Scientists Bridle at Lecture Plan for Dalai Lama – New York Times
Same story as before. As SfN gets closer, I’m sure we’ll only hear more about this. Oh, and for fairness, here are links to both the anti-DL and pro-DL petitions.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 19th, 2005 at 2:12 pm by Neville Sanjana and is filed under Conferences, Discussion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Additional comments powered by BackType
In Multisensory homunculi align, Bill said:
Funny how philosophers of consciousness try to exclude homunculi for logical reasons even as we find more and more of them empirically…
In Why Tononi is wrong, Sean O Nuallain PhD said:
Thanks for your comments I just published a paper in Biosemiotics that I think answers your question It’s at http://www.springerlink.com...
In Scientists use MRI to reveal the movies in our mind, brain shirts said:
The decoding work from Jack Gallant’s group at UC Berkeley coming out over the last few years has really been...
In How to prepare for a PhD in neuroscience, Eric said:
I’m sorry, but I don’t agree with the stockpiling of quantitative skills and then waltzing into neuroscience like it’s...
(under construction)
Using Yahoo Pipes, we combined neuro/ai/cog-related RSS feeds from many sources into one, sometimes filtering along the way so as to minimize offtopic posts:
Ultimate neurodudes RSS feed (relatively inclusive version)
Feeds are periodically added and subtracted, but hopefully reflects the blogrolls below (but doesn't yet -- it's still under construction), except for those feeds which Yahoo Pipes had trouble processing, a list of which can be seen by checking the Pipe page.
Bayle's working on Google Reader bundles for neuroscience journals, and other neuro feeds. Like the Ultimate Neurodudes Feed, these are heavily under construction, and probably aren't very good yet.
Here's a neurodudes' friend feed on Twitter, which follows a bunch of people who often post interesting material.
See our links page.
neurodudes (since 2000) | contact us
proudly powered by WordPress | Feeds: entries (RSS)
and comments (RSS)
October 20th, 2005 at 9:57 am
This is sickening, but not unexpected. The NY Times, lately far from the paragon of journalistic integrity, fails to apply much scrutiny to this petition. If SfN caves to this kind of pressure, they will not be having a very effective dialogue with society. That is clearly how this lecture is billed.
October 25th, 2005 at 11:30 am
I work with Carol Barnes, let’s just say caving in was out the window a long time ago. The Dalai Lama will speak, that much is certain.
October 27th, 2005 at 6:21 pm
I’d like to know if there are members of the Society for Neuroscience who welcome the presentation by the Dalai Lama BUT who nonetheless feel uneasy about the collaboration between neuroscience and Buddhism. Let’s accept that meditation research is worth pursuing. Is there concern that this collaboration is a slippery slope? Might it things stray into mysticism?
October 30th, 2005 at 10:06 am
Who would researchers get other than people dedicated to meditation who have any semplance of countrol over their mind? Doesn’t it follow that these same people would be as interested as scientists in what is really going on?
April 16th, 2006 at 5:41 pm
The line between science and Buddhist conceptions of reality, neuroplasticity etc. is neither here nor there- the scientific community wishes to remain objective and to not concern itself with ‘metaphysical’ notions. On the other hand, Buddhists (on some level) wish to maintain the legitimacy of their theories IN CONJINCTION with Budhist practices. The Dalai Lama sees connections between modern brain science and the ‘internal’ exploration that Buddhist meditation and cultivated practice can yeild. Wolf Singer offers some great insights between the study of consciousness (liner vs. non-linear oprganization, etc.) with new insights involving the way the brain is organized and functions (complex, NON-linear).