Spindle neurons and rationality

[DavidV]

I was reading recently about spindle neurons, a type of neuron found only in humans, great apes, and some whales. Humans have about 80 thousand of them (out of 100 billion total neurons), while the most any other animal has is 16 thousand.

Research indicates that spindle neurons play a crucial role in large-scale integration and emotions. Abnormalities in spindle neurons are implicated in autism and savant abilities. Human spindles also have a unique cluster structure, which make us vulnerable to Alzheimer's, which affects spindle neurons most severely.

Suppose that scientists find that X thousand of working spindle neurons are necessary and sufficient for concept-formation to be possible. This means that any conscious being without spindle neurons is incapable of reason, while any being with them is. (By "working" I mean that they are sufficiently integrated with the rest of the brain to function correctly.)

Some questions:

*Because infants lack spindle neurons for the first four months, they are incapable of rational thought. Their mind is physiologically and functionally more primitive than an adult ape. Do they have rights?

*If we successfully implanted a sufficient number of spindle neurons into an ape, would it have rights (given the above assumption)? This assumes that the ape would be capable of concept-formation, regardless of whether it did so.

*Instead of looking for brain waves or functional tests to determine whether someone is brain dead, can we just scan whether their spindles are firing? (This could be used with coma patients, the mentally retarded, or genetic pre and post natal screening.

[FeatherFall]

If it could be proved that spindle neuron clusters are the mechanisms by which humans think rationally, then we could answer those questions. I'd be totally psyched to have an intelligent gorilla as a roommate, assuming he cleaned up after himself. Yeah, I think that ape would have rights.

I don't think I want to touch the other two questions.

[~Sophia~]

I am going to take a shot at this.

Suppose that scientists find that X thousand of working spindle neurons are necessary and sufficient for concept-formation to be possible. This means that any conscious being without spindle neurons is incapable of reason, while any being with them is.

Bold mine.

This would have made the X amount of spindle neurons the sole source of rational capacity as the level of complexity of a host brain is not a factor. Highly unlikely scenario.

Also, when it comes to neurons it is not just a number of cells but also the connections between them that is significant.

*Because infants lack spindle neurons for the first four months, they are incapable of rational thought. Their mind is physiologically and functionally more primitive than an adult ape. Do they have rights?

Yes.

An infant already has the natural, biological features necessary to develop spindle neurons (in their naturally occuring environment of human kind of brain) and working connections between them and thus there is a reasonable expectation of rational capacity.

Can we say the same about naturally occuring (non-chimera) adult ape?

Mentally retarded would have some spindle neurons and human kind of consciousness - just not of normal level. A limited reason is still a huge step above no reason.

*If we successfully implanted a sufficient number of spindle neurons into an ape, would it have rights (given the above assumption)? This assumes that the ape would be capable of concept-formation, regardless of whether it did so.

According to your scenario, a bundle of spindle neurons of some X number, would be enough regardless of the host so why wouldn't an ape display rationality? If it did - it would have rights. If it did not - I would not call that a successful implantation.

I think, since an ape does not belong to a group of species which possess rights (this bundle of neurons does not occur naturally in an ape's brain) - one would have to show that it is working.

*Instead of looking for brain waves or functional tests to determine whether someone is brain dead, can we just scan whether their spindles are firing? (This could be used with coma patients, the mentally retarded, or genetic pre and post natal screening.

Again, if that bundle of neurons was "enough" regardless of what else was going on in the brain - than- yes.

Edited March 7, 2007 by ~Sophia~

[Ifat Glassman]

Wow! So cool! Thanks for posting this!

I think in order to answer if this is the structure in the brain responsible for our unique ability to be rational there is a need to study where these neurons are coming out of, and where they are projecting to. This will be an indication of their functionality.

I'm going to do some reading about this and report back .

Just some of my thoughts here... :

I think that to achieve this ability to analyze the world, there has to be a complex feedback system, a system to detect similarities and differences in entities, a system to form entities... Something that detects similarities in objects and entities, or parts of them, and then when such similarity is found, something is built to strengthen that new understanding. All of these similarities, differences etc' has to be expressed in firing patterns (similar firing paterns indicate similar entities). Then one starts analyzing the world using this new concept, and when more positive feedback is received, the knowledge is carved more deeply. If something comes that contradicts it, the knowledge gets unlearned. All this has to be achieved by neuron wiring. Amazing.

Anyway, it doesn't seem right to me that if you just plant some neurons, then all of a sudden the animal becomes rational. The brain has precise wiring to achieve it's functionality, from what I know. For example, the vision system: The neurons are connected very very precisely to each other. They are separated according to which eye they came from, and later connect to neurons in the visual cortex that are located in a matrix according to the location in space (more or less), the eye they originated from, the color they represent, and more. If you just start planting neurons there in random locations, I think it will interfere with the normal function of the visual system, and not enhance it. Likewise, you need to understand the function of the order of wiring before you start planting neurons in apes. If you have no understanding of how rational analysis is achieved in the brain through wiring, I'm not sure if just connecting more neurons is going to enhance it's functionality. It is interesting to know what would happen though.

As for rights: In case of a baby, I think you should examine the rights of a being not only according to it's nature at a given moment, but also according to it's potential. A baby has the potential to grow into a rational being, and so it has rights. It's potential is part of what it is.

[Olex]

*Because infants lack spindle neurons for the first four months, they are incapable of rational thought. Their mind is physiologically and functionally more primitive than an adult ape. Do they have rights?

If a person is in a coma, they are incapable of rational thought. Does the person have rights? Yes, of course. The current moment is not the only time frame to consider; this would mean ignoring some knowledge. Thus, the decision wouldn't be right.

*If we successfully implanted a sufficient number of spindle neurons into an ape, would it have rights (given the above assumption)? This assumes that the ape would be capable of concept-formation, regardless of whether it did so.

The nature of the species is what determines its rights. If, just as humans, it needs to function in a way that requires rights and ability to understand them, then it would have rights.

[Galileo Blogs]

I think we have seen what apes look like with more spindle neurons. Has anyone seen Planet of the Apes or Escape from the Planet of the Apes? In all seriousness, apes would have rights if they were capable of rational thought. Of course, if they had more spindle neurons than us, we may end up working for them.

This is fascinating science. Imagine if by planting more spindle neurons in a human's head, you could increase their conceptual abilities. Although Ifat makes some good points, while sitting here in my armchair and without the benefit of having studied neuroscience, I don't see why more spindle neurons could not be implanted in the human brain. Observe how the brain can learn new functions when there is a stroke or a traumatic brain injury and part of the brain is destroyed. Apparently, a completely new part of the brain learns the function of the damaged/missing part of the brain and a person can re-gain use of a limb that was paralyzed or some other function that was lost.

If the brain shows such "adaptability" in the face of injury, could it not also adapt to having more neurons added to a specific part of it? I, for one, would marvel at a living creature that had double or triple our number of spindle cells. In that vein, it reminds me of my favorite Star Trek episode (I'm talking about the original 1960s series starring William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy): "Where No Man Has Gone Before".

In that episode, the space ship passes through a radiation cloud and one member of the ship begins to develop super-human capabilities. Of course, some of these capabilities are most likely impossible, such as telekinesis. However, the essence of his mental expansion is simply the ability to conceptualize and learn extremely rapidly. Eventually, he is seen to be studying the ship's manuals and plotting to take over the ship. Spock warns Kirk that at the rate his mental abilities are progressing, he will eventually gain abilities of such magnitude that no one on the ship will be able to stop him. So, Kirk and crew plot to strand him on an uninhabited mining planet nearby. After they manage to inject him with a tranquilizer, before the tranquilizer has taken full effect and in a half-conscious state, the new God-man says (something like), "Be careful, I can squash you like ants."

Well, the rest of the episode is excellent. It raises very interesting questions about God, and just what it means for man to worship a God. I am not sure if I was an atheist when I first watched the episode, but purely on an emotional level, it shows the essence of what religion is for me, and what it means for man to worship anything in a subservient manner.

Well, that was a big tangent (but fun talking about). As for the topic at hand, the Star Trek episode takes the perspective that super-human capabilities would make the super-human creature have so little in common with man that we would become like ants to it. Whether to kill us or not would have the same level of moral significance to it as killing ants is to us.

What if a new creature, one with more spindle cells, was far more advanced than us intellectually? How would it view us? What would our lives be like, in relationship to that creature?

[DavidOdden]

I'd be totally psyched to have an intelligent gorilla as a roommate, assuming he cleaned up after himself.

Well, have you asked him?

[DarkWaters]

This is an exciting topic and some excellent questions have been asked.

A baby has the potential to grow into a rational being, and so it has rights.

It is also necessary to note that the infant is not anatomically attached to its biological mother. This is necessary to distinguish between the rights of a healthy infant and the rights of a human zygote in a womb.

*If we successfully implanted a sufficient number of spindle neurons into an ape, would it have rights (given the above assumption)? This assumes that the ape would be capable of concept-formation, regardless of whether it did so.

I think Olex answered this question very well. Nevertheless, I just wanted to emphasize that I think it would be too rationalistic to conclusively say whether or not an ape would have rights after receiving a successful implant of spindle neurons. We would need to actually observe a statistically significant collection of surgically enhanced apes are demonstratably capable of reason and of recognizing and respecting the rights of other rational beings. To my knowledge, nothing even remotely close to such an operation has ever been performed. It is extraordinarily difficult to predict what the outcomes of such a surgery would be.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with speculating on the outcomes of such a medical advancement or the ethical implications of the said advancement.

*Instead of looking for brain waves or functional tests to determine whether someone is brain dead, can we just scan whether their spindles are firing? (This could be used with coma patients, the mentally retarded, or genetic pre and post natal screening.)

Does anybody know about the level of brain activity exhibited by coma patients while they are in their catatonic state? Specifically, I am curious about the level of brain activity of those who eventually awake from their coma and return to an almost fully functional state versus those who do not.

Well, have you asked him?

All this discussion aside, as an ape who has been participating on this forum for close to a year, I am insulted that the cognitive capability, rationality and entitlement to rights of my species has yet again been called into question. Over the past few years, gorillas have been successful in many capitalist ventures including day trading, adhesives and fitness centers. Some gorillas have even made contributions to the visual arts. U.S. Representative Koko and Ambassador Willie B will surely hear about this.

Just look into the eyes of these apes and tell me that you do not see intelligence.

[Galileo Blogs]

All this discussion aside, as an ape who has been participating on this forum for close to a year, I am insulted that the cognitive capability, rationality and entitlement to rights of my species has yet again been called into question. Over the past few years, gorillas have been successful in many capitalist ventures including day trading, adhesives and fitness centers. Some gorillas have even made contributions to the visual arts. U.S. Representative Koko and Ambassador Willie B will surely hear about this.

Just look into the eyes of these apes and tell me that you do not see intelligence.

My favorite apes are Dr. Zira and Cornelius who live on the Planet of the Apes.

Isn't Dr. Zira hot?

Edited March 10, 2007 by Galileo Blogs