3 ms·

I don't think pain can be measured reliably at all, nor can it be reliably communicated.

ikeboy 8y ago
I suppose if you're a staunch Behaviourist you can say that
prophesi 8y ago
It's such a shame that the two scientific fields that we desperately need to advance, psychology and neuroscience, often need to rely on purely subjective input.
- disgruntledphd2 8y ago
  How would it ever be any different? You can't really remove subjectivity from the measurement of people and their brains.
  - prophesi 8y ago
    One trick is to figure out if there are any objective measurements that can be taken which line up with the subjective input. One example is taking an EEG recording while performing a backward-masking experiment (aka displaying subliminal images), and seeing if their subjective experience "I did see the second image" versus "I did not see the second image" line up with the EEG measurements in the prefontal lobe. https://www.amazon.com/Consciousness-Brain-Deciphering-Codes-Thoughts/dp/0143126261/ https://www.amazon.com/Consciousness-Brain-Deciphering-Codes...
    - disgruntledphd2 8y ago
      I'm not sure if we can actually localise particular EEG's that precisely. In any case, that just punts on the problem - subject reports they did or did not which we use to make an assessment. We still rely on subjectivity. Like, I really don't see any way of avoiding this in psychology and neuroscience (and indeed even if possible, it might not be a good idea).
      - prophesi 8y ago
        But we can localize it that precisely, and cheaply. In that particular experiment, they found that the areas of the brain that are commonly associated with raw visual input activates precisely whenever an image appears, subliminal or not. Then a large, delayed negative wave reliably appears in the frontal lobe only when the patient affirms that they saw the image. It's using objective methods to confirm the subjective. These sorts of experiments are helping with making prognoses of whether a patient recovering from a coma will remain in a vegetative state, or if they'll regain consciousness in time.
        disgruntledphd2 8y ago
        Do you happen to have a paper link, rather than a book link?
        prophesi 8y ago
        Sure, I don't have the book on me, but this journal entry (written by the author) in Neuron outlines the main points raised here with plenty of references/citations to back it up. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627311002583 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089662731...
  - Sean1708 8y ago
    Just because we can only measure something subjectively right now doesn't mean that we won't be able to measure it objectively in the future, unless of course we don't bother trying.
- srtjstjsj 8y ago
  How is it a shame that solvable problems are solved before unsolvable problems? The alternative would be NOT solving solvable problems.
  - prophesi 8y ago
    Not sure how you construed that from my response, but regardless, I'd argue that tackling the "unsolvable" problems is still a worthwhile pursuit. The alternative would be not discovering germ theory or quantum mechanics (well, more relevant examples would be the realm of philosophy and psychotherapy).

I suppose if you're a staunch Behaviourist you can say that

It's such a shame that the two scientific fields that we desperately need to advance, psychology and neuroscience, often need to rely on purely subjective input.

disgruntledphd2 8y ago
How would it ever be any different? You can't really remove subjectivity from the measurement of people and their brains.
- prophesi 8y ago
  One trick is to figure out if there are any objective measurements that can be taken which line up with the subjective input. One example is taking an EEG recording while performing a backward-masking experiment (aka displaying subliminal images), and seeing if their subjective experience "I did see the second image" versus "I did not see the second image" line up with the EEG measurements in the prefontal lobe. https://www.amazon.com/Consciousness-Brain-Deciphering-Codes-Thoughts/dp/0143126261/ https://www.amazon.com/Consciousness-Brain-Deciphering-Codes...
  - disgruntledphd2 8y ago
    I'm not sure if we can actually localise particular EEG's that precisely. In any case, that just punts on the problem - subject reports they did or did not which we use to make an assessment. We still rely on subjectivity. Like, I really don't see any way of avoiding this in psychology and neuroscience (and indeed even if possible, it might not be a good idea).
    - prophesi 8y ago
      But we can localize it that precisely, and cheaply. In that particular experiment, they found that the areas of the brain that are commonly associated with raw visual input activates precisely whenever an image appears, subliminal or not. Then a large, delayed negative wave reliably appears in the frontal lobe only when the patient affirms that they saw the image. It's using objective methods to confirm the subjective. These sorts of experiments are helping with making prognoses of whether a patient recovering from a coma will remain in a vegetative state, or if they'll regain consciousness in time.
      - disgruntledphd2 8y ago
        Do you happen to have a paper link, rather than a book link?
        prophesi 8y ago
        Sure, I don't have the book on me, but this journal entry (written by the author) in Neuron outlines the main points raised here with plenty of references/citations to back it up. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627311002583 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089662731...
- Sean1708 8y ago
  Just because we can only measure something subjectively right now doesn't mean that we won't be able to measure it objectively in the future, unless of course we don't bother trying.
srtjstjsj 8y ago
How is it a shame that solvable problems are solved before unsolvable problems? The alternative would be NOT solving solvable problems.
- prophesi 8y ago
  Not sure how you construed that from my response, but regardless, I'd argue that tackling the "unsolvable" problems is still a worthwhile pursuit. The alternative would be not discovering germ theory or quantum mechanics (well, more relevant examples would be the realm of philosophy and psychotherapy).