Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Myths about the brain

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 80 posts

Re: Myths about the brain

#31

Post by mmmrtl »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #25
uniqueuid wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the key here is that some tasks are very clearly localized, such as speech in Broca and Wernicke. But others are not as localized. And functional areas might even move during phases of plasticity (i.e. being born blind). So it seems very clear that some functionally distinct regions exist, but researchers still struggle to pinpoint very abstract things like memory, personality, and complex behavior.

Can we be sure what "localised" means in this context? If you destroy an area and some people lose one particular function, while other people only lose small fragments of the function - which seems to be true of Broca's region - can the function really be said to be localised?

And even if Broca's region is necessary for speech, that does not mean it is sufficient. You wouldn't assume an electronic circuit is localized to one resistor just because it breaks when that resistor is removed.

Re: Myths about the brain

#32

Post by porkbrain »

uniqueuid wrote: post #26
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we be sure what "localised" means in this context? If you destroy an area and some people lose one particular function, while other people only lose small fragments of the function - which seems to be true of Broca's region - can the function really be said to be localised?

That's a good question, I'd need to ask a neurologist friend of mine. IIRC there are some areas that are localized almost in the sense of a circuit. Hearing is an example, which needs to process sensory information much faster (and more direct) than ordinary pathways would, in order to be able to construct spatial representation from latency differences.

I suppose "more direct" can be interpreted differently, but to the best of my knowledge the signal from your cochlea takes more axonal jumps[0] than e.g. visual, which jumps "only" through LGM[1]. Even more direct is the olfactory pathway which skips the thalamus altogether[2].

However, in the context of the article you might be referring only to intertelencephalic processing, in which case I'd love to read a paper which compares the directness of hearing vs other modalities.

[0]: https://teachmeanatomy.info/neuroanatomy/pathways/auditory-p...

[1]: https://www.ophthalmologyreview.org/articles/the-afferent-vi...

[2]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fncir.2015.0004...

Re: Myths about the brain

#33

Post by ggm »

Overstated argument to tell a story. Their creative writing tutor should be asked for a refund. This is one of those half-right statements: the regionalism of brain function is Overstated? Yes. There is no locality to specific tasks? No, that's overstated itself. We know loss of prefrontal cortex has different effects to loss of other regions. What's disputed is the specificity and singularity of the regions. Some functions can be reacquired despite loss of a region. Some functions are more diffuse.

Re: Myths about the brain

#34

Post by passivate »

feoren wrote: post #3

> [Myth 1] specific parts of the human brain have specific psychological jobs ... [Rebuttal] Neurons in a brain region called the anterior cingulate cortex are regularly involved in memory, emotion, decision-making, pain, moral judgments, imagination, attention, and empathy. This is not a rebuttal to the myth. Imagine I'm talking about a car, and I say: It's a myth that specific parts of the car have specific functio…

>This is not a rebuttal to the myth. Imagine I'm talking about a car,

You're simply asserting that the car is analogous to the brain to make an argument. Humans designed the car and fully understand how it works. If you take out the engine - it doesn't run. The brain is not the same - tons of evidence of neural plasticity. There is simply no analogy here. Also, the author is a subject matter expert in cognitive neuroscience so they do have credibility IMO.

>But we have a huge body of evidence showing that there is a big difference in how the left vs. right brain processes information and that different brain regions are highly specialized, but that their specialized functions don't map cleanly into the language we were already describing human behavior with.

You're saying we only use certain parts of our brain for certain things, and the author is saying (with citations) that multiple regions of the brain are involved in most brain tasks. To me, this makes sense when you read about people who got brain surgery or whatever and then their brain re-wired itself, etc. Clearly there is a disagreement here. Can you point to this huge body of evidence that disagrees with the author?

Re: Myths about the brain

#35

Post by nfkrk8j »

feoren wrote: post #3

> [Myth 1] specific parts of the human brain have specific psychological jobs ... [Rebuttal] Neurons in a brain region called the anterior cingulate cortex are regularly involved in memory, emotion, decision-making, pain, moral judgments, imagination, attention, and empathy. This is not a rebuttal to the myth. Imagine I'm talking about a car, and I say: It's a myth that specific parts of the car have specific functio…

No post body was provided.

Re: Myths about the brain

#36

Post by passivate »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #7

I love articles like this. But I have NO facility or background to evaluate them. Given their premise is "everything you've been told is wrong", how do I know that this one is right? :-/ I just finished Blindsight, which is a SciFi novel but written by PhD Biologist and highly respected in Neurological circles... which pretty much commits to every.single.one. of these 'myths'. Note, this is not an issue of "it's a yo…

I think we should let anyone propose any theory in good faith. If you think you're being sold some 'woo-woo' - you simply ask - if this was true what can I do to apply this theory in practice and go out and test it? The onus should be on the person pushing for the theory to propose methods of practical application of this knowledge. Consensus only comes with repeated tests are in agreement. Until then, IMO, a theory is in the same category as an opinion - and people often do disagree with others' opiniosn.

Re: Myths about the brain

#37

Post by kovac »

For those wondering/asserting if the author is an expert in neuroscience, she is actually a psychologist by training.

I'm personally very skeptical about anything psychologists say. I would not take any of this by face value without validating them against real neuroscience research or consulting neuroscientists. Psychologists love to say stuff helter-skelter and make them sound like real science.

[https://www.affective-science.org/lisa-feldman-barrett.shtml]

Re: Myths about the brain

#38

Post by heavyset_go »

kovac wrote: post #37

For those wondering/asserting if the author is an expert in neuroscience, she is actually a psychologist by training. I'm personally very skeptical about anything psychologists say. I would not take any of this by face value without validating them against real neuroscience research or consulting neuroscientists. Psychologists love to say stuff helter-skelter and make them sound like real science. [ https://www.affec…

I studied a lot of psychology in undergrad, and psychologists do study neuroscience and brain physiology. Many psychologists are responsible for making physiological discoveries about the brain and the functions of its parts, and for designing and executing experiments to study the physiology of the brain.

Re: Myths about the brain

#39

Post by simplestats »

passivate wrote: post #34
feoren wrote: post #3

> [Myth 1] specific parts of the human brain have specific psychological jobs ... [Rebuttal] Neurons in a brain region called the anterior cingulate cortex are regularly involved in memory, emotion, decision-making, pain, moral judgments, imagination, attention, and empathy. This is not a rebuttal to the myth. Imagine I'm talking about a car, and I say: It's a myth that specific parts of the car have specific functio…

>This is not a rebuttal to the myth. Imagine I'm talking about a car, You're simply asserting that the car is analogous to the brain to make an argument. Humans designed the car and fully understand how it works. If you take out the engine - it doesn't run. The brain is not the same - tons of evidence of neural plasticity. There is simply no analogy here. Also, the author is a subject matter expert in cognitive neuro…

I think the point is that it isn't a "myth" so much as an extremely simplified model that can still be very informative and useful.

Re: Myths about the brain

#40

Post by [deleted] »

bjornsing wrote: post #21

> Scientists have believed for a long time that severe damage to the visual cortex in the left side of your brain will leave you unable to see out of your right eye, assuming that the ability to see out of one eye is largely due to the visual cortex on the opposite side. IIRC it’s well known that the left hemisphere processes visual stimuli from the right field of view of both eyes…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN