Lord Alderdice reviews 'The Ideological Brain'
Image by: SOPA Images Limited / Alamy Stock Photo
3 min read
Leor Zmigrod’s hypothesis that some of us are born uniquely susceptible to radicalisation – rather than shaped by our communities – makes for an engaging but flawed book
How our minds and brains relate, in individuals and groups, is one of humanity’s perpetually fascinating preoccupations. From philosophy, theology and psychology to current neuroscience research, we seek to shed light on a subject which is the particular focus for a psychiatrist like myself, interested in disturbed historic relations in individuals and societies. A book entitled The Ideological Brain is therefore of immediate interest, though the strapline A Radical Science of Susceptible Minds triggers a certain reservation.
Sigmund Freud was a neurologist who became fascinated with patients whose physical symptoms seemed triggered by psychological events. He employed psychological methods but believed that scientific and medical advances would bring technical innovations to clarify the connections between the brain and mental function. Recent decades have seen enormous progress, especially with non-invasive investigations such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) enabling the visualisation of brain activity in real time during conversations with subjects.
Much is written about such research findings, but the engaging style of this book assists general readers unfamiliar with navigating scientific journals. There are three elements to such questions: research methods; the facts that emerge; and theories purporting to explain the findings.
Advertising Revenue helps fund our journalism.
Please consider disabling your ad blocker.
Her own approach is not as ‘ideology-free’ as she would like to believe
The author Leor Zmigrod observes that some people do not think rationally; they do not balance up costs and benefits, beliefs and facts. She believes that cognitive psychology and neuroscience can help us understand why, and rightly maintains that the reasons for “political extremism” are less to be found in the content of the ideas as in the form of thinking which she calls “ideological”.
However, her own approach is not as ‘ideology-free’ as she would like to believe, and she ignores some important facts. The complexities of the field are all interpreted through the narrow lens of a mental inflexibility that she believes characterises some people from childhood and affects both their personal and political perspectives.
Zmigrod does not seem to appreciate that the capacity for ‘ideological thinking’ is both universal and impacted by emotional pressures in our communities. The horrors of the Holocaust did not result from an inherent brain susceptibility in German people.
Around the world and across history, whole societies can suffer a wave of ‘ideological thinking’ with few individual exceptions but with terrible consequences. Her proposition that this form of thinking must be combatted in all circumstances also fails to appreciate that we need some people to set aside the interrogation of “all ‘shoulds’, all duties, all compulsions imposed… from outside”. Without that commitment to duty, we would not have soldiers defending us without question, at the cost of their own lives and wellbeing, instead of calculating whether such sacrifices were in their individual ‘best interest’.
Her final brief epilogue – “Going Off-Script” – acknowledges some of these challenges but dismisses them too perfunctorily. Perhaps as she observes the current deepening radicalisation right across her home society of America, her next book will show a more complex and nuanced interpretation of the facts that are emerging from the application of new technology to the historic mind/brain problem.
Lord Alderdice is a Liberal Democrat peer, retired consultant psychiatrist and fellow of the Royal College of Psychiatrist
The Ideological Brain: A Radical Science of Susceptible Minds
By: Leor Zmigrod
Publisher: Viking
