How Emotions Are Made: The Secret Life of the Brain by Prof. Lisa Feldman Barrett Ph.D (Author) 4.6 out of 5 stars 1,306 ratings

Having grown up thinking that emotions come in categories, getting through How Emotions are Made has been very eye opening. Science of the last 200 yrs has mainly focused on deconstructing the world into its essential parts in areas like physics, brain science as well has gone through much change with imaging technology that allows us to keep track of where neural activity is taking place during various experiences that we might have. In my educational system I am sure I was told that certain emotions create certain body responses and response to emotions like fear and anger and happiness could be usually seen through their impact on our physiology. How Emotions are Made brings new ideas to the table, that there is no such thing as essential emotions and that we merely have physiological responses to sensory inputs based on our historical pattern recognition of similar sensory inputs and how we then categorize them has to do with cultural knowledge. As a consequence emotions are not physical responses but rather cultural/subjective categorizations of our physical responses. This all sounds quite abstract I am sure. This is a deep book that weaves together a lot of ideas and presents a whole new way of thinking about emotions and our own humanity and consciousness. It starts out by showing some images or faces with expressions and asking the reader what they believe those people are experiencing as emotions. The reader as well as the groups surveyed with the results contained in the book all show very strongly that people see the same emotions in those faces. Interestingly as the surveyed group's culture becomes more removed the overlap does diminish. The author uses this as a starting point to frame the discussion and gives the background of the photos taken, which are from actors hyperbolizing some face. The author goes on to describe how a mind works and discusses it is a pattern recognition machine. The author discusses how the mind creates hierarchical knowledge and how we categorize objects very well. Our ability to distinguish objects into distinct categories has always been a challenging skill to program but this patter recognition is a strong attribute of how our minds work. The author goes on to discuss how emotions do not have a universal character and that a roller coaster and being in an out of control car might create similar physical conditions but totally different emotional characters. The idea that emotion has an independent character from the body the author believes is fundamentally flawed. The author then discusses how the body receives inputs from our environment and responds to best balance the "body budget" and then we frame our understanding of that process via the use of emotional characterizations. The author brings up ideas like emotions don't objectively exist as they represent our internal interpretations of our physiological responses rather than something objective and thus they are constructed from the way we live in a social world. There is much in common with some memetic ideas in this book. In particular that concepts are created and become reality by our use of language rather than have their independent existence. The author gives advice on how to better understand yourself and your emotions and frames the questions we should ask ourselves to improve the way we respond to stimuli. In particular expanding our emotional vocabulary and improving our categorization of emotions allows us to better understand our selves. The author also dedicates space to illness and the mind, examining things like depression and the overmedication in the US. As well the author discusses how diet, sleep, exercise help keep one's body balance in tune, which is the origin of where responses which are then interpreted as emotions come from. The author then tackles the law from a philosophical standpoint, ideas like intent are fundamentally questioned and the author argues that things like crimes of passion are misguided ideas. Finally the author reinforces how emotions are socially constructed ideas with the example of a barking dog. The interpretation of our favorite animals actions as manifestations of their emotional state just doesn't make sense as they don't have essential emotions. They do feel pain and pleasure but that is very different from happiness, sadness, fear, anger. We project how we interpret the physiological responses to certain stimuli as those emotions and it is fundamentally flawed to assume that we can project those on to other people. How emotions are made is a deep book with a lot of fascinating ideas. A review cannot do the book justice and I suspect it needs to be read multiple times, though I don't plan on re-reading it just yet! It has new ideas for an old field that needs to be rethought with modern imaging technologies. It is bold and illuminating and definitely food for much thought and will cause much introspection I suspect. Excellent book

This book is certainly complicated and deals with a lot of excellent, modern concepts in neuroscience. As a professional in the field, I find Barrett's theory to be very intriguing and incredibly compelling. The ideas contained in this book have the potential to create a major paradigm shift the field. From an academic's perspective, I will examine a few of the major premises of the book. The biggest and most important thesis of this book is that the human mind constructs emotions via what she terms "predictions" and "affect." Barrett defines predictions (or concepts) in a similar way to previous theorists who call these ideas "schema or schemata." Her definition includes a very simple use that is similar to the colloquial term, or basically a concept or an idea of what we think will happen informed on what has happened to us in the past. Simple enough and very easy to understand. Affect, by her account, is the brain's ability to interpret signals coming in from the various parts of the body and t turn it into something meaningful for us. According to her, the brain is not very good at interpreting these signals at times, and our methods of interpretation come by way of external teaching rather than internal methods of defining them. She says that this is what separates the average person from those with Autism Spectrum Disorder; that they have not successfully incorporated these emotional keywords into their lives. All of these assertions are backed up by strong evidence, and by all accounts are consistent with most previous research in the field of cognition. Emotions and predictions or concepts all function in a similar fashion to heuristics, which are shortcuts and best guesses about what the brain things will happen. This is indeed how most people use emotions to function, as a methodology for interpreting how they feel and how others feel. I have noticed in other reviews some have questioned her evidence of questioning the objectivity of emotional perception, and I think these readers are missing the point. If something is completely arbitrary, as is the case with the social determination of emotions, then there can be no objective method for determining what someone is feeling. Objective, in this sense, is used in a scientific term to mean "Constant regardless of the observer." Typically this definition is applied to mathematical constants of the universe, such as the law of gravity which affects all things at the same rate proportional to mass and acceleration. Emotions do not function in the same way as the laws of physics do objectively, and therefore cannot be considered anything more than subjective; that is reliant on interpretation or our own experiences. With this in mind, her theory is far more comprehensive than any other that I have seen in my career, and is far more down to earth than other decisionmaking theories that tend towards a neat equation-style method of explaining how people work. People work based upon their "emotions" and the majority of people make decisions based on what "feels the best." In this case since Barrett has discovered the methodology by which these people govern their daily lives, there are huge implications for further studies down the road. On to the part about the applications of this resarch, which I find to be less infromative than the theory part, but that is likely because I'm an academic. In the second half of her book, Barrett uses the information she's discovered to apply it to how you, the reader, can use it to change your behavior and thoughts. You are in control of your emotions, and with some training, you can de-condition yourself from using them as a crutch for everything. Her advice is rather easily summarized as "be more self aware" and "Meditate to relax." To briefly editorialize, it seems unlikely to me that the average person would be able to complete changes like these on their own without the help of a therapist. That is, after all, (and this is something she admits in her book), why people seek the help of therapists in the first place---to reframe issues in a new light. Despite this, barrett does make an attempt to help the reader use this new information, despite how little it will likely mean.

This book is about emotions, but, the setup work of describing how the brain works was more interesting to me. I love the idea that we Experience our Constructed Model of the World as Reality. The other big ideas are: Constructed Emotions, Body Budgeting, Affective Realism, Social Reality (as a Super Power), and the Interoceptive System. There is a lot to unpack here. And, there are a few nits, too. Some of this is my spin on what the book says. Since my lens is Consciousness, the idea of the Model as Reality is the key to the book FOR ME. This ia a fragment of text that needs a lot of set-up. And the set-up needs set-up, too. So, the set-up and this text are repeated near the end. Obviously, the book leads you into this gently. p287: "From these three inevitabilities of the mind, we see that construction teaches us to be skeptical. Your experiences are not a window into reality. Rather, your brain is wired to model your world, driven by what is relevant for your body budget, and then you experience that model as Reality..." Also, very current about unlearning implicit bias, aka, Training the Elephant: "It is your responsibility to learn concepts that, through prediction, steer you away from harmful actions." Barrett goes into a lot of detail on a set of concepts that all have to do with modelling Reality. They are: Concepts (the model), Simulation (running the model), Prediction (using the model), Error Correction (tweaking the current categorization and/or the Concept). [jch] Our mental model is a "deep learning" model and categorization similar is "inference" in deep learning lingo, except deep learning does not have the simultaneous predictions... Prediction: (See Also: Clark's Surfing Uncertaintity) p59: "Though prediction, your brain constructs the world you experience. It combines bits and pieces of your past and estimates how likely each bit applies in you current situation." p62 "Through prediction and correction, your brain continually creates and revises your mental model of the world. It's a huge ongoing simulation that constructs everything you perceive while determining how you act..." p64 "When prediction errors occur there are two general options:" 1) change prediction or 2) filter sensory input to match prediction (Affective Realism, aka, implicit bias) I'd add 3) Throw the prediction error to consciousness. Perhaps that would be considered "Experiential Blindness". Barrett's Concepts are VERY SIMILAR to Bor's. Chunking. The "bits and pieces" packaged up into easily retrievable bundles. p29: "Every moment that you are alive, your brain uses concepts to simulate the outside world. Without concepts, you are experientially blind, as you were with the [ visual anomaly ] . With concepts, your brain simulates so invisibly and automatically that vision, hearing, and your other senses seem like reflexes rather than constructions." Constructed Emotions: emotions are concepts and the finer the granularity of your concepts, the easier it is to feel what you're feeling. It is more efficient. p67: "Usually, you experience interception only in general terms: those simple feelings of pleasure, displeasure, arousal, or calmness [mentioned earlier] Sometimes, however, you experience moments of intense interoceptive sensations as emotions. That is a key element of the theory of constructed emotion.In every waking moment, your brain gives your sensations meaning. Some of those sensations are interoceptive sensations, and the resulting meaning can be an instance of an emotion." p35: "The theory of constructed emotion incorporates elements of all three flavors of construction. From social construction, it acknowledges the importance of culture and concepts. From psychological construction, it considers emotions to be constructed by core systems in the brain and body. And from neuroconstuction, it adopts the idea that experience wires the brain." Barrett spent the early part of her PhD work trying to detect the "signatures of emotions" for the universal emotions, which was and still is the commonly accepted view. She could not find them. Instead, she started thinking in terms of population thinking. Each instance of anger is unique, based on habit and circumstance. On p 138, Emotions are 1) to make meaning - to understand one's state is more efficient, 2) prescribe action, 3) regulate your body budget to prepare for said action. These 3 are about you. Two other functions: emotional communication and social influence. Social Reality p134. "Emotions become real to us through two human capabilities that are prerequisites for Social Reality. First, you need a group a people to agree that a concept exists, such as "Flower" or "Cash" or "Happiness". This shared knowledge is called collective intentionality. Most people barely think about collective intentionality, but it nevertheless is a foundation of every society. Even your own name is made real through collective intentionality." p135. "Collective intentionality is necessary for social reality but not sufficient. Certain non-human animals are capable of a rudimentary form of collective intentionality without social reality. Ants work together toward a common activity, as do bees. ... Humans are unique, however, because our collective intentionality involves mental concepts. We can look at a hammer, a chainsaw, and an ice pick and categorize them all as "Tools," then change our minds and categorize them all as "Murder Weapons" We can impose functions that would not otherwise exist, thereby inventing reality. We can work this magic because we have the second prerequisite for social reality: language. No other animals have collective intentionality combined with words." Body Budget Body Budget is a term that is purposefully vague, but it works. Your brain minimizes the amount of energy it expends. It can refer to body budgeting regions, metabolism, psychological well being. The lab just published: Evidence for a large-scale brain system supporting allostasis and interoception in humans_ in Nature, Human Behavior. Ian R. Kleckner. p200: Your body budget fluctuates normally throughout the day, as your brain anticipates your body's needs and shifts around your budgetary resources like oxygen, glucose, salt, and water. When you digest food, your stomach and intestines "borrow" resources from your muscles. When you run, your muscles borrow from your liver and kidneys. During these transfers, your budget remains solvent. Affective Realism Affective Realism is a step past implicit bias. The Reality we see/hear is shaped by our affect. p79: "You might believe that you are a rational creature, weighing the pros and cons before deciding how to act, but the structure of your cortex makes this an implausible fiction. Your brain is wired to listen to your body budget. Affect is in the driver's seat and rationality is a passenger. It doesn't matter whether you're choosing between two snacks, two job offers, two investments, or two heart surgeons your everyday decisions are driven by a loudmouthed, mostly deaf scientist who views the world through affect-colored glasses." Interoception Exteroception are the senses vision, hearing, etc. Interoception senses our internal state. p73: "Interoception is a fundamental feature of the human nervous system, and why you experience these sensations as affect is one of the great mysteries of science. Interoception did not evolve for you to have feelings but to regulate your body budget. It helps your brain track your temperature, how much glucose you are using, whether you have any tissue damage, whether your heart is pounding, whether your muscles are stretching, and other bodily conditions, all at the same time. Your affective feelings of pleasure and displeasure, and calmness and agitation, are simple summaries of your budgetary state. Are you flush?Are you overdrawn?Do you need a deposit, and if so, how desperately? Experiencing our Constructed Model of the World as Reality Now, hopefully this makes sense. Perhaps, as my wife says, this is obvious to everyone, but, to me, it's a great model for consciousness. p283: "Affective Realism, the phenomenon that you experience what you believe, is inevitable because of your wiring. The body budgeting regions ... are the most powerful predictors in your brain, and your primary sensory regions are eager listeners. Body budget predictions are laden with affect, not logic and reason, are the main drivers of your experience and behavior." p284: "Affective Realism is an inevitability, yet you are not helpless against it. The best defense against it is curiosity..." "The second inevitability of the mind is that you have concepts, because the human brain is wired to construct a conceptual system." "The third inevitability of the mind is social reality." ... The social world becomes real. p287: "From these three inevitabilities of the mind, we see that construction teaches us to be skeptical. Your experiences are not a window into reality. Rather, your brain is wired to model your world, driven by what is relevant for your body budget, and then you experience that model as Reality..." We are responsible for our actions. Sure, your brain made you do it, but, "It is your responsibility to learn concepts that, through prediction, steer you away from harmful actions." We all need to "Train the Elephant" in Haidt's rider and the elephant metaphor. p155 "If you grow up in a society full of anger or hate, you can't be blamed for having the associated concepts, but as an adult, you can choose to educate yourself and learn additional concepts. It's certainly not an easy task, but it is doable. This is another basis for my frequent claim, "You are an architect of your experience?" You are indeed partly responsible for your actions, even so-called emotional reactions that you experience as out of your control. It is your responsibility to learn concepts that, through prediction, steer you away from harmful actions. You also bear some responsibility for others, because your actions shape other people's concepts and behaviors, creating the environment that turns genes on and off to wire their brains, including the brains of the next generation. Social reality implies that we are all partly responsible for one another's behavior, not in a fluffy, let's-all-blame-society sort of way, but a very real brain-wiring way." Nits. Granted, I am not the target for this book. I have read a lot of books and papers on Consciousness. This book is aimed at a much wider audience and I hope it does really well. For the most part, Barrett does a good job balancing between abstraction and complexity and dumbing the subject down. One example of dumbing it down too much is when she discusses to Damasio and the loss of a specific brain region at that point, just name the orbitofrontal context. 1) Terminology - intrinsic networks (p58), which is way too vague. The term Intrinsic Brain Network get 1.5M gaggle hits, while Large Scale Brain Networks (LSBN) gets 9.7M hits. Why not use the more decriptive and more widely used term? Another example, Theory of Mind is the widely used term for figuring out intentions, beliefs, etc of other people. She uses mental inference. If you are going to use a different term, use a more explicit term. Interception system would be better than interoception network. If the default mode Network is a part of it and the brain network concept is well established, don't add another layer of networks. No mention of Vagus Nerve.. Barrett refers to brain regions as if they were homogeneous "brain blobs". If all nodes in a network are homogeneous, then the intelligence would live in the routing tables, and downplaining the regions would be fine. HOWEVER, cytoarchitecture makes it clear that the different nodes have different processing capabilites. So the brain regions are as important as the network topology and they should be identified if it is relevant. Universal Emotions p173: So when the classical view [ of emotions ] reasserted itself in the 1960s, half a century of anti-essentialist research was swept into history's dustbin. And we are all the poorer for it, considering how much time and money are being wasted today in pursuit of illusory emotion essences. At press time, Microsoft is analyzing facial photographs in an attempt to recognize emotion. Apple has recently purchased Emollient. . . Google . . ." What? If emotions are not essences, not purely physiological, then it is a waste of time to detect them? Since language is learned, is it a waste of time to do speech recognition? What if the core emotions are not inherent physiologically, but, they are nearly universal because part of the Social Reality so early that they are nearly universal. They are like Proto-Indo-European roots. Another nit, she uses "scientists say" too much, as if everyone agrees with her. Nerdly nit: p129 "We only experience red when light of 600 nanometers reflects off of an object". If you are reading a screen and there is red on it, that is being emitted, not reflected. So, if you are well read in neuroscience, it may be a little distracting in some places, but, it was a lot of new material for me and SO worthwhile!!!