Update me with Neuroscience.

http://bnreview.barnesandnoble.com/t5/The-Thinking-Read/Wisdom-From-Philosophy-to-Neuroscience/ba-p/2495

I don't remember exactly what the authors conclusion was, but this is a good read about philosophy and neuroscience. I think generally the neuroscience stuff is very interesting, but it's not an answer finding field for philosophical questions. It provides information rather.

I had somehow missed this, and just now caught it by mere chance. Yes what is being learned in the neurosciences at large (more specifically, neuroscience is a particular range of study within the brain sciences, and would be seen to work along with others, such as cognitive science, psychology, neurophysiology, neurology, etc.) will inform philosophical positions, and philosophy will 'fine-tune' the description of terms which the evidences lead towards. Both disciplines will only gain from working more closely with each other as knowledge increases.

One major block to that in philosophy circles, is the tendency of that discipline to adhere to traditional and classic treatises put forward by its 'leading spokespeople' of old.

What has neuroscience discovered that would be of philosophical interest?

The only thing I can think of that ties them both together is related philosophical thoughts after a deed

You seem to be the type who has an interest in how things work.

There are some very good videos on YouTube covering many things about the brain, and the good part is, " they are in layman's terms.

People to check out on YouTube would be David Eagleman, Sam Harris, Patrica Churchland.








This is some of Patrica's new work, I have not seen it but I hope that it is as good as some of her old stuff. She is a neuro-philosopher.

You seem to be the type who has an interest in how things work. >>

... and how things don't work.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how this can be...

Quote: BRAIN-DAMAGED children are actually able to recover some intellectual ground if the entire damaged half of the brain is surgically removed, researchers are finding.

Its success in children with damage confined to half the brain astonishes even seasoned scientists and suggests that until now, they may have greatly underestimated the brain's flexibility, particularly in older children.

We are awed by the apparent retention of memory and by the retention of the child's personality and sense of humor,'' Dr. Eileen P. G. Vining of Johns Hopkins University wrote in this month's issue of the journal Pediatrics. Quote

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/19/science/removing-half-of-brain-improves-young-epileptics-lives.html

It would take a very brave surgeon indeed, to dive into a child's head and surgically remove half a brain.

Whatever, I briefly skimmed an article involving intelligence in birds. The thesis seemed to be that a certain amount of thought really did occur outside the strict boundaries of the brain. I remember thinking at the time that maybe I should have read it more thouroughly. I also recall the article using several technical terms I wasn't really familiar with.

It would take a very brave surgeon indeed, to dive into a child's head and surgically remove half a brain.

Whatever, I briefly skimmed an article involving intelligence in birds. The thesis seemed to be that a certain amount of thought really did occur outside the strict boundaries of the brain.>>

There's still a lot of things we don't know, probably never will. Anything is possible.