The Interpreter

            In an experiment, a man who had undergone split-brain surgery was shown two pictures.  The man’s left hemisphere was shown a chicken-claw and the right shown a snow scene.  Than the man was to choose the most appropriate matching pictures which were visible to both hemispheres.  Without any surprise, a picture of the chicken was matched with the claw and a picture of a shovel with snow.

            Only when the man was asked to explain why he chose those pictures did something come up.  The chicken went with the claw but when he described the shovel, he said “And you need a shovel to clean out the chicken shed.”  The left hemisphere had not seen the snow scene and created a fabrication.

            Dr. Gazzaniga, the researcher responsible for this experiment and our textbook author, explains the left hemisphere is responsible for taking the information ready and delivering a cohesive explanation to conscious awareness. During his earlier years of research, he asked the question “Why, if we have these separate systems, is it that the brain has a sense of unity?”   Experiments similar to this one have explained how the brain maintains the sense of unity amidst a “cacophony” of competing processes/voices.  More importantly, the sense of unity is maintained because “some module or network in the left hemisphere is providing a running explanation.”

            Many times the interpreter leads me to trouble or confusion.  Too many times my selective hearing leads to assumptions of the wrong time or location for a meeting.  Popular media has also chosen to use the influences of the interpreter.  For example, when a political figure shares the same sentence with events or other figures having negative connotation, our interpreters create an association.  A more common instance we can blame the interpreter for trouble is when we find ourselves making false assumptions or when we hear gossip about something else.  The interpreter has the ability to fill in the blanks, create connections and concoct stories that will create a coherent explanation.

            Further questions are raised in “Decoding the Brain's Cacophany” written by Benedict Carey of The New York Times  regarding the implication of the interpreter’s power.  One of these implications is responsibility.  “If our sense of control is built on an unreliable account from automatic brain processes, how much control do we really have?”  More recently, the advancement of brain imaging technologies have lead to brain images becoming evidence, lessening the responsibility for a crime or event.  However, Dr. Gazzaniga believes the attempt to do so is a “fool’s game.”

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2011/10/31/science/100000001142409/michael-gazzaniga.html

What are your thoughts about the interpreter?  Have you ever been “victimized” by the interpreter?  What do you think of the emergent properties such as responsibility?  Will brain imaging ever be solid evidence to show implications such as responsibility?  Are there any problems involved with this, scientific and/or ethical?