Reply to comment

We first talked about Dickenson’s and Descartes’ definitions of the brain and mind and how we see the world around us. We discussed which theory each of us favored, or found more comforting. Did you like the idea that our thoughts and behaviors can be broken down into billions of neurons or the idea that the mind (one’s sense of self and ability to make decisions) is a separate entity from the body?

This past week’s discussion got us talking about topographical organization and patterns of neurons and the I-function. The idea that every human brain is different (and these differences correspond to differences in behavior) is, to me, more comforting than anything discussed by Dickenson or Descartes. While no motor neurons are specific for any type of behavior, the way in which all the neurons in the brain receive, process, and transmit information creates interesting and diverse patterns of motor neuronal activity (behavior). This slightly more empirical explanation for the individuality of human behavior feels more right to me.  In addition, the introduction of the “I-function” as the “box” containing a restricted sense of how we perceive our actions and ourselves was very interesting. I would like to learn more about this I-function and its connections to other parts of the brain and the body. If the I-function is related to how we see ourselves and control our actions, is it connected to personality? Could differences in connections to (or in) the I-function be responsible for individuals seeing themselves and their interactions in a distorted manner (BDD, delusions, social phobias, etc.)? What causes the extreme discrepancies in the “thoughts” of different individuals? Is our sense of self solely located in this I-function (I find this hard to believe, though the thought is intriguing)?