Reply to comment

This week I found our discussion about the “I-function” very interesting. I think this idea fits into our model of the brain and it makes a lot of sense to me. The example about Christopher Reeves was very insightful to me and I think it demonstrates the idea of the “I-function” very well. Although Reeves' limbs still reacted to stimuli due to the sensory and motor neurons at the caudal end of the spinal cord, he couldn’t control his limbs himself. It seems extreme to say that Reeves (what contains him) was only located above his neck, but when taking the “I-function” into consideration, it makes perfect sense. How can anything below Reeves’ neck be him if he can’t control it? I also found the example involving autonomic functions very interesting. I had never thought about what separates autonomic functions from voluntary functions. It seems that the “I-function” is what separates them.