You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 302 No. 4, July 22/29, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Medical Practice
 •Medical Ethics
 •Neurology
 •Coma/ Vegetative State
 •Patient-Physician Relationship/ Care
 •End-of-life Care/ Palliative Medicine
 •Psychosocial Issues
 •Transplantation
 •Transplantation, Other
 •Diagnosis
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Controversies About Brain Death

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: I believe that in his commentary on the JAMA Classics article on brain death, Dr Rosenberg1 erred in approvingly commenting on Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis.2 Rosenberg summarized the book's point as "there is no separate mind from the brain, the mind is the brain. Cartesian logic of a separate mind and brain is an archaic philosophical concept displaced by current functional magnetic resonance imaging, DBS [deep brain stimulation] studies, years of meticulous clinical-neuropathologic studies, and experimental neurophysiological animal studies that have proven that consciousness and mind are embedded into specific neuroanatomical arousal and behavioral circuits."

Cartesian dualism—one of multiple mind-brain dualistic hypotheses—is an interactionist hypothesis that is not only consistent with the studies Rosenberg cites. It predicts an embedded relationship between mind and brain insofar as Cartesian dualistic interactionism posits a (causal) change in the (material) brain for each and every change in the (immaterial) mind.3 . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Avak Albert Howsepian, MD, PhD
avak.howsepian@va.gov
University of California, San Francisco  Fresno Medical Education Program
Fresno



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Consciousness, Coma, and Brain Death—2009
Roger N. Rosenberg
JAMA. 2009;301(11):1172-1174.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTERS

Controversies About Brain Death
Franklin G. Miller and Robert D. Truog
JAMA. 2009;302(4):380-381.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Controversies About Brain Death
Thomas E. Finucane
JAMA. 2009;302(4):381.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Controversies About Brain Death—Reply
Roger N. Rosenberg
JAMA. 2009;302(4):381-382.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2009 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.