Google Tech Talks September 16, 2008 ABSTRACT The ability to recognize and work with different emotions is fundamental to psychological flexibility and well-being. Neuroscience has contributed to the understanding of the neural bases of emotion, emotion regulation, and emotional intelligence, and has begun to elucidate the brain mechanisms involved in emotion processing. Of great interest is the degree to which these mechanisms demonstrate neuroplasticity in both anatomical and functional levels of the brain. Speaker: Dr. Phillippe Goldin
Video Rating: 4 / 5
Terrence J. Sejnowski and David Eagleman from the Neurobiology Lab explain their research on the human brain and the perception of vision and sound, the binding problem and the flash-lag effect.
Video Rating: 4 / 5
@naushadisgay I had to read the subtitles because his thick accent!
Did they have subtitles or some sort of transcripts above him when he was talking?!
what marcus aurelius said is simply superb,onus is on us only
The “definiton” as a” package of bodily behaviors” is hardly enlightening and is typical of semantic sloppiness. The term functions might be appropriate – acceptable in part in that physiological and cognitive functioning are present when we experience emotion. Damasio fails to define the phenomenon – his is a simplistic evasive abstraction which fails to set parameters between emotion,reaction and ensuing mood, beliefs or attitudes. As for “Self-explaining”- at least i write in plain English
Sorry, I thought you were educated to the extent that ‘operational definition’ would have meaning; my mistake. See also my response to your comment on a Damasio video where I point out the time in the vid when he offers his definition: of emotion: an automated, genetically programed package of bodily behaviors with a problem-solving purpose; ‘feeling’ is the perception of this behavioral response. Clear enough for me. ‘Gotcha criticism’ should be self-explaining. I merely reflect your tone…
If I had the remotest idea what you are trying to convey, other than gratuitous sarcasm. I could possibly respond. Trouble is you rely on pseudo-scientific and intellectual gobbledegook in an effort to impress rather than address the fundamental subject. As for Damassio and others-i.e, Goleman(Emotional Intelligence) and Griffiths(What Emotions Really Are) writing books on the subject none have attempted-far less succeeded- in defining the phenomenon and you seem none the wiser.
Did you hear his phrase ‘rough sketch’ and his acknowledgment that classifying is not definitive? We are trying to agree on operational definitions, not preen ourselves by divisive, competitive ‘gotcha’ criticism, haha!! (Self-irony is a higher emotional function…). Also see Damasio’s work where his OPERATIONAL definitions are, for a young science, fairly clear to my mind…
Certain kinds of ego-gratifying over-rationalized over-certain statements might indicate lack of self-insight no? We know that words are not things so we use operational definitions, and some effort to understand sympathetically before making self-satisfied critique-slinging is wisdom, no? Snow at equator may threaten or promise in various cognitive-defense modes, intellectual pride etc., no? Yes? Tone of written statement reveals emotion moving ‘reason’, yes?
An example of the nonsense attached to labelling” emotions” is that of “Surprise” which, in terms of eliciting stimulus, may present neither threat or promise of any kind whatsoever. e.g. If you inform me it is snowing on the equator in mid summer it will not induce any physiological changes associated with emotion-. it may , impact on my knowledge and understanding of climate & require some adjustment of my beliefs, yes, but presents no threat or promise unless I am due there on holiday!
You cannot legitimate defining emotion as a phenomenon in terms of what follows from emotional impact Facial expressions, moods, behavior and adjustment of attitudes expectancies or beliefs which follow emotion cannot be claimed to be part of the phenomenon itself. All labels attributed to episodes of emotion only indicate which aspect of our existence is subjected to threat or promise from the eliciting stimulus.
Currently, researchers in psychology recognize six universal emotions: anger, fear, disgust, happiness, sadness, and surprise. The definition of emotion in this sense is an immediate physiological arousal in response to a situation; we feel and respond to the emotion prior to labeling it. These emotions are recognized universally in our facial expressions. There are other contenders for the list, such as pride and contempt. Other states we might think of as emotion are considered moods.
If Golden claims to know exactly what emotion is and can define it , then we could start to debate “how many emotions” there are! .For over 2000 years there has been no universally accepted definition of emotion Ongoing speculation from such as Dennett, Damasio add other observations do little to distinguish emotion (as process and subjective experience) from, instincts, moods and behavior arising from emotional impact. Let them first define what they are speculating about…
At 20:50…isn’t that considered cognitive therapy aswell?”
I’m so cunfused about this neuroscience thing…
Great video
lol the main activity
i like google talks, very interesting and informative!!
and Ming is cool
What is said around 21:30??
I like the emphasis on 14:25
“ALOT of statistical processing” 🙂
Dr. Phillippe Goldin is, from my point of view, not correct with 6 main emotion. R. Plutchik created model with 8 dimensions and it is, for me, much better interpretazion.
Why can’t it be both?
I think, everything is picked up somewhere and rearranged by our brain.
It’s impossible to comment specifically about this because it’s so on the wrong track in so many different ways.
But let’s try an intuitive (“emotional” if you like . . .) appreciation of it anyway.
Tell me: does this guy give you the impression that he himself has any personal insight, from his own experience, into what he’s talking about?
Or does he give the impression, instead, that he’s just repeating a lot of stuff that he’s picked up and re-arranged from somewhere else?
This is a good presentation, impressive and educative!
thank you.
really formidable and beautifully presented:) thanks for this:)
a youtube video does not give the correct framerate for viewing that experiement. thats probably why it doesnt work for some.
thats crap! that man is just wasting our taxes
But if there’s no region in the brain where the neural signals all come together, then there would be no where in the brain that would benefit from neural signals being bound together temporally. (cont.)…
…(cont.) it seems to stand to reason that the brain would represent time temporally, but the very nature of a representation is a medium in which the value of representation differs from the value being represented. For example, motion in the world isn’t represented by way of motion in the brain, so similarly there’s no reason to suspect that time in the world is represented by time in the brain.
i dont think so
I saw the flash right in the middle tho.
I suspect he meant it as a relative term.
If u like this song as much as I do dont forget to get the official ringtone for your phone at DownloadEveryTone. com ____
Damn I love this video………Heads up if anyone wants this celltone I found it a bit ago at DownloadEveryTone. com ******
Copy and Paste this message to 8 other videos
2-Go to your channel and look at you background.
I wonder what he means by “long since passed” wouldn’t that mean that the flash would appear “way behind” the black circle rather than “just outside” it? hhmmm
Look, you take a human brain from a clone, and you plug it into a cpu, and bam you got creative intelligence.
i discovered this. fuck these guys.
“I know the secret to the brain and the universe. ” — tiberianfallout.
Wait, I know: “God did it.”
Me too! I have research to go with it though, hope you do too.
I have Dr. Eagleman as a professor at Rice University, and he is the best!
Do you like science? Do you like attempting to answer life’s biggest questions? Come check out my new forum at scienceandtheories . freeforums . org we just opened this month, so you can be the first to post.
*gets wallet out*
oh no … “matrix” graphics….
I know the secret to the brain and the universe.
i got interested in neuroscience when i found out my niece got CP, facinatine stuff, how a brain can control behaviour and muscle and thought level.
i guess the famous philosopher decarte was right, “i think…therefore i am”
this is very informing. and i wondered about the same thing about he brain. how the brain stiches sound and sight to gether. its a very interesting matter.
my brain ran outta tokens a long time ago.
Easy there big guy, first things first… this lab is looking at computational effects, and they are useful for understanding the brain. Where mind and consciousness fit are still in the realm of philosophy. Although, we can make speculations. Just remember, the computational approach is the most effective we have, but nobody says it tells us everything yet. That may come in time….who knows.
It seems you haven’t yet scratched the surface. We think of the brain as SOLID matter, but where does “mind” and “consciousness” fit into all of this? Certainly not inside a machine.