Welcome Letter To A Dental Office

Stanislas Dehaene, reading. The greatest invention of mankind, and what happened here in our heads, Munich 2010 (2009)

1. description of the subject and the action subject in brain research
2. for interdisciplinary brain research
3. to neuro-physiological functions of the brain, consciousness and behavior
4. to neuro-physiological functions of the brain: competition versus reciprocity
5. to neuro-physiological functions of the brain: Perception of Shape
6. to neurophysiological functions of the brain: Proto letters
7. to neurophysiological function of the brain: school
   

in reading Dehaene's research results to transform the object of perception to perception of letters and words, I noticed that there is a neurophysiological level on a visual analogy to the phenomenal structure of the object of perception, which in addition to certain similarities interesting differences to shape perception. The problem that using the neurophysiological processes must be solved to ensure the functionality of shape perception is that the retina arrive as a place to which the light stimuli, resolves these light stimuli in many different individual stimuli, and so the object "into thousands of disassembled parts "forwards. (See Dehaene, 2010, p.21, 144) The procedure related to the these items again Object is composed, is similar to assembling a mosaic or a puzzle. (See Dehaene, 2010 S.147f.)

similar Just as we in assembling a jigsaw puzzle are guided by the contours of the puzzle pieces, are also involved in the object perception groups of neurons specialized for certain contours, for example, the three lines in the corners of a cube meet at a point. From the lowest level of a hierarchy of groups of neurons that respond only to underscore, on the still relatively low level of those groups of neurons that combine these lines to more complex contours to the top of the pyramidal hierarchy, where a single neuron only to the sight their own grandmother or responding to the face of Jennifer Aniston (see Dehaene, 2010, p.146), is the puzzle and more concrete to finally awaken our conscious awareness.

is interesting especially the flatness of the object of perception. While it is irritating when Dehaene and again at this level of "topological and spatial relations" speaks of the characteristics of perceived objects (see Dehaene, 2010, p.154), but if you look closely, it seems not the phenomenal structure of the meant to be objects in space, but those spatial 'distribution of the perceived characteristics of the retina, which the flat Character of this level of perception does not destroy. Dehaene raises even out specifically that this level of visual perception, the identification of the goods "on its position in space" makes you independent. (See Dehaene, 2010, p.153) However, one need here to draw not only on conjecture, because the findings of Dehaene concrete - obviously not influenced by the stereoscopic vision - flatness of the object of perception: "Our visual system seems shapes in three dimensions not to know - it is based solely on the two-dimensional images seen and expects them to appropriately "(Dehaene, 2010, p.320) The objects are

about. our visual perception solely through the flat, mosaic-like assembly of contours and have identified only later with the third dimension. These neurophysiological through the functionality of the object perception of certain two-dimensional plane, with its preference for contours (lines) is even a specific aesthetic expression in the stylization. Dehaene leads as an example the conversion from the stylized outline of a bull's head in the letter A. (See Dehaene, 2010, p.212) with the stylization of the human reduced its object of perception to the essential characteristics, which, according to Dehaene "a form of car stimulation 'for the visual cortex" is. (See Dehaene, 2010, p.203) Here we are again surprised how unconcerned Dehaene his perspective as transfers with magnetic resonance imaging brain researchers equipped the cave of Lascaux was 50 people 000 years ago. For me, however, is much more interesting as the person is able to do with the limited resources most neuronal function artistically highest standard of art.

The shape perception is on the level of neurophysiological function together as a mosaic. This is a different principle than the nesting inner and outer horizons at the level of phenomena. The neurophysiological mosaic is missing the space and with it the dimension of non-visibility of the rear sides of a phenomenon. Rotating objects can not be recognized as the same because it is the retina of many different, turning pages' and other hide. (See Dehaene, 2010 S.320f.) Rotate This, pages', this mesh and apart nested horizons leads out of the anatomy of the brain and gives effect to the anatomy of the human body. For only on the border of their own physicality created a center and a periphery, a difference of inside and outside, in short, spatial perception.

Dehaene which are now considered a second, the object of perception (. Cf. Dehaene, 2010 S.328f) independent visual system, visual system and this seems to functional anatomy of the body and its movement to be, so the level of behavior: "There is still another way of processing visual information: it is the route over the parietal region of the occiput, which deals with programming of the action. It depends solely on his (the subject matter - DR) distance, its position, its speed and direction of his outline to -. All those parameters that determine how we could act with respect to a subject "(Dehaene 2010, S.329)

This second visual system allows us to "pure virtual introduce gestures or movements. In this way we can rotate the objects in the mind. "(See Dehaene, 2010, S.329) is reminiscent of Husserl's eidetic not by chance variations, the basic principle of phenomenal analysis. Only with the possibility of rotation begins the actual vision, and it is no coincidence that on this second visual system, which is sensitive to rotation, are also regions of the brain that are "for the movements of the hand, others for the eyes "interested. (See Dehaene, 2010, S.331) completes the second visual system, then, as I already noted above, the performance with the inclusion of body image, that aspect of human physicality, as the Plessner, body "means.

How Many Calories In Beef

Stanislas Dehaene, reading. The greatest invention of mankind, and what happened here in our heads, Munich 2010 (2009)

1. description of the subject and the action subject in brain research
2. for interdisciplinary brain research
3. to neuro-physiological functions of the brain, consciousness and behavior
4. to neuro-physiological functions of the brain: competition versus reciprocity
5. to neuro-physiological functions of the brain: Gestalt perception
6. to neurophysiological function of the brain: Proto letters
7. to neurophysiological function of the Brain: school
   

In this post would still go once in detail on Dehaene's thesis that the limited plasticity of the brain also affects limiting effect on the individual learning and cultural freedom of man. (See Dehaene, 2010, p. 16, 164f., 197u.ö.) In several places Dehaene expressed the suspicion that the teaching of reading in a loss of other skills associated, because this new ability busy cultural circuits which hitherto for other functions had been planned: "The competition between this new cultural functions and the earlier evolution of the inherited functions within our brain has perhaps led to lost that because of the increasing literacy skills were some of our culture - such as the visual recognition of certain categories of goods' (. Dehaene, 2010 S.195f, 247 and elsewhere)

Apart from the fact that the respective circuits in the left posterior temporal area specialized for the general perception of objects, and learning to read and a diversion of specialization is made to the recognition of letters and words, but concrete Dehaene is only one place, what could it be for a loss. For that to recognize the recognition of objects by the new capability, letters and words affected would, one can not really say. Dehaene proposed as candidates for such a loss in the competition before the evolution due to limited amount of available circuits, the track read: "All anthropologists who have spent some time with hunters and gatherers in the Amazon, New Guinea or in the African bush and return with a feeling of inferiority back. Your hosts, they say, it would mean so much to read the natural world. Particularly virtuosic they master it, to interpret animal tracks. "(Dehaene 2010, p. 241)

The new cultural ability to read text, so should the older cultural ability, the nature of To read to compete and eventually displace them from the circuits that they had been used. To prove this hypothesis empirically, one would Dehaene not only compare the brain function of track-read illiterate in the text read equally well trained alphabets, but shall also, tracker 'and' text reader 'in their competing ability, the possibilities of the simultaneous reading of traces and texts to elicit. Thus, the comparative study but would really give some indication, that should not take place in a laboratory study, but it would be a field study. There would, however, for the tracker give an equivalent cultural environment for the texts read, and the text reader it would give an equivalent cultural environment for the Tracking. It would have to be a culture, check out the tracks and reading texts will be considered equally valuable, and to judge really compete if and how to read signs and texts read by a limited repertoire of neuro-physiological functionality!

But first, there is not such a culture, so that such experiments are not feasible. Yet one can second the lack of such a culture as evidence values for the proposition that the limited plasticity of the brain also available standing cultural space is limited. One can only conclude from this that have cultures that prefer the text read, there is little interest in tracking, and that cultures that prefer the tracking, only a slight interest have read on or just barely opportunities for texts. So if there would be a cultural interest in the simultaneous use of these skills, so first there is nothing that read traces and reading texts could complement each other as well as playing violin, embroider and to type. (See Dehaene, 2010, p. 241)

The following article argues Dehaene then not so much in terms of a competition between tracks and Read words, but more in the direction of a precursor function of the track reading text for later reading, which is something else entirely. Then would the Tracking the ability to read words, only paved the way (see Dehaene, 2010, p.242), not to necessarily be in competition (see Dehaene, 2010 p.243). In the end, so not much of Dehaene's thesis of a cultural skills competition for a limited amount of available functional circuits.

addition, there are a variety of counter-arguments and counter-examples, Dehaene own lists and much more different from a mutual support of cultural skills talk than predatory. How to Hold Dehaene, first, that the "scope of our learning process" is not defined "absolute": "The large increase of synapses as well as the branching of axons and dendrites at the beginning of the development a margin of learning, its contours are not known. "(Dehaene, 2010, p.240) - Second, seem to" associative 'neurons of the cerebral cortex in präfontalen area and in the parietal and temporal region ... to belong to several groups sometimes very different. "(Ibid.) The specialization of certain neurons and circuits is thus by the ability of other neurons, to mediate between different circuits added.

Third, "learning can raise the precision of the neural code - this is a redundant coding to meet in most neurons of the same rough distinctions, to a differentiated representation of the environment of where each neuron precisely on each separate set of stimuli responding. ... With the learning process grows on the cortical map the surface of the left hand (eg, pianists and violinists - DR). Stimulated card can then spread to adjacent areas of the cortex, which normally devoted to the representation of arm and face are. "(Dehaene 2010, S.240f.) This is not about competition from the speech, but rather an additional stimulus" adjacent areas ", which may well have a positive influence on the overall activity of these areas," said occupation modified the accuracy, with which we carry out other parts of the body? This is possible, but you can imagine as well that there is a positive transfer is: What the neurons for the function A (violin play - DR) could have learned to write eventually be useful for the function B (embroidery or machine - DZ prove). "(Dehaene 21010, p. 241)

Further evidence that learning to read not just an isolated, potentially with others in the displacement of competing cultural ability, but that goes along with it a whole set of other mental skills, is that "the hours that you spends so tiny to identify differences between the letters, also increase the analytical capabilities of our visual cortex can. When compared to illiterate is reflected in the fact that the perception of geometric shapes with the acquisition of reading is better () "(Dehaene 2010, p. 241)

Ultimately Dehaene is not around it -. Even if this conclusion is not explicit in his -, to put his own "very speculative" theory (see Dehaene, 2010, p.240) even the death blow: "The brain is a plastic and constantly under renovation located institution, set in the experience as much as Gene ... the child's brain contains millions of redundant circuits that can compensate each other mutually. ... Each new learning process modifies the expression of our genes, turning our neural circuitry. "(S.291f.) - There remains then not much left of the allegedly by the neuro-physiological functions related cultural limitations of our" invention capability "(see Dehaene, 2010 S .352).