Motivations and Reactions in Human Behavior

When I began this science blog, the goal was to highlight historical figures who had contributed significantly to the physical sciences. The subject matter of the resulting essays spanned up to, and included, the mid-20th century, coinciding in time with the end of my formal education in physics. Recently, I began pondering motivations of these historical figures and seeking a broader understanding of motivations in general. Lacking expertise, I turned to Google.  I’ll include in brackets […] the information I took from the Google search, which seemed reasonable from my untrained perspective.

[According to scientific research, key motivations for human behavior include: the need for achievement of personal goals, affiliation (social connection), the desire for autonomy (control over one’s actions), competence (feeling capable), relatedness (social interaction), basic physiological needs like food and shelter, safety, esteem, and self-actualization.

The Greek philosophers, particularly Plato and Aristotle, believed that motivation stemmed from a pursuit of “eudaimonia” (happiness or wellbeing), which was achieved through rational thought and living virtuously, meaning that understanding what is good leads to doing what is good, thereby driving behavior towards ethical actions; they emphasized the role of reason and knowledge in guiding human actions, rather than solely relying on impulses or desires.]

The key aspects of factors that influence reactions and behaviors seemed well summarized by the following:

Under the category of physiological or psychological needs:

• [Basic needs: Physiological needs like hunger, thirst, and shelter can trigger strong reactions when threatened.]
• [Safety needs: The desire for security and stability. This can lead to defensive behaviors when one’s perceived safety is compromised.] 
• [Belonging needs: The need for social connection and acceptance (relationships) can motivate reactions to events.] 
• [Esteem needs: The desire for self-respect and recognition can influence how people react to situations affecting their status or reputation.]
• [Self-actualization needs: The drive to fulfill one’s potential can motivate one’s actions. This is related to a desire for personal growth or achievement.]

Under the category of emotional needs:

• [Positive emotions: Joy, happiness, and contentment lead to positive responses like sharing good news or expressing gratitude.]
• [Negative emotions: Fear, anger, sadness, and disgust can trigger defensive or aggressive reactions and belligerence, depending on the situation.] 

Under the category of cognitive factors:

• [Perception: How an event is interpreted and perceived by an individual significantly impacts his/her reaction.] 
• [Beliefs and values: Personal values and beliefs guide how people evaluate events and determine their responses.] 
• [Past experiences: Prior encounters with similar situations influence how someone reacts to an event.]

Under the category of social context:

• [Cultural norms: Societal expectations and cultural values shape how people express themselves through their reactions.] 
• [Social: The influence of peers may be important in one’s behavior.

The fast pace of information flow in the modern age may have reduced opportunities for deep thought and introspection, and one could argue that modern life demands more now than has been experienced in previous eras.

Brain Physiology: Frontal Cortex and the Brainstem

The role of the cortex in influencing behavior

[The frontal cortex plays a crucial role in overall regulation of human behavior by managing actions like planning, decision-making, impulse control, judgment, complex social cognitive awareness, essentially acting as the “executive control center” of the brain, shaping how we respond to situations and interact with our environment.  Damage to this area can lead to significant changes in personality and behavior.]

Frontal Cortex Damage Leads to:

• [Disinhibition: Difficulty controlling impulses, leading to inappropriate behavior]
• [Poor Judgment: Difficulty making sound decisions or assessing risks]
• [Personality Changes: Alterations in social demeanor, emotional expression, and overall personality]
• [Difficulty Planning: Problems organizing tasks and following complex instructions]
• [Impaired Working Memory: Difficulty holding information in mind for even short periods]

The classical example of Phineas Gage

Phineas Gage (1823-1861) was an American railroad foreman who survived a brain injury when an iron rod was driven through his head. Gage’s case is famous because it helped establish the link between the frontal lobe of the brain and personality. 

What happened?

• [On September 13, 1848, Gage was preparing to blast a rock when an explosion drove the tamping iron through his head.] 
• [The iron rod destroyed most of the left frontal lobe of his brain.]
• [Gage was conscious and able to walk to a cart to be treated.] 
• [He had a torn scalp, fractured skull, and a virulent infection.] 
• [He was blind in his left eye and had facial weakness from damage to the anterior parts of the optic and facial nerves in addition to a large part of his left front cortex.] 

What was the outcome?

• [He developed epilepsy 11 years after the accident.] 
• [Gage lived for another 12 years and 6 months before dying of convulsions in 1861.] 
• His physician described a significant change in Gage’s personality: Before the accident, this foreman was known as a responsible and respected family man and member of the community. Afterwards he was unable to control his impulses, plan his activities, or conduct himself as he had in the past according to societal norms of behavior. Gage’s case is considered an example of how brain damage can affect personality. 

The role of the brainstem in human behavior

[The brainstem is responsible for a wide range of essential physiological functions that maintain life, regulate bodily processes, and connect the brain to the rest of the body.] 

Various parts of the brainstem receive signals from a variety of body sensors.

The immediate, reflexive reactions that appear irrational at times are often indicative of brainstem-influenced behavior. They are required to be rapid. These reflexes do not involve higher-level brain processing, like those included in the frontal cortex. The brainstem, an evolutionary more primitive part of the brain, is not involved in the rational thought and pursuit of “eudaimonia” as discussed by Plato and Aristotle.

Due to its roles in physiological stability and other essential functions, any significant damage to the brainstem is generally not survivable.

Classification of Human Behavior

Categorizing human behavior is challenging, but I’ll suggest four proposed personality types. Individuals, of course, do not fit neatly into one of these categories, as we all exhibit a combination of types … behaving differently at different times and under different conditions. The suggested categories are:

The saints: Individuals who act primarily for the benefit of others, with little regard for their own welfare.

Those motivated by enlightened or benevolent self-interest: This category likely encompasses most people most of the time. Individuals seek to obtain good outcomes for themselves, while also considering the good of others.

Those motivated strictly by self-interest: Individuals in this category prioritize their own wellbeing, with no emphasis for the welfare of others.

Those governed by a criminal nature: This involves individuals harming others for their own satisfaction and benefit, which is generally seen by most societies as contemptable and avoidable behavior.

Which parts of the brain may we associate with the Greek concepts of motivation and behavior aligning with the classification given above? Reason is likely to be localized largely in the frontal cortex. Additionally, virtues, ethics, cultural norms, and societal behavior would be partially encompassed within this part of the brain.

Quick response and non-contemplative emotional behavior may reside partly in the brainstem.

How, then, have these processes prepared us for the modern world? This seems pertinent to consider.

We exist in an environment that promotes short attention spans and hampers quiet, contemplative thought, one might suggest. This is not to suggest that thoughtful individuals no longer exist among us; certainly, they do; some are engaged in writing books and pondering profound subjects. However, most of us do not take the time to think deeply, akin to well-known figures of history such as Einstein, Newton, Maxwell, and notable philosophers, historians, and public figures like Jefferson, Madison, or Lincoln to name only a few.

Nevertheless, our brains possess both this capacity for deep thought as well as an ability for rapid un-thinking reactions.

Would it not be commendable if the youthful generation (it may be too late for those of us older) were to experience a resurgence embracing philosophical reflection and profound, deep thinking? Unthinking reactions will always be present for the “human condition”. They are built into our nature but need not dominate.

If you are young, I hope you will consider engaging your peers and wider acquaintances in contemplative discussions. Albert Einstein apparently did this with his friends during his youth. This would, without doubt, be beneficial for all: engage thoughtfully with friends and acquaintances; form discussion groups, spend quiet time thinking deeply. We are social creatures, and our interactions with others ultimately determine the direction of our society.

This call for social engagement is not new, of course. It has been eloquently advocated recently by American political scientist Robert D. Putnam, Professor Emeritus at Harvard University. As the author of Bowling Alone, he discusses the importance of engagement. A hope is that this could be a global resurgence for all young people, but it appears particularly needed in the United States today.