Reply to comment

This week we clarified the idea of the “I-function” a bit in our description of signals and connections. If all signals are the same, then it must be the pathways through which they travel that affect a person’s behavior. So, if those cables that connect the “I-function” to the rest of the brain/nervous system are blocked or disabled, signals generated in the I-function will not be able to reach the rest of the nervous system. In addition, signals from the rest of the nervous system will not be able to use pathways that lead to the I-function. Such is the issue in Christopher Reeve’s case in that “he” was unable to generate outputs because the signals he generated could not reach the rest of the nervous system to, say, move his leg.

This situation is interesting because it demonstrates that one’s mind is not usually separate from one’s brain and that this connection is essential for an individual’s survival. While there are certain behaviors that the I-function does not seem capable of influencing (heart-beat, organ function, blood flow, etc.) it does seem to function as a “box” that creates a representation of the nervous system. It almost allows the nervous system the ability to view itself, its actions, its inabilities. This function is crucial because an ability to look at one’s actions and to be self-aware allows an individual to better adapt to changes in the environment and in oneself. In addition, it further allows ones actions to be a bit less instinctual and more learned (based upon the situation and previous experiences). I am interested in learning more about the idea of self-awareness and its advantages.