Strange Islands.



Untitled

My life as a scrapbook.






Theme by spaceperson Powered by Tumblr

klammer
Tagged
brain





This 1875  drawing showing a dog’s olfactory bulb was completed using a staining  method named after Camillo Golgi in which certain chemicals are injected  into nervous tissue so they can be seen. Some say its application to  the study of brain tissue represents the beginning of modern  neuroscience.


via Livescience: Inside the Brain

This 1875 drawing showing a dog’s olfactory bulb was completed using a staining method named after Camillo Golgi in which certain chemicals are injected into nervous tissue so they can be seen. Some say its application to the study of brain tissue represents the beginning of modern neuroscience.


via Livescience: Inside the Brain

06:42 pm, by jamreilly26 notes Comments

Is consciousness a product of the brain? The only certainty here is that anyone who thinks they can answer this question with certainty has to be wrong. We have only our conceptions of consciousness and of the brain to go on; and the one thing we do know for certain is that everything we know of the brain is a product of consciousness. That is, scientifically speaking, far more certain than that consciousness itself is a product of the brain. It may or it may not; but what is an undeniable fact is the idea that there is a universe of things, in which there is one thing called the brain, and another thing called the mind, together with the scientific principles that would allow the one to emerge from the other - these are all ideas, products of consciousness, and therefore only as good as the particular models used by that consciousness to understand the world. We do not know if mind depends on matter, because everything we know about matter is itself a mental creation.

In that sense, Descartes was right: the one undeniable fact is our consciousness. He was wrong, however most would now agree, to think of mind and body as two separate substances (two ‘whats’). This was, I believe, a typical product of a certain way of thinking which I suggest is characteristic of the brain’s left hemisphere, a concern with the ‘whatness’ of things. Where it was so obviously a matter of two ‘hownesses’ in the same thing, two different modes of being (as the right hemisphere would see it), he could formulate this only as two whatnesses, two different things. Equally it is a misplaced concern with the whatness of things that leads to the apparently anti-Cartesian, materialist, idea that the mind and body are the same thing. We are not sure, and could never be sure, if mind, or even body, is a thing at all. Mind has the characteristics of a process more than of a thing; a becoming, a way of being, more than an entity. Every individual mind is a process of interaction with whatever it is that exists apart from ourselves according to its own private history. 

- Iain McGilchrist

excerpt from The Master and his Emissary : The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World (2009).

10:38 am, by jamreilly17 notes Comments

Continuous Partial Attention and the Cognitive Benefits of Nature

Feel frazzled by the internet? Try going for a walk in the park.

09:38 am, by jamreilly Comments