Why BrainPoke is misleading

Brain Poke is just a simple simulation of Wilder Pennfield's experiments on human subjects during neurosurgery. The experiments were conducted in the 1950s and early 1960s and involved electrically stimulating the cortex of subjects undergoing neurosurgical resections. Most of these surgeries were performed to reduce the symptoms of epilepsy. To the surprise of most people, these surgeries were generally conducted with the patient awake. Many neurosurgical procedures are still done this way. Being able to ask the patient questions during surgery is often very important to the successful outcome of the surgery. As for Pennfield's data, he simply believed that the brain had a number of localized functions and this was a way to map them out.

We are still in the mapping business today. Functional neuroanatomical maps have been printed in texts since the 1700s and we've gotten more sophisticated in making these maps. Newly developed techniques such as the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) give us an unparalleled view of the brain. It would seem that we have only to do enough experiments to adequately create a functional map, elaborating on the mapping which Pennfield helped refine.

Unfortunately, while we have made marvelous technical advances in watching brains, we have made almost no theoretical advances in assigning function to structure. There are two problems. The first is that we don't know the structure(s) of the brain. This must seem a surprise and most readers must be reciting the lobes and other names of brain structures. Still, we don't know where to draw the boundaries in the geography of the brain as it relates to function. Is it the dendritic trees of neurons which are important? What about the number of cells in a cortical layer? Should we make such decisions about similarities of brain regions mini-column by mini-column? We just don't know.

The second difficulty is in determining function. Psychophysiologists have been trying "officially" to determine the fundamental elements of psychological process since the mid-nineteenth century. Unofficial attempts go hundreds (maybe thousands) of years before that. What are the fundamental elements of function? Seeing? Hearing? Perhaps the dichotomy is between input and output? If that's true, would planning for the future be input or output? These are very difficult questions. Let's take an illustrative case: reading. Reading is something you are doing now. But even within the confines of what we know about function, it involves receiving an image on the retina, focusing, moving the eyes, getting another image, not getting sick because your eyes are moving, translating what has been seen into a symbol system, and using the symbol system to create knowledge about the world (or at least Brain Poke). That's a lot of stuff and it's a very incomplete list. So, what part of the brain does that? Many, many parts. What part of the brain isn't working right in disorders like dyslexia? The answer could be one of many, many parts.

So, while Brain Poke tries to be true to the original experiments, don't be misled by the structure/function picture that emerges. Assigning a psychological function like creativity, language, emotion, or math ability to a spot in the brain or even a whole hemisphere is just too simple to be real.

TL
11/18/97