Plan To Survive 2012 .com

"Helping You Prepare For Your Future!"



Connectomics: Sebastian Seung vs. Tony Movshon, Columbia 2012

Does the brain’s wiring make us who we are? Neuroscientists Sebastian Seung and Anothony Movshon debate minds, maps, and the future of their field. Moderated by Robert Krulwich and Carl Zimmer Introduction by Stuart Firestein Columbia University April 2, 2012 Hosted by Neuwrite

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, June 5th, 2012 Future Maps of 2012

7 Comments to Connectomics: Sebastian Seung vs. Tony Movshon, Columbia 2012

atthetopofmyvoice
April 7, 2012

Thanks so much for posting this.

culurciello
April 9, 2012

If you want to reverse-engineer the algorithm running on the brain you will have to record from cells and also know how they are connected. For example in a multi-layered piece of cortex, you will need to record all inputs to a cell (thus use the connectome) in order to figure out how it it using information and drive its output. In the visual cortex, if you want to know about aV4 neuron, you will have to record from all its inputs and its output to understand its elementary computation.

culurciello
April 9, 2012

And Yes Sebastian: a few people have to think about new technologies that can push the field forward, breaking the limits of current tools

mingli66
May 2, 2012

I recommend the article Gregory A. Miller (2010) “Mistreating Psychology in the Decades of the Brain”. I think there are many points in the article that can be used to argue against the connectomics approach in understanding how mind works. The connectomics may be valuable for understanding how brain works, not mind. Understanding structure does not necessary lead to understanding function.

djhenyo
May 6, 2012

Function is nothing more than structure over time. Study any structure across multiple time periods, such as experimental trials in a behavioral neuroscience lab, and you inevitably gain an understanding of function. I honestly have no idea where you are coming from with your argument.

mingli66
May 6, 2012

“Study any structure across multiple time periods, such as experimental trials in a behavioral neuroscience lab, and you inevitably gain an understanding of function” is not what connectomics does, although I disagree with your statement. You have to study “structure” together with “behavior” (output) to gain understanding of “function”. You cannot understand “function” by just studying “structure”.

joseerre
May 13, 2012

Great debate, what Sebastian’s team is doing taking turning this investigation into a “social” neuroscience task is definately new ground. Take a look at eyewire (dot) com and see what I’m talking about. My only regret: we never got to see Sebastian’s shoes. That’s unforgivable… (-.-)

Leave a comment