May 2011
April 2011
Eleven Tigers - Stableface
The only track you need to hear today. Love the vocal dance that takes place at midpoint and beyond.
A new study uses creative engineering to unravel brain mechanisms associated with one of the most fundamental subjective human feelings: self-consciousness. The research, published in the April 28 issue of the journal Neuron, identifies a brain region called the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) as being critical for the feeling of being an entity localized at a particular position in space and for perceiving the world from this position and perspective.
Recent theories of self-consciousness highlight the importance of integrating many different sensory and motor signals, but it is not clear how this type of integration induces subjective states such as self-location (“Where am I in space?”) and the first-person perspective (“From where do I perceive the world?”). Studies of neurological patients reporting out-of-body experiences have provided some evidence that brain damage interfering with the integration of multisensory body information may lead to pathological changes of the first-person perspective and self-location. However, it is still not known how to examine brain mechanisms associated with self-consciousness.
“Recent behavioral and physiological work, using video-projection and various visuo-tactile conflicts showed that self-location can be manipulated in healthy participants,” explains senior study author, Dr. Olaf Blanke, from the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in Switzerland. “However, so far these experimental findings and techniques do not allow for the induction of changes in the first-person perspective and have not been integrated with neuroimaging, probably because the experimental set-ups require participants to sit, stand, or move. This makes it very difficult to apply and film the visuo-tactile conflicts on the participant’s body during standard brain imaging techniques.”
Making use of inventive neuroimaging-compatible robotic technology that was developed by Dr. Gassert’s group at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Dr. Blanke and colleagues studied healthy subjects and employed specific bodily conflicts that induced changes in self-location and first-person perspective while simultaneously monitoring brain activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging. They observed that TPJ activity reflected experimental changes in self-location and first-person perspective. The researchers also completed a large study of neurological patients with out-of-body experiences and found that brain damage was localized to the TPJ.
“Our results illustrate the power of merging technologies from engineering with those of neuroimaging and cognitive science for the understanding of the nature of one of the greatest mysteries of the human mind: self-consciousness and its neural mechanisms,” concludes Dr. Blanke. “Our findings on experimentally and pathologically induced altered states of self-consciousness present a powerful new research technology and reveal that TPJ activity reflects one of the most fundamental subjective feelings of humans: the feeling that ‘I’ am an entity that is localized at a position in space and that ‘I’ perceive the world from here.”
via ScienceDaily
Could veterans of war, rape victims and other people who have seen horrific crimes someday have the traumatic memories that haunt them weakened in their brains? In a new study, UCLA life scientists report a discovery that may make the reduction of such memories a reality.
Thank you, friend. The means by which we communicate are paths that we all share. They deserve to be approached with care and mutual respect. We can either diminish their beauty or widen their channels. It is my wish to connect. :)
A fundamental principle of bioethics requires the consent of a patient to any medical procedure performed upon them. A patient will exist the moment a conscious mindclone arises in some academic laboratory, or hacker’s garage. At that moment, ethical rules will be challenged, for the mindclone has not consented to the work being done on their mind. Does this situation create a catch-22 ethical embargo against developing cyber-consciousness?
There are at least three ways to answer this challenge. First, it can be approached with a medical ethics focus on the mindclone itself. Second, it can be approached philosophically — focusing on the mindclone as just part and parcel of the biological original. Third, it can be approached pragmatically: what will the government likely require?








