Neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor thinks she knows.
The most fascinating part of this talk for me was listening to Taylor describe the experience of her stroke in amazing detail. She's also a highly engaging, and engaged speaker.
While I can't advocate for the amount of lateralization she seems to believe in, her portrayals of the right and left brain are interesting.
From TED Talks: My stroke of insight.
Video length < 19 min.
Friday, April 4, 2008
If humans only use 10% of their brain, what would happen if you used all of it?
It's not uncommon to hear people use this familiar adage while surmising that full use would lead to telepathy, world peace, and the ability to fry soup cans with eyebeams. If only!
Well, it happens that a small percentage of the population have managed to use all of their brains all at once -- these people have experienced what is called a grand mal seizure (the kind we think of when we imagine epilepsy) and it's characterized by a loss of consciousness and violent bodily contractions.
Of course, it's not true that we only use 10% of our brains. We use all of it, but we selectively activate and inhibit certain parts as appropriate for getting things done.
For example, there's a part of thalamus (the VLo) that we want to keep turned off (inhibited) most of the time. This part of the thalamus transmits voluntary motor commands and we allow it to turn on exactly when we want to transmit them, the rest of the time we keep it turned off so that static firing doesn't send our muscles into wonky contractions. A loss of this inhibitory ability results in ballism, a serious condition involving violent and uncontrollable flinging movements.
To get any idea of just how active your brain is consider that the brain represents about 3% of your body's weight and uses almost 20% of your body's energy.
Well, it happens that a small percentage of the population have managed to use all of their brains all at once -- these people have experienced what is called a grand mal seizure (the kind we think of when we imagine epilepsy) and it's characterized by a loss of consciousness and violent bodily contractions.
Of course, it's not true that we only use 10% of our brains. We use all of it, but we selectively activate and inhibit certain parts as appropriate for getting things done.
For example, there's a part of thalamus (the VLo) that we want to keep turned off (inhibited) most of the time. This part of the thalamus transmits voluntary motor commands and we allow it to turn on exactly when we want to transmit them, the rest of the time we keep it turned off so that static firing doesn't send our muscles into wonky contractions. A loss of this inhibitory ability results in ballism, a serious condition involving violent and uncontrollable flinging movements.
To get any idea of just how active your brain is consider that the brain represents about 3% of your body's weight and uses almost 20% of your body's energy.
How The Internet Lets Us Share the Love (and cost us our private lives).
Yup, I discovered the awesome and articulate Clay Shirky this evening.
This first clip is very The Wealth of Networks -- Shirky describes how the organizing power of the web allows us to power operating systems, encyclopedias, relief efforts and protein folding on love. ;)
After watching this, I couldn't help but think of independent mini-MMO developer Eskil Steenberg -- who named his project Love. (The screenshots for Love are just beautiful.)
In the second clip, Shirky discusses personal privacy in a world with Facebook and MySpace -- to name only the most salient pair.
And hay, he has his own book -- Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations -- which is going straight to my wishlist.
Cory Doctorow says, " -- not only is he smart and articulate, but he's one of those people who is able to crystallize the half-formed ideas that I've been trying to piece together into glittering, brilliant insights that make me think, yes, of course, that's how it all works."
You'll definitely have a few of those moments if you watch these clips. The big "aha" for me was listening to Clay nail exactly how I feel about respecting (and invading) other's privacy on the Internet. If only I could have been so articulate when the person we bought our house from brought up personal information from the web in conversation; at the time I wrinkled my nose and said, "You Googled me?!" (implied: you creepy fucker).
So, in summation -- awesome stuff. Have a look see.
This first clip is very The Wealth of Networks -- Shirky describes how the organizing power of the web allows us to power operating systems, encyclopedias, relief efforts and protein folding on love. ;)
After watching this, I couldn't help but think of independent mini-MMO developer Eskil Steenberg -- who named his project Love. (The screenshots for Love are just beautiful.)
In the second clip, Shirky discusses personal privacy in a world with Facebook and MySpace -- to name only the most salient pair.
And hay, he has his own book -- Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations -- which is going straight to my wishlist.
Cory Doctorow says, " -- not only is he smart and articulate, but he's one of those people who is able to crystallize the half-formed ideas that I've been trying to piece together into glittering, brilliant insights that make me think, yes, of course, that's how it all works."
You'll definitely have a few of those moments if you watch these clips. The big "aha" for me was listening to Clay nail exactly how I feel about respecting (and invading) other's privacy on the Internet. If only I could have been so articulate when the person we bought our house from brought up personal information from the web in conversation; at the time I wrinkled my nose and said, "You Googled me?!" (implied: you creepy fucker).
So, in summation -- awesome stuff. Have a look see.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Queen Rania addresses YouTube, "Send me your stereotypes".
Queen Rania launched her first YouTube video March 30th and is asking viewers to send her their stereotypes and questions about the Arab world. After a summer of collecting messages from YouTubers, she'll reply -- answering questions and breaking down stereotypes. Her intention is to foster a world with fewer barriers and more understanding.
A fantastic move on her part, and it's already generated a lot of attention! Almost 500,000 views in just four days.
A fantastic move on her part, and it's already generated a lot of attention! Almost 500,000 views in just four days.
World Science Festival
It was just announced that the 2008 World Science Festival will be held this year in New York City, my own town!
Brian Greene is apparently one of the co-founders, and it looks like they've got a pretty thrilling lineup. I'll get to see Daniel Dennett. :] So! Anyone want to come to Manhattan the end of May and hang out with me?
Correction, some thrilling things. Lots of filler.
Brian Greene is apparently one of the co-founders, and it looks like they've got a pretty thrilling lineup. I'll get to see Daniel Dennett. :] So! Anyone want to come to Manhattan the end of May and hang out with me?
Correction, some thrilling things. Lots of filler.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
A Patient's Paradox
The patient in question is a living embodiment of the familiar Liar's Paradox ("this statement is false") -- a deeply delusional man whose delusions are nevertheless completely accurate. Psychiatrist and philosopher Bill Fruford describes him in his enticingly titled book Philsophical Psychopathology:
[There is an] even more fundamental sense in which delusions may not be false beliefs, namely that for some patients this would present us with a paradox.
I have reported one such case that occurred in Oxford... The patient, a 43-year-old man, was brought into the Accident and Emergency Department following an overdose. He had tried to kill himself because he was afraid he was going to be "locked up". However, this fear was secondary to a paranoid system at the heart of which was the hypochondriacal delusion that he was "mentally ill".
He was seen by the duty psychiatrist and by the consultant psychiatrist on call, neither of whom were in any doubt that he was deluded. Indeed, both were ready on the strength of their diagnosis to admit him as an involuntary patient.
Yet had their diagnosis depended on the falsity of the patient's belief, as in the standard definition, they would have been presented with a paradox: if the patient's belief that he was mentally ill was false, then (by the standard definition) he could have been deluded, but this would have made his belief true after all.
Equally, if his belief was true, then he was not deluded (by the standard definition), but this would have made his belief false after all. By the standard definition of delusion, then, his belief, is false, was true and, if true, was false.
via Mind Hacks
[There is an] even more fundamental sense in which delusions may not be false beliefs, namely that for some patients this would present us with a paradox.
I have reported one such case that occurred in Oxford... The patient, a 43-year-old man, was brought into the Accident and Emergency Department following an overdose. He had tried to kill himself because he was afraid he was going to be "locked up". However, this fear was secondary to a paranoid system at the heart of which was the hypochondriacal delusion that he was "mentally ill".
He was seen by the duty psychiatrist and by the consultant psychiatrist on call, neither of whom were in any doubt that he was deluded. Indeed, both were ready on the strength of their diagnosis to admit him as an involuntary patient.
Yet had their diagnosis depended on the falsity of the patient's belief, as in the standard definition, they would have been presented with a paradox: if the patient's belief that he was mentally ill was false, then (by the standard definition) he could have been deluded, but this would have made his belief true after all.
Equally, if his belief was true, then he was not deluded (by the standard definition), but this would have made his belief false after all. By the standard definition of delusion, then, his belief, is false, was true and, if true, was false.
via Mind Hacks
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Scholarpedia
I stumbled on Scholarpedia this afternoon while searching for computational neuroscience articles.
From the Scholarpedia main page, "The approach of Scholarpedia does not compete with, but rather complements that of Wikipedia: instead of covering a broad range of topics, Scholarpedia covers a few narrow fields, but does that exhaustively.
Currently, Scholarpedia hosts Encyclopedia of Computational Neuroscience, Encyclopedia of Dynamical Systems, Encyclopedia of Computational Intelligence and Encyclopedia of Astrophysics."
Authors include a slew of famous names, including Koch, Minsky, Damasio and Ramachandran. Indeed, the Scholarpedia isn't shy about telling you that amongst it's contributors are 12 Nobel Laureates and 4 Fields Medalists. All these in the computational neuroscience section alone.
Eventually editions of the encyclopedia will be made available in hard copy, as well as online where they will continue to be updated.
Amazing! Why haven't I seen this before?
From the Scholarpedia main page, "The approach of Scholarpedia does not compete with, but rather complements that of Wikipedia: instead of covering a broad range of topics, Scholarpedia covers a few narrow fields, but does that exhaustively.
Currently, Scholarpedia hosts Encyclopedia of Computational Neuroscience, Encyclopedia of Dynamical Systems, Encyclopedia of Computational Intelligence and Encyclopedia of Astrophysics."
Authors include a slew of famous names, including Koch, Minsky, Damasio and Ramachandran. Indeed, the Scholarpedia isn't shy about telling you that amongst it's contributors are 12 Nobel Laureates and 4 Fields Medalists. All these in the computational neuroscience section alone.
Eventually editions of the encyclopedia will be made available in hard copy, as well as online where they will continue to be updated.
Amazing! Why haven't I seen this before?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
