Reply to comment

The extent to which culture is a lens through which everything is viewed has become apparent due to this class.  Like many others have stated, the idea of shared subjectivity and our tendency to call that objectivity when talking with people with whom we share that culture, has been striking.  My long taught quest for scientific objectivity has been effected the most by the article concerning the Laysan albatrosss in Hawaii.  The outrageousness of people calling for rainbow flags to be placed in front of same-sex parents and to use these birds as symbolic of human homosexuality seems crazy.  Yet this imposition of our values and culture on science reminded me that it's subtly present everywhere.  The spin of general science articles after they have been "translated" from Science or Nature is sometimes obvious and sometimes not but always present.  Further, scientists think that by clearly stating obvious biases such as who funds their research, most bias can be revealed.  As we have discussed, our shared subjectivity and each person's mentality has been shaped by so many factors as to make the sources of the bias nearly unidentifiable.  We have prejudices and subtle motivations driving our behaviors and interpretations of results that we so frequently forget they exist.  

1.  I am fascinated by savants, particularly the interaction between autism and savantism.  For example, Daniel Tammet is a famous savant who was only diagnosed with autism after he reached celebrity status for his memorization capabilities.  His autism was mild enough to go unnoticed until his intellectual prowess came to light then neuroscientists wanted to diagnose him with autism.  I would be interested in looking at a correlation or perhaps causational relationship between severity of autism and degree of savantism.  This also the surprising opposite to our conversation about overlooked gains of function.  

2.  Katie and I looked at memory and one of our articles about PKMzeta, a memory blocking drug, seemed very compelling and I am interested in following the research about this drug and its therapeutic uses.  To what extent is such a drug marketable, ethically and technically?  

3.  Another issue I would be interested in exploring is the general question of whether or not we'll determine what is "normal."  I first began to consider this after our discussion about anxiety but it determining someone has too much anxiety or not enough attention to task, we are by default deciding what is normal anxiety and attention.  Thus, I was considering the extent to which neuroscience is obligated to comprehensively define normal functioning (remembering that this only "objective" in our society) so we can decide when we want to alter someone's personality.