Andrew+Week+14

Neurology is an amazingly intriguing subject not only in that, like most any science, it uncovers the workings of nature but also in that it investigates that which literally makes us what we are. Even as just a science it stands out as an example of how science and knowledge progress. Like any field the more we learn about it the less we actually turn out knowing. At the turn of the 20th century humanity thought it was on the brink of understanding all there was to know about physics. It just seemed we knew everything, what else could there be? But then quantum physics came and all that we knew went out the window. We can see the final results and put formulas to some of the basic principles but all in all we have no definite knowledge of the basic fabric of the universe. It's just, beyond us, for the time being. Neurology follows a parallel path. We've broken down the nervous system and named the different parts. Neurons, axons, dendrites, synapses, etc, they're not all that unfamiliar. Electrochemical signals, receptors, transmitters, hormones, the processes by which information is transferred is known. But how does it all really work to make, well, us? From where is consciousness derived? It took a century just to decide whether the functionality was within the cells themselves or within the entirety. We understand poking where produces what result and possibly some of how it's transmitted. However when it comes to the brain we know so little. Watching what “lights up” during certain conditions and what happens when an area is damaged can point to it's function but not how it does it. Lobotomies can fix certain disorders, now believed to possibly be misfiring nerves, but that's not why they began. Someone, sometime noticed cutting the brain in half had some good effects in some rare cases, but there was no real idea why. It's almost rather crude when one thinks about it, and this is the field of the exalted “brain surgeon,” the connotation of which is meant to express high intellect.

On another note the field develops social conflict nearly as strong as evolution. Probably only less so because so little of how the brain functions is understood. Evolution's battles stem for the way it slams up against theology and humanities “natural superiority.” I favor neither of this but in discussion and reality they both are common driving factors on the anti-evolution side. Many people are ingrained to love their god, whoever, whatever, and how ever many, and also feel comfort in thinking they have some destiny, that they are meant to be on top. Neurology conflicts equally much but instead in the area of the soul instead of our origins as evolution does. The idea is that the mind and “soul” are the essence of humans and are ethereal. However neurology is proving otherwise but we are still “out to lunch” on how the brain truly works and develops what we call consciousness, thus making it ignorable for now. In the future however it will change as thought's physical basis is more deeply understood, speaking from my biased secular opinion, and it will begin to clash as openly and as strongly as evolution does now. So in this field can you not only fight over how it works but over what makes us human and where the mind/us actually exist.