The Divide

    This page contains audio segments under the theme of 'divide.' This theme references discussions about philosophical and/or practical divisions inhibiting collaborative work among those in the neurosciences and those in the humanities. Note: if discussions referenced issues previously raised, then they were non-exclusively coded with other categories.

    To learn more about the coding methods, click here.

      Themes: newness   macro-micro    hype   funding   divide   multiplicity  
      across-disciplines


The Divide

Audio Segments with Description

Daniel Margulies

1. Dr. Daniel Margulies expresses awareness of the critique that neuroscience can seem reductionist, but he argues that neuroscientists are aware of the limitations of their methods and think about such issues. The real obstacle to cross-disciplinary work, he suggests, is finding where to publish it.

Transcript

Jack Gallant

1. Dr. Jack Gallant finds some of the experimental collaborations between the humanities and the neurosciences to be problematic due to language barriers and differing backgrounds. He also sees a disconnect in the type of answers someone in the humanities versus someone in the neurosciences would be looking for in response to the same question.

Transcript

2. Dr. Jack Gallant explains that neuroscience is primarily concerned with the workings of the brain while humanities is interested in the behavioral outcomes of what the brain does. He also notes that neuroscience is still new and mechanisms are, thus, poorly understood. Note: this segment non-exclusively coded also as 'macro-micro.'

Transcript

3. Dr. Jack Gallant explains how different areas within the neurosciences still need to find ways to work together, so discussing the humanities involvement at this point still feels premature.

Transcript

Marco Iacoboni

1. Dr. Marco Iacobani gives an example of an ideal scenario for a joint experiment involving the humanities and the cog neurosciences; it relies on the ability to reduce the complexity of a humanities problem down to a quantitative question that can be approached by scientific methods.

Transcript

2. Dr. Marco Iacobani disagrees with the claim that there’s a lack of engagement between the humanities and the sciences due to a history of criticism. He instead believes that the lack of collaboration is due to a preoccupation with experiments within the field and a lack of funding advantages by working with someone from the humanities.

Transcript

Gregory Hickok

1. Dr. Gregory Hickok explains the interdisciplinarity of his work and how he bridges neuroscience with physics and engineering to conduct technology-based research. He foresees his work on language affecting the fields of sociology and communication in the future.

Transcript

2. Dr. Gregory Hickok disagrees with the idea that tension exists between the humanities and the sciences; he suggests that the lack of tension is due to an indifference felt from the scientists’ point of view towards philosophical ideas and theories.

Transcript

Larry Cahill

1. Dr. Larry Cahill describes his work on sex differences in the brain and suggests that they have not been historically examined or accepted due to political alignments and a strong belief in the power of culture.

Transcript

2. Dr. Larry Cahill gives hypothetical examples of experiments that could bridge the humanities and neurosciences; overall, he suggests that experiments need to be formulated in ways testable for neuroscientists.

Transcript

    Back to top