DOCSLIB.ORG

The Problem of Consciousness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Problem of Consciousness the problem of consciousness IT IS NOW BEING EXPLORED THROUGH THE VISUAL SYSTEM— REQUIRING A CLOSE COLLABORATION AMONG PSYCHOLOGISTS, NEUROSCIENTISTS AND THEORISTS BY FRANCIS CRICK AND CHRISTOF KOCH 10 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN COPYRIGHT 2002 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, INC. he overwhelming question in neurobiology today is We selected the mammalian visual system because humans are the relation between the mind and the brain. Everyone very visual animals and because so much experimental and the- agrees that what we know as mind is closely related to oretical work has already been done on it. certain aspects of the behavior of the brain, not to the It is not easy to grasp exactly what we need to explain, and heart, as Aristotle thought. Its most mysterious aspect it will take many careful experiments before visual conscious- Tis consciousness or awareness, which can take many forms, ness can be described scientifically. We did not attempt to de- from the experience of pain to self-consciousness. In the past fine consciousness itself because of the dangers of premature the mind (or soul) was often regarded, as it was by Descartes, definition. (If this seems like a copout, try defining the word as something immaterial, separate from the brain but interact- “gene”—you will not find it easy.) Yet the experimental evi- ing with it in some way. A few neuroscientists, such as the late dence that already exists provides enough of a glimpse of the Sir John Eccles, have asserted that the soul is distinct from the nature of visual consciousness to guide research. In this arti- body. But most neuroscientists now believe that all aspects of cle, we will attempt to show how this evidence opens the way mind, including its most puzzling attribute—consciousness or to attack this profound and intriguing problem. awareness—are likely to be explainable in a more materialistic way as the behavior of large sets of interacting neurons. As Wil- Describing Visual Consciousness liam James, the father of American psychology, said a century VISUAL THEORISTS AGREE that the problem of visual con- ago, consciousness is not a thing but a process. sciousness is ill posed. The mathematical term “ill posed” Exactly what the process is, however, has yet to be discov- means that additional constraints are needed to solve the prob- ered. For many years after James penned The Principles of Psy- lem. Although the main function of the visual system is to per- chology, consciousness was a taboo concept in American psy- ceive objects and events in the world around us, the informa- chology because of the dominance of the behaviorist move- tion available to our eyes is not sufficient by itself to provide the ment. With the advent of cognitive science in the mid-1950s, brain with its unique interpretation of the visual world. The it became possible once more for psychologists to consider men- brain must use past experience (either its own or that of our dis- tal processes as opposed to merely observing behavior. In spite tant ancestors, which is embedded in our genes) to help inter- of these changes, until recently most cognitive scientists ignored pret the information coming into our eyes. An example would consciousness, as did almost all neuroscientists. The problem be the derivation of the three-dimensional representation of the was felt to be either purely “philosophical” or too elusive to world from the two-dimensional signals falling onto the retinas study experimentally. It would not have been easy for a neu- of our two eyes or even onto one of them. roscientist to get a grant just to study consciousness. Visual theorists would also agree that seeing is a constructive In our opinion, such timidity is ridiculous, so some years process, one in which the brain has to carry out complex activi- ago we began to think about how best to attack the problem ties (sometimes called computations) in order to decide which in- scientifically. How to explain mental events as being caused by terpretation to adopt of the ambiguous visual input. “Compu- the firing of large sets of neurons? Although there are those who tation” implies that the brain acts to form a symbolic represen- believe such an approach is hopeless, we feel it is not produc- tation of the visual world, with a mapping (in the mathematical tive to worry too much over aspects of the problem that can- sense) of certain aspects of that world onto elements in the brain. not be solved scientifically or, more precisely, cannot be solved Ray Jackendoff of Brandeis University postulates, as do solely by using existing scientific ideas. Radically new concepts most cognitive scientists, that the computations carried out by may indeed be needed—recall the modifications of scientific the brain are largely unconscious and that what we become thinking forced on us by quantum mechanics. The only sensi- aware of is the result of these computations. But while the cus- ble approach is to press the experimental attack until we are tomary view is that this awareness occurs at the highest levels confronted with dilemmas that call for new ways of thinking. of the computational system, Jackendoff has proposed an in- There are many possible approaches to the problem of con- termediate-level theory of consciousness. sciousness. Some psychologists feel that any satisfactory theory What we see, Jackendoff suggests, relates to a representation should try to explain as many aspects of consciousness as pos- of surfaces that are directly visible to us, together with their out- sible, including emotion, imagination, dreams, mystical experi- line, orientation, color, texture and movement. In the next stage ences and so on. Although such an all-embracing theory will be this sketch is processed by the brain to produce a three-dimen- necessary in the long run, we thought it wiser to begin with the sional representation. Jackendoff argues that we are not visual- particular aspect of consciousness that is likely to yield most eas- ly aware of this three-dimensional representation. ily. What this aspect may be is a matter of personal judgment. An example may make this process clearer. If you look at a person whose back is turned to you, you can see the back of the VISUAL AWARENESS primarily involves seeing what is directly in front of you, head but not the face. Nevertheless, your brain infers that the per- but it can be influenced by a three-dimensional representation of the object son has a face. We can deduce as much because if that person in view retained by the brain. If you see the back of a person’s head, the brain turned around and had no face, you would be very surprised. infers that there is a face on the front of it. We know this is true because we would be very startled if a mirror revealed that the front was exactly like the The viewer-centered representation that corresponds to the ©1997 C. HERSCOVICI, BRUSSELS/ARTISTS RIGHTS SOCIETY (ARS), NEW YORK back, as in this painting, Reproduction Prohibited (1937), by René Magritte. visible back of the head is what you are vividly aware of. What www.sciam.com Updated from the September 1992 issue 11 COPYRIGHT 2002 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, INC. your brain infers about the front would of a monkey’s brain and partly from ex- not clear exactly which forms of memory come from some kind of three-dimen- amining the effects of certain types of are involved. Is long-term memory need- sional representation. This does not mean brain damage in humans, that different ed? Some forms of acquired knowledge that information flows only from the sur- aspects of a face—and of the implications are so embedded in the machinery of neur- face representation to the three-dimen- of a face—may be represented in differ- al processing that they are almost certain- sional one; it almost certainly flows in both ent parts of the brain. ly part of the process of becoming aware directions. When you imagine the front of First, there is the representation of a of something. On the other hand, there is the face, what you are aware of is a sur- face as a face: two eyes, a nose, a mouth evidence from studies of brain-damaged face representation generated by informa- and so on. The neurons involved are usu- patients that the ability to lay down new tion from the three-dimensional model. ally not too fussy about the exact size or long-term episodic memories is not essen- It is important to distinguish between position of this face in the visual field, nor tial for consciousness to be experienced. an explicit and an implicit representation. are they very sensitive to small changes in It is difficult to imagine that anyone An explicit representation is something its orientation. In monkeys, there are could be conscious if he or she had no that is symbolized without further pro- neurons that respond best when the face memory whatsoever, even an extremely cessing. An implicit representation con- is turning in a particular direction, while short one, of what had just happened. Vi- What we are aware of at any moment, in one sense or another, is not a simple matter. tains the same information but requires others seem to be more concerned with sual psychologists talk of iconic memory, further processing to make it explicit. the direction in which the eyes are gazing. which lasts for a fraction of a second, and The pattern of colored dots on a televi- Then there are representations of the working memory (such as that used to re- sion screen, for example, contains an im- parts of a face, as separate from those for member a new telephone number) that plicit representation of objects (say, a the face as a whole.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Discovery of DNA Structure and Function: Watson and Crick By: Leslie A
    01/08/2018 Discovery of DNA Double Helix: Watson and Crick | Learn Science at Scitable NUCLEIC ACID STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION | Lead Editor: Bob Moss Discovery of DNA Structure and Function: Watson and Crick By: Leslie A. Pray, Ph.D. © 2008 Nature Education Citation: Pray, L. (2008) Discovery of DNA structure and function: Watson and Crick. Nature Education 1(1):100 The landmark ideas of Watson and Crick relied heavily on the work of other scientists. What did the duo actually discover? Aa Aa Aa Many people believe that American biologist James Watson and English physicist Francis Crick discovered DNA in the 1950s. In reality, this is not the case. Rather, DNA was first identified in the late 1860s by Swiss chemist Friedrich Miescher. Then, in the decades following Miescher's discovery, other scientists--notably, Phoebus Levene and Erwin Chargaff--carried out a series of research efforts that revealed additional details about the DNA molecule, including its primary chemical components and the ways in which they joined with one another. Without the scientific foundation provided by these pioneers, Watson and Crick may never have reached their groundbreaking conclusion of 1953: that the DNA molecule exists in the form of a three-dimensional double helix. The First Piece of the Puzzle: Miescher Discovers DNA Although few people realize it, 1869 was a landmark year in genetic research, because it was the year in which Swiss physiological chemist Friedrich Miescher first identified what he called "nuclein" inside the nuclei of human white blood cells. (The term "nuclein" was later changed to "nucleic acid" and eventually to "deoxyribonucleic acid," or "DNA.") Miescher's plan was to isolate and characterize not the nuclein (which nobody at that time realized existed) but instead the protein components of leukocytes (white blood cells).
    [Show full text]
  • Koch AAAS Updated
    Consciousness and Intelligence Dr. Christof Koch Allen Institute for Brain Science Seattle, USA Cartesian Certainty As a radical skeptic, the only certainty Rene Descartes had Je pense, donc je suis translated later on as Cogito, ergo sum. or, in modern language, I am conscious, therefore I am Rene Descartes (1637) Intelligence and Consciousness • Intelligence - the ability to understand new ideas, to adapt to new environments, to learn from experience, to think abstractly, to plan and to reason • It can be decomposed into crystalline and fluid intelligence and can be measured (IQ, g-factor) • Consciousness - the ability to experience something, to see, hear, feel angry, or explicitly recall an event • Many animals besides humans experience the sights and sounds of the world Lilac Chaser What do we know about Consciousness? • Consciousness is associated with some complex, adaptive, biological networks (not immune system nor enteric nervous system) • Consciousness does not require behavior • Consciousness can be dissociated from emotion, selective attention, long-term memory and language • Self-consciousness is one of many aspects of consciousness, highly developed in adult neuro-typical humans, less so in infants, certain patients and non-human animals Many Zombie Behaviors Many - if not most - behaviors occur in the absence of conscious sensations, or consciousness occurs after the fact: • Over-trained routines - shaving, dressing, tennis, video games, keyboard typing, driving, rock-climbing, dancing • Reaching and grabbing, posture adjustments • Generating and understanding speech • Eye-movement control • High-level decision making (e.g. choice blindness, dissociations) Neuronal Correlates of Consciousness (NCC) Search for the minimal neuronal mechanisms jointly sufficient for any one conscious perception, the NCC.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewels in the Crown
    Jewels in the crown CSHL’s 8 Nobel laureates Eight scientists who have worked at Cold Max Delbrück and Salvador Luria Spring Harbor Laboratory over its first 125 years have earned the ultimate Beginning in 1941, two scientists, both refugees of European honor, the Nobel Prize for Physiology fascism, began spending their summers doing research at Cold or Medicine. Some have been full- Spring Harbor. In this idyllic setting, the pair—who had full-time time faculty members; others came appointments elsewhere—explored the deep mystery of genetics to the Lab to do summer research by exploiting the simplicity of tiny viruses called bacteriophages, or a postdoctoral fellowship. Two, or phages, which infect bacteria. Max Delbrück and Salvador who performed experiments at Luria, original protagonists in what came to be called the Phage the Lab as part of the historic Group, were at the center of a movement whose members made Phage Group, later served as seminal discoveries that launched the revolutionary field of mo- Directors. lecular genetics. Their distinctive math- and physics-oriented ap- Peter Tarr proach to biology, partly a reflection of Delbrück’s physics train- ing, was propagated far and wide via the famous Phage Course that Delbrück first taught in 1945. The famous Luria-Delbrück experiment of 1943 showed that genetic mutations occur ran- domly in bacteria, not necessarily in response to selection. The pair also showed that resistance was a heritable trait in the tiny organisms. Delbrück and Luria, along with Alfred Hershey, were awarded a Nobel Prize in 1969 “for their discoveries concerning the replication mechanism and the genetic structure of viruses.” Barbara McClintock Alfred Hershey Today we know that “jumping genes”—transposable elements (TEs)—are littered everywhere, like so much Alfred Hershey first came to Cold Spring Harbor to participate in Phage Group wreckage, in the chromosomes of every organism.
    [Show full text]
  • © 2017 Luis H. Favela, Ph.D. 1 University of Central Florida PHI
    1 University of Central Florida PHI 3320: Philosophy of Mind Fall 2017, Syllabus, v. 08222017 Course Information ¨ Title: Philosophy of Mind ¨ Course number: PHI 3320 ¨ Credit hours: 3.0 ¨ Term: Fall semester 2017 ¨ Mode: Web Instructor Information ¨ Name: Luis Favela, Ph.D. (Please refer to me as “Dr. Favela” or “Professor Favela.”) ¨ Email: [email protected] ¨ Website: http://philosophy.cah.ucf.edu/staff.php?id=1017 ¨ Office location: PSY 0245 ¨ Office hours: Tuesday and Thursday 1:30 – 3:00 pm Course Description ¨ Catalogue description: Recent and contemporary attempts to understand the relation of mind to body, the relation of consciousness to personhood, and the relation of psychology to neurobiology. ¨ Detailed description: This course introduces some of the main arguments, concepts, and theories in the philosophy of mind. Some of the questions addressed in the philosophy of mind include: “What are minds made of,” “How does the mind relate to the brain,” and “what is consciousness?” Answers to these questions have consequences for a wide range of other disciplines, including computer science, ethics, neuroscience, and theology. The first part of the course covers the main philosophical views concerning mind, such as dualism, behaviorism, identity theory, functionalism, and eliminativism. The second part of the course focuses on consciousness, and questions such as: “Does ‘consciousness’ exist,” “Is consciousness physical,” and “Can there be a science of consciousness?” Student Learning Outcomes ¨ Students will be able to describe the main philosophical views concerning the mind. § Students will be able to reconstruct the arguments underlying the main philosophical views concerning the mind. § Students will be able to articulate their positions concerning whether or not they agree with the conclusions of the arguments behind the main philosophical views concerning the mind.
    [Show full text]
  • MCDB 5220 Methods and Logics April 21 2015 Marcelo Bassalo
    Cracking the Genetic Code MCDB 5220 Methods and Logics April 21 2015 Marcelo Bassalo The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) Frederick Griffith The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) Oswald Avery Alfred Hershey Martha Chase The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) Linus Carl Pauling The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) • The structure of DNA (1953) James Watson and Francis Crick The DNA Saga… so far Important contributions for cracking the genetic code: • The “transforming principle” (1928) • The nature of the transforming principle: DNA (1944 - 1952) • X-ray diffraction and the structure of proteins (1951) • The structure of DNA (1953) How is DNA (4 nucleotides) the genetic material while proteins (20 amino acids) are the building blocks? ? DNA Protein ? The Coding Craze ? DNA Protein What was already known? • DNA resides inside the nucleus - DNA is not the carrier • Protein synthesis occur in the cytoplasm through ribosomes {• Only RNA is associated with ribosomes (no DNA) - rRNA is not the carrier { • Ribosomal RNA (rRNA) was a homogeneous population The “messenger RNA” hypothesis François Jacob Jacques Monod The Coding Craze ? DNA RNA Protein RNA Tie Club Table from Wikipedia The Coding Craze Who won the race Marshall Nirenberg J.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Integrated Information Theory of Consciousness Compatible with Russellian Panpsychism?
    Is the Integrated Information Theory of Consciousness Compatible with Russellian Panpsychism? Hedda Hassel Mørch Erkenntnis (2018) Penultimate draft – please refer to published version for citation. Abstract: The Integrated Information Theory (IIT) is a leading scientific theory of consciousness, which implies a kind of panpsychism. In this paper, I consider whether IIT is compatible with a particular kind of panpsychism known as Russellian panpsychism, which purports to avoid the main problems of both physicalism and dualism. I will first show that if IIT were compatible with Russellian panpsychism, it would contribute to solving Russellian panpsychism’s combination problem, which threatens to show that the view does not avoid the main problems of physicalism and dualism after all. I then show that the theories are not compatible as they currently stand, in view of what I call the coarse-graining problem. After I explain the coarse-graining problem, I will offer two possible solutions, each involving a small modification of IIT. Given either of these modifications, IIT and Russellian panpsychism may be fully compatible after all, and jointly enable significant progress on the mind–body problem. 1 Introduction Panpsychism is the view that every physical thing is associated with consciousness. More precisely, it is the view that every physical thing is either (1) conscious as a whole, (2) made of parts which are all conscious, or (3) itself forms part of a greater conscious whole. Humans and animals (or certain areas of human and animal brains) are conscious in the first sense—our consciousness is unified, or has a single, subjective point of view.
    [Show full text]
  • In 1953 in England James Watson and Francis Crick Discovered the Structure of DNA in the Now-Famous Scientific Narrative Known As the “Race Towards the Double Helix”
    THE NARRATIVES OF SCIENCE: LITERARY THEORY AND DISCOVERY IN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY PRIYA VENKATESAN In 1953 in England James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA in the now-famous scientific narrative known as the “race towards the double helix”. Meanwhile in France, Roland Barthes published his first book, Writing Degree Zero, on literary theory, which became the intellectual precursor for the new human sciences that were developing based on Saussurean linguistics. The discovery by Watson and Crick of the double helix marked a definitive turning point in the development of the life sciences, paving the way for the articulation of the genetic code and the emergence of molecular biology. The publication by Barthes was no less significant, since it served as an exemplar for elucidating how literary narratives are structured and for formulating how textual material is constructed. As Françoise Dosse notes, Writing Degree Zero “received unanimous acclaim and quickly became a symptom of new literary demands, a break with tradition”.1 Both the work of Roland Barthes and Watson and Crick served as paradigms in their respective fields. Semiotics, the field of textual analysis as developed by Barthes in Writing Degree Zero, offered a new direction in the structuring of narrative whereby each distinct unit in a story formed a “code” or “isotopy” that categorizes the formal elements of the story. The historical concurrence of the discovery of the double helix and the publication of Writing Degree Zero may be mere coincidence, but this essay is an exploration of the intellectual influence that both events may have had on each other, since both the discovery of the double helix and Barthes’ publication gave expression to the new forms of knowledge 1 Françoise Dosse, History of Structuralism: The Rising Sign, 1945-1966, trans.
    [Show full text]
  • James Watson and Francis Crick
    James Watson and Francis Crick https://www.ducksters.com/biography/scientists/watson_and_crick.php biographyjameswatsonandfranciscrick.mp3 Occupation: Molecular biologists Born: Crick: June 8, 1916 Watson: April 6, 1928 Died: Crick: July 28, 2004 Watson: Still alive Best known for: Discovering the structure of DNA Biography: James Watson James Watson was born on April 6, 1928 in Chicago, Illinois. He was a very intelligent child. He graduated high school early and attended the University of Chicago at the age of fifteen. James loved birds and initially studied ornithology (the study of birds) at college. He later changed his specialty to genetics. In 1950, at the age of 22, Watson received his PhD in zoology from the University of Indiana. James Watson and Francis Crick https://www.ducksters.com/biography/scientists/watson_and_crick.php James D. Watson. Source: National Institutes of Health In 1951, Watson went to Cambridge, England to work in the Cavendish Laboratory in order to study the structure of DNA. There he met another scientist named Francis Crick. Watson and Crick found they had the same interests. They began working together. In 1953 they published the structure of the DNA molecule. This discovery became one of the most important scientific discoveries of the 20th century. Watson (along with Francis Crick, Rosalind Franklin, and Maurice Wilkins) was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962 for the discovery of the DNA structure. He continued his research into genetics writing several textbooks as well as the bestselling book The Double Helix which chronicled the famous discovery. Watson later served as director of the Cold Spring Harbor Lab in New York where he led groundbreaking research into cancer.
    [Show full text]
  • From Controlling Elements to Transposons: Barbara Mcclintock and the Nobel Prize Nathaniel C
    454 Forum TRENDS in Biochemical Sciences Vol.26 No.7 July 2001 Historical Perspective From controlling elements to transposons: Barbara McClintock and the Nobel Prize Nathaniel C. Comfort Why did it take so long for Barbara correspondence. From these and other to prevent her controlling elements from McClintock (Fig. 1) to win the Nobel Prize? materials, we can reconstruct the events moving because their effects were difficult In the mid-1940s, McClintock discovered leading up to the 1983 prize*. to study when they jumped around. She genetic transposition in maize. She What today are known as transposable never had any inclination to pursue the published her results over several years elements, McClintock called ‘controlling biochemistry of transposition. and, in 1951, gave a famous presentation elements’. During the years 1945–1946, at Current understanding of how gene at the Cold Spring Harbor Symposium, the Carnegie Dept of Genetics, Cold activity is regulated, of course, springs yet it took until 1983 for her to win a Nobel Spring Harbor, McClintock discovered a from the operon, François Jacob and Prize. The delay is widely attributed to a pair of genetic loci in maize that seemed to Jacques Monod’s 1960 model of a block of combination of gender bias and gendered trigger spontaneous and reversible structural genes under the control of an science. McClintock’s results were not mutations in what had been ordinary, adjacent set of regulatory genes (Fig. 2). accepted, the story goes, because women stable alleles. In the term of the day, they Though subsequent studies revealed in science are marginalized, because the made stable alleles into ‘mutable’ ones.
    [Show full text]
  • Cover June 2011
    z NOBEL LAUREATES IN Qui DNA RESEARCH n u SANGRAM KESHARI LENKA & CHINMOYEE MAHARANA F 1. Who got the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1933) for discovering the famous concept that says chromosomes carry genes? a. Gregor Johann Mendel b. Thomas Hunt Morgan c. Aristotle d. Charles Darwin 5. Name the Nobel laureate (1959) for his discovery of the mechanisms in the biological 2. The concept of Mutations synthesis of ribonucleic acid and are changes in genetic deoxyribonucleic acid? information” awarded him a. Arthur Kornberg b. Har Gobind Khorana the Nobel Prize in 1946: c. Roger D. Kornberg d. James D. Watson a. Hermann Muller b. M.F. Perutz c. James D. Watson 6. Discovery of the DNA double helix fetched them d. Har Gobind Khorana the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (1962). a. Francis Crick, James Watson, Rosalind Elsie Franklin b. Francis Crick, James Watson and Maurice Willkins c. James Watson, Maurice Willkins, Rosalind Elsie Franklin 3. Identify the discoverer and d. Maurice Willkins, Rosalind Elsie Franklin and Francis Crick Nobel laureate of 1958 who found DNA in bacteria and viruses. a. Louis Pasteur b. Alexander Fleming c. Joshua Lederberg d. Roger D. Kornberg 4. A direct link between genes and enzymatic reactions, known as the famous “one gene, one enzyme” hypothesis, was put forth by these 7. They developed the theory of genetic regulatory scientists who shared the Nobel Prize in mechanisms, showing how, on a molecular level, Physiology or Medicine, 1958. certain genes are activated and suppressed. Name a. George Wells Beadle and Edward Lawrie Tatum these famous Nobel laureates of 1965.
    [Show full text]
  • Biographical Notes on Scientists Involved in the Asilomar Process M.J
    International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science and Engineering Case Study Series: Asilomar Conference on Laboratory Precautions Appendix D: Biographical Notes on Scientists involved in the Asilomar Process M.J. Peterson Version 1, June 2010 Edward A. Adelberg (1920-2009). PhD Yale 1949. Chair of Yale Department of Microbiology 1961-64 and 1970-72; a founding member of Yale Department of Genetics. Deputy Provost for the Biomedical Sciences, 1983-91. Specialist in plasmid biochemistry of E. coli. Ephraim Anderson (1911-2006). M.D., Durham University. Served in the Royal Army Medical Corps during World War II where he developed interests in Epidemiology. Researcher in Enteric Laboratory of the British Public Health Laboratory Service 1947, Deputy Director 1952, Director 1954-1978. Came to public notice for tracing sources of typhoid outbreaks in Zermatt (1963) and Aberdeen (1964). Built on earlier work by Japanese researchers to demonstrate the plasmid-based pathways by which bacteria could spread antibiotic resistance to others and became the world’s leading expert on antibiotic resistance. Also prominent in efforts to limit use of antibiotics in raising animals. Fellow of the Royal Society 1968; Companion of the Order of the British Empire 1976. Eric Ashby, Baron Ashby (1904-1992). Lecturer in Botany, Imperial College London 1931-35; Reader in Botany Bristol University 1935-37; Professor of Botany University of Sydney 1938-1946; Chair of Botany, University of Manchester 1947-50. Turned to administration as President and Vice-Chancellor of Queen's University, Belfast 1950-59; Master of Clare College in Cambridge University 1959-67 and Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University 1967-1969.
    [Show full text]
  • Members of Groups Central to the Scientists' Debates About Rdna
    International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science and Engineering Case Study Series: Asilomar Conference on Laboratory Precautions Appendix C: Members of Groups Central to the Scientists’ Debates about rDNA Research 1973-76 M.J. Peterson Version 1, June 2010 Signers of Singer-Söll Letter 1973 Maxine Singer Dieter Söll Signers of Berg Letter 1974 Paul Berg David Baltimore Herbert Boyer Stanley Cohen Ronald Davis David S. Hogness Daniel Nathans Richard O. Roblin III James Watson Sherman Weissman Norton D. Zinder Organizing Committee for the Asilomar Conference David Baltimore Paul Berg Sydney Brenner Richard O. Roblin III Maxine Singer This case was created by the International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science and Engineering (IDEESE) Project at the University of Massachusetts Amherst with support from the National Science Foundation under grant number 0734887. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. More information about the IDEESE and copies of its modules can be found at http://www.umass.edu/sts/ethics. This case should be cited as: M.J. Peterson. 2010. “Asilomar Conference on Laboratory Precautions When Conducting Recombinant DNA Research.” International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science and Engineering. Available www.umass.edu/sts/ethics. © 2010 IDEESE Project Appendix C Working Groups for the Asilomar Conference Plasmids Richard Novick (Chair) Royston C. Clowes (Institute for Molecular Biology, University of Texas at Dallas) Stanley N. Cohen Roy Curtiss III Stanley Falkow Eukaryotes Donald Brown (Chair) Sydney Brenner Robert H. Burris (Department of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin) Dana Carroll (Department of Embryology, Carnegie Institution, Baltimore) Ronald W.
    [Show full text]