Neuroscience to Read Before You Get Stupid (ENG)

Neuroscience to Read Before You Get Stupid (Book Reading)

Original Title : 멍청해지기 전에 읽는 뇌과학 - 이인아 저 (독후감)

There is a concept called neuroplasticity. The brain continues to change depending on what it experiences and on the process of reusing those experiences. This is how we are able to learn. This book explains very well the principles of how the brain learns and how to develop the brain. It seems to convey neuroscience effectively in accessible language without relying on the strict terminology of academic texts. In particular, it focuses on the hippocampus, and it is said that Professor Inah Lee researches the hippocampus.

The hippocampus is one of the most important brain regions contributing to remembering events that occurred sequentially at a specific time and place. It is also used when creating stories and constructing anecdotes. The hippocampus plays a major role in simulation through imagination, and it is also used for navigation and finding one’s way. Of course, because the brain is highly interconnected with other regions, it is difficult to say the hippocampus alone is used; it functions through interaction with various areas.

People often say you must study when you are young and that you cannot study when you are old. However, this book presents examples of people who demonstrate cognitive abilities comparable to young people even in old age. What we observe is that the dispersion of cognitive ability among young people is not very large, whereas among older people it is very large. This is an element that varies depending on how one uses the brain from youth into old age.

Of course, there are things—such as one’s native language or certain sensory functions—that form much more easily in early childhood. After that period, it is said to be harder and less efficient to automate them to the same degree. But aside from those cases, when studying an academic field, I think one may even become better at studying in old age depending on how one uses the brain and studies. I myself feel that I study much better now than when I was younger. When I study concepts in epidemiology, statistics, mathematics, and so on, my speed of understanding is faster, and my metacognitive ability—judging whether the concept I initially understood truly makes sense (whether I’m learning it properly)—has also improved, and I use it well while learning.

For change, curiosity and interest are needed, along with the motivation to do a task well. Because the brain uses energy efficiently, I need to invest energy into what I truly want and need. But some people say they don’t know what that is. To find it, the book says you should often see new things, meet people who do new things, and try newly released products. A line that resonated with me was: “If you throw yourself into an environment, the brain will automatically adjust the level of curiosity to fit that environment.” There is a similar concept in schizoanalysis: if you change the arrangement (the assemblage), a person’s code changes. Abstractly deciding “I should do this” in one’s head does not easily translate into action. But if you gradually change the possible arrangement (environment) in real situations, behavior changes.

It is said that going to an art museum or a museum, reflecting deeply, and constructing your own story about what it means is good for hippocampal development. Beyond that, if you have made mistakes in the past, you can simulate what you will do in the future and actually practice it. This is adaptively changing one’s behavior.

What matters in learning is soon reusing what you learned to create action, and when you have to make decisions yourself, the brain becomes much more alert and learns better. In my case, studying went better when I had to solve problems or do research than when I only studied passively. Especially when I studied related theory, organized it, presented it, and wrote it up, my understanding became much deeper, and my ability to structure information improved a lot through that process.

Regular physical activity is said to be good for brain development. In particular, fully focusing on the activity is said to enhance brain function. There is also something called the default mode network, which becomes more active when you block incoming inputs and loosen up the brain to have “time for the brain itself.” It is said to help you remember one-off events that happened to you, improve imagination, enhance social cognition in relationships with others, and enable better self-reflection. Procedural learning (habits and repetitive tasks) may also activate the default mode network.

I once read somewhere that the mathematician Gauss complained that repetitive administrative tasks interfered with his research. But some scholars also argue that because Gauss had a certain amount of such administrative work, he was able to do his research that well. Since this is speculation about a situation that did not actually happen, we cannot know whether it is true or false, but the idea is that if you repeatedly do only high-intensity work like research (declarative learning), you burn out quickly. You need to alternate between declarative learning (or behavior) and procedural learning (or behavior). I also used to dislike repetitive administrative work or coding tasks, but I should think of them as giving me some rest and try doing them with a positive mindset.

Also, I can find my way well with Naver Maps turned on, but my ability to understand where I am without a map is noticeably poor. Yet during seminars, I can track very well what we were discussing just a moment ago. It is said that the same region—the hippocampus—is used for these two situations. Probably this is because I did not pay attention to my surroundings, did not grasp where my position was relative to the destination or nearby buildings, and did not consider what to use for the shortest route. Next time, I’ll use Naver Maps but also carefully observe my surroundings, and when I need to turn right or left, I’ll try moving while simulating which landmarks I should use as reference points. If I do that, it seems I may be able to shake off the label of being directionally challenged.

There are also stories about dopamine and short-form content, research on nuns, London taxi drivers, and various other interesting cases, along with many methods to develop the brain. What I can try is viewing my experiences from a unique perspective and writing about them. I can also try richer simulations to decide how I will act going forward, and when I listen to music or look at artworks, I can try to view them from multiple perspectives. And rather than trying to find grand meaning in repetitive tasks, I should simply do them. If I keep doing that, they will become habits and routines, and I will become an expert.