Skip to main content

Neuroplasticity



Neuroplasticity – a theory in formation.  One aspect is clear about medicine.  It is a latecomer to the application of modern scientific methods, essentially beginning only in the late 19th century.  In medicine, there is so much to discover that we may say many of the discoveries of the early 20th century were the reaping of the proverbial low-hanging fruit.  It was only the examination of phenomena from a rigorous viewpoint that proved fruitful to medical discovery.  It advanced quickly and profoundly during the entire 20th century, using microbiology, chemistry, physics, and even engineering to examine the physical human resulting great discoveries.  Thus, medicine provides a fertile are to examine the development of theories from their grounding to maturity. 

From the 15th up to the 20th century, neurology was focused on the theory of localization, meaning that certain areas of the brain were dedicated irrevocably to certain mental activities.   There were literal maps of the brain demonstrating this.  Making precise the question of which areas of the brain control which functions was among others the research of Paul Broca (1824–1880).  He believed that by studying the brains of cadavers (he had hundreds) this determination could be made.  This was the subject of a book by Carl Sagan (1934-1996), published in 1979[1]


Neuroplasticity is a generalized term that refers to the brains ability to change during a lifetime. Included are its ability to change during select inputs, to change due to thought, to re-purpose neural pathways from one function to another.  It applies to almost everything we do mentally.  It cannot be escaped in the sense your brain may be different from day-to-day.  One interesting conclusion is that among the elderly, the continued use of the brain into old age keeps it vibrant, often times functioning as a much younger brain. 
 

The concept is hardly new philosophically, but quite new analytically.  The great philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), at the age of 70, wrote an essay on how to master the powers of mind by resolution.  One principle was to breath only through the nose. Not much science was evident in the essay, but as with many proto theories, intuitive thought preceded actual theory. 


Neuroplasticity began the (very) early 20th century phenomenon, seeming to originate in the seminal work of William James[2], though observations were made in earlier centuries.   Ignored at the time, it contrasts with the idea that the brain develops during childhood, reaching a steady and constant state in the teen years.  However, early research was conducted over the next few decades, also somewhat ignored.  It seems to have taken off in the 1960’s with the work of Paul Bach-y-Rita (1934-2006), who invented a devise to help blind people “see” words, shadows, and distance using neural pathways connect to touch. In some cases stroke victims were able to regain the use lost limbs through cleverly devised mechanisms that encouraged the brain to use other neural pathways.  Remarkably, once the brain was rewired, the devises were no longer needed, implying a permanent change.  


In another example, a man with a severed arm experienced for years phantom pain from the severed limb.  By using a simple devise using mirrors, the brain was somehow (note this word) able to eliminate this pain. In another example, a woman who had permanently lost balance control was able to reconnect balance into her brain by using a device through her tongue nerves. Even more remarkable, subjects were able to stimulate appropriate parts of their mind simply by thinking through particular actions, such as playing piano chords.  Neuroplasticity seems to work for persons of any age, giving rise to the hope and potential reality that mental aging actually is a myth, at least partly. 


Where is neuroplasticity as a theory?  Fundamentally, there is a single axiom or hypothesis. The brain is “plastic” in nature being able to adapt neural pathways from one purpose to another. In many, if not most cases, devises seem to be needed to effect this, though thinking in and of itself seems also applicable.  The subject is so new and so potentially powerful that future applications seem almost without bound. As the theory, its status is remarkably primitive.  With the single hypothesis and belief in its efficacy, researchers are continually devising new methods for empowering the plasticity of the brain to more and more situations where some brain function seems lost.  Yet, the theory is not quite advanced to explain how or why the brain has this ability.   






[1] Sagan, Carl, (1979), Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science, Random House.


[2] James, William, (1890), Principles of Psychology.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view