Pulled from here Feynman’s Nobel Lecture: December 11, 1965 The Development of the Space-Time View of Quantum Electrodynamics We have a … More
Clarification should account for roughly 90% of what a shrink says, particularly in the early years (yes, I said years!). Confrontation should account for roughly 5-9% of what a shrink says. And, as I talked about last time, and will flesh out in more detail below, interpretation should take up 1-5%
Most psychiatrists of a certain age began their careers thinking marijuana use – even daily marijuana use – was no big deal. We bought the conspiracy theory (somewhat accurate, somewhat false) that marijuana was histrionically banned in the 1920s through sneaky back-room deal making by Hearst and DuPont in order to get rid of hemp, which was a threat to their business models (making paper and nylon respectively). The terrifying, effects of weed on the human mind – particularly the nonwhite human mind, but also the white female mind – was the scare tactic these corporations used to accomplish their financial objectives. And thus, tragically, in white America’s panic to avoid miscegenation and race wars, which turned out merely to deprive them of superior paper and nontoxic, organic clothing and rope – both superior by far to wood pulp paper and cotten clothes and nylon rope – we got rid of a perfectly safe drug.
Increasing the firing rate of prefrontal cortical neurons via agonism of serotonin receptors with LSD looks like this (All credit … More
In contrast the the modern belief that the universe is physical, Pythagoras (among other ancients) believed that the universe’s basic “stuff” … More
This kid’s as good as the octopus – and as unpretentious – but with the soul of an artist.
Larry Young just published his Tedx talk on pair bonding. It’s very accessible to the so-called intelligent layman; it sets … More
As a follow up to my paranoia about Obama’s BRAIN initiative last month, I thought I’d compile some cool robot videos showing that DARPA is moving us closer to Star Wars – the movie – every day; that’s why allowing them to be the majority funder of BRAIN should have elicited a tad more cynicism from the mainstream press than it did.
If the results stand up, they provide intriguing evidence that “emotional eating” binges may be just the opposite – efforts to turn off emotion. Have people who binge eat after distressing experiences stumbled upon a hypothalamic emergency brake?
The NYT has a loving and heart-warming replica of Watson’s letter describing the discovery of DNA to his 12 year old son in 1953. To say something nice about it, it’s amazing to see what a good teacher Watson was – he describes the double-helix, first-time out, from a standing start, better than it is usually described by professional educators in high school and college. What’s even more amazing and heart-warming is that Watson completely forgets to mention Rosalind Franklin to his son. You know, Rosalind Franklin…the Jewish woman chemist who took the x-ray diffraction picture of DNA that led directly to Watson’s theory? Never heard of her? Riiiiiiiiiight.
As I brought up last week, we should watch the merging of DOD and NIH monies in the pursuit of neuroscience research. Here’s an article on one use the Pentagon may want to put all this research to: “Pentagon to build robots with real brains.” As a side note, this seems far-fetched.
If you don’t think there aren’t a few neocons salivating at the thought of future fleets of American neurosoldiers cutting through the Mongol hordes, you haven’t been watching enough House of Cards. DARPA’s got skin – big skin – in this game for a reason. Visions of neuroweaponry are dancing through at least some of their heads. Isn’t it time to ask some questions about it? America’s just flubbed two wars, at incredible expense, in which overconfidence in DARPA weaponry played a huge role. Let’s find out exactly what their thinking about the BRAIN initiative is, and how this military-scientific collaboration is supposed to play out. And let’s hope that we don’t have a new challenge on our hands – to keep not only weapons out of the wrong hands, but the wrong heads. And let’s follow their mission statement and funding patterns closely over the years. NYT, what do you say? Want to give cynicism a shot? I’ve heard it’s something that reporters – and even Presidents – used to do.
Yesterday I posted that the White House’s upcoming BRAIN initiative was conceptually incoherent, and I snarkily implied the NYT needed some science-fiction checkers for its overly credulous reporting of what we could expect out of the initiative.
What a difference a day makes! In an article today they write: “the new initiative… has, as yet, no clearly defined goals or endpoint. Coming up with those goals will be up to the scientists involved and may take more than year.”
For anyone reading today’s NYT article on the ADHD “epidemic” (sidenote: the only epidemic is in the eyes of the diagnosticians and, worse, the school administrators who ensure that normal boys look hyperactive by sticking them in classrooms at 8am every morning), it wasn’t hard to notice someone conspicuously absent: Jaak Panksepp. If you haven’t read Panksepp’s most recent article on the normal evolutionary function of attentional shifting, and on the necessity of reorganizing our grade schools to make recess the first class of the day, read it now (link here…)