Researchers from the Department of Neurobiology at the Weizmann Institute and doctors from the Tel Aviv Medical Center named Sourasky recently provided evidence of the existence of strong neural activity in the areas that process visual information in the human brain, which creates the conscious visual experience
"The eye sees only what the mind is ready to understand" - said the 19th century French philosopher and Nobel laureate Henri Bergson. Indeed, the process of seeing includes - along with the physical changes involved in the image of the observed object on the retina - also processes that take place in the brain and make it perceive that it is indeed seeing. A study by Prof. Raphael Malach and research student Lior Fish from the Department of Neurobiology at the Weizmann Institute of Science recently brought evidence of the existence of strong neural activity in areas that process visual information in the human brain, which creates the conscious visual experience.
In a joint study with Prof. Yitzhak Farid and other senior doctors from the Sorasky Tel Aviv Medical Center, and research students from the Weizmann Institute of Science, Lior Fish and Prof. Malach asked epilepsy patients - who underwent electrode implantation for a medical procedure - to participate in a task designed to decipher the mechanisms responsible for conscious perception. The subjects were asked to look at a computer screen on which some "target object" was quickly projected - a person's face, a house or an object, and to say what the object they were looking at was. Immediately after it, another meaningless image was projected - the whole purpose of which was to stop the perceptual process - which was presented at varying time intervals after the projection of the target itself. In this way, the scientists could control the subjects' ability to see and recognize the image - so that in some cases they succeeded in recognizing it, and in some cases - they failed. By comparing the electrical activity measured in cases where the subjects succeeded in identifying the target itself, with those obtained when they failed to identify the nerve cells, the scientists were able to accurately indicate the activity occurring in the brain during the transition to conscious perception, its location and its characteristics.
The scientists discovered a rapid burst of neural activity that occurs in the higher areas of the brain that are associated with processing visual information, that is, areas that respond to the sight of whole objects (such as a human face). This activity took place only when the subjects were able to distinguish the target that was projected to them. From this it follows that the transition to conscious perception is not gradual but takes place all at once in a kind of "ignition" process. Lior Fish: "When the masking image is presented within too short a period of time after the presentation of the target object, it stops the signals that inform the presentation of visual information, and as a result the subject is unable to identify the object presented in front of him. Beyond a certain threshold time, the subject suddenly becomes aware of the very goal, which implies that the brain needs a certain period of time to process the sensory information, in order to 'activate' the conscious perception."
The study, recently published in the scientific journal Neuron, reveals the connection between the mechanism that ignites the activity of nerve cells located in high areas of visual information processing, and conscious perception in humans. However, many questions remain open: Is this the only mechanism responsible for the transition to conscious perception? If not - what are the other mechanisms? Is this a local phenomenon, or maybe there are other areas of the brain - higher or lower in the hierarchy of information processing - that are involved? The researchers hope that answering these and other questions will help us to bridge the mysterious and incomprehensible gap between the processes taking place in the brain, and human consciousness.
More on the subject on the science website
16 תגובות
This article actually reminds me of the story about the natives in South America who did not see the ships of the Spaniards because they did not know what a ship was and that there was even a possibility that such a large object would sail on the water.
The conclusion was that the brain is actually the seer and not the eyes and if the information about the visible object is not wired in the brain then it will not be "seen" (although the eyes will still receive the photons but there will be no interpretation of an image in the brain).
Does anyone know if there is any research that confirms/disproves this matter?
point:
I don't understand what you claim that you didn't claim, but you definitely wrote this wrong sentence:
"He who does not have the ability to speak (for example, a deaf person who did not hear words from his mouth, and therefore could not form words within himself) is not conscious. Just like animals are not conscious."
This is not true. point.
The fact that many things we do (and speech in general) are closely related to consciousness - no one disputes that!
Michael, my claim is not that awareness is in words. Note that I qualified this from consideration.
The claim is that the same ability to speak that developed in our childhood is closely related to consciousness.
point:
In my opinion, you are completely wrong and I have already explained that the consciousness and even the internal language had to - for evolutionary reasons - precede the spoken language.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/birth-of-language-1110084/
Beyond that - there are many types of conscious and creative thought that have nothing to do with words.
I personally solve a lot of problems using visual images and without any use of words.
Please solve the following problem (in which the bodies are composed of a material that can be stretched and contracted without limit but cannot be torn, punched or glued):
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgz8mg3w_338gpbx35fr
Then tell us which words helped you in the solution
Michael, the ability to speak is an internal quality (quite similar to thinking). Perhaps similar, but still different from what Descartes meant in his unsuccessful sentence I think means I exist.
And the one who does not have the ability to speak (for example, a deaf person who did not hear words from his heart, and therefore could not form words within himself) is not aware. Just like animals are not conscious.
And behavior does not indicate awareness. Nor does the statement "I have awareness" prove that he has awareness.
We lost the trial
point
I mean I'm aware… Amusing, I loved it.
point:
First of all when you say "I see" that in itself means that there is already an I. ” You are actually saying exactly what the title says - but exactly! This is exactly the same use that Descartes made of the word "meaning" in the sentence from which the title is derived. He understood that if he thinks - that in itself means that he exists and therefore said "I think means I exist".
Besides - being aware does not exactly belong to the ability to speak and not only because mute and paralyzed people are also aware but also because people with Aphasia can be aware.
I don't know if you have come across people who have had a stroke that impaired their ability to speak or people who have had brain cancer but those who have come across such people know that they are completely aware of themselves and what is happening around them.
If they are precise in their statements, then the sentence "I see means I am aware" is misleading.
"I see" by itself means that there is already an I. So the use of "meaning" is incorrect.
The question is what is that "I". It seems to me that it has nothing to do with sight or hearing. but for the ability to speak only.
Yigal:
This is not excessive!
what did you want? Describe a study they didn't do?
They did some research that dealt with the sense of sight (which is Professor Malach's field of expertise; should the blind be offended by his choice of this field of expertise as well?)
In the research, they apparently discovered an important step in the transition between "blind sight” and “conscious vision” and the title (which should be understood as just a title) implies exactly that.
Michael, nevertheless, there is something exaggerated in the title: the meaning of "I hear" for those whose eyes have been robbed from them is similar to "I see" for those who do see. Apparently blind people "see" in other ways, such as through elaborate (and unconscious) analysis of sounds and voices. It is likely that a similar test in people who cannot see (and it is probably more accurate to test those who are blind from birth) will find similar results in them as well.
For number 4:
You should pay attention to the fact that the title is "I see, therefore I am aware" and not "I am aware, therefore I see".
This eliminates your reservation about the blind.
It is clear that visual perception is a significant part of consciousness, but there is no denying that the blind from birth also have awareness and perceptive ability. Of course, in the right context, this discovery is an important breakthrough in neuropsychological research, but the road to the final goal is still long.
Come on, half past one in the morning, I don't have a life, I fly to bed
what are you claiming
Sounds kind of ridiculous.
No one thought that conscious activity was separate from the brain. And yet no one has explained the connection between the activity of the neurons in a certain area and awareness.
In total, another area was discovered that is responsible for object recognition. As long as it is not active, the object is not recognized by the brain.