p>There seems to be a move toward “brain based” everything. Somehow knowing which area of the brain “fires up” when an activity is on-going appears to explain something. My background is in cognitive psychology and this background offers a way to understand some thinking and learning activities. I understand that core constructs in cognitive psychology represent what are sometimes called “hypothetical constructs” and the models that are built without biological equivalents to explain cognitive phenomena do trouble some folks. Just what is attention or working memory if you can’t locate it in the brain. I have the same reaction to those who are enthralled by the correlations between engagement in certain cognitive tasks and certain parts of the brain lighting up on a PET scan or fMRI. I am still waiting for applications and I am not certain what an application would even look like. Perhaps the future will bring such applications, but at this point I still regard neuroscience as basic science.<\/p>\n
Will Thalheimer offers an interesting post on our fascination with “brain based” explanations<\/a>. The focus in this case is on the impact of arguments that utilize a scientific sounding connection to brain function.<\/p>\n