Brain and cognition: The need for a broader biological perspective to overcome old biases.

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105928
Jiří Dvořáček, Dalibor Kodrík
{"title":"Brain and cognition: The need for a broader biological perspective to overcome old biases.","authors":"Jiří Dvořáček, Dalibor Kodrík","doi":"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Even with accumulating knowledge, no consensus regarding the understanding of intelligence or cognition exists, and the universal brain bases for these functions remain unclear. Traditionally, our understanding of cognition is based on self-evident principles that appear indisputable when looking only at our species; however, this can distance us from understanding its essence (anthropocentrism, corticocentrism, intellectocentrism, neurocentrism, and idea of orthogenesis of brain evolution). Herein, we use several examples from biology to demonstrate the usefulness of comparative ways of thinking in relativizing these biases. We discuss the relationship between the number of neurons and cognition and draw attention to the highly developed cognitive performance of animals with small brains, to some \"tricks\" of evolution, to how animals cope with small hardware, to some animals with high-quality brains with an alternative architecture to vertebrates, and to surprising basal cognitive skills in aneural, unicellular organisms. Cognition can be supplemented by the idea of a multicellular organism as a continuum, with many levels of cognitive function, including the possible basal learning in single cells.</p>","PeriodicalId":56105,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105928","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Even with accumulating knowledge, no consensus regarding the understanding of intelligence or cognition exists, and the universal brain bases for these functions remain unclear. Traditionally, our understanding of cognition is based on self-evident principles that appear indisputable when looking only at our species; however, this can distance us from understanding its essence (anthropocentrism, corticocentrism, intellectocentrism, neurocentrism, and idea of orthogenesis of brain evolution). Herein, we use several examples from biology to demonstrate the usefulness of comparative ways of thinking in relativizing these biases. We discuss the relationship between the number of neurons and cognition and draw attention to the highly developed cognitive performance of animals with small brains, to some "tricks" of evolution, to how animals cope with small hardware, to some animals with high-quality brains with an alternative architecture to vertebrates, and to surprising basal cognitive skills in aneural, unicellular organisms. Cognition can be supplemented by the idea of a multicellular organism as a continuum, with many levels of cognitive function, including the possible basal learning in single cells.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大脑与认知:需要更广泛的生物学视角来克服旧的偏见。
即使知识在不断积累,人们对智力或认知的理解仍未达成共识,这些功能的普遍大脑基础仍不清楚。传统上,我们对认知的理解是建立在不言而喻的原则基础上的,这些原则只着眼于我们这个物种,似乎无可争议;然而,这会使我们远离对其本质的理解(人类中心主义、皮质中心主义、智力中心主义、神经中心主义以及大脑进化的正演思想)。在此,我们将用生物学中的几个例子来说明比较思维方式在相对化这些偏见方面的作用。我们讨论了神经元数量与认知能力之间的关系,并提请注意小脑动物高度发达的认知能力、进化的一些 "技巧"、动物如何应对小硬件、一些拥有与脊椎动物不同结构的高质量大脑的动物,以及无神经、单细胞生物令人惊讶的基础认知能力。多细胞生物体是一个连续体,具有多层次的认知功能,包括单细胞中可能存在的基础学习,这一观点可以对认知进行补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
466
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the International Behavioral Neuroscience Society publishes original and significant review articles that explore the intersection between neuroscience and the study of psychological processes and behavior. The journal also welcomes articles that primarily focus on psychological processes and behavior, as long as they have relevance to one or more areas of neuroscience.
期刊最新文献
Charting the neuroscience of interpersonal trust: A bibliographic literature review. A systematic and meta-analytic review of the impact of sleep restriction on memory formation. Brain and cognition: The need for a broader biological perspective to overcome old biases. Role of the locus coeruleus-noradrenergic system in stress-related psychopathology and resilience: clinical and pre-clinical evidences. The Relationship Between Self-Reported Interoception and Anxiety: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1