Insight and imagination.

V. Carroll
{"title":"Insight and imagination.","authors":"V. Carroll","doi":"10.1097/jnn.0b013e3181da4131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How are humans different from other animals? What unique characteristics set us apart from other mammals? Language? Many other mammalsV dolphins, chimps, dogsVcommunicate in meaningful ways with each other. Tools? Again, many other mammals use tools in their every day lives. Emotions? We observe behaviors in other mammals that appear similar to human emotion. The Public Broadcasting System recently aired a seriesVBThe Human Spark[Vthat examines these questions. In the three-part series, host Alan Alda joins neuroscientists, archeologists, and primatologists as they try to explain the nature of Bhuman uniqueness.[Using state-of-the-art, high-tech imaging techniques as well as low-tech but scientifically sound laboratory studies of primates, dogs, and human children, scientists examine the ways in which we are similar and those in which we differ. Some of the early evidence of human uniqueness exists in the cave paintings found in southern France. Thirty thousand years ago, our Neanderthal predecessors created extraordinary art that demonstrates imagination, representational thinking, and perhaps a sense of spirituality that we share. Archeological evidence indicates that the Neanderthals lived cooperatively within some sort of social network. However, the Neanderthal line did not survive, leading scientists to ask what really makes us different. Brain size alone? Spoken language or other means of social communication? Better cognitive sequencing? Alda observed the chimps and participated in experiments with them; he and the researchers studying these primates observed the continuity and discontinuity between their skills and ours. Chimps Bmake[ tools and use them efficiently, but they do not save the tools for future, repeated use as we do. Chimps live in social networks that include empathy and cooperation, but these traits are limitedVfor example, sharing food rewards occurs rarely despite nonverbal cues from others in the network. They do not seem to attend to the concerns of others in the group; social understanding is limited. The story of the FOXP2 gene may explain how we made the neurological Bjump[ that explains our uniqueness. Human cognition and abstract thought rely on language. In 1995, Vargha-Khadem et al. published an article that investigated a familial language disorder, a verbal apraxia, linked to a bilateral reduction in the size of affected individuals’ caudate nucleus. Six years later, other researchers announced that they had linked a mutation in a single gene to this language disorder. Named FOXP2, this gene contains a forkhead domain that facilitates transcription fromDNA to RNA. Human FOXP2 differs from chimp FOXP2 in two amino acids; these mutations occurred between 10,000 and 100,000 years ago and have been critical for the development of human speech and the evolution of languageVcritical components of human uniqueness. Language and speech provide us with representational thinking and the ability to conceptualize what others might be thinking. Finally, Alda and the neuroscientists using high-tech imaging demonstrated that humans may be the most creative when we are idle, that we are best able to tap into intentionality when we are Bnot thinking[ actively. We are able to think of ourselves in others’ lives and to think in terms of others’ concerns. We anticipate what others might think about a particular event, experience, or idea. Even very young children Bread[ the intentions of others and behave in response to these. What do all of these findings mean to us as neuroscience nurses? Many of our patients experience changes in their ability to communicate using spoken language. If we believe that this ability makes us unique, then we need to help them compensate for dysfunction. We need to look for ways to support their unique losses and remaining skills. We need to use our own insights into human behavior, cooperation, and empathy to provide the best care possible. As neuroscience nurses, we are Bintentional[ care providers, thinking in terms of others’ concerns. We can also use all of our high-tech, scientifically sophisticated knowledge and equipment to help our patients and their families understand and cope with neurological dysfunction. We can be a spark!","PeriodicalId":94240,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/jnn.0b013e3181da4131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How are humans different from other animals? What unique characteristics set us apart from other mammals? Language? Many other mammalsV dolphins, chimps, dogsVcommunicate in meaningful ways with each other. Tools? Again, many other mammals use tools in their every day lives. Emotions? We observe behaviors in other mammals that appear similar to human emotion. The Public Broadcasting System recently aired a seriesVBThe Human Spark[Vthat examines these questions. In the three-part series, host Alan Alda joins neuroscientists, archeologists, and primatologists as they try to explain the nature of Bhuman uniqueness.[Using state-of-the-art, high-tech imaging techniques as well as low-tech but scientifically sound laboratory studies of primates, dogs, and human children, scientists examine the ways in which we are similar and those in which we differ. Some of the early evidence of human uniqueness exists in the cave paintings found in southern France. Thirty thousand years ago, our Neanderthal predecessors created extraordinary art that demonstrates imagination, representational thinking, and perhaps a sense of spirituality that we share. Archeological evidence indicates that the Neanderthals lived cooperatively within some sort of social network. However, the Neanderthal line did not survive, leading scientists to ask what really makes us different. Brain size alone? Spoken language or other means of social communication? Better cognitive sequencing? Alda observed the chimps and participated in experiments with them; he and the researchers studying these primates observed the continuity and discontinuity between their skills and ours. Chimps Bmake[ tools and use them efficiently, but they do not save the tools for future, repeated use as we do. Chimps live in social networks that include empathy and cooperation, but these traits are limitedVfor example, sharing food rewards occurs rarely despite nonverbal cues from others in the network. They do not seem to attend to the concerns of others in the group; social understanding is limited. The story of the FOXP2 gene may explain how we made the neurological Bjump[ that explains our uniqueness. Human cognition and abstract thought rely on language. In 1995, Vargha-Khadem et al. published an article that investigated a familial language disorder, a verbal apraxia, linked to a bilateral reduction in the size of affected individuals’ caudate nucleus. Six years later, other researchers announced that they had linked a mutation in a single gene to this language disorder. Named FOXP2, this gene contains a forkhead domain that facilitates transcription fromDNA to RNA. Human FOXP2 differs from chimp FOXP2 in two amino acids; these mutations occurred between 10,000 and 100,000 years ago and have been critical for the development of human speech and the evolution of languageVcritical components of human uniqueness. Language and speech provide us with representational thinking and the ability to conceptualize what others might be thinking. Finally, Alda and the neuroscientists using high-tech imaging demonstrated that humans may be the most creative when we are idle, that we are best able to tap into intentionality when we are Bnot thinking[ actively. We are able to think of ourselves in others’ lives and to think in terms of others’ concerns. We anticipate what others might think about a particular event, experience, or idea. Even very young children Bread[ the intentions of others and behave in response to these. What do all of these findings mean to us as neuroscience nurses? Many of our patients experience changes in their ability to communicate using spoken language. If we believe that this ability makes us unique, then we need to help them compensate for dysfunction. We need to look for ways to support their unique losses and remaining skills. We need to use our own insights into human behavior, cooperation, and empathy to provide the best care possible. As neuroscience nurses, we are Bintentional[ care providers, thinking in terms of others’ concerns. We can also use all of our high-tech, scientifically sophisticated knowledge and equipment to help our patients and their families understand and cope with neurological dysfunction. We can be a spark!
洞察力和想象力。
人类和其他动物有什么不同?是什么独特的特征使我们有别于其他哺乳动物?语言吗?许多其他哺乳动物,如海豚、黑猩猩、狗,彼此之间都以有意义的方式交流。工具吗?同样,许多其他哺乳动物在日常生活中也使用工具。情绪吗?我们观察到其他哺乳动物的行为似乎与人类的情感相似。公共广播系统最近播出了一个系列节目《人类火花》,探讨了这些问题。在这个由三部分组成的系列节目中,主持人艾伦·阿尔达与神经科学家、考古学家和灵长类动物学家一起,试图解释人类独特性的本质。[利用最先进的高科技成像技术,以及对灵长类动物、狗和人类儿童进行的低技术但科学合理的实验室研究,科学家们研究了我们的相似之处和不同之处。人类独特性的一些早期证据存在于法国南部发现的洞穴壁画中。三万年前,我们的尼安德特人祖先创造了非凡的艺术,展示了想象力、具象思维,也许还有我们共有的一种灵性。考古证据表明,尼安德特人在某种社会网络中合作生活。然而,尼安德特人并没有存活下来,这让科学家们开始思考,到底是什么让我们与众不同。仅仅是大脑的大小?口语或其他社会交流方式?更好的认知排序?阿尔达观察黑猩猩,并和它们一起做实验;他和研究这些灵长类动物的研究人员观察到它们的技能和我们的技能之间的连续性和不连续性。黑猩猩会制造工具并有效地使用它们,但它们不会像我们一样把工具保存起来以备将来反复使用。黑猩猩生活在包括同情和合作在内的社会网络中,但这些特征是有限的——例如,尽管网络中其他黑猩猩发出了非语言暗示,但它们很少分享食物奖励。他们似乎不关心群体中其他人的关心;社会理解是有限的。FOXP2基因的故事或许可以解释我们是如何产生神经上的Bjump,从而解释我们的独特性。人类的认知和抽象思维依赖于语言。1995年,varga - khadem等人发表了一篇文章,研究了一种家族性语言障碍,一种语言失用症,与受影响个体的双侧尾状核大小减少有关。六年后,其他研究人员宣布,他们已经将一个基因突变与这种语言障碍联系起来。这个基因被命名为FOXP2,它包含一个叉头结构域,可以促进从dna到RNA的转录。人类的FOXP2与黑猩猩的FOXP2在两个氨基酸上不同;这些突变发生在1万到10万年前,对人类语言的发展和语言的进化至关重要,而语言是人类独特性的关键组成部分。语言和言语为我们提供了表征思维和将他人的想法概念化的能力。最后,阿尔达和神经科学家利用高科技成像技术证明,人类在无所事事的时候可能是最有创造力的,在不积极思考的时候,我们最有能力挖掘意向性。我们能够在别人的生活中思考自己,能够从别人的角度考虑问题。我们预测别人对某一特定事件、经历或想法的看法。即使是很小的孩子也会注意别人的意图,并做出相应的行为。所有这些发现对我们这些神经科学护士意味着什么?我们的许多病人都经历了口语交流能力的变化。如果我们相信这种能力使我们独一无二,那么我们就需要帮助他们弥补功能障碍。我们需要寻找方法来支持他们独特的损失和剩余的技能。我们需要利用自己对人类行为、合作和同理心的洞察,尽可能提供最好的护理。作为神经科学护理人员,我们是有意识的护理提供者,会考虑他人的担忧。我们也可以利用我们所有的高科技,科学的复杂知识和设备来帮助我们的病人和他们的家人了解和应对神经功能障碍。我们可以成为火花!
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信