[HN Gopher] Myths about the brain ___________________________________________________________________ Myths about the brain Author : dnetesn Score : 85 points Date : 2021-12-22 11:05 UTC (11 hours ago) (HTM) web link (nautil.us) (TXT) w3m dump (nautil.us) | notfed wrote: | This article bothers me a little bit. It makes it sound like the | brain is completely structureless, and that the division of brain | into "parts" is a myth. | | I'm not a neurologist but this seems a disingenuous. Surely we | know that the limbic system serves a major role in emotions. We | know that the hippocampus serves a major role in long term memory | formation. The amygdala controls the fear response. Plenty of | other examples. | | But this article is very high level so maybe I'm completely | misunderstanding what "myth" they're trying to debunk. | ziddoap wrote: | Also not a neurologist, but my reading of it was not the brain | is "completely structureless" by any means. More that the | 'structures' aren't clearly defined and, crucially, that the | 'structures' don't act completely independently from the rest | of the brain. | | _" Pretty much everything that your brain creates, from sights | and sounds to memories and emotions, _involves your whole | brain_."_ | | They briefly mention that our notion of distinct brain | structures may be influenced by our hyper-focus on certain | areas of the brain, rather than wholistic study of the brain | (because it's expensive). | | As a kid, I certainly thought each portion of the brain was | independent. As in, I believed that my motor functions came | from the clearly distinct "motor function structure" of the | brain and without that structure, I would have no motor | function at all (and with no ability to regain motor function). | I think that is the myth they are referring to. | neom wrote: | I think what he's trying to say is that although the brain is | divided, because consciousness is complex, most neurons are | involved in most things? | | Good conversation: Potential Functional Role for Minicolumns in | Neocortex - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nEVO22IsVY | neuroma wrote: | Agreed. Phrenology was the old hat idea, where names of folk | psychology concepts were scrawled across areas of cortex. | | The brain is specialised and differentiated. | | However our concepts of what it does are being refined. | | Instead of hunting for "the place where happiness lives", | imposing ideas from culturally laden folk psychology onto the | gelatinous mass... we are moving towards more fundamental | notions of complex nervous system axioms. Like seeking, | avoidance, arousal, mood, emotional valence, attention. | | Brains are fun | eveningsteps wrote: | > The third myth is that there's a clear dividing line between | diseases of the body, such as cardiovascular disease, and | diseases of the mind, such as depression. | | "The Widowmaker", the 15th episode of "Circle of Willis", also | touches this topic, where heartache and uneasiness may, and often | do, kill: | http://circleofwillispodcast.com/episode/3c339c578a884870/th... | taeric wrote: | I regret that we have grown to call things like this myths. Seems | many are then dismissed as false, without retaining any sense of | usefulness they may or may not have. | | Instead, simplifications and the limits of their explanation | would be a much greater framing for some things. | wrp wrote: | The books of William Uttal cover the issues of localization and | neurological modeling at different levels of detail. The most | popular I think is _The New Phrenology_ [1] and the most | technical is _Mind and Brain_ [2]. A quote from the latter: | | _To sum up, the new metaphor proposed here asserts that it seems | more likely in the light of current research that there are no | demarcatable regions nor any regions of predetermined and fixed | cognitive functionality in the brain; there are, rather, just | "softly" bounded areas that may shrink, enlarge, or be recruited | as the current task demands. Furthermore, none of these weakly | bounded regions has any specific, preassigned, or fixed function. | They all serve as general-purpose processing entities as required | by whatever cognitive task is being processed. The whole notion | of a place on the brain having a specific identifiable purpose | has to be abandoned as an unreliable and outmoded metaphor._ | | [1] https://www.amazon.com/New-Phrenology-Localizing- | Philosophic... | | [2] https://www.amazon.com/Mind-Brain-Appraisal-Cognitive- | Neuros... | NikolaNovak wrote: | 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 young empirical discipline | with a lot of uncertainty" (though that is the case as well:). | For things which we _should_ be able to discern some basic | patterns and models, there seems to be tremendous amount of | disagreement in seemingly-authoritative and knowledgeable | sources; which just allows so much Woo-Hoo of the world to arise | (and I 'm not _just_ thinking of Deepak Chopra:). | sowbug wrote: | If you find the subject interesting and would like to read | more, I recommend Jeff Hawkins' _A Thousand Brains: A New | Theory of Intelligence_ , which was released earlier this year | and covers a theory that a large part of your brain is made of | 150,000 near-identical subsystems called "cortical columns." | It's geared toward people who have little background in | neuroscience. You might also follow up with Anil Seth's | "controlled hallucination" theory in _Being You: A New Science | of Consciousness_. | | If you prefer to pay for this knowledge with just time rather | than also money, on YouTube there are three videos from Numenta | that cover Jeff's book, and then there's a Ted talk by Anil on | consciousness. | jasonhansel wrote: | > Most neurons have multiple jobs, not a single psychological | purpose. For example, 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. | | One possible answer here is that these things (e.g., memory, | emotion, decision-making, and pain) actually have more in common | than we perceive. It's possible that mental states that seem very | different to us (from "inside" our brains) are in fact quite | similar (from "outside" the brain), or vice versa. The lesson may | really just be that our own introspection is an unreliable guide | to the actual structure of the mind. | ppod wrote: | I agree with the other comments in here: this article takes | several complex, long-running debates (modularity vs | connectionism, predictive vs feedforward processing, | dualism/monism) and reduces them to simplistic flamebait answers | that come down definitively on one side. It's really the worst | kind of popular science writing, because it's overconfident and | dismissive of the opposing view rather then separating the debate | out into appropriate parts that can be tackled with evidence- | based research. | devindotcom wrote: | I'm no expert, but this article seems misleading in several ways. | | >Myth number one is that specific parts of the human brain have | specific psychological jobs. | | Your brain is both very compartmentalized and generalized. The | neocortex contains many discrete regions with very specialized | neural architectures for specific tasks. The visual cortex and | Broca's Area have specific and very different psychological jobs. | No one's Broca's Area does edge detection on signals coming from | the optic nerve, and no one's V1 is contributing to their manner | of speech. The cerebellum does one thing, the olivary complexes | another, etc. | | Of course there is a huge amount of uncertainty as to what | various areas do and how they communicate - the brain is an | amazingly plastic network and as the author points out it can | reorganize and repurpose quickly, but there are certainly | specialized areas like "puzzle pieces," just with somewhat fuzzy | borders to them. The "triune brain" is | | >Myth number two is that your brain reacts to events in the | world... All your neurons are firing at various rates all the | time. | | I don't understand this. Of course your brain reacts to events in | the world. That is what it is for, to interpret events in the | world and issue instructions to respond to them. It is true that | for example the reading portions of your brain are not "off" | until you open a book, but it's clear that neuronal activity and | blood flow increases to these areas when a person is engaged in | the corresponding activity. So it is not a matter of off and on, | but rather idle and under load. | | Prediction is part of this process as well, but it doesn't mean | that the brain does not respond in a macro or micro way to | stimuli. | | >The third myth is that there's a clear dividing line between | diseases of the body, such as cardiovascular disease, and | diseases of the mind, such as depression. | | I can see how this might be confusing, but I don't think many | people take Cartesian Dualism this literally. Maybe I'm wrong. | People I think generally understand that the brain is an organ, | part of the body and different from individual to individual. | | But what you treat with a serotonin reuptake inhibitor or | antipsychotic is different from what you treat with therapy. One | is a treatment for the brain, the organ, the other is a treatment | for the mind, the abstract concept we have for the sum of our | learned experiences. These are certainly different things. | | I would not go blindly repeating the things this article claims. | It is mischaracterizing both the myths and the truth, in my | (amateur) opinion. | bjornsing wrote: | > 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... | rikeanimer wrote: | "Today, we know the brain isn't divided into puzzle pieces with | dedicated psychological functions. Instead, the human brain is a | massive network of neurons." | | Wow. Speechless. Maybe it's Broca's aphasia? | | It's a sad day when nautil.us is publishing stuff like this. | Sigh. | jbandela1 wrote: | I think this article focuses on too much on some nuances of | neuroscience, that in the end it becomes misleading. I guess a | similar example would be making a statement like, all programming | languages are equally useful since they are all Turing complete. | It has some basis of truth, but is very misleading as in the real | world, Javascript and QBasic are used in radically different | ways. | | Though I no longer am practicing neurosurgery, I did do 6 years | of training in neurosurgery and probably treated thousands of | patients with various brain issues. | | So let me give my perspective on the first myth, and if I have | time may address some of the other ones as well. | | > Myth number one is that specific parts of the human brain have | specific psychological jobs. | | What is true is that specific parts of the brain have very | specific _physiological_ jobs. Psychological function is likely | complex enough that multiple parts of the brain are involved, but | there are areas when affected, that can have certain | psychological effects. Let me give a couple of cases that | illustrate both the physiological and psychological aspects. | | For the physiological case, we had a patient that had seizures | that could not be treated with medicine, and required some of the | brain tissue to be removed. Unfortunately, the area was very | close to the speech areas of the brain. What we ended up doing is | putting the patient to sleep, opening up the skull and brain | covering (dura), and then waking the patient back up. | Neuropsychologists tested the patient's ability to name things | and speak as we zapped small areas of the brain with electrodes. | When we hit a critical area, the patient's speech stopped | instantly. Doing this, we were able to map the speech areas with | millimeter accuracy so we could safely do the surgery. | | In terms of psychological function, it is know that the front | part of the brain is involved in impulse control. I saw an older | patient with his family who had a large tumor there. I asked them | if he had done anything impulsive recently. They had surprised | looks on their faces as they said, "How did you know?" and then | related how the man, who had been a very upstanding person all | his life, had done something that had gotten him arrested. | | So I would say, for the general non-specialist, the idea that | brains have specific parts that do specific things is probably | less of a myth than some notion of all parts of the brain doing | everything/most things. | | A computer analogy to what the article is doing would be like | saying that because there is no one specific part of a computer | that is responsible for playing Youtube videos (the CPU, GPU, | Memory, SSD, PCI system would all be involved) it is myth that | computers have specialized parts. | sabellito wrote: | Well, the first myth is a complete surprise to me, especially the | bit about the lizard brain. I've parroted about it in casual | conversation for decades now. | mwattsun wrote: | Like me, you were probably exposed, like most of us, to the | ideas in Carl Sagan's "The Dragons of Eden" and "Broca's Brain" | | _The triune brain hypothesis became familiar to a broad | popular audience through Carl Sagan 's Pulitzer prize winning | 1977 book The Dragons of Eden._ | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragons_of_Eden | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broca%27s_Brain | | The other mythical meme of note from those days is that we only | use 10% of our brain. | boomboomsubban wrote: | I thought the "lizard brain" was the part of our nervous system | that would respond before the actual brain had time to process. | Like I've heard we'll pull our hand away from a hot pan before | we feel pain. | | Now I both don't know if I've misunderstood peoples references, | and have no idea if my version of a lizard brain does exist. | roywiggins wrote: | Some reflexes do happen before the signals hit the brain, | they go through the spinal cord and back to your limbs. | | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK544292/ | ppod wrote: | The article sets up a bit of a straw man (or maybe a motte-and- | bailey) I think, because it says "all mammal brains (and most | likely, all vertebrate brains as well) are built from a single | manufacturing plan using the same kinds of neurons."; but I'm | not sure that really refutes the notion that most of us have | when we think of the lizard brain. Ontology doesn't | recapitulate phylogeny, but we do have a cerebellum, and our | actions and reactions happen along a broad spectrum of temporal | control and conscious awareness. | feoren wrote: | > [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 functions. For example, the engine is involved in | starting the car, accelerating the car, decelerating the car, | regulating the car's speed, producing heat for the cabin, and | running the alternator to produce electricity for the lights, | power systems, and radio! That's so many things! But of course | the engine has one dedicated, primary function, and the others | are either downstream functions or side benefits. The anterior | cingulate cortex is clearly not as specialized as a car engine, | but it _is_ highly specialized; it 's just that its specialized | function is not so easy to describe (or even discern) in words | like "memory", "emotion", etc. Each of those words describes a | huge group of functions that are downstream of the function of | the anterior cingulate cortex and many other specialized | structures. | | I believe the "specialized brain regions" idea has been over- | debunked. It was the source of so much woo woo in the late 20th | century (are you right-brained or left-brained!?) that we've come | to think it's complete bunk. 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. | treeman79 wrote: | Suffered some minor strokes. Right left brain stuff was | interesting. Lost ability to hand write. But could draw fine. | Right side of body became very weak and numb. Some mental stuff | was fine. Others were not. Last I looked up it seemed to match | left and right brain theory. Creative vs math side, etc. | lr4444lr wrote: | Fascinating. How is your ability to do math problems? Can you | do them on paper at least? | treeman79 wrote: | All math or programming tasks become oddly hard. Something | simple that I had done 1000 times before in seconds became | a week long project. | | After I had been on blood thinners for a bit and my mind | recovers I sat down at a problem that I couldn't figure out | for six months. 10 minutes later it was done. | | Had an ER visit were I was getting all questions wrong. | Year, president, etc. I knew my answers were wrong. But I | didn't know why, or what they should be. | feoren wrote: | You've probably already heard of Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor, but | if you haven't, you should look up "My Stroke of Insight". | The TED talk version is quick and interesting -- she talks | about exactly this. I'm working through her "Whole Brain | Living" book and it addresses many of the exact points in | this Nautilus article, although I can't _resoundingly_ | recommend the book as it has its own flaws. | cknizek wrote: | > I believe the "specialized brain regions" idea has been over- | debunked. It was the source of so much woo woo in the late 20th | century (are you right-brained or left-brained!?) that we've | come to think it's complete bunk. | | I still see PopSci articles with a title along the lines of; | "Scientists have discovered the part of the brain responsible | for X". Even in studies or experiments in the literature, I | still see color gradient scales used for fMRI. These are | _known_ to vastly over exaggerate the discrepancy between | functional areas. And yet they allow for a more easily | digestible view of what the study is after, which is probably | why they 're still used. | | I think what the author is getting at is that, yes, some parts | of the brain are more specialized than others. But there is | _no_ specific part of the brain that regulates a specific | function and _nothing else_. Rather, it 's an enormously | complex system. | | edit: Color gradient scales are fine for academic studies and | research. However, they can be misleading to laypeople. | uniqueuid wrote: | 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. | TheOtherHobbes wrote: | 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? | uniqueuid wrote: | 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. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-12-22 23:00 UTC)