A wonderful, wide-ranging view of one of the most inspirational bodies of neuroscientific research. Essential repeated listening for anyone interested in understanding what it means to own a brain. Thank you very much to the organizers for providing such a rich program of hippocampal exercise / self-synthesis.
How is it that most of us get the me me me me me me thing so wrong? When veridicality - not necessarily religious but certainly otherwise - is so important? Can we use the same meaning of self in self- organization, control, and ish?
A facinating discussion that is replicated across every field of study today. The presumption there needs to be a dominate consensus on the definition of words is a recurring theme. First, even if one field resolved their definitional disputes, it compounds the greater challenge this poses in communicating across deciplinary fields to bridge professional silos. Second, this resolution (one "grounded" definition) only serves dominate voices (usually those from white English speaking males). Innovation, or arriving at a milestone (making progress), is" navigated" best through negotiation...meaning making is a bridge to sensemaking. Language serves to both expand and constrict "movement". While novel concepts may deserve to hold value in intellectual property (I.P.) rights, language, and word meanings, should be deemed the dymanic "property of the commons". Questioning doesn't have to be an assault on one's intelligence. Imagine the possibilities if the purpose of all conversations presumes negotiating meanings together serves the common good. I wish these fields would study how we can brake the shackles of colonialism and discover ways to "wire" humans to hold sacred wisdom, curiosity and awe.
Nice Chinese room reference. Seems working causation too much from previous psychology terms is dangerous. Deleuze not Freud should have been a neurologist 😊
One should not start with religious beliefs and then study the brain to confirm those beliefs. Very poor science. This is poor and erroneous right out of the gate. I am shocked at Gyorgy Buzsaki for taking this approach to science.
according to how i understand that from his book "The Brain from indide out" - he criticizes exatly that approach to science (i think chapter 2 "the problem"?). So, I'm unsure why you think his approach is that of a religious bias to his research? intrested in your thoughts
