Week 7: Neuroscience + Art

 As a budding neuroscience major, I was quite interested to learn how the science of the brain contributes to art this week. To me, the human brain is the most fascinating construct in the universe, not just for the practical utilities of understanding the organ of understanding, but also for the philosophical implications for abstract concepts like identity and consciousness. 

A Brainbow Image Taken From Cell Press

Of the art we discussed this week, the most visually striking and meaningful is certainly the Brainbow-- which is rather interesting as one could argue the Brainbow is not art as all, as it was created for the purpose of neuroscience. I was intrigued by most of the work discussed in the article "Neuroculture" by Giovanni Frazzetto and Suzanne Anker, but most of all the artist Jonathon Keats, who sold his brain and thoughts in order to achieve immortality. I particularly liked his description of his brain as a sculpture created by thinking. Though true immortality though brain uploading is a long way away, Keats' work helps us begin to consider its implications now-- particularly its potential for abuse. If one can perfectly simulate a human brain in a computer, would they ever be justified in doing so unless they intended to give it the same consideration and right to self-determination they would afford to a fellow human?

Jonathon Keats and his brain Taken from BBC

To me, the most intriguing implications of our developing understanding of the brain is those for ethics and the concept of responsibility. If the vast spectrum of human behavior can be reduced to specific neural structures or brain chemistries, if "criminal" behavior can precisely linked to certain observable characteristics of the brain, what does that mean for our conception of justice and right and wrong? Should a criminal be blamed or punished for their behavior if it can linked to a quirk of their brain? Or is drawing a distinction between person and brain in this way meaningless? And if it is possible to manipulate or modify the brain in a way that reduces or removes criminal or other undesirable behavior, would society be justified in doing so, or is doing so functionally equivalent to murder? I feel a novel, with its currently unparalleled ability to explore the human psyche through art, is a prime method of helping people consider these questions. 

Taken from Knowing Neurons

Works Cited:

Bigenwald, Ariane, and Valerian Chambon. “Criminal Responsibility and Neuroscience: No Revolution Yet.” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 10, 27 June 2019, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01406.

Frazzetto, Giovanni, and Suzanne Anker. “Neuroculture.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience, vol. 10, no. 11, Nov. 2009, pp. 815–821., doi:10.1038/nrn2736. 

Graziano, Michael S.A. “Will Your Uploaded Mind Still Be You?” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 13 Sept. 2019, www.wsj.com/articles/will-your-uploaded-mind-still-be-you-11568386410.

Singel, Ryan. “He Thinks, Therefore He Sells.” Wired, Conde Nast, 7 Mar. 2018, www.wired.com/2003/10/he-thinks-therefore-he-sells/.

 Weissman, Tamily A, and Y Albert Pan. “Brainbow: New Resources and Emerging Biological Applications for Multicolor Genetic Labeling and Analysis.” Genetics, vol. 199, no. 2, 2 Feb. 2015, pp. 293–306., doi:10.1534/genetics.114.172510. 

Image Credits:

“Cell Picture Show.” Cell Press, Hamamatsu, www.cell.com/pictureshow/brainbow.

Shiels, Maggie. “UK | Magazine | The Man Who Sold His Brain.” BBC News, BBC, 27 Oct. 2003,         news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3217423.stm. 

“Neurolaw: Combining Neuroscience and Criminal Justice.” Knowing Neurons, 22 Nov. 2017, knowingneurons.com/2017/11/22/neurolaw/.