Coincidentally, I only relatively recently watched that video where Feynman goes to task with the foundational notion of the question asked of him. It's entertaining and insightful. It reminds me in a way of Mindy and her nested "Why?" questions (https://youtu.be/TR-qdjtyYyc).
The Star Trek episode you mention is one that stayed with me since I first watched it as a young lad. It was prime sci-fi. Interestingly, through my work in studying the brain as an adult, I was exposed to the notion of there possibly already being two personalities (after a fashion) inside our skull. I worked briefly with a child who was born without her corpus callosum and went down a rabbit hole of reading. As it turns out, in extreme cases of epilepsy, adults (at least used to) sometimes undergo surgery which severed the corpus callosum. I often think about it as going from broadband to dial-up in terms of hemispheric communication (the cerebellum picking up the slack). The weird outcome of this was what appeared to be independent and often competing consciousness coexisting inside the same head. One dominant (can freely communicate via speech etc.) and the other present but only able to act out via, say, undoing the shirt that was just buttoned, or drawing something that the dominant consciousness couldn't visually perceive when presented to the eye that corresponded to the non-dominant hemisphere; the whole contralateral set-up making for confusing and darkly humorous outcomes. It brings into question the very notion of the self.
Anyway, as always, your writing is stimulating and a joy.
I think the first time I read about different selves in the same brain, and severing the corpus callosum to treat severe epilepsy, etc, was in the work of Oliver Sacks — or was it Douglas Hofstadter? Someplace else? Well, wherever it was, it certainly got my attention.
My own late sister Maureen, who passed away in 2008, suffered horribly from cancer of the brain for years before she died. Various surgeries affected some parts of her personality — although she was unmistakably still Maureen. My father also had cancer of the brain -- but of a different kind (near the brain stem). After surgery he was out in outer space for months and months, but eventually made a nearly complete recovery. The explanation, as I understand it, was that his post-surgical dementia was caused by swelling of the brain during the surgery, not by damage done by the cancer itself. In any event it was a blessing and a surprise to watch his recovery. But then 10 or 12 years later he lapsed into dementia again. Much to ponder in all this.
"Bringing into question the very notion of the self" is what we're all about here at Sundman figures it out! Thanks as always, Fargo, for your kind and insightful comments.
You had me at Feynman. HUGE Feynman fan! Huge! His two memoirs are MUST HAVES and the Gleick book is wonderful too. And then you go and throw Daniel Dennett into things, and well, you had me at hello!
Kert, thank you for this kind comment. As you're also acquainted with Daniel Dennett, I most sincerely suggest that you check out my substack essay 'scared firefighter up in the bucket'. It's a 3-part essay (yes, that's long) but it goes into not only my encounters with the ideas of Dan Dennett, but my encounters with Dan Dennett, the human being. If you are enjoying my "My greatest problem" essay, I am highly confident that you will also enjoy the "Scared firefighter" one as well. Happy to know you! jrs
Thanks for responding so kindly yourself! I will definitely link in to your essays—I just bought Dennett’s “I’ve Been Thinking” (actually, the week of his death!). HE had me at “Darwin’s Dangerous Idea.”
If you're not a subscriber to my substack I hope you'll subscribe. Easy to unsubscribe with one click & I never ever pester unsubscribers. Substack is pushing 'followers' instead of 'subscribers' as a way to lock writers like me onto their platform, since, if I ever move to another provider (e.g. ghost or beehive), I can take all my subscribers with me since I have their email addresses, but I lose 'followers', because I don't have theirs.
That Feynman video had me chuckling when I pictured him and toddler, and the toddler comes to him to ask a "why" question. I can imagine either a VERY prolonged conversation where the two get to the fundamentals of the universe, or a very confused tyke as Feynman redirects the "why" energy against the questioner, aikido-style.
Coincidentally, I only relatively recently watched that video where Feynman goes to task with the foundational notion of the question asked of him. It's entertaining and insightful. It reminds me in a way of Mindy and her nested "Why?" questions (https://youtu.be/TR-qdjtyYyc).
The Star Trek episode you mention is one that stayed with me since I first watched it as a young lad. It was prime sci-fi. Interestingly, through my work in studying the brain as an adult, I was exposed to the notion of there possibly already being two personalities (after a fashion) inside our skull. I worked briefly with a child who was born without her corpus callosum and went down a rabbit hole of reading. As it turns out, in extreme cases of epilepsy, adults (at least used to) sometimes undergo surgery which severed the corpus callosum. I often think about it as going from broadband to dial-up in terms of hemispheric communication (the cerebellum picking up the slack). The weird outcome of this was what appeared to be independent and often competing consciousness coexisting inside the same head. One dominant (can freely communicate via speech etc.) and the other present but only able to act out via, say, undoing the shirt that was just buttoned, or drawing something that the dominant consciousness couldn't visually perceive when presented to the eye that corresponded to the non-dominant hemisphere; the whole contralateral set-up making for confusing and darkly humorous outcomes. It brings into question the very notion of the self.
Anyway, as always, your writing is stimulating and a joy.
I think the first time I read about different selves in the same brain, and severing the corpus callosum to treat severe epilepsy, etc, was in the work of Oliver Sacks — or was it Douglas Hofstadter? Someplace else? Well, wherever it was, it certainly got my attention.
My own late sister Maureen, who passed away in 2008, suffered horribly from cancer of the brain for years before she died. Various surgeries affected some parts of her personality — although she was unmistakably still Maureen. My father also had cancer of the brain -- but of a different kind (near the brain stem). After surgery he was out in outer space for months and months, but eventually made a nearly complete recovery. The explanation, as I understand it, was that his post-surgical dementia was caused by swelling of the brain during the surgery, not by damage done by the cancer itself. In any event it was a blessing and a surprise to watch his recovery. But then 10 or 12 years later he lapsed into dementia again. Much to ponder in all this.
"Bringing into question the very notion of the self" is what we're all about here at Sundman figures it out! Thanks as always, Fargo, for your kind and insightful comments.
You had me at Feynman. HUGE Feynman fan! Huge! His two memoirs are MUST HAVES and the Gleick book is wonderful too. And then you go and throw Daniel Dennett into things, and well, you had me at hello!
Kert, thank you for this kind comment. As you're also acquainted with Daniel Dennett, I most sincerely suggest that you check out my substack essay 'scared firefighter up in the bucket'. It's a 3-part essay (yes, that's long) but it goes into not only my encounters with the ideas of Dan Dennett, but my encounters with Dan Dennett, the human being. If you are enjoying my "My greatest problem" essay, I am highly confident that you will also enjoy the "Scared firefighter" one as well. Happy to know you! jrs
Thanks for responding so kindly yourself! I will definitely link in to your essays—I just bought Dennett’s “I’ve Been Thinking” (actually, the week of his death!). HE had me at “Darwin’s Dangerous Idea.”
If you're not a subscriber to my substack I hope you'll subscribe. Easy to unsubscribe with one click & I never ever pester unsubscribers. Substack is pushing 'followers' instead of 'subscribers' as a way to lock writers like me onto their platform, since, if I ever move to another provider (e.g. ghost or beehive), I can take all my subscribers with me since I have their email addresses, but I lose 'followers', because I don't have theirs.
That Feynman video had me chuckling when I pictured him and toddler, and the toddler comes to him to ask a "why" question. I can imagine either a VERY prolonged conversation where the two get to the fundamentals of the universe, or a very confused tyke as Feynman redirects the "why" energy against the questioner, aikido-style.