专门引导到你感兴趣的大脑成分，这样你就可以减轻副作用。这些东西正在动物模型中完成，但我们还没有完全做到这一点。我感觉我们快到了。 >> 没错。我在牛津和世界其他地方的一些同事正在使用聚焦超声波打开血脑屏障，即覆盖大脑的拉链，以便在您想要输送药物的位置集中打开。 >> 哦，那太酷了。 >> 我的意思是，那是，你知道，>> 非常酷。 >> 如果你能实现它那就太棒了。 >> 这些 MS 结果让我感到兴奋和鼓舞。嗯，我们这里有一位同事患有多发性硬化症，嗯，我们还没有制作关于它的一集。呃我们需要但是那太棒了

时间轴｜02:10:00

encouraging. Super encouraging. >> It really is transformative in that field. >> You've been very generous with your time. Before we uh wrap up, can I just ask you a few more questions? >> Of course. >> Okay. Um people will wonder if there's anything they can do to increase their attention or ability to stay focused in stuff that isn't super engaging for them. Is that a is that a skill? the studies that have been done there have really focused on things like playing video games or stuff like that and you can improve on those sort of tasks but what you mentioned before this doesn't necessarily generalize to other types of activity so it seems to be very task specific domain specific in in that way hyperdomain specific so training your attention I'm not sure there is such uh such great literature which I would think you I could point you to this has been also tried in people with stroke and who lose attention like the neglect syndrome and again things improve on the task but they don't necessarily generalize to other tasks can we train to not get distracted so the inverse of that this is might seem like a crazy example but in the world of mouse genetics I learned a long time ago that it takes many generations to evolve a trait but it doesn't take very many generations to devolve all of a trait. So, you can just breed some mice, breed some mice, pretty soon you'll get interesting mutations um that you can study and you can find the role of particular genes, put them back in. But if you go and you try and say, "Oh, you know, we're going to like breed mice for a while until we get an interesting outlier and then we're going to study that outlier." You're going to you're going to be an old old human before you even get something that might be interesting. And that's [clears throat] a for me was a very informative example because in the realm of attention maybe we can't get better but maybe we're doing a lot of things in our daily life that are degrading our attention and we just rescue a little bit of that and we're like oh I'm actually much better at focusing than I thought. >> Yeah. So I think although there might not be a great deal of evidence that you can intrinsically train your attention to do better generally what you could do is to cut out things that are distracting for you. I mean you know these are simple things that people will be very familiar with. Make sure you don't get notifications. That's a really important thing that many people don't do, right? Or keep your email open while you're doing something else. Make sure that there isn't some sort of distracting noise wherever you're doing this. So, you could do things in your environment to cut down distracting stimuli that will capture your attention. >> I sometimes wonder if there's both a pleasure and a pain in giving something our full attention. M I now look at the world as okay what's effective in grabbing people's attention and distracting them what's effective in grabbing people's attention and engaging them okay well drama arousal and numbing out are very effective at grabbing people's attention but I think I and others have experienced this thing I know I have perhaps others where when you try hard to really focus on something it's a pleasure once you get through it and you get someplace but there's a kind of a pain to it also [snorts] And so perhaps the attention economy isn't so much about grabbing people's attention. It's about distributing it over a certain array of things where they can potentially make money. I think about this a lot lately and I think wait what I'm getting back when I'm >> getting much better getting so focused cuz I have a pretty laser focus when I want to. I learn a lot of it in here. I'm not thinking about anything else. But were my

令人鼓舞。超级鼓舞人心。 >> 它在该领域确实具有变革性。 >> 您非常慷慨地花费了时间。在我们结束之前，我可以再问你几个问题吗？ >> 当然。 >> 好的。嗯，人们会想知道是否可以做些什么来增加他们的注意力或能力，让他们能够专注于那些对他们来说不太有吸引力的事情。这是一种技能吗？那里所做的研究确实集中在玩视频游戏或类似的事情上，你可以改进这类任务，但你之前提到的并不一定能推广到其他类型的活动，所以它似乎是非常特定于任务特定领域的，以这种方式超域特定的，所以训练你的注意力我不确定有这么好的文献，我想你我可以向你指出，这也已经在患有中风和失去注意力的人（如忽视综合症）中进行了尝试，并且任务再次得到改善，但他们不一定能推广到其他任务 我们可以训练不分心吗？所以相反，这似乎是一个疯狂的例子，但在小鼠遗传学领域，我很久以前就知道，需要很多代才能进化出一种性状，但不需要很多代来转移所有的性状。所以，你可以繁殖一些老鼠，繁殖一些老鼠，很快你就会得到有趣的突变，你可以研究它们，你可以找到特定基因的作用，把它们放回去。但是如果你去尝试说，“哦，你知道，我们会喜欢繁殖老鼠一段时间，直到我们得到一个有趣的异常值，然后我们将研究那个异常值。”在你得到一些可能有趣的东西之前，你就会成为一个老人。这对我来说是一个非常有启发性的例子，因为在注意力领域，我们可能无法变得更好，但也许我们在日常生活中做了很多事情，这些事情正在降低我们的注意力，而我们只是挽救了其中的一点点，我们就像哦，我实际上比我想象的更擅长集中注意力。 >> 是的。所以我认为，虽然可能没有大量证据表明你可以从本质上训练你的注意力，以做得更好，但你可以做的就是去掉那些让你分心的事情。我的意思是你知道这些都是人们非常熟悉的简单事情。确保您不会收到通知。这是一件非常重要的事情，但很多人都没有做，对吗？或者在做其他事情时保持电子邮件打开。确保无论您在哪里执行此操作，都不会出现任何分散注意力的噪音。因此，您可以在您的环境中做一些事情来减少会吸引您注意力的干扰刺激。 >> 我有时会想，全神贯注于某件事是否既快乐又痛苦。 M 我现在认为这个世界很好，什么可以有效地吸引人们的注意力并分散他们的注意力，什么可以有效地吸引人们的注意力并吸引他们，好吧，戏剧性的唤醒和麻木对于吸引人们的注意力非常有效，但我想我和其他人都经历过这件事，我知道我可能也有其他人，当你努力真正专注于某件事时，一旦你完成它并到达某个地方，这是一种快乐，但也有一种痛苦[哼哼]所以也许注意力经济并不是为了吸引人们的注意力。这是为了将其分配到一系列有可能赚钱的事物上。我最近经常思考这个问题，我想等一下我会得到什么，当我>>变得更好，变得如此专注时，因为当我想要的时候，我有一个漂亮的激光焦点。我在这里学到了很多东西。我没有考虑任何其他事情。但我的

mind to flip to something I can grab it right back. Is my attention and focus getting better or are we just not allowing ourselves to get pulled into the array of other things? This has been a pleasure I should say. But as you say, hard work is hard work. Focus is hard work and hard work involves a bit of friction. Does this make sense? >> Yeah. And and I I think it goes back to that conversation we were having about economy of what you do. You know, is it better to be inert? Is it better to allow your attention to just focus on one thing or is it better to allow it to be deployed widely to be captured by different things? So there might be an economical benefit for the brain >> and for Andrew to just devote resources to a few things rather than to many things. So reduce the choices. >> I don't normally ask these sorts of questions, but I feel compelled to ask and feel free to say pass. Uh what do you do for um enrichment? Uh I don't like the word fun. For enrichment uh when you're not thinking about the brain or or engaging with, you know, family and that sort of thing. Like what what do you like to do to stimulate your mind if it's not work or or family? >> Yeah, I really like drawing. I like art. >> That's something I get a lot of pleasure from. I mean, I I do physical things, too. I'll go to the gym as well, but but the thing I really like I wish I had more time for >> is art and painting. If I could do that, I'd be I would love it. But I know I'd have to devote a lot of resources and time to do that properly to do it. Well, >> what do you draw? Is it neural related? Is it by >> I drew the figures, for example, in the book. I really enjoyed that doing that. But I can, you know, I can draw anything else that I fancy. It could be a still life, whatever it is. But but I don't take a huge amount of time, but I get a lot of pleasure from doing it. >> And you have thoughts about other things while you do it, ideas and that >> and that will come. But there is a just an intrinsic pleasure from disengaging from everything else and just you know even if you spend half an hour on something like this which doesn't necessarily have value to anybody else. It's just for you. It's something you're doing and maybe improving your skill in this. So maybe that's what I what you might call enriching. >> No, it certainly is. Uh as someone who likes to draw, I can relate. But no matter what people enjoy doing, I hope uh they heard your answer clearly. I I knew there was a reason I asked, which is interesting people always have a lot of interests. This is like kind of obvious when you hear it, but it's like interesting people have a lot of interests and they they pursue them even if they're not trying to, you know, have their work in the Guggenheim or something. Although you probably will knowing you, you Oxford types, you know. Thank you, Dr. Massud Hussein. I appreciate you very much for the work you do. Your patients certainly appreciate you for the science you're doing in addition to the clinical work, for the fact that you write books, that you go on podcasts, and that you share information that is interesting and relevant to everybody because this is after all the the human experience. Sometimes pathologies and overcoming them, but always the reflections on the quote unquote normal everyday human experience is what's so relevant to everybody. I've thoroughly enjoyed this conversation. and hopefully we can encourage you to come back across the pond to talk to us again in a few years because you're moving at a rapid rate and it's going to be hard to keep up with your discoveries, but please do. >> Thanks for a really stimulating conversation. Thank you. >> Thank you for joining me for today's discussion with Dr. Massud Hussein. To learn more

介意翻到一些我可以马上拿回来的东西。我的注意力和专注力是否变得更好，或者我们只是不允许自己陷入其他事情中？我应该说这是一种荣幸。但正如你所说，努力就是努力。专注是艰苦的工作，而艰苦的工作会带来一些摩擦。这有道理吗？ >> 是的。我认为这可以追溯到我们关于工作的经济性的对话。你知道吗，保持惰性更好吗？是让你的注意力只集中在一件事上更好，还是让它广泛部署以被不同的事物捕获更好？因此，对于大脑来说，>>并且对于安德鲁来说，将资源投入到少数事情而不是很多事情上可能会带来经济利益。所以减少选择。 >> 我通常不会问这类问题，但我觉得有必要问并且可以随意说“通过”。呃，你做什么来丰富自己的生活？呃，我不喜欢“有趣”这个词。为了充实，呃，当你不思考大脑或不参与家庭之类的事情时。比如，除了工作或家庭之外，你喜欢做什么来刺激你的思维？ >> 是的，我真的很喜欢画画。我喜欢艺术。 >> 这是我感到非常高兴的事情。我的意思是，我也做身体上的事情。我也会去健身房，但我真正喜欢的事情我希望我有更多的时间>>是艺术和绘画。如果我能做到这一点，我会喜欢它。但我知道我必须投入大量资源和时间才能正确做到这一点。嗯，>>你画什么？与神经有关吗？是不是通过>>我画了图，比如书里的。我真的很喜欢这样做。但我可以，你知道，我可以画任何我喜欢的东西。它可能是一幅静物画，不管它是什么。但我并没有花很多时间，但我从中得到了很多乐趣。 >> 当你做这件事的时候，你会想到其他事情，想法等等 >> 然后那将会到来。但是，脱离其他一切会有一种内在的乐趣，而且你知道，即使你花半个小时在这样的事情上，这对其他人来说不一定有价值。这只是为了你。这是你正在做的事情，也许可以提高你在这方面的技能。所以也许这就是我所说的丰富。 >> 不，确实如此。呃，作为一个喜欢画画的人，我能体会到。但无论人们喜欢做什么，我希望呃他们清楚地听到你的回答。我知道我问这个问题是有原因的，有趣的人总是有很多兴趣。当你听到它时，这有点明显，但这就像有趣的人有很多兴趣，他们追求这些兴趣，即使他们不想，你知道，在古根海姆或其他什么地方工作。虽然你可能会认识你，但你们这些牛津类型的人，你知道。谢谢马苏德·侯赛因博士。我非常感谢你所做的工作。除了临床工作之外，您的患者当然还感谢您所做的科学工作、您写的书、您上播客以及您分享与每个人相关的有趣信息，因为这毕竟是人类的经验。有时会出现病态并克服它们，但总是对正常的人类日常经验进行反思，这与每个人都息息相关。我非常喜欢这次谈话。希望我们可以鼓励您几年后再次跨越大西洋回来与我们交谈，因为您的移动速度很快，很难跟上您的发现，但请这样做。 >> 感谢您进行了一次非常激动人心的谈话。谢谢。 >> 感谢您参加今天与 Massud Hussein 博士的讨论。了解更多

about his work and to find a link to his book, please see the links in the show note caption. If you're learning from and or enjoying this podcast, please subscribe to our YouTube channel. That's a terrific zerocost way to support us. In addition, please follow the podcast by clicking the follow button on both Spotify and Apple. And on both Spotify and Apple, you can leave us up to a five-star review. And you can now leave us comments at both Spotify and Apple. Please also check out the sponsors mentioned at the beginning and throughout today's episode. That's the best way to support this podcast. If you have questions for me or comments about the podcast or guests or topics that you'd like me to consider for the Huberman Lab podcast, please put those in the comment section on YouTube. I do read all the comments. For those of you that haven't heard, I have a new book coming out. It's my very first book. It's entitled Protocols: An Operating Manual for the Human Body. This is a book that I've been working on for more than 5 years, and that's based on more than 30 years of research and experience. And it covers protocols for everything from sleep to exercise to stress control protocols related to focus and motivation. And of course, I provide the scientific substantiation for the protocols that are included. The book is now available by pre-sale at protocolsbook.com. There you can find links to various vendors. You can pick the one that you like best. Again, the book is called Protocols, an operating manual for the human body. And if you're not already following me on social media, I am Huberman Lab on all social media platforms. So that's Instagram, X, Threads, Facebook, and LinkedIn. And on all those platforms, I discuss science and science related tools, some of which overlaps with the content of the Huberman Lab podcast, but much of which is distinct from the information on the Hubberman Lab podcast. Again, it's Huberman Lab on all social media platforms. And if you haven't already, subscribe to our neural network newsletter. The neural network newsletter is a zerocost monthly newsletter that includes podcast summaries as well as what we call protocols in the form of one to three-page PDFs that cover everything from how to optimize your sleep, how to optimize dopamine, deliberate cold exposure. We have a foundational fitness protocol that covers cardiovascular training and resistance training. All of that is available completely zero

有关他的作品并找到他的书的链接，请参阅节目注释标题中的链接。如果您正在学习或喜欢此播客，请订阅我们的 YouTube 频道。这是支持我们的绝佳零成本方式。此外，请通过单击 Spotify 和 Apple 上的关注按钮来关注播客。在 Spotify 和 Apple 上，您都可以给我们五星级的评价。您现在可以在 Spotify 和 Apple 上给我们留下评论。另请查看今天节目开头和整个节目中提到的赞助商。这是支持这个播客的最佳方式。如果您对我有疑问，或者对播客、嘉宾或您希望我为 Huberman Lab 播客考虑的主题有意见，请在 YouTube 上的评论部分留言。我确实阅读了所有评论。对于那些还没有听说过的人，我即将出版一本新书。这是我的第一本书。它的标题是《协议：人体操作手册》。这是我花了 5 年多时间编写的一本书，它基于 30 多年的研究和经验。它涵盖了从睡眠到锻炼，再到与注意力和动机相关的压力控制协议等各个方面的协议。当然，我还为所包含的协议提供了科学依据。该书现已在 protocolbook.com 上预售。在那里您可以找到各个供应商的链接。您可以选择您最喜欢的一个。同样，这本书的名字叫《Protocols》，一本人体操作手册。如果您还没有在社交媒体上关注我，我是所有社交媒体平台上的 Huberman Lab。这就是 Instagram、X、Threads、Facebook 和 LinkedIn。在所有这些平台上，我讨论科学和科学相关工具，其中一些与 Huberman Lab 播客的内容重叠，但其中大部分与 Hubberman Lab 播客上的信息不同。同样，所有社交媒体平台上都是 Huberman Lab。如果您还没有订阅我们的神经网络时事通讯，请订阅我们。神经网络通讯是一份零成本的每月通讯，其中包括播客摘要以及我们所说的一到三页 PDF 形式的协议，涵盖从如何优化睡眠、如何优化多巴胺、故意冷暴露等所有内容。我们有一个基本的健身方案，涵盖心血管训练和阻力训练。所有这一切都是完全零可用的

时间轴｜02:20:00

cost. You simply go to hubermanlab.com, go to the menu tab in the top right corner, scroll down to newsletter, and enter your email. And I should emphasize that we do not share your email with anybody. Thank you once again for joining me for today's discussion with Dr. Massud Hussein. And last but certainly not least, thank you [music] for your interest in science.

成本。您只需访问 hubermanlab.com，转到右上角的菜单选项卡，向下滚动到时事通讯，然后输入您的电子邮件即可。我要强调的是，我们不会与任何人分享您的电子邮件。再次感谢您参加今天与马苏德·侯赛因博士的讨论。最后但并非最不重要的一点是，感谢[音乐]对科学的兴趣。