Inquiring minds want to opine

Re “Misreading the mind,” Opinion, Jan. 20

Jonah Lehrer attempts to ridicule neuroscience because of its seeming indifference to feelings and emotions encompassed in, among other things, the arts.

May I suggest to Lehrer that a brain concussion could erase all of his feelings and emotions; with all the art, music and sympathy in the world, he would still lie helpless -- and seek the knowledge of the neuroscientist.

Mayer Gerson

Northridge

Lehrer seems much too worried that scientists are going to try to explain all of human experience and the meaning of life in terms of neurotransmitters and synapses. If anything, I think that most who work in this field are humbled by the limitations of looking at human beings from only one perspective.

Neuroscience helps to explain how some things take place, such as thoughts and memory, but it doesn’t pretend to explain why. Consider gravity: Physics tells us what it is and how it works, but not why or how it came to be.

Explaining things is not the same as “explaining away.” Psychologist Kenneth Pargament made this point about religion, and I think it applies to neuroscience. To say that human experience is nothing but neuroscience is like saying religion is nothing but a way to find meaning in life, or a way to cope with anxiety.

There always will be reductionists among us, but I believe that most people -- neuroscientists or the rest of us -- know that it’s not that simple.

Richard

Moldawsky MD

Anaheim

This article misleads the reader. It promotes a corporate research project (Blue Brain) while misrepresenting the findings of neuroscience. Neuroscientists do not claim to measure consciousness in terms of sound waves or reaction times, as the author alleges. It is simply outside of their scope.

The author spends a great deal of time denouncing the scientific method without offering any alternatives. He tells us that a fresh approach is what’s needed. However, he doesn’t present us with anything new except to say that the Blue Brain project is building computer models. What’s so new about that?

William Robertson

Santa Barbara

I’m afraid the inquiring neuroscientists Lehrer talks about are going to be disappointed. What they are searching for cannot be found in the synapses and signals of the brain, no matter how you reconfigure them. The question of what directs the mind is as old as humanity, and so is the answer: the soul.

Lehrer is on the right track when he talks about symphonies and novels. The arts can speak to and express the soul. But to find out what the inner being truly is and does, you need religion.

As long as the elite insist that science and religion are opposed to each other (they are not by any means), they will have only a part of the story. Evolution explains a great many things, but not everything. To plumb the mysteries of the soul takes a step of -- you’ll pardon the expression -- faith.

Sylvia Alloway

Granada Hills