Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeThe "we" problem...
Posted by mapologist on 09 Sep 2011 at 21:31 GMT
we
http://plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0021236#article1.body1.sec3.sec2.p14
Since Jaak Panksepp is the only author of this paper, I really wonder what is meant by this "we".
It is always interesting to see how scientists of all sorts make rhetorical use of the term "we", apparently not being aware of this "subjectivism problem" or problem of some "theory of mind".
Although H. sapiens may be the best "mind-reader", reading minds is always subjected to some "ToM", i.e., I will never be able to be sure what another body thinks or feels -- unless "our" bodies will be linked directly (brain-to-brain link) perhaps...
RE: The "we" problem...
jvkohl replied to mapologist on 11 Sep 2011 at 02:26 GMT
Given the context, I'm somewhat certain that "we" includes most other neuroscientists. For example, I agree with Panksepp, but of course there are many others.
Regarding the "ToM." Clearly, Panksepp's bottom up approach is the gene-cell-tissue-organ-organ system pathway that links sensory input to mammalian behavior. And his top down approach merely requires sensory input that activate genes in this organized pathway. But that's not theory, it's biological fact. And Panksepp addresses how sure we can be of his biological facts. Did you find any factual errors?
RE: The "we" problem...
preternaty replied to mapologist on 03 Apr 2019 at 20:16 GMT
mapologist said: "I will never be able to be sure what another body thinks or feels -- unless "our" bodies will be linked directly (brain-to-brain link) perhaps..."
I'm certain (generally, at the very least!) how my mother thought and felt when her favorite cat died, and she cried. At least in this case, I will maintain this certainty by default, until I there is scientific evidence presented to the contrary.