home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!auvm!UXA.CSO.UIUC.EDU!MWOG8061
- X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
- Message-ID: <199212161848.AA20692@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 12:48:50 CST
- Sender: "Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)" <CSG-L@UIUCVMD.BITNET>
- From: Mark William Olson <mwog8061@UXA.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
- Subject: neuroscience
- Lines: 17
-
- OK--I figured out that I gotta limit my message length.
- First, I never saw Bill's post to me--I don't know if that was my fault or the
- computer's. Second, when I speak of levels I am speaking not of perceptual
- levels but levels of analyis--like molecular, biological, psychological: that
- sort of thing but not quite that distinct. I can describe what is going on in
- terms of neurons, or systems of neurons, or go lower and talk of the chemistry,
- or go higher and talk of the "computational models" (PCT). I don't have to
- know much abut chemistry to have a good computational model and vice versa. So
- when I say that PCT is at a different level than neuropsych, this is what I
- mean. At one level there are goals, at one level there are neurons
- firing--nothing new. (I don't remember what I was saying in relation to this,
- however, unfortunately).
- Third, I completely agree that I can't equate function with place--that's what I
- tried to write before and its what I am writing in my neuropsych final--but you
- got to start somewhere. If I was doing a memory experiment (and by the way,
- neuroscientists are one up on this topic over PCTers as far as I can tell) I
- would do it exactely the same [switch to new post]
-