Graduate studies at Western
Open Neuroimaging Journal 4:53-69 (2010)
|Abstract||Despite allowing for the unprecedented visualization of brain functional activity, modern neurobio-logical techniques have not yet been able to provide satisfactory answers to important questions about the relationship between brain and mind. The aim of this paper is to show how two different but complementary approaches, Mind Operational Semantics (OS) and Brain Operational Architectonics (OA), can help bridge the gap between a specific kind of mental activity—the higher-order reflective thought or linguistic thought—and brain. The fundamental notion that allows the two different ap-proaches to be jointly used under a common framework is that of operation. According to OS, which is based on introspection and linguistic data, the meanings of words can be analyzed in terms of elemental mental operations (EOMC), amongst which those of attention play a key role. Linguistic thought is made possible by special kinds of elements, which OS calls “correlators”, which have the function of tying together the other elements of thought, which OS calls “correlata” (a "correlational network” that is, a sentence, is so formed). Therefore, OS conceives of linguistic thought as a hierarchy of operations of increasing complexity. Likewise, according to OA, which is based on the joint analysis of cognitive and electromagnetic data (EEG and MEG), every conscious phenomenon is brought to existence by the joint operations of many functional and transient neuronal assemblies in the brain. According to OA, the functioning of the brain is always operational (made up of operations), and its structure is characterized by a hierarchy of operations of increasing complexity: single neurons, single assemblies of neurons, syn-chronized neuronal assemblies or Operational Modules (OM), integrated or complex OMs. The authors put forward the hypothesis that the whole level of OS’s description (EOMC, correlators, and correlational networks) corresponds to the level of OMs (or set of them) of different complexity within OA’s theory: EOMC could correspond to simple OMs, correlators to complex OMs and the correlational network to a set of simple and complex OMs. Finally, a set of experiments is proposed to verify the putative correspondence between OS and OA and prove the existence of an integrated continuum between brain and mind|
|Keywords||mental categories consciousness linguistic thought language attention mental operations EEG functional synchrony connectivity metastability|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts, Sergio Bagnato, Cristina Boccagni & Giuseppe Galardi (2012). Toward Operational Architectonics of Consciousness: Basic Evidence From Patients with Severe Cerebral Injuries. Cognitive Processing 13 (2):111-131.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves (2012). “Machine” Consciousness and “Artificial” Thought: An Operational Architectonics Model Guided Approach. Brain Research 1428:80-92.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts (2001). Operational Architectonics of the Human Brain Biopotential Field: Toward Solving the Mind-Brain Problem. [REVIEW] Brain and Mind 2 (3):261-296.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts (2013). Dissipative Many-Body Model and a Nested Operational Architectonics of the Brain. Physics of Life Reviews 10:103-105.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves (2009). Phenomenological Architecture of a Mind and Operational Architectonics of the Brain: The Unified Metastable Continuum. In Robert Kozma & John Caulfield (eds.), Journal of New Mathematics and Natural Computing. Special Issue on Neurodynamic Correlates of Higher Cognition and Consciousness: Theoretical and Experimental Approaches - in Honor of Walter J Freeman's 80th Birthday. World Scientific.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves (2009). Brain and Mind Operational Architectonics and Man-Made “Machine” Consciousness. Cognitive Processing 10 (2):105-111.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves (2010). Natural World Physical, Brain Operational, and Mind Phenomenal Space-Time. Physics of Life Reviews 7 (2):195-249.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Giorgio Marchetti (2010). Editorial: Brain, Mind and Language Functional Architectures. Open Neuroimaging Journal 4:26-29.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts, Sergio Bagnato, Cristina Boccagni & Giuseppe Galardi (2012). DMN Operational Synchrony Relates to Self-Consciousness: Evidence From Patients in Vegetative and Minimally Conscious States. Open Neuroimaging Journal 6:55-68.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves (2010). Emergentist Monism, Biological Realism, Operations and Brain-Mind Problem. Physics of Life Reviews 7 (2):264-268.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts (2006). Timing in Cognition and EEG Brain Dynamics: Discreteness Versus Continuity. Cognitive Processing 7 (3):135-162.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves (forthcoming). Consciousness as a Phenomenon in the Operational Architectonics of Brain Organization: Criticality and Self-Organization Considerations. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts (2012). Mind as a Nested Operational Architectonics of the Brain. Physics of Life Reviews 9 (1):49-50.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts (2011). Persistent Operational Synchrony Within Brain Default-Mode Network and Self-Processing Operations in Healthy Subjects. Brain and Cognition 75 (2):79-90.
Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts (2004). Making Complexity Simpler: Multivariability and Metastability in the Brain. International Journal of Neuroscience 114 (7):843 - 862.
Added to index2010-08-26
Total downloads47 ( #27,326 of 725,494 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 725,494 )
How can I increase my downloads?