Reply to comment

The transition from the I function to neuronal signals seems like a huge leap for me. Obviously the two are connected, but the I function and other important characteristics of the human brain are removed in my mind from neuronal signals. Neuron firings are like the building blocks to the I function, except that there are many stages before the I function is reached. I think because of these countless steps, it is hard to see how the two interconnect. Despite this difficult transition from something as complicated as defining ourselves to understanding things on a molecular level, there is no other way to make the transition. Individual neuron firings lead to a traveling signal, which leads to an interpretation of that signal and eventually a response. But we have not dealt with complicated responses such as defining the self relating to the response of a stimuli in class. This is difficult because the gap between neuron firing and the I function is so great that it is hard to know where to begin to fill it. That being said, any transition between the two would be difficult. Perhaps it would have made more sense to start on a molecular level and eventually build up to understanding things such as the I function. However, it is also important to intrigue learners with the ideas that they will eventually be able to understand. This allows for a goal at the end of interpreting the complications of the brain on a molecular level. It is also hard to understand the connections between the two because they are so different from each other. We cannot see, feel, or slow down a neuron firing, and yet we constantly think about the identity of ourselves. Something as reachable as the I function is hard to connect with in depth molecular actions.