BRAIN POLICE

kkollins at pop3.concentric.net kkollins at pop3.concentric.net
Wed Oct 21 17:43:30 EST 1998


CLARIFICATION:

if it's not clear that I was referring only to prosthetic devices (not tissue
implants), that's what I was, in fact, referring to. ken

kkollins at pop3.concentric.net wrote:

> While not saying that it's not possible to implant stuff in the brain (there are
> even now successes with artificial cochlea, etc.), it's not possible to
> "re-engineer" the brain from without because everything that the brain does
> constitutes its own re-engineering of itself... so, if something lacking that
> plasticity is stuffed in-there, that thing will be as an island of
> non-plasticity that just sits there, all "static" (not itself plastic), stealing
> what would, otherwise, be optimized plasticity.
>
> It's one thing to work to develop prosthetics with respect to organic damage.
> It's quite another to invade fully-functional systems. While the former has a
> purpose, and possible benefits, the latter does not... the fully-functional
> system can only be made less than it is by mucking around with its awesome
> degree of innate integration. ken collins






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list