Unconscious Cerebellum[i]

Massimini said that in HBP[ii] they have a lot of information, data and good people on the matters of consciousness, neurons, skull, etc., that need to be put together. He compares our time with the time before Darwin joined the things in the theory of evolution. Thus, even more effort in mining what they have than in collecting new data.
One very interesting thing he said is about the cerebellum[a] and its disassociation with consciousness. With 80 billion neurons, cerebellum does his job unconsciously. Despite of the fact that is does wonderful tasks related to our motor coordination, what is missing in its architecture that can explain it is like a zombie? On the other hand, thalamocortical[b] system is central to consciousness. So, they should be able to compare both of them in their experiments and try to find the answer.
This mystery is a very short problem that HBP has in hands and can that can be investigate deeper in its researches involving neurobiology, neuromorphic, robotics and philosophy. Mixing all these things can put us in the Darwin road shortly.
[a]cerebellum[iii]: it performs everyday voluntary tasks such as walking and writing. It is also essential to being able to stay balanced and upright.
[b]thalamocortical[iv]: the thalamocortical system constitutes the vast majority of the mammalian brain and has been the subject of extensive neurobiological and computational study. The thalamus and the neocortex are reciprocally connected via pathways of varying levels of topography.
Thalamus[v]: responsible for relaying information from the sensory receptors to proper areas of the brain where it can be processed.

Cortex[vi]: Responsible for thinking and processing information from the five senses.


[ii] The Human Brain Project is a H2020 FET Flagship Project which strives to accelerate the fields of neuroscience, computing and brain-related medicine.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Free will and determinism*

          According to SoL (School of Life), the debate between free will and determinism has been crossing the Philosophy History since the beginning until our time reaching even the neuroscientists. It concerns about whether the human being is able to dominate their actions by themselves or they are determined by forces beyond their control, like fate and politics. SoL argues that the long running arguments in favor or against both sides are not conclusive because they are based on objective variables when they should be thought as what is relevant to me (to me… to me?). Also, they vary from person to person guided by two psychological aspects: defeatism and aspiration.           Does the course of our life belong to the others, like our parents, bosses and so on or can we change our life and our relationships based on our strenght and free will? The second should be even better but more difficult, of course. So moving far from the o...
Read more

The soul is just a function*

Image
Putman talks about the contribution of Computer Science to Philosophy of Mind in terms of thinking the mind as a kind of function rather than physical or chemistry. He says that the rise of computers could result in everything being explained in terms of machines but the paradox is that it didn´t contribute for this kind of reductionism . Generally, according to Putman, when we work with computer we think in its programs, instructions, rules, etc., and we ignore the hardware. Ironically, he says that there is an emergency (not violating the laws of physics) where we work in a high level of the organization, in the program level. So we can think in the mind the same way: instead of thinking we are spirit inboded would be better think in the relation between the mind and the body in terms of functions. * Short digest of short interisting vídeo: https://youtu.be/m0YIm8p30aU . Acessed in Jan, 28 th . Hilary Putnam on Functionalism.
Read more

Eudaimonia*

SoL (School of Life) worked with the eudaimonia concept in this video: a word that comes from Plato and Aristotle. Basically, SoL compares eudaimonia with a contemporaneous word - happiness - saying that the ancient philosophers didn’t propose us to have a happy life. The purpose of our life is not avoid suffering or be unhappy – the way the word is used today, but overcome the daily and simple challenges that come every day under pressure. For SoL, eudaimonia should be associated with the word fulfilment that is distinguished by happiness by pain. So, the word eudaimonia is able to accommodate happy and unhappy and, instead of pursuing a pain free existence, we need to go further and we can make the difference. In short terms, we need to do what is really important more than to smile all the time. Follows eudaimonia recommendation means that we can spend our whole life fighting in our job, relationship and political engagement but finishing our days feeling these tasks wer...
Read more