I refer you to an article by joni d. Wallis entitled “Decoding Cognitive processes from neural ensembles.” it appeared in trends in cognitive science, 2018, dec; 22(12): 1091-1102. i am identifying this work since it shows how neuroscientists are endeavoring to decode cognitive processes, called “unobservable states that exist in between observable responses to the sensory environment. cognitive states must be inferred from indirect behavioral measures.” the author does not reduce cognition soley to the activities of the physical brain; hence my interest in this work.
the author identifies a central tenet of neuroscience, that neurons represent information as codes. tHEY ARE instantiated within action potentials at various frequencies, amplitudes, phases and shapes, discussed at length in my writings. it is stated that “the experimenter has little control over the cognitive process. . . [the approach is] to record the activity of many single neurons simultaneously and then project the pattern of neural ACTIVITY INTO A HIGH DIMENSIONAL SPACE THAT CAN BE USED TO CLASSIFY THE INFORMATION REPRESENTED BY THE NEURONS.”
NEUROSCIENTISTS ARE WORKING TO APPLY “DECODING ANALYSES TO UNCOVER OTHERWISE UNOBSERVABLE STates. . . . it has been possible to decode speech from neural activity in the superior temporal cortex evoked by speech,” but immaterial, unobservable cognition, such as choice, cannot be directly interpreted from codes within neural activity. but neuroscientists are getting close!
the author states “that hippocampal neural activity may provide an insight into the decision-making process. the experimenters [cited by the author] used decoders trained on established ground truths (hippocampal place fields during actual navigation) to measure hidden cognitive states (navigational decisions). however, they lack a critical piece of the decision: what makes one option preferable to another?” the selection of an option is a cognitive act of an immaterial mind. the author goes on to state the following, “unlike sensory stimuli, value judgments are frequently hidden states [of a mind] that must be inferred. . . . because value is a hidden state and inherently subjective, studying the mechanisms underpinning value-based decision-making is particularly difficult. decoding provides a potential solution. . . . what is noticeably absent from the above discussion is how the choice is implemented. . . . one of the posited reasons that we have working memory is so that we are not ‘stimulus-bound’: we can think about things we are not necessarily looking at.” the author asks “how do we access the contents of working memory, which is an unobservable, covert process?”
i highly value this article. it strongly suggests the reality of the immateriality of the human mind (the “unobservable”) that causally interacts with the material components of the synaptic networks of the brain.
the author makes the following statement toward the end of the article: “decoding enables neuroscientists to measure cognitive processes as they unfold. however, there are some caveats to keep in mind in interpreting the results of a decoding analysis. most importantly, just because we can decode information from the activity of a neural ensemble, this does not mean that individual neurons are encoding that information.”
I trust that i have been able to provide compelling evidence that the immaterial mind is the source of the power, perhaps as wave forms, to instantiate specified information into neural codes.