Cognitive Neuroscience: the Biology of Mind

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of a passage from the book "Cognitive Neuroscience: the Biology of Mind," specifically regarding a patient's ability to recognize faces while struggling with everyday objects. Participants explore the implications of the phrase "it is triggered to produce the percept for our conscious lives" and its relation to consciousness and face recognition systems in the brain.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the brain region responsible for face recognition operates independently of the low-level features of the objects, suggesting a high-level abstraction of "face."
  • Others argue that consciousness is not confined to a single brain area and may be synonymous with "conscious perception" in this context.
  • A participant critiques the phrasing of the original text, suggesting it is poorly written and lacks clarity, particularly for a scientific article.
  • Another participant points out that the face recognition system may operate subconsciously, with recognition rising to conscious awareness.
  • Some participants express concerns about the quality of writing in scientific texts, attributing awkward phrasing to non-native speakers and editorial oversight.
  • One participant references the fusiform face area in the brain as relevant to the discussion of face recognition.
  • There are comments on the general readability of the book and comparisons to other works by the same author, highlighting differences in clarity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the clarity of the original text and the implications of the face recognition system's relationship to consciousness. There is no consensus on the interpretation of the phrase in question or the quality of the writing in the book.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the phrasing in the original text may reflect common issues in initial-submission manuscripts, particularly those written by non-native speakers. There is also mention of the potential influence of editorial decisions on the clarity of scientific writing.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in cognitive neuroscience, the relationship between perception and consciousness, and the challenges of scientific communication may find this discussion relevant.

tarekatpf
Messages
140
Reaction score
1
From, ''Cognitive Neuroscience: the Biology of Mind'':

A patient has a terrible time seeing everyday objects but has no problem seeing faces! In fact, if the faces are composed of fruit arranged to look like a face, the patient says he sees the face but does not realize it is made up of fruit! It appears as though a special system in the brain sees faces; it is triggered to produce the percept for our conscious lives by the configuration of elements.

......

What does ''it is triggered to produce the percept for our conscious lives'' in the last sentence mean?

What I understand is that there is a part of brain that makes us recognize faces. But how does recognizing faces also ''produce the percept for our conscious lives''? Isn't consciousness a function of a different part of the brain?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
I think the author means that this brain region is configured to recognise a face from a collection of elements. The important point is the abstraction of a "face", which is recognised independently of the elements making up such a face. What this shows is that high level percepts are coded explicitly and separately from the low level features. In this pathological case, the patient can't even "see" the low level features, but still perceives a face.

Consciousness is not a function of a different part of the brain, at least as far as we currently know. I think in this context the author is using the word consciousness as synonymous with "conscious perception" (of a face). We don't yet understand the neural mechanisms behind consciousness, but it is probably not confined to a single brain area.
 
tarekatpf said:
What does ''it is triggered to produce the percept for our conscious lives'' in the last sentence mean?
It means some editor didn't do a good job of reviewing the article for readability.

I would take that to mean that this purported face recognition system operates subconsciously. When a face is recognized, this recognition rises to the level of conscious thinking (whatever that is). Moreover, this face recognition system operates by recognizing some configuration of elements as constituting a "face".

We see faces in clouds, in rocks, on potatoes, in the shadows in a forest, even on Mars. It doesn't take a whole lot to trigger that system.
 
The authors don't mean that the hypothesized face recognition system is needed for consciousness. They mean that the face recognition system can be accessed by consciousness. "Consciousness" in this context probably means something concrete like the person is able to tell you what he is seeing.
 
tarekatpf said:
From, ''Cognitive Neuroscience: the Biology of Mind'':

A patient has a terrible time seeing everyday objects but has no problem seeing faces! In fact, if the faces are composed of fruit arranged to look like a face, the patient says he sees the face but does not realize it is made up of fruit! It appears as though a special system in the brain sees faces; it is triggered to produce the percept for our conscious lives by the configuration of elements.

......

What does ''it is triggered to produce the percept for our conscious lives'' in the last sentence mean?

What I understand is that there is a part of brain that makes us recognize faces. But how does recognizing faces also ''produce the percept for our conscious lives''? Isn't consciousness a function of a different part of the brain?

It is a terrible way to phrase it. I would just replace that entire last sentence with: "It appears that a centre that enables us to specifically perceive faces resides in the brain."

Also, even though the preceding portion is comprehensible, it is badly written for a scientific article/text. It is unduly informal and comes across as cheaply sensational.

This sort of awkward phrasing is present in many initial-submission manuscripts. They are most often written by non-native speakers of the English language. It is the editor's responsibility to ensure that manuscripts are rewritten to be easily comprehensible to a native English speaker; clearly, the editor has failed here.
 
Last edited:
conscious lives = subjective experience
 
Curious3141 said:
This sort of awkward phrasing is present in many initial-submission manuscripts. They are most often written by non-native speakers of the English language. It is the editor's responsibility to ensure that manuscripts are rewritten to be easily comprehensible to a native English speaker; clearly, the editor has failed here.
This is born out by the works of V.S. Ramachandran. Phantoms in the Brain, which credits a Sandra Blakeslee as the co-author is an easy read. A Brief Tour of Human Consciousness, by Ramachandran alone, is a very awkward read. You don't appreciate what Blakeslee contributed to the first book till you read what he sounds like without her help.
 
Curious3141 said:
It is a terrible way to phrase it. I would just replace that entire last sentence with: "It appears that a centre that enables us to specifically perceive faces resides in the brain."

Also, even though the preceding portion is comprehensible, it is badly written for a scientific article/text. It is unduly informal and comes across as cheaply sensational.

This sort of awkward phrasing is present in many initial-submission manuscripts. They are most often written by non-native speakers of the English language. It is the editor's responsibility to ensure that manuscripts are rewritten to be easily comprehensible to a native English speaker; clearly, the editor has failed here.
Amazingly, Cognitive Neuroscience: the Biology of Mind is a textbook, written by Americans.

http://books.google.com/books/about/Cognitive_Neuroscience.html?id=_B9CGgAACAAJ
 
The phrase in question comes from the second page of this book.

This is not the way to read scientific texts, trying to determine what each and every phrase means.

What that passage is discussing is what made Giuseppe Arcimboldo portraits so famous:
https://www.google.com/search?site=&tbm=isch&q=giuseppe+arcimboldo

We see faces, everywhere, thanks to the fusiform face area in our brain.
 
  • #10
Evo said:
Amazingly, Cognitive Neuroscience: the Biology of Mind is a textbook, written by Americans.

http://books.google.com/books/about/Cognitive_Neuroscience.html?id=_B9CGgAACAAJ

To paraphrase "Yes, Prime Minister" (one of my absolute favourites!), the Americans can, with a certain generosity of spirit, be considered one of the English-speaking peoples. :biggrin:

The exact quote goes as follows:

Bernard: [on the phone] Yes, we will want simultaneous translators. No, not when the PM meets the leaders of the English-speaking nations. Yes, the English-speaking nations can be said to include the United States. With a certain generosity of spirit.

:smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Evo said:
Amazingly, Cognitive Neuroscience: the Biology of Mind is a textbook, written by Americans.
That's upsetting. To my conscious life.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
50K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
9K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
18K