Is it true that Most neuroscientists no longer subscribe Triune theory

[animez3]

A friend of mine posted this article from The Guardian to facebook about how Early man and women were equal according to scientists. I commented on the page by saying:

 

 

A lot of things came about with the rise of agriculture. Slavery, surfdom etc. Creatures will do anything to survive sometimes that means putting others under so you can ensure your own survival. This way of thinking comes from the oldest part of brain called the "Triune brain".

 

Another friend posted that he didn't agree and said that he was reading about how most neuroscientists no longer subscribe Triune theory. This is what he said.

 

 

So I'm reading that most neuroscientists no longer subscribe to this theory.

My introduction to this theory was through watch Carl Sagans Cosmos on Episode eleven The Persistence of Memory. As of now he has yet to cite his sources. What do you guys think? I've looked all over but can't find anything disproving this theory. If you do please share your sources. As far as I can see this makes sense when looking at it from the standpoint of evolution. Unfortunately, I'm not a neuroscience buff.

Edited December 15, 2015 by animez3

[Sato]

Some searching shows that more recent works and discoveries have gone against the grain of the Triune model (citing Principles of Brain Evolution (2005), Comparative Vertebrate Neuroanatomy: Evolution and Adaptation (2005)).

 

The wiki article speaks to its present-day usefulness:

 

The triune model of the mammalian brain is seen as an oversimplified organizing theme by some in the field of comparative neuroscience. It continues to hold public interest because of its simplicity. While technically inaccurate as an explanation for brain activity, it remains one of very few approximations of the truth we have to work with... The broad explanatory value makes this approximation very engaging and is a useful level of complexity for high school students to begin engaging with brain research.

[CharonY]

It is important to keep in mind that the triune brain is used as a simplified model. As such it has certain uses (as every other model) without being very accurate in detail. I think that subscribing is not the accurate term but rather it is a model with a limited range of usefulness (e.g. to describe overarching themes) and which fails to describe specifics. In the latter case one would switch to more detailed models.

Or, in other words, neuroscientists know very well the limitations of the triune model and when it can be useful to use at least parts of it.

Edited December 15, 2015 by CharonY

[kisai]

Slavery and serfdom are complex concepts that depend on agricultural living and land ownership. The human brain evolved during a time when the species were hunter-gatherers, so I don't see how humans had an 'old part of the brain' that depends on enslaving others. When you hunt/gather, every slave you own is another mouth to feed, so you're not really getting ahead of the game. With agriculture, you can translate labor into extra food, so it works out.

Edited December 15, 2015 by kisai

[animez3]

 

 

Slavery and serfdom are complex concepts that depend on agricultural living and land ownership. The human brain evolved during a time when the species were hunter-gatherers, so I don't see how humans had an 'old part of the brain' that depends on enslaving others. When you hunt/gather, every slave you own is another mouth to feed, so you're not really getting ahead of the game. With agriculture, you can translate labor into extra food, so it works out.

Maybe but that wasn't my question. I just wanted to know if the Triune brain model was really no longer valid. You did not answer the question at all.

[Phi for All]

Maybe but that wasn't my question. I just wanted to know if the Triune brain model was really no longer valid. You did not answer the question at all.

 

Yes, he did. It was quite clear that the model is still valid only for a small range of solutions. Like many models, and most analogies, they suffer from being stretched to fit circumstances they weren't meant for.

 

So your answer is, it depends how broadly or deeply you want use the arguments the model covers

 

Slavery and serfdom are complex concepts that depend on agricultural living and land ownership. The human brain evolved during a time when the species were hunter-gatherers, so I don't see how humans had an 'old part of the brain' that depends on enslaving others. When you hunt/gather, every slave you own is another mouth to feed, so you're not really getting ahead of the game. With agriculture, you can translate labor into extra food, so it works out.

 

There are examples of h/g societies that took prisoners and slaves. The ones I remember reading about were native to the US Northwest, and were not an insignificant percentage of the tribe. More people to hunt and gather means the potential for more food, not less. I think you assume they weren't part of the workforce, which isn't what we see with slaves. "Another mouth to feed" almost assumes that mouth isn't doing anything to feed itself.

.

[animez3]

 

Yes, he did. It was quite clear that the model is still valid only for a small range of solutions. Like many models, and most analogies, they suffer from being stretched to fit circumstances they weren't meant for.

 

So your answer is, it depends how broadly or deeply you want use the arguments the model covers

 

 

There are examples of h/g societies that took prisoners and slaves. The ones I remember reading about were native to the US Northwest, and were not an insignificant percentage of the tribe. More people to hunt and gather means the potential for more food, not less. I think you assume they weren't part of the workforce, which isn't what we see with slaves. "Another mouth to feed" almost assumes that mouth isn't doing anything to feed itself.

.

I see what you're saying.

[animez3]

Some searching shows that more recent works and discoveries have gone against the grain of the Triune model (citing Principles of Brain Evolution (2005), Comparative Vertebrate Neuroanatomy: Evolution and Adaptation (2005)).

 

The wiki article speaks to its present-day usefulness:

Thanks for the sources I'll check them both out. This topic is really interesting.

[puppypower]

The triune brain theory has the brain evolving from the center outward. This is consistent with anatomical observations in nature. I am not an expert at this theory, but from a quick read, one consideration that does not appear included in the theory, is as each layer of the triune brain is added, the complexity of the lower layers of the triune, will also continued to evolve, to keep up with the demands of the newer regions.

 

For example, the thalamus region of the brain, connected to the core of the brain, is the most wired part of the brain, with connectivity to all aspects of the brain. The thalamus is wired into all three layers and therefore continued to evolve, as layers were added to the brain. The net result was the first layer always remained the most advanced part of the brain.

 

As an analogy, say you start a small one person business in your garage. You and your business idea is the core of this new business. As the business grows, you add some employees and build a small building to house the business. You are still the CEO and the core idea is the same. The difference is, now your role has become more sophisticated taking into consideration all the needs of the idea, the business, the employees and your new assets. Later the company continues to expand, you create a secondary factory, a separate corporate headquarters, form a chain of command, and even sell stock. You are still the CEO, the core idea is the same, with your role becoming even more complex. You may not be working in the factory any longer, but you are still at the helm of the ship.

Edited December 16, 2015 by puppypower