Michael Levin Bioelectricity 101 Crash Course Lesson 41: Somatic Psychiatry: Influencing Non-Neural Cellular Decisions Summary

• “Somatic Psychiatry” is a term coined by Michael Levin to describe a potential future approach to medicine that focuses on influencing the decisions of cells and tissues, not just their physical state.
• It builds on the idea that even non-neural cells exhibit a form of “basal cognition” – they sense their environment, process information, and make choices that affect their behavior.
• This is not about treating mental illness in the traditional sense. It’s about addressing physical ailments by understanding and altering the “cognitive landscape” of cells and tissues.
• Cancer is a prime example: Somatic psychiatry might involve “re-educating” tumor cells to rejoin the healthy tissue network, rather than simply killing them.
• This approach views tissues and organs as “cognitive agents” with goals, preferences, and the ability to learn and adapt. It personifies tissue.
• Bioelectricity is a crucial tool in this hypothetical field, as it provides a means to “communicate” with cells and influence their decisions.
• This represents the far frontier of scientific thinking; no clear path of how exactly to do it is defined, and might depend on future advances of understanding on “what cells want”.
• Somatic psychiatry is a conceptual framework for future medicine, not a currently established medical practice.

Michael Levin Bioelectricity 101 Crash Course Lesson 41: Somatic Psychiatry: Influencing Non-Neural Cellular Decisions

We’ve come a long way in our exploration of bioelectricity, uncovering its profound role in development, regeneration, and even cancer. Now, we’re going to venture into a more speculative, yet incredibly thought-provoking, territory: the concept of “Somatic Psychiatry.” This term, coined by Michael Levin, might sound strange at first, but it captures a radical new way of thinking about medicine, one that’s deeply rooted in the principles of bioelectricity and basal cognition that we’ve been exploring.

“Somatic” refers to the body, and “psychiatry” traditionally deals with the mind. So, what does it mean to talk about “Somatic Psychiatry”? Are we suggesting that our livers have anxiety disorders, or our kidneys suffer from depression? Of course not. Somatic psychiatry is not about treating mental illness in the traditional sense. It’s about approaching physical ailments – birth defects, injuries, cancer, even aging – from a cognitive perspective, by understanding and influencing the decisions that cells and tissues make.

This builds on the idea of basal cognition, which we introduced in earlier lessons. Basal cognition refers to the basic information-processing capabilities of all living cells, not just neurons. Even a single-celled organism, like an amoeba, can sense its environment (e.g., detect the presence of food or a harmful chemical), process that information, and make a decision (e.g., move towards the food or away from the toxin). This is not “thinking” in the way we humans think, but it’s a form of goal-directed behavior, a rudimentary form of intelligence.

Levin’s work suggests that this basal cognition scales up. Multicellular tissues and organs also exhibit a kind of “collective intelligence.” Cells communicate with each other, share information, and coordinate their actions to achieve specific outcomes, like building a limb or healing a wound. These tissues aren’t just passively following instructions; they’re actively problem-solving, adapting to changing circumstances and making decisions based on the available information. This goes back to “error correction” as well: life strives to meet defined parameters, even going out of its ways and pathways to accomplish what it had “set” as “ideal morphology”.

Somatic psychiatry takes this idea to its logical conclusion. It proposes that we can treat many diseases, not just by targeting their physical manifestations (e.g., killing cancer cells, replacing damaged tissue), but by addressing the underlying cognitive processes that lead to those manifestations. It’s about understanding the “mental life” of tissues – their goals, their preferences, their “beliefs” about what the correct body plan should be – and influencing those “mental states” to promote health and repair. This does not imply a human level, philosophical awareness; only a level of information exchange.

Think of it like this: Imagine a group of construction workers who have gone rogue. Instead of building the house according to the blueprints, they’re building a haphazard, unstable structure. Traditional medicine might try to tear down the faulty structure or eliminate the rogue workers. Somatic psychiatry, on the other hand, would try to persuade the workers to get back on track, to remind them of the original plan and convince them to cooperate.

Cancer is perhaps the clearest example of how somatic psychiatry might work. We’ve discussed how cancer can be viewed as a breakdown in bioelectric communication, where cells lose their connection to the larger tissue network and revert to a more primitive, self-centered state. They “forget” their role in maintaining the overall body plan and start pursuing their own, selfish goals – uncontrolled proliferation and metastasis.

Somatic psychiatry might involve “re-educating” these cancer cells, restoring their connection to the bioelectric network and reminding them of their “civic duty” to the larger organism. This could involve manipulating their membrane potential, altering gap junction connectivity, or exposing them to specific bioelectric patterns that promote normal behavior. The goal is not to kill the cancer cells, but to normalize them, to coax them back into a cooperative, healthy state. It’s a negotiation, so to say, a process where persuasion, not brutal force, would take hold.

Bioelectricity is a crucial tool in this hypothetical field. It’s the primary means by which we can “communicate” with cells and influence their decisions. By manipulating voltage gradients, ion flows, and gap junction connectivity, we can alter the “cognitive landscape” of tissues, nudging cells towards desired behaviors.

This can get very speculative and enter bordering philosophies! Consider that every living thing tends towards certain outcomes. If even cells hold “intentions” on a basal level, then the body, including tissues, have goal-driven urges to seek outcomes that it perceives as its ideal form. Somatic psychiatry thus would not simply consider health to fix broken tissues, rather it considers issues to fix malfunctioning of “decision making machinery”, tissues mis-stepping on fundamental goals of self. “Reeducating” the tissues to make right choices. It represents fixing what may be described “cognitive pathology” on the somatic, cell decision level. This doesn’t yet exist, mind. And even then, such treatment wouldn’t be magic, as with all things. This paradigm, if anything, shifts problems, rather than fixing every malady. It opens door to other questions like if cell misguided, poorly implemented goal can itself damage surrounding tissues in trying to meet goals, if bioelectrically it “thought” it did a proper job? It might open up to many bioethical discussions if true!

It’s important to emphasize that somatic psychiatry is, at this stage, primarily a conceptual framework, a way of thinking about the future of medicine. It’s not a currently established medical practice. There are enormous challenges to overcome before this vision can become a reality. We need to develop a much deeper understanding of how cells and tissues process information, how they make decisions, and how we can precisely and safely manipulate their bioelectric states. We might need a general model on tissues goals to do anything on larger scale. It involves many theoretical and practical difficulties before application can be implemented!

However, the potential benefits are so profound that it’s worth pursuing this radical new approach. Somatic psychiatry offers a glimpse of a future where we can treat disease, not just by attacking its symptoms, but by addressing its root causes in the “cognitive” processes of cells and tissues. It’s a future where we work with the inherent intelligence of living systems, harnessing their ability to self-organize, adapt, and heal.

Michael Levin Bioelectricity 101 Crash Course Lesson 41: Somatic Psychiatry: Influencing Non-Neural Cellular Decisions Quiz

1. “Somatic Psychiatry” primarily focuses on:

A) Treating mental illnesses like depression and anxiety.
B) Influencing the decisions of cells and tissues to address physical ailments.
C) Replacing damaged cells with healthy cells.
D) Studying the electrical activity of the brain.

2. Somatic psychiatry builds upon the concept of:

A) Genetic determinism.
B) Basal cognition.
C) Neural plasticity.
D) Chemical signaling.

3. Which of the following is the BEST example of how somatic psychiatry might be applied?

A) Using antibiotics to kill bacteria.
B) “Re-educating” tumor cells to rejoin the healthy tissue network.
C) Performing surgery to remove a damaged organ.
D) Using gene therapy to correct a genetic mutation.

4. Bioelectricity is a crucial tool in somatic psychiatry because it:

A) Provides a means to “communicate” with cells and influence their decisions.
B) Can directly kill cancer cells.
C) Is the only factor that controls cell behavior.
D) Can replace damaged tissues with artificial ones.

5. The concept may sound bizarre at first: in what manner does Somatic Psychiatry approach cell “collectives”?

A) Micro-machine structures
B) The idea of “agents”, individual pieces with “mini-goals”, working together and influencing the entire unit.
C) “Top-down” commands with specific outcome defined prior.
D) Genetic Engineering.

6. True or False: Somatic psychiatry is currently a widely used medical practice.

A) True
B) False

7. Which represents Levin’s perspective, according to Somatic Psychiatry ideas:

A) All problems can be viewed by reducing all activity to the action of proteins and chemical pathways, as sole explanation.
B) Only “brain level”, neuron and “wetware” can possess decision making attributes and cognitive activity.
C) Goal-oriented behavior is limited to what humans and mammals can accomplish
D) The collective “cognitive medium”, where every cell may “work” as mini-agent pursuing and correcting behavior to a certain end

8. Somatic psychiatry, the idea can be characterized by attempting, more directly,:

A) altering behavior by direct command.
B) …”persuading” via appropriate inputs that the collective will listen to.
C) …reprogramming the tissue directly via a device
D) …replacing parts using bio-engineering

9. Which is relevant towards addressing cancer:
A) Kill All cancer cells directly
B) Bioelectrically altering the behavior pattern, for them to no longer express metastatic/cancer properties
C) Removing only, without restoring anything.
D) Somatic Psychiatry is unrelated towards Cancer, since it only has relation to minds.

10. True or False: Somatic Psychiatry is a way to help treat psychiatric or “mind”-related illness using electrical current.

A) True
B) False

11. One theoretical way to fix bioelectrical pathology involves

A) Bioelectrical changes.
B) Removing it physically
C) Pharmacological applications, but only ones working through nervous system and chemical diffusion
D) Somatic Psychiatry is irrelevant towards it

12. Somatic psychiatry considers cells in relation to a whole tissue to work through

A) Preprogrammed genetic machinery that makes them unable to adapt or change plans.
B) The body, by solely using biomechanics.
C) A collection of isolated parts working like clock-work machines
D) Goal oriented, Collective Agents.

13. True or False: The principles within Somatic Psychiatry might work because Tissues want certain states

A) True
B) False.

14. True or False? Tissue have certain pre-defined set-point as the end “result”: cells have individual preferences on what ought to take place, with that influencing tissues?

A) True.
B) False.

15. The most crucial concept of basal cognition that relates to this somatic psychiatry:
A) Life doesn’t follow specific goals and tends, as fundamental principle.
B) Life follows fixed instruction code with 0 ambiguity, without choice or “opinions” from any cellular element.
C) Life at every scale possesses the ability to reach “desired outcome”, via making small scale “decisions” on what paths to implement, based on bioelectrical feedback or communications
D) Nothing.

16. Which can be theoretically targeted in cancer treatment?

A) Genome
B) Chemical and hormones
C) Ion Channels and Electrical Synapses
D) All of the Above.

17. The somatic aspect relates to:

A) Brain
B) Tissue/Body.
C) Psychiatric Diseases
D) Genetics only

18. Which, beyond biology, may Somatic Psychiatry relate:
A) Evolutionary Development.
B) Bioethics
C) Philosophy.
D) All of the above.

19. True or False? It is currently, perfectly possible to “reset” every decision any cell will ever do to a pre-determined one that YOU dictate to influence behavior of organisms easily?
A) True
B) False.

20. Which best captures that Bioelectric idea in relation to malfunctioning “goal-oriented” organization, that cells take within Somatic Psychiatry’s scope:

A) “Error Signal Detection”
B) Target Fix
C) Somatic Tissue “reeducation”.
D) All of The Above.

Michael Levin Bioelectricity 101 Crash Course Lesson 41: Somatic Psychiatry: Influencing Non-Neural Cellular Decisions Answer Sheet

1. B

2. B

3. B

4. A

5. B

6. B

7. D

8. B

9. B

10. B

11. A

12. D

13. A

14. A

15. C

16. D

17. B

18. D

19. B

20. D

迈克尔·莱文 生物电 101 速成课程 第41课：体细胞精神病学：影响非神经细胞的决策 摘要

• “体细胞精神病学”是迈克尔·莱文创造的一个术语，用于描述一种潜在的未来医学方法，该方法侧重于影响细胞和组织的决策，而不仅仅是它们的物理状态。
• 它建立在以下理念之上：即使是非神经细胞也表现出一种“基础认知”形式——它们感知环境、处理信息并做出影响其行为的选择。
• 这不是指传统意义上的治疗精神疾病。 它是关于通过理解和改变细胞和组织的“认知景观”来解决身体疾病。
• 癌症是一个很好的例子：体细胞精神病学可能涉及“重新教育”肿瘤细胞，使它们重新加入健康的组织网络，而不是简单地杀死它们。
• 这种方法将组织和器官视为具有目标、偏好以及学习和适应能力的“认知主体”。 它将组织人格化。
• 生物电是这个假设领域中的一个关键工具，因为它提供了一种与细胞“交流”并影响其决策的方法。
• 这代表了科学思想的前沿； 尚未定义如何做到这一点的明确路径，并且可能取决于未来对“细胞想要什么”的理解的进展。
• 体细胞精神病学是未来医学的概念框架，而不是目前已建立的医学实践。

迈克尔·莱文 生物电 101 速成课程 第41课：体细胞精神病学：影响非神经细胞的决策

在探索生物电的过程中，我们已经走了很长一段路，揭示了它在发育、再生甚至癌症中的重要作用。 现在，我们将进入一个更具推测性但却非常发人深省的领域：“体细胞精神病学”的概念。 这个术语由迈克尔·莱文创造，乍一听可能听起来很奇怪，但它抓住了一种思考医学的全新方式，这种方式深深植根于我们一直在探索的生物电和基础认知的原理。

“Somatic”指的是身体，“psychiatry”传统上处理的是精神。 那么，谈论“体细胞精神病学”是什么意思呢？ 我们是在暗示我们的肝脏有焦虑症，或者我们的肾脏患有抑郁症吗？ 当然不是。 体细胞精神病学不是指传统意义上的治疗精神疾病。 它是关于从认知的角度处理身体疾病——出生缺陷、损伤、癌症，甚至衰老——通过理解和影响细胞和组织做出的决策。

这建立在我们之前课程中介绍的基础认知的理念之上。 基础认知是指所有活细胞（不仅仅是神经元）的基本信息处理能力。 即使是单细胞生物，如变形虫，也能感知其环境（例如，检测食物或有害化学物质的存在），处理该信息，并做出决定（例如，向食物移动或远离毒素）。 这不是我们人类所认为的“思考”，但它是一种目标导向行为的形式，一种基本的智能形式。

莱文的研究表明，这种基础认知会扩大。 多细胞组织和器官也表现出一种“集体智慧”。 细胞相互交流、共享信息并协调它们的行动以实现特定结果，例如构建肢体或治愈伤口。 这些组织不仅仅是被动地遵循指令； 它们正在积极地解决问题，适应不断变化的环境并根据可用信息做出决策。 这也回到了“纠错”：生命努力达到定义的参数，甚至不惜一切代价和途径来实现它“设定”为“理想形态”的目标。

体细胞精神病学将这个想法推向了逻辑结论。 它提出我们可以治疗许多疾病，不仅仅是通过靶向它们的物理表现（例如，杀死癌细胞、替换受损组织），而是通过解决导致这些表现的潜在认知过程。 这是关于了解组织的“精神生活”——它们的目标、它们的偏好、它们对正确身体计划应该是什么的“信念”——并影响这些“精神状态”以促进健康和修复。 这并不意味着人类水平的哲学意识； 只有信息交换的水平。

可以这样想：想象一群建筑工人失控了。 他们没有按照蓝图建造房屋，而是建造了一个杂乱无章、不稳定的结构。 传统医学可能会试图拆除有缺陷的结构或消灭失控的工人。 另一方面，体细胞精神病学会试图说服工人回到正轨，提醒他们最初的计划并说服他们合作。

癌症也许是体细胞精神病学如何发挥作用的最明显的例子。 我们已经讨论过，癌症可以被视为生物电通讯的崩溃，其中细胞失去与更大组织网络的连接并恢复到更原始的、以自我为中心的状态。 他们“忘记”了自己在维持整个身体计划中的作用，并开始追求自己的自私目标——不受控制的增殖和转移。

体细胞精神病学可能涉及“重新教育”这些癌细胞，恢复它们与生物电网络的连接，并提醒它们对更大生物体的“公民义务”。 这可能涉及操纵它们的膜电位、改变间隙连接连接性，或将它们暴露于促进正常行为的特定生物电模式。 目标不是杀死癌细胞，而是规范化它们，将它们哄骗回合作、健康的状态。 可以说，这是一种谈判，一种说服而不是蛮力的过程。

生物电是这个假设领域中的一个关键工具。 它是我们与细胞“交流”并影响其决策的主要手段。 通过操纵电压梯度、离子流和间隙连接连接性，我们可以改变组织的“认知景观”，将细胞推向期望的行为。

这可能非常具有推测性，并且进入了边界哲学！ 考虑到每个生物都倾向于某些结果。 如果即使是细胞在基础层面上也有“意图”，那么身体，包括组织，都有目标驱动的冲动来寻求它认为理想形式的结果。 因此，体细胞精神病学不仅会考虑健康来修复破损的组织，还会考虑解决“决策机制”故障的问题，即组织在自我基本目标上误入歧途。 “重新教育”组织做出正确的选择。 它代表了修复在体细胞、细胞决策层面上可以描述为“认知病理学”的东西。 请注意，这还不存在。 即使到那时，这种治疗也不会像所有事物一样神奇。 如果有什么区别的话，这种范式会转移问题，而不是解决所有疾病。 它打开了通向其他问题的大门，例如，如果细胞被误导、执行不力的目标本身是否会在试图实现目标时损害周围组织，如果从生物电的角度来看，它“认为”自己做得很好？ 如果属实，它可能会引发许多生物伦理学讨论！

重要的是要强调，在这个阶段，体细胞精神病学主要是一个概念框架，一种思考医学未来的方式。 它不是目前已建立的医学实践。 在这一愿景成为现实之前，还有巨大的挑战需要克服。 我们需要对细胞和组织如何处理信息、它们如何做出决策以及我们如何精确和安全地操纵它们的生物电状态有更深入的了解。 我们可能需要一个关于组织目标的一般模型才能在更大范围内做任何事情。 在实施应用之前，它涉及许多理论和实践上的困难！

然而，潜在的好处是如此深远，以至于值得追求这种激进的新方法。 体细胞精神病学让我们瞥见了未来，在那里我们可以治疗疾病，不仅仅是通过攻击其症状，而是通过解决细胞和组织“认知”过程中的根本原因。这是一个未来，我们*与*生命系统固有的智能合作，利用它们自我组织、适应和治愈的能力。

迈克尔·莱文 生物电 101 速成课程 第41课：体细胞精神病学：影响非神经细胞的决策 小测验

1. “体细胞精神病学”主要关注：

A) 治疗抑郁症和焦虑症等精神疾病。
B) 影响细胞和组织的决策以解决身体疾病。
C) 用健康的细胞替换受损的细胞。
D) 研究大脑的电活动。

2. 体细胞精神病学建立在以下概念之上：

A) 遗传决定论。
B) 基础认知。
C) 神经可塑性。
D) 化学信号。

3. 以下哪一项是体细胞精神病学如何应用的最好例子？

A) 使用抗生素杀死细菌。
B) “重新教育”肿瘤细胞，使它们重新加入健康的组织网络。
C) 进行手术以切除受损的器官。
D) 使用基因疗法纠正基因突变。

4. 生物电是体细胞精神病学中的一个关键工具，因为它：

A) 提供了一种与细胞“交流”并影响其决策的方法。
B) 可以直接杀死癌细胞。
C) 是控制细胞行为的唯一因素。
D) 可以用人工组织替换受损组织。

5. 这个概念起初听起来可能很奇怪：体细胞精神病学以何种方式处理细胞“集体”？

A) 微型机器结构
B) “主体”的概念，具有“迷你目标”的单个部分，共同工作并影响整个单元。
C) 具有预先定义的特定结果的“自上而下”命令。
D) 基因工程。

6. 对或错：体细胞精神病学目前是一种广泛使用的医学实践。

A) 对
B) 错

7. 根据体细胞精神病学的观点，哪一项代表了莱文的观点：

A) 所有问题都可以通过将所有活动简化为蛋白质和化学途径的作用来观察，作为唯一的解释。
B) 只有“大脑层面”、神经元和“湿件”才能拥有决策属性和认知活动。
C) 目标导向行为仅限于人类和哺乳动物能够完成的事情
D) 集体“认知媒介”，其中每个细胞都可以作为追求和纠正行为以达到特定目的的迷你主体“工作”

8. 体细胞精神病学，这个想法的特点是试图更直接地：

A) 通过直接命令改变行为。
B) …通过集体会听取的适当输入进行“说服”。
C) …通过设备直接重新编程组织
D) …使用生物工程更换零件

9. 哪些与解决癌症有关：
A) 直接杀死所有癌细胞
B) 通过生物电改变行为模式，使它们不再表达转移/癌症特性
C) 仅移除，不恢复任何东西。
D) 体细胞精神病学与癌症无关，因为它只与精神有关。

10. 对或错：体细胞精神病学是一种使用电流帮助治疗精神疾病或“精神”相关疾病的方法。

A) 对
B) 错

11. 修复生物电病理学的一种理论方法涉及

A) 生物电变化。
B) 物理移除它
C) 药物应用，但仅适用于通过神经系统和化学扩散的药物
D) 体细胞精神病学与之无关

12. 体细胞精神病学认为细胞与整个组织的关系是通过以下方式发挥作用的

A) 预先编程的遗传机制，使它们无法适应或改变计划。
B) 身体，仅通过使用生物力学。
C) 像钟表机器一样工作的孤立部件的集合
D) 目标导向的集体主体。

13. 对或错：体细胞精神病学中的原理可能会起作用，因为组织想要某些状态

A) 对
B) 错。

14. 对或错？组织具有某些预定义的设定点作为最终“结果”：细胞对应该发生什么有个人偏好，这会影响组织？

A) 对。
B) 错。

15. 与这种体细胞精神病学相关的基础认知的最关键概念：
A) 生命不遵循特定的目标和倾向，作为基本原则。
B) 生命遵循固定的指令代码，没有 0 歧义，没有任何细胞元素的选择或“意见”。
C) 生命在每个尺度上都具有通过根据生物电反馈或通信做出小规模“决策”来实现“期望结果”的能力
D) 没有。

16. 哪些可以在癌症治疗中从理论上作为靶标？

A) 基因组
B) 化学物质和激素
C) 离子通道和电突触
D) 以上都是。

17. 体细胞方面与以下哪一项相关：

A) 大脑
B) 组织/身体。
C) 精神疾病
D) 仅遗传学

18. 除了生物学，体细胞精神病学还可能与以下哪一项相关：
A) 进化发育。
B) 生物伦理学
C) 哲学。
D) 以上都是。

19. 对或错？目前，完全有可能“重置”任何细胞将要做的每一个决定，以达到你指定的预定决定，从而轻松地影响生物体的行为？
A) 对
B) 错。

20. 哪个选项最能体现与细胞在体细胞精神病学范围内采取的“目标导向”组织功能障碍相关的生物电概念：

A) “错误信号检测”
B) 目标修复
C) 体细胞组织“再教育”。
D) 以上都是。

迈克尔·莱文 生物电 101 速成课程 第41课：体细胞精神病学：影响非神经细胞的决策 答案表

1. B

2. B

3. B

4. A

5. B

6. B

7. D

8. B

9. B

10. B

11. A

12. D

13. A

14. A

15. C

16. D

17. B

18. D

19. B

20. D