Benjamin D. Powell

Benjamin D. Powell makes an argument in his paper Exploring Mirror Neurons Rethinking cognitive process and communicatory Processes that will make every self-avowed video game dork ecstatic. The plan that by observing an action repeatedly our mirror neurons learn to practice the action will appeal to thousands or even millions who spend their days in front of a television or video secrecy rather than out experiencing life.Powell adds the caveat that without practicing the action, the body will not be equal to(p) to perform it with the skill of a trained athlete, b arely argues that the figurehead of mirror neurons explains why he was not more injured when piss by a car. The paper claims that the presence of mirror neurons may channelize that more study is needed regarding how our bodies develop skills and what effect activities like playacting video games have on our neurological development. At worst, Powells speculation is an interesting pipe dream. At best, it is hope for the plurality who spend to a fault much time playing World of Warcraft.Unfortunately, the reality is it seems to be something of a pipe dream. It is much more likely that he scarce got gilt when the car hit him and instinctively get togethered and rolled. And, the car, which he described as barreling toward him, probably was not moving with the speed he believed it to be. Writing for the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Kathleen Wilkes seems to echo parts of Powells basic thesis. (Wilkes 111). She argues that the happening exists that people are capable of learning simply through observation, but there is no hard science to defend either her logical argument or Powells.The reality is that this is some odd combination of philosophy and science, with people speculating on something that science has yet to be able to measure or audition. In the end, while the philosophy of a mind-body link so mysterious that the mind can control the bodys actions after only when observing an action seems plausible there is no science to sticker it up. Powells evidence is merely a corollary, coincidental and not chair proof of a tie.To actually prove Powells theory would be difficult and complicated. One would have to prove that there was simply no other way, short of mirror neurons that the test subject could have wise(p) to complete a specific action. And, the researcher would have to be able to determine how much of the action and the response to it is based on able knowledge versus muscle knowledge.In short, the researcher would have to prove that simply watching someone swing a bat repeatedly would consider to the ability to do it and that the ability is more than the intellectual knowledge of where to habitation ones hands on the bat. He would have to prove that Powells escape from injury was more related to his ability to tuck and roll than his knowledge that tuck and roll was the right way to decrease the force of impact of an oncoming ca r.Ultimately, Powells problem becomes in find what actions are effective because of the mental processes telling us how to do them and which ones are effective because of the muscle knowledge of when to flex or release. Even make the differentiation there could take years.WORKS CITEDPowell, Benjamin D. Exploring Mirror Neurons Rethinking Performance and Communicative Processes.Wilkes, Kathleen V. Brain States The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 31, No.2. June, 1980. pp. 111-129.