The limited physics research in neuroscience is striking in light of the fact that brain electricity is one of two major areas of study essential to understanding the electrochemical brain. Even a basic understanding of the brain’s electrical system requires much more than the limited study of neuroscience today with its focus on the neuron doctrine, ionic currents and action potentials, and the connectionist model. Also relevant, in unclassified neuroscience research, non-remote technologies to access the brain have been limited to the brain implant, the EEG and scanning machines such as the MRI. Physics of the brain requires the study how the brain conveys and integrates information that results in human behavior; it requires the study of interactions of electricity, magnetism and electromagnetism in the brain, including in individual brain cells and groups and systems of cells. It requires measuring and studying how the brain communicates via direct currents, semiconducting electricity and EMR and magnetic waves of the brain. The importance of biophysics to the study of the brain was well known in the 1950s; nevertheless, for over half a century, neuroscience has completely ignored this area of physics. In particular, the brain as an electrical system has been scientifically established although not definitively proven or accepted in mainstream neuroscience.
Many of Locke's views were sharply criticized by rationalists and empiricists alike. In 1704 the rationalist Gottfried Leibniz wrote a response to Locke's work in the form of a chapter-by-chapter rebuttal, the Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain ("New Essays on Human Understanding"). Leibniz was critical of a number of Locke's views in the Essay , including his rejection of innate ideas, his skepticism about species classification, and the possibility that matter might think, among other things. Leibniz thought that Locke's commitment to ideas of reflection in the Essay ultimately made him incapable of escaping the nativist position or being consistent in his empiricist doctrines of the mind's passivity. The empiricist George Berkeley was equally critical of Locke's views in the Essay . Berkeley's most notable criticisms of Locke were first published in A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge . Berkeley held that Locke's conception of abstract ideas was incoherent and led to severe contradictions. He also argued that Locke's conception of material substance was unintelligible, a view which he also later advanced in the Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous . At the same time, Locke's work provided crucial groundwork for future empiricists such as David Hume . John Wynne published An Abridgment of Mr. Locke's Essay concerning the Human Understanding , with Locke's approval, in 1696. Louisa Capper wrote An Abridgment of Locke's Essay concerning the Human Understanding , published in 1811.
21. There is a tendency among Homo sapiens to cornucopian thinking and an exaggerated assessment of human culture. These inclinations became hardwired into our brains during our evolutionary past when the human population was small, technology was relatively unsophisticated and had no lasting impact on the environment. These inclinations are at the foundation of our culture but their validity has now been superseded by the artefacts and impacts of human civilization, multiplied by the sheer number of Homo sapiens . The cornucopian perspective is comforting, comfortable and easy - and therefore seductive - but it is anachronistic in a world where the ecological footprint score exceeds . Biophysical reality will ultimately and always trump human culture. Back to text