When I look at Figure 11.1 in his book Neural Darwinism, I see a diagrammatic representation of the idea that brains have evolved to be complex systems that can interact with their environment so as to develop minds. It is clear that Edelman is thinking in terms of complex systems. Dealing with complex systems is exactly what we need to be doing in order to understand the brain. I find such diagrams to be useful road maps for travel through the complexity of brain science. Unfortunately, many folks probably can not make sense of such diagrams, and Edelman's figure legend is little help. How is anyone to deal with: "Communication in species with changes leading to delays in primary repertoire formation can lead to neotenic learning that can be fixated in a population." Such Edelmanisms are like riddles or koans: every time I read them I can formulate a new possible meaning; but which meaning did Edelman have in mind?

My translation of this particular Edelmanism would be: when brains were first evolving there was selection for brains that had genetically programmed behavioral repertoires. Many animal species with brains have a very short time period after birth during which new individuals can bumble around their environment trying to learn how to behave. Such animals depend on genetically programmed behaviors for survival and usually have very little opportunity to communicate with and learn from other members of their species. Biologists say that these kinds of organisms rely primarily on instinctive behavior. In contrast, there has been strong selection for humans to have neotenic brain development. Humans are born into a protected environment in which they can learn much from their fellow humans. Neoteny allows for the brain of human children to be functionally less mature than in other species and to remain plastic after birth so that the human primary repertoire of neuronal connectivity can be highly influenced by the environment. Human brains mature yet retain the ability to function as sponges for soaking up memes from their social environment.

Part of Edelman's problem in being understood is a problem of language. First, he uses terms like "neotenic" without concern for the fact that many people from the academic world of cognitive research who will be reading his book will not know what words like that mean. Second, cognitive science does not have a well developed vocabulary for relating mind functions to brain structures and functions. We all face this problem, but Edelman has certainly been at the cutting edge of pushing the languages of brain and mind together. If Edelman's prose is not clear, what is clear is that he is trying to create a new way of looking at the mind/brain problem. How many other mind theorists would focus on the three fundamental mechanisms illustrated in Figure 3.1 of Edelman's book The Remembered Present?

go back to the first Edelman page

Go to John's Book Page.

Go to John's Home Page.