We do know a lot, but I would argue that much of what we know is not a result of the techniques used in this article. The things you mention are results of lesi

We do know a lot, but I would argue that much of what we know is not a result of the techniques used in this article. The things you mention are results of lesion experiments or observations, which are decades (or more) old. Most of what you mention is sort of negative information - what happens when the brain breaks. How it works is a fundamentally different question, and I suspect we'll only get real understanding by building computational models that are able to do similar computations to those the brain does.