RE: why do we enjoy poetry From the perspective of neuroscience?
January 16, 2019 at 7:08 am
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2019 at 7:08 am by Belacqua.)
I'm about halfway through The Consciousness Instinct by Michael Gazzaniga.
In Chapter 3 I find this sentence:
So this doesn't bode well for the specific question that we've been pondering on this thread.
So far, it appears that the book does two things:
1) It gives the most up to date information on what is going on in the brain when consciousness occurs. This includes descriptions of the "architecture" of the brain, to explain things like different levels of attention. For example, when you're concentrating on one thing, you may be less aware of something near you, which may suddenly come to the front of your perception.
2) It explains why consciousness is useful for us -- how we benefit from it. This shows why natural selection would favor it.
These are interesting topics. But, as I say, not the one we were looking at.
Maybe something more relevant will appear later in the book.
In Chapter 3 I find this sentence:
Quote:In discussing cerebral events as they relate to conscious experiences, Eccles asked the question, "How can some specific spatiotemporal pattern of neuronal activity in the cerebral cortex evoke a particular sensory experience?" That question was left unanswered, and remains so.
So this doesn't bode well for the specific question that we've been pondering on this thread.
So far, it appears that the book does two things:
1) It gives the most up to date information on what is going on in the brain when consciousness occurs. This includes descriptions of the "architecture" of the brain, to explain things like different levels of attention. For example, when you're concentrating on one thing, you may be less aware of something near you, which may suddenly come to the front of your perception.
2) It explains why consciousness is useful for us -- how we benefit from it. This shows why natural selection would favor it.
These are interesting topics. But, as I say, not the one we were looking at.
Maybe something more relevant will appear later in the book.