false5715339<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>571533915886955book27112007Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertaintytotal:8|5:1|4:5|3:2|831203165933.93534290125576743.88838231533.888337846410144786457153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200741falseThu Nov 01 00:00:00 -0700 2007Sat Nov 15 23:41:10 -0800 2008Fri Sep 18 23:06:43 -0700 2009 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words...more...]]>
47322439206449157153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200740falseMon Feb 23 18:45:36 -0800 2009Mon Feb 23 18:47:49 -0800 20093864446558921657153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseTue Nov 25 14:08:12 -0800 2008Tue Nov 25 14:08:24 -0800 200881221854149209657153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseWed Dec 16 14:05:10 -0800 2009Wed Dec 16 14:05:10 -0800 200977459435158955857153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseWed Nov 11 12:26:20 -0800 2009Wed Nov 11 12:26:20 -0800 200966878755243805957153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200730falseMon Aug 10 14:38:40 -0700 2009Mon Aug 10 15:05:07 -0700 200965839198256259757153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200740falseSat Aug 01 23:04:54 -0700 2009Sat Aug 01 23:04:54 -0700 200962875117244734957153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200740falseThu Jul 09 22:46:37 -0700 2009Mon Sep 21 14:49:31 -0700 200960330041233941457153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseFri Jun 19 13:59:27 -0700 2009Fri Jun 19 13:59:27 -0700 200959098054239354457153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseTue Jun 09 20:47:49 -0700 2009Tue Jun 09 20:47:49 -0700 200958499446236448657153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200740falseThu Jun 04 21:18:23 -0700 2009Thu Jun 04 21:18:23 -0700 20095641733317940657153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseSun May 17 17:41:56 -0700 2009Sun May 17 17:41:56 -0700 200953565698224249457153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseWed Apr 22 03:51:16 -0700 2009Wed Apr 22 03:51:16 -0700 200952399892110721957153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseSun Apr 12 12:08:10 -0700 2009Sun Apr 12 12:08:10 -0700 20095056804633655157153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200730falseThu Mar 26 18:40:29 -0700 2009Thu Mar 26 18:40:29 -0700 20094882782781882657153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseTue Mar 10 12:56:38 -0700 2009Tue Mar 10 12:56:38 -0700 20094795587459231457153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseSun Mar 01 19:55:41 -0800 2009Sun Mar 01 19:55:41 -0800 200946462019203412457153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseSun Feb 15 17:53:10 -0800 2009Sun Feb 15 17:53:10 -0800 200939177516124850957153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200750falseWed Dec 03 00:12:44 -0800 2008Wed Dec 03 00:12:44 -0800 200837937642161673057153393
<![CDATA[Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty]]>
http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081m/5715339.jpghttp://photo.goodreads.com/books/1226822081s/5715339.jpg
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5715339.Functional_Neuroimaging_of_Belief_Disbelief_and_Uncertainty
3.888 Objective: The difference between believing and disbelieving a proposition is one of the most potent regulators of human behavior and emotion. When we accept a statement as true, it becomes the basis for further thought and action; rejected as false, it remains a string of words. The purpose of this study was to differentiate belief, disbelief, and uncertainty at the level of the brain.
Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the brains of 14 adults while they judged written statements to be “true” (belief), “false” (disbelief), or “undecidable” (uncertainty). To characterize belief, disbelief, and uncertainty in a content-independent manner, we included statements from a wide range of categories: autobiographical, mathematical, geographical, religious, ethical, semantic, and factual.
Results: The states of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty differentially activated distinct regions of the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as the basal ganglia.
Interpretation: Belief and disbelief differ from uncertainty in that both provide information that can subsequently inform behavior and emotion. The mechanism underlying this difference appears to involve the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the caudate. While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as “true,” or its rejection as “false,” seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula. Truth may be beauty, and beauty truth, in more than a metaphorical sense, and false propositions might actually disgust us.
READ THE EDITORIAL ABOUT THE STUDY WRITTEN BY OLIVER SACKS & JOY HIRSCH HERE:
Neurology of Belief]]>
200700falseMon Nov 17 07:18:13 -0800 2008Mon Nov 17 07:18:15 -0800 20088
http://www.goodreads.com/book_link/follow/8?book_id=5715339