The Idea of the Brain: The Past and Future of Neuroscience

Product Information

Malinowski, P., et al. (2017). Meditation and cognitive ageing: The role of mindfulness meditation in building cognitive reserve. According to Zeki and colleagues [ 74], consciousness comprises nodes of micro-consciousnesses in different brain regions. Interestingly, in contrast to other theories, Zeki argues that consciousness is not unified [ 75]. Therefore, color and motion, for example, are consciously perceived in different parts of the cortex and only then bind together with other nodes to form a macro-consciousness. A micro-consciousness is autonomous [ 76] and does not require further processing. Therefore, the resected visual cortex in Step 3 may become micro-conscious of the green light during the replay. We could not find a direct reason as to why, according to Zeki, scattered brains during replay cannot bind together into a macro-consciousness.

The authors have created a sort of anti-Book of Virtues in this encyclopedic compendium of the ways and means of power. How computer AI works. Very short intro. There are some points about how AI researchers see the brain, but brains are totally different from programs. Also, we don't know how AI works so the research is not used to understand the brain as even simple AI is too complicated to understand. Part three, "Future", is a brief exploration of where Cobb thinks research might go, and the many questions which remain unsolved. It looks at the flaws of current methodology and postulates how scientists might work past them. He makes some valid points, and whilst there are no easy answers, all neuroscientists should consider what he has to say. All of that is from the “Past” section of the book. In the “Present” section Cobb describes our current understanding of how memory works, how circuits have limited explanatory power, and how brains are similar to but different from digital computers. He describes the chemical basis for neural and mental phenomena. He describes the current view, that mental functions are both local and global; though some regions must be present for specific functions, those function may still require the whole brain. I was surprised to learn that fMRI ���brain scans” are misleading, and that results from fMRI data are often over-hyped.

Article contents

To underscore the usefulness of replay as a potential experimental strategy, let us compare the replay of brain activity to a detailed simulation of the brain. A frequent objection to the view that a detailed simulation of the human brain can become conscious is that it merely manipulates symbols whose meaning depends on external interpretation, whereas neural activity is intrinsically meaningful to the brain [ 88]. In contrast to a simulation, the artificial neuronal firing induced by the replay is intrinsically meaningful to the brain/participant because it is an identical copy of intrinsically meaningful activity (i.e., an experience of green light). John Searle famously explained that “you could not digest pizza by running the program that simulates such digestion” [ 89]. Unlike biologically detailed simulations running on a computer, the replay is recorded and activated on the same substrate. Therefore, in contrast to a simulation of the stomach, recording and then replaying smooth muscle contraction and enzyme secretion would result in digestion. What would it imply about the nature of consciousness if replay would work for stomach digestion or the heart pumping blood but not for the brain and consciousness?

The second section, "Present", covers more modern neuroscience from the 1950s to 2019. It covers a wide variety of branches, from computational and cognitive neuroscience to mental health to the origins of consciousness. Once again, Cobb tries to take an unbiased viewpoint, although some of what he concludes might be disputed by some in the field. (It is difficult to say anything that someone would not disagree with). Highly complex ideas are made as understandable as possible for novices to the field, although again some familiarity is helpful. Paradigmatic metaphor (the idea of the brain) has played an enormous role in guiding our thinking and inquiry.

Need Help?

We tend to assume that our models of the brain are correct. For example, we “instinctively” think of the brain as separate from the body, the seat of consciousness, as a computer, and as a collection of neurons; we “instinctively” think that what the brain does is think (Cobb’s argument), or remember, or create consciousness. Cobb documents that each of these ways of understanding the brain are relatively modern and incomplete—not instinctive or obvious at all. Our limited understanding of the brain is a general conclusion of the book. Even small neuron systems, such as that controlling the stomach movements of a crustacean (30 neurons), are currently too complex for us to fully understand or model. For the human brain (86 billion neurons), the complexity is such that it's not clear we'll build a deep understanding this century. At this moment, we have a mechanical understanding at micro level (the basic functioning of small amounts of neurons), a rough organizational view at macro level (primarily a coarse sense of the localities of certain functions), and some functional theories (e.g. that our conscious brain often post-rationalizes decisions which are really already made by unconscious parts of our brain). This enthralling book starts at the earliest points of the halting journey to an experimental science of the brain and moves forward to the present era, where we simultaneously have a surfeit of data and a poverty of far-reaching, intellectually satisfying theories of brain function. The brain’s left half is primarily responsible for speech and abstract thinking. It also controls the right side of the body. The right side of the brain is responsible for image processing, spatial thinking, and movement in the left side of the body.

Finally, Cobb postulates that there may not in fact be any real organizing principle to brain function, because it is a messy, evolved, pragmatic and embodied system. Whether or not the participant loses consciousness during the replay has concrete, practical consequences. For some theories, experiments using whole-brain replay [ 90] (such as the study of the neuronal microcircuitry of agonizing pain) would be ethically unacceptable without proper animal welfare measures because the animals will consciously experience the effects of replay during the experiment. In contrast, for other theories, a whole-brain replay may reduce the ethical concerns to a minimum because it is identical to potent anesthesia and a complete loss of consciousness but allows studying the active brain. An animal that expresses agony during such an experiment is similar to the unconscious participant pushing the button during the replay, i.e., it would not feel anything consciously. Of course in a work such as this there is a section on consciousness. And once again, I am glad to see that no one has a coherent definition of this, studies of the brain's relation to consciousness are thus fraught with issues based purely on arbitrary definitions (mostly from non-scientists), and as a result, providing any satisfactory universal answer to this question is like trying to hit a bullet, with another bullet, fired from two passing trains so that each bullet deflects onto a nail and piece of jello, respectively, and nails them to a wall on a third passing train. I tend to the materialist side of things here and think that woo-woo idiots keep making the definition more mysterious in the face of mounting physical evidence, just my two cents, and Cobb does everything he can to make this Mississippi mud pie of an issue as intellectually healthy as possible. Gazzaniga MS. The split-brain: rooting consciousness in biology. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111(51):18093-4. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1417892111 Electricity is seen as the force of life. As electricity experiments are popular it makes sense to make these conclusions. Then as we experiment on animals and see muscles move via electricity it makes sense to conclude that this is the power of the soul.Hurley RA, Flashman LA, Chow TW, Taber KH. The brainstem: anatomy, assessment, and clinical syndromes. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010;22(1):iv-7. doi:10.1176/jnp.2010.22.1.iv All of that is from the “Past” section of the book. In the “Present” section Cobb describes our current understanding of how memory works, how circuits have limited explanatory power, and how brains are similar to but different from digital computers. He describes the chemical basis for neural and mental phenomena. He describes the current view, that mental functions are both local and global; though some regions must be present for specific functions, those function may still require the whole brain. I was surprised to learn that fMRI “brain scans” are misleading, and that results from fMRI data are often over-hyped. In the 19th century, the electrical paradigm became less spark-like, and more like that modern miracle, the telegraph. Brain studies shifted from mechanism to function. Phrenologists measured lumps in the skull, on the theory that specific functions and capabilities arose from specific parts of the brain, so that talents and deficiencies could be explained by having excess or deficient brain matter, which one could discover by measuring lumps and dips in the skull. Thus one could “prove” that someone was a natural criminal, laborer, or intellectual by measuring the skull. For example, the fact that men’s brains are bigger than women’s was taken to prove that men are more intelligent than women. Phrenology was eventually discredited when scientists began looking at the actual brain, rather than the skull. Parts of the brain were indeed sometimes associated with mental abilities, but these were not enlarged nor did they lie beneath lumps. Still, some capabilities such as “intelligence” did not have seem to be localized. A surprisingly acrimonious debate emerged over whether specific mental activities were localized in the brain or whether they arose from the brain as a whole. This is an active debate, even today. Because the precise functions of the brain have been (and continue to be) extremely difficult to research and understand. In the “Future” section Cobb describes where brain science might be going, and which new metaphors and technologies may help. This was the most exciting part of the book. But to say too much would spoil the journey for you, dear reader. And this review is long enough already.

Wie weit ist dieses Hirn-Feld, was wissen wir und was wissen wir noch nicht? Auf was sollten wir in Zukunft einen Augenmerk werfen, damit wir beispielsweise Menschen mit ernsthaften Erkrankungen helfen können. In experiments routinely performed in neurobiological laboratories, action potentials are recorded and evoked in single neurons and even in small-scale networks [ 15, 16] using current clamp and voltage clamp techniques. Using these techniques, triggering action potentials at the researcher’s bidding (rather than naturally due to the synaptic inputs) is commonplace and even mundane in a modern electrophysiological laboratory. The rapid development of tools and technologies in neuroscience [ 17– 21] brings the goal of capturing every action potential in every neuron of the brain ever closer [ 22, 23]. To date, the highest number of channels recorded by an electrode array belongs to the Argo system, with 65,536 channels [ 24]. These technologies provide unprecedented insights into the fine details of brain function. Thus, it is perhaps just a matter of time until newer, more powerful technologies will eventually allow us to solve the mechanics of how the brain works. As we converge on this goal, will we get closer to understanding brain function and, with it, the biological causes of conscious experience? main job is to process information. But some experts argue that because brains are biological — they evolved within the vagaries of a body — they operate in ways that a machine doesn’t ( SN: 8/23/16). Di Liegro CM, Schiera G, Proia P, Di Liegro I. Physical activity and brain health. Genes (Basel). 2019;10(9):720. doi:10.3390/genes10090720 Matthew Cobb covered each era and discovery with as little bias as he could, and clearly attempted to make each section accessible. I'm not usually much of a historian, but the sections on theology and cultural influences were just as interesting as those which directly pertained to neuroscience or psychology.Does the replay of recorded action potentials to the entire brain result in the loss of consciousness? And if so, what are the implications for our ability to study consciousness on the basis of neural activity? Would the right technology make these questions a matter of experimental investigation rather than (or in addition to) a philosophical debate? Towards answering these questions, our thought experiment makes an important step towards challenging the conventional wisdom regarding the causal link between action potentials and consciousness. The ancients believed the heart was the anatomical seat of thought and consciousness and considered the brain to be of relative little import.