Different in degree or kind: An essay captures Adler (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, November 16, 2015, 05:35 (3296 days ago) @ romansh
edited by David Turell, Monday, November 16, 2015, 06:06

David fMRI's measure blood flows to the regions being used by the brain, nothing more. All overhyped. The ideas, themselves, are still immaterial. Consciousness is still unexplained by all the research we know how to do.
> 
> Romansh: A technicality
> 
> fMRIs do not measure blood flow ... regardless of what you might have read.
> 
> fMRIs measure the nuclear magnetic resonance of protons which depends on the chemical environment of the protons. The fMRI can distinguish an oxygenated and deoxygenated environment. This is used for a proxy of blood flow. Higher the blood flow the more oxygenated the blood.-You have simply restated what I said in a more technical way. MRI means magnetic resonance imaging. Yes the protons line up in one direction due to magnetism and when they rotate back computer images are created in slices thinner than those in Cat scans. And yes, oxygenation is what is measured due to increased blood flow. Surprise, all of us physicians know that. But perhaps your superior attitude is surprised by that. I keep it simple for those who are following the discussion but who don't care about the highly nuanced details.-I also know the history of MRI's. They were first invented to study defects in metal products and the adapted to human medical studies, with much of the initial work done in Israel. All beside the point. Why do you presume to know what I do not to know?
> 
> Romansh: Now of course this is a pretty crude measure of what is going on in the brain. This makes it all the more amazing that such a crude device could actually determine anything going on in the brain.-Thank you for the word crude. It is not amazing because previous research has told us what areas of the brain are roughly in control of what actions and thought processes. When they light up in the fMRI we know they are more active since they are receiving more oxygenated blood.
> 
> Romansh So if such a crude method can "read" what an observer can see albeit far from perfectly this is a huge step forward and does support the concept that these ideas are patterns in the brain.-Of course they are, but it tells us very little about the real intrinsic mechanisms of the brain and how consciousness arises. Nagel's Mind and Cosmos is something you should read.
> 
> Romansh: That you say it is overhyped is amazing.-I would remind you of your own commentary: on this entry I presented:-http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029390.600-hidden-depths-brain-science-is-drowning-in-uncertainty.html?full=true#.VLWxFWA5C1s->fMRI: a very critical review (Introduction)->by romansh ? @, Wednesday, January 14, 2015, 03:28 (306 days ago) @ David Turell-> While I would agree that there is much hyperbolae in some fMRI studies, but I would argue videos like this show there also a great deal of promise in this type of study.-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsjDnYxJ0bo-> And bear in mind all this is simply a proxy for blood flow in the brain.-Yes, a proxy for blood flow. Just like I said in my last entry.-To me you are amazing. You jump into this arcane garbage and skip the real issue; ideas, thoughts, and concepts are immaterial, aren't they?