GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS THE LOGO OF THE COURSE DEMYSTIFYING MEDICINE, WHICH THIS DAY, THIS SESSION, BEGINS ITS 12TH YEAR. THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF IT IN THE BEGINNING WAS TO TRY AND LINK THE ADVANCES IN BIOLOGICAL -- PREDOMINANTLY BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE WITH DISEASE AND HUMAN HEALTH, DIRECTED MORE TOWARD THE LARGE NUMBER OF POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWS MAINLY THDs, AND ALSO GRADUATE STUDENTS HERE AT NIH. THE AUDIENCE CONSISTS OF EVERYBODY. AND SO YOU ARE ALL WELCOME TO ATTEND, AND THERE'S A COPY, I BELIEVE, OF THE PROGRAM OF THIS YEAR'S EVENTS, WHICH WAS HANDED TO YOU, I HOPE. AT ANY RATE, THE SESSIONS ARE HELD TUESDAY AFTERNOONS FROM 4:00 TO '0 6:00 IN BUILDING 50, AND THE FORMAT IS LIKE OLD-FASHIONED GRAND MEDICAL ROUNDS. WE TRY WHERE POSSIBLE TO BEGIN WITH A LIVE PATIENT WHO, AS ONE PH.D. TOLD ME, PUTS A HUMAN FACE ON A DISEASE, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS, AND THEN A CLINICAL INVESTIGATOR, USUALLY FROM THE CLINICAL CENTER, DISCUSSES A IN NON-JARGON TERMS THINGS LIKE THE EP DEEM NOLG OF THE DISEASE, DIAGNOSIS, TREATMENT, AND WHY THAT INDIVIDUAL IS HERE SPENDING THEIR CAREER AT NIH, WHICH MAY COVER GENOMIC STUDIES, OR MAYBE IT'S A DRUG TRIAL OR WHATNOT. AND THEN THE SECOND SPEAKER IS AN OUTSTANDING BASIC SCIENTIST WHO DISCUSSES FUNDAMENTAL MECHANISMS. THE WHOLE GOAL OF THIS IS TO EXCITE INTEREST. IT'S NOT TO HAVE PEOPLE SIT AND TAKE COPIOUS NOTES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S TO EXCITE AND BUILD BRIDGES. THIS, OF COURSE, THIS LOGO IS ONE OF THE MOST FAMOUS BRIDGES IN THE WORLD. ANYONE FROM THE EASTERN PART OF THE UNITED STATES RECOGNIZES IT AS THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE. NOW, THINGS ON EITHER SIDE OF A BRIDGE ARE NEVER THE SAME AFTER THEY'RE BUILT. SO THAT'S THE THESIS IF YOU BRING THESE DIFFERENT GROUPS TOGETHER AND COMMUNICATE THAT GOOD THINGS CAN HAPPEN. AND THEY SEEM TO BE, BECAUSE OVER 800 OR SO NIH PEOPLE EACH YEAR REGISTER, COME TO THIS COURSE, IT'S SPONSORED BY NIH AND FAES, AND MANY WATCH, MANY HUNDREDS WATCH WHEN IT'S LIVE, AND THEN A FEW DAYS LATER, IT GOES OUT TO THE WORLD ON THE NIH VIDEO ARCHIVE, AND WE HAVE INFORMATION THAT IS REPLICATED IN PART IN ABOUT 18 COUNTRIES NOW AND OVER TWO DOZEN MAJOR NORTH AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS. SO WE SEEM TO BE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT IN SOLVING ONE OF THE BIG PROBLEMS, WHICH I FORGOT WHO IT WAS WHO WROTE IN THE 19TH CENTURY THAT MUCH IS KNOWN BUT UNFORTUNATELY, IN DIFFERENT HEADS. SO THE WHOLE PROCESS IS TO LINK ACROSS THIS ENORMOUS GAP WHICH IS CREATED BY THE RAPID ADVANCE IN SCIENCE AND THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE RELATED IN BRINGING THIS INTO HUMAN HEALTH AND DISEASE. TODAY'S TALK IS QUITE DIFFERENT IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S A LECTURE BY ERIC KANDEL, WHO I'M SURE ALL OF YOU KNOW OF, SO NOW FRANCIS COLLINS IS GOING TO INTRODUCE ERIC TO YOU AND THE SUBJECT OF HIS TALK. >> FIRST I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR SO ABLY LEADING THE COURSE OVER THE YEARS. I'VE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING A SPEAKER ONCE OR TWICE AND I KNOW HOW MUCH THEY VALUE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR HOW MUCH A CLINICIAN AND SCIENTIST CAN TAKE APART A MYSTERY AND DEMYSTIFY IT, SO YO WE ARE ALL IN YOUR DEBT, WE ARE DEMYSTIFIER IN CHIEF, I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO GIVE HIM A HAND. [APPLAUSE] AND IT'S WONDERFUL HERE AT THE BEGINNING OF 2016, HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL OF YOU, BY THE WAY, THE FIRST TIME THAT I THINK WE'VE GATHERED IN THIS SETTING AS A GROUP SINCE THE YEAR TURNED OVER, TO HAVE SUCH A REMARKABLE MOMENT. TO HEAR FROM AN INVESTIGATOR WHO'S NOT ONLY A NOBLE LAUREATE, BUT HAS CONTRIBUTED MAJOR INSIGHTS INTO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE BRAIN AND WHO ALSO HAS A GIFT OF BRINGING MANY DIFFERENT ISSUES TOGETHER IN A SYNTHETIC WAY THAT HE IS GOING TO TALK ABOUT TO YOU TODAY IN THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THE AGE OF INSIGHT. ERIC WAS BORN IN VIENNA, AND JUST AT THE AGE OF 8 1/2, WITNESSED THE INNOVATION OR ANNEXATION OF AUSTRIA BY HITLER AND ESCAPED TO THE UNITED STATES, BARELY, BEFORE WORLD WAR II BECAME EVEN MORE SEVERE, BUT HE WILL CERTAINLY TELL YOU, AND MAYBE HE WILL IN THIS PRESENTATION, WHAT THE CONSEQUENCE WAS FOR HIM AND HIS FAMILY OF THIS INNOVATION OF AUSTRIA, WHERE THEY SUDDENLY WERE TOLD BY FRIENDS THAT THEY COULDN'T SPEAK TO THEM ANYMORE BECAUSE OF BEING JEWISH. REALLY A FRIGHTENING AND REVEALING ASPECT THE OF THE DARK SIDE OF HUMANITY, WHICH HE HAS REFLECTED ON OVER THE COURSE OF TIME AND WILL NO DOUBT TALK TO YOU ABOUT TODAY. ARRIVING IN THE U.S., HE ENDED UP AT HARVARD, WHERE HE GOT HIS UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE IN HISTORY AND LITERATURE, BECAME INTERESTED IN PSYCHIATRY AND PSYCHOANALYSIS, GOT AN MD FROM NYU SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO THEN CLAIM HIM BECAUSE HE CAME HERE TO THE NIH AS A CLINICAL ASSOCIATE IN THE LABORATORY OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY AT NIMH FROM 1957 TO IT 1960. I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF READING HIS AUTOBIOGRAPHY IN THE NOBEL PRIZE WEBSITE, WHERE YOU CAN GET A GREAT SENSE OF ALL THE CHAPTERS OF HIS LIFE, OF WHICH THERE ARE MANY VERY INTRIGUING STORIES, AND CERTAINLY THE WAY HE DESCRIBES HIS TIME HERE, WHERE BRIGHT, CAPABLE PHYSICIANS WHO DIDN'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHAT KINDS OF QUESTIONS THEY COULDN'T ASK, JUST CAME HERE AND ASKED THEM ANYWAY AND LEARNED THINGS THAT HAVE REVERBERATED DOWN THROUGH THOSE DECADES, CERTAINLY AN ENVIRONMENT THAT WE SEEK TO CONTINUE TO CREATE HERE EVERY DAY. HE WENT BACK TO HARVARD TO DO A RESIDENCY IN PSYCHIATRY AND ENDED UP AT NYU AS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AND BEGAN RESEARCH ALONG THE WAY TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE BASIS OF MEMORY, AND PARTICULARLY RECOGNIZING AFTER INITIAL EXPERIMENTS WITH THE HIPPOCAMPUS THAT IF YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO TAKE THIS APART, YOU NEEDED A SIMPLE SYSTEM, TURNED HIS ATTENTION TO A GIANT SNAIL, AND THE KA THE DATA THAT HE GENERATED THERE, WHICH REALLY BECOMES A FUNDAMENTAL BEDROCK OF MUCH OF WHAT WE UNDERSTAND ABOUT HOW MEMORY OCCURS IS SOMETHING THAT HE CONTRIBUTED TO OVER MANY YEARS, NEVER FAILING, HOWEVER, TO EXPLORE OTHER SYSTEMS, AS HE DOES EVEN TO THIS DAY IN MANY OTHER WAYS TO SHED LIGHT ON THAT MOST MYSTERIOUS PART OF THE HUMAN EXISTENCE, THE MIND, AND SO HE COULD HARDLY BE A MORE APPROPRIATE PERSON TO BE DEMYSTIFYING FOR US TODAY. HE'S A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, HE RECEIVED A LASKER AWARD IN 1983, THE NATIONAL MEDAL OF SCIENCE IN 1988, AND AS I MENTIONED, THE NOBEL PRIZE FOR PHYSIOLOGY OR MEDICINE IN THE YEAR 2000. HE CURRENTLY SERVES AS UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR, DIRECTOR OF KAVLI INSTITUTE FOR BRAIN SCIENCE, CO-DIRECTOR OF THE MIND BRAIN BEHAVIOR INSTITUTE, SENIOR INVESTIGATOR OF THE HOWARD HUGHES MEDICAL INSTITUTE, COLUMBIA, WHERE HE HAS BEEN FOR THE LAST 42 YEARS. THE LECTURE HE'S GOING TO GIVE TO US TODAY IS BASED UPON A BOOK WHICH I SUSPECT MANY OF YOU WILL WANT TO GO OUT AND ACQUIRE WHICH HAS THE SAME TITLE. "THE AGE OF INSIGHT, THE QUEST TO UNDERSTAND THE UNCONSCIOUS, IN IT ART, MIND AND BRAIN," FROM VIENNA, 1900, TO IT THE PRESENT. IT'S A GOOD THING WE GAVE YOU TWO HOURS. PLEASE JOIN ME IN WELCOMING ERIC KANDEL. [APPLAUSE] >> FRANCIS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT THOUGHTFUL, GENEROUS AND SCHOLARLY INTRODUCTION. THIS IS A VERY MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY FOR ME. I'M NOT AS YOUNG AS I LOOK, I'VE BEEN AROUND THE BLOCK BEFORE. I HAVE, AS YOU'VE HEARD, RECEIVED MORE RECOGNITIONS THAN I DESERVE, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER EVER BEING INVITED TO GIVE A LECTURE AT THE NIH. NOW MAYBE MY MEMORY FAILS ME, BUT I DON'T THINK I HAD OCCASION TO SPECIFICALLY BE INVITED TO GIVE A LECTURE, AND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT FOR ME WHEN I WAS ASKED BY -- P TO GIVE THIS LECTURE, I ACCEPTED IMMEDIATELY WITHOUT A MOMENT, BECAUSE THIS OPPORTUNITY OF SPENDING TIME HERE CHANGED MY LIFE. I WOULD BE A PRACTICING PSYCHOANALYST TODAY IF IT WASN'T FOR MY OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN HOW TO DO RESEARCH HERE. AND IT WAS SUCH A FANTASTIC EXPERIENCE. FIRST OF ALL, I BUMP ED INTO A YOUNG GUY, HE WAS A DRAFT DODGE, WE CALLED EACH OTHER DRAFT DODGERS, ALL THE PHYSICIANS WERE BEING DRAFTED, BUT IF YOU WERE ELIGIBLE THROUGH THE NIH, HE NOMINATED ME FOR THIS POSITION. I BECAME ELIGIBLE FOR IT. AND I MET IT GUY CALLED ALDON SPENCER HERE, FABULOUS GUY, MY AGE, AND HE JOINED IN, IMAGINED -- WE WERE THE FIRST PEOPLE EVER TO RECORD FROM CELLS IN THE HIPPOCAMPUS. WE WERE EUPHORIC. THE WHOLE LAB WAS EU FOARK. EUPHORIC. I WAS ASKED TO PRESENT THIS TO A LAB CHIEF MEETING AND THEY SAID OH, MY GOD, THIS IS A TYPICAL NIH EXPERIENCE. TWO INCOMPETENT GUYS COME HERE AND THIS ENVIRONMENT LIFTS THEM UP AND LOOK, THEY'RE DOING INTERESTING SCIENCE. NOW IT WAS INTERESTING SCIENCE IF YOU WERE INTERESTED IN KNOWING HOW NERVE OF CELLS FUNCTIONS, BUT WE WANTED TO KNOW HOW MEMORY FUNCTION, AND WE REALIZED THE HIPPOCAMPUS, 1957, 58, WAS TOO MUCH OF AN AREA OF OBSCURITY TO REALLY MAKE PROGRESS OF US, SO WE BOTH TOOK A REDUCTIONIST APPROACH BEFORE COMING BACK TO THE HIPPOCAMPUS. BUT THE POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS I OWE AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT, NOT ONLY TO THE KUN RI THAT TOOK ME AS A JEWISH REFUGEE AND ALLOWED ME TO HAVE THIS PRIVILEGED LIFE THAT I HAD, BUT TO THE NIH, THAT REALLY MADE ME THE PERSON THAT I AM, ALLOWED ME -- IT WAS AN UNBELIEVABLE EXPERIENCE. AND I'M VERY GRATEFUL AND FRANCIS, I'M GRATEFUL TO YOU FOR BEING HERE. I'M NOT SURE I'M GOING TO DEMYSTIFY MEDICINE, I MAY MYSTIFY YOU, LU BUT I WILL TRY NOT TO. IN 1959, C.P. SNOW, WHOSE IMAGE I HAVE HERE, A MOLECULAR PHYSICIST WHO LATER BECAME A NOVELIST, DELIVERED THE PRESTIGIOUS LECTURE AT THE IT UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE IN WHICH HE DECLARED THAT WESTERN INTELLECTUAL LIFE IS DIVIDED INTO TWO CULTURES, THAT OF THE SCIENTISTS KER CONCERNED WITH THE NIZ CAL NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE, HUMANISTS THAT ARE CONCERNED WITH THE NATURE OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE. HAVING LIVED IN BOTH OF HE'S CULTURES, HE WAS CONVINCED THAT THEY COULDN'T UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER BECAUSE THEY HAD DIFFERENT ASPIRATIONS AND DIFFERENT GOALS. TO ADVANCE HUMAN KNOWLEDGE AND BENEFIT HUMAN SOCIETY, HE ARGUED, SCIENTISTS AND HUMANISTS MUST FIND THE WAYS TO BRIDGE THE CHASM BETWEEN THESE TWO CULTURES. OBVIOUSLY MANY PEOPLE ARE DOING THIS, AND MY PURPOSE IN THIS TALK TODAY IS TO ILLUSTRATE THAT MODERN BRAIN SCIENCE CAN HELP BRIDGE THIS GAP AND IT CAN DO SO IN TWO WAYS. FIRST IS I WILL TRY TO SHOW, BEGINNING TO ADDRESS IN A VERY PRELIMINARY FASHION, QUESTIONS AND GOALS THAT ARE CENTRAL TO GENERAL HUMANISTIC THOUGHT. AND I USE AS AN EXAMPLE A STUDY OF THE BIOLOGY -- HOW THE VIEWER RESPONDS TO A WORK OF ART. -- TRIED TO ARGUE THAT PEOPLE IN THE ART ALSO USE SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES IN ORDER TO TACKLE THEIR ARTISTIC GOALS, AND THOSE APPROACHES BEAR SOME RESEMBLES WITH WHAT SCIENTISTS DO. I USE MY SAMPLE, THE MODERNISTS OF 1900. LET ME PUT THESE IDEAS INTO MORE CONCRETE PER SPEC ITTIVE. PERSPECTIVE OF. THE CENTRAL CHALLENGE, SCIENCE IN THE 21ST CENTURY, IS TO UNDERSTAND THE HUMAN MIND IN BIOLOGICAL TERMS. THIS IS WHAT THE CHALLENGE GENOMICS OFFICE IN THE PREVIOUS CENTURY. THE POSSIBILITY OF MEETING THAT CHALLENGE OPENED UP IN THE LATE PART OF THE 20TH CENTURY, WERE THE SCIENCE OF THE MIND, MERGED WITH NEUROSCIENCE, AND TOGETHER, THEY GAVE RISE TO IT A NEW SCIENCE OF MIND THAT ALLOWED US TO RAISE A MAJOR QUESTION ABOUT OURSELVES, HOW TO PROCEED, LEARN AND REMEMBER, WHAT IS THE NATURE OF EMOTION, EMPATHY, CONSCIOUSNESS. THIS NEW BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE OF MIND IS IMPORTANT NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT PROVIDES A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT MAKES US WHO WE ARE, BUT ALSO BECAUSE IT MAKES POSSIBLE A MEANINGFUL SERIES OF DIALOGUE BETWEEN BRAIN SIZE AND OTHER AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE. IN THE LARGER SENSE, THESE DIALOGUES COULD HELP MAKE SCIENCE PART OF OUR COMMON CULTURAL EXPERIENCE. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE UP THIS SCIENTIFIC CHALLENGE THIS AFTERNOON BY FOCUSING ON HOW THE NEW BY LOGICAL SCIENCE OF MIND IS BEGINNING TO ENGAGE WITH FIGURATIVE ART. AS YOU HEARD FROM FRANCIS, IN MY LIFE AS A SCIENTIST, I'VE OFTEN BENEFITED AS HAVE MANY OF YOU BY TAKING A REDUCTIONIST APPROACH. I TRIED TO EXPLORE A LARGE PROBLEM THAT INTERESTS ME, IN MY CASE, THE PROBLEM OF MEMORY STORAGE, BY INITIALLY FOCUSING ON THE SIMPLEST EXAMPLE AND TRYING TO EXPLORE DEEPLY. I WOULD ALSO DO THIS HERE TONIGHT. I WILL LIMIT MY DISCUSSION TO ONE PARTICULAR ART FORM, AND ONE PARTICULAR CULTURAL PERIOD, MOD MODERNISM IN THE 1900s. IT'S A HIGHLY SUITABLE ART FORM FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION. WE NOW HAVE THE BEGINNINGS OF AN INTELLECTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF HOW RESPONSE TO FACIAL EXPRESSION, BODILY POSTURES AND OTHERS. I FOCUS ON PORE TRA TOUR IN THE PERIOD AT THE END OF -- THREE MAJOR ARTISTS, THE SCHOOL IS IMPORTANT BOTH COLLECTIVELY AND INDIVIDUALLY. AS A GROUP, THEY SOUGHT TO -- OF PEOPLE IN THEIR PORTRAITS AND EACH ARTIST DEVELOPED A DISTINCTIVE WAY OF USING FACIAL EXPRESSIONS AND HAND AND BODY GESTURES TO COMMUNICATE ITS INSIGHTS, AND IN SO DOING, EACH ARTIST MADE INDEPENDENT CONCEPTUAL AND TECHNICAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO MODERN ART. MOREOVER, THE CONCERN OF THESE ARTISTS WITH THE TRUTH LYING BENEATH THE SURFACE APPEARANCE OF THEIR SUBJECT WAS PARALLELLED AND INFLUENCED BY SIMILAR CONCERNS IN UNCONSCIOUS MENTAL PROCESSES AND CO CONTEMPORANEOUS SCIENTIFIC MEDICINE AND PSYCHOANALYSIS. THE PORTRAITS OF MODERNISTS REPRESENTS AN IDEAL EXAMPLE OF HOW SCIENTIFIC INSIGHTS IT -- ONE ANOTHER. LET ME BEGIN BY PUTTING THE MOD DERNISTS IN A PICTURE OF A PERSPECTIVE FOR YOU . MODERN THOUGHT BEGAN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE 19TH CENTURY IN THE RESTRIPTIONS OF HIPPOCRATE RESTRICTION S AND HYPOCRISIES OF EVERYOF DAY LIFE -- AS RATIONAL CREATURES THAT DIFFERED FROM OTHER LIVING CREATURES BY HAVING ACTIONS GUIDED BY REASON. THESE ENLIGHTENMENT BELIEFS WERE INSPIRED BY THE EXTRAORDINARY SUCCESS OF THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION OF THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURIES. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE SUCCESS OF THIS REVOLUTION DERIVED FROM THE APPLICATION OF REASONED THINKING TO THE STUDY OF THE UNIVERSE BY GREAT RATIONAL MINDS SUCH AS THOSE OF COPENNICUS, KEPLER, GAL LAY LOW AND NEWTON. IT WAS CELEBRATED IN 1660 WITH THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON. FOUNDERS OF THIS SOCIETY THOUGHT OF GOD AS A MATHEMATICIAN WHO DESIGNED THE UNIVERSE TO OPERATE ACCORD ACCORDING TO LOGICAL MATHEMATICAL PRINCIPLES. I SHOULD POINT OUT TO THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO MAY NOT BE FAMILIAR WITH IT, THIS IS NOT THE JEWISH CONCEPTION OF GOD. [LAUGHTER] THE FUNCTION OF THE SCIENTISTS -- TO CREATE THE UNIVERSE. THIS PERSPECTIVE LED TO THE BELIEF THAT WE LIVE IN A RATIONAL WORLD IN WHICH REASONED AND ENLIGHTENED THOUGHT WOULD ULTIMATELY LEAD TO A BETTER CONDITION FOR ALL HUMAN KIND. IN REACTING TO THE ENLIGHTENMENT, MODERNISM REPRESENTED A SEARCH FOR NEW WORLD VIEW, HE ARGUED HUMANS ARE NOT E UNIQUELY CREATED BUT ARE BIOLOGICAL CREATURES THAT HAVE EVOLVED FROM SIM LER ANIMAL ANCESTORS. THE LEF USING IS DRIVEN BY SEXUAL SELECTION SO THAT FROM AN EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF A BIOLOGICAL ORGANISM IS TO REPRODUCE ITSELF. SINCE SEXUAL ATTRACTION AND MATE SELECTION ARE CENTRAL TO THE BEHAVIOR OF ALL ANIMALS, SEX MUST ALSO BE CENTRAL TO HUMAN BEHAVIOR. DARWIN WAS FASCINATED BY FACES. MODERNISM HAS MANY MOODS BUT THE AGE OF INSIGHT HAS THREE MAIN FEATURES WHICH CHARACTERIZES THE WORLD WE LIVE IN TODAY HERE AT THE NIH. A NEW VIEW OF THE HUMAN MIND IS NOT BEING RATHE RATIONAL BUT -- THE CONVICTION THAT THE SEARCH FOR RULES THAT GOVERN THE NATURE OF THE HUMAN MIND BEGINS WITH AN EXAMINATION OF ONE'S SELF. A BROAD ATTEMPT TO INTEGRATE AND UNIFY KNOWLEDGE AND ATTEMPT DRIVEN BY SCIENCE. ONE EXAMPLE OF THIS WAS THE INITIATION OF A DIALOGUE BETWEEN ART AND SCIENCE. THE DIALOGUE RELATING -- ORIGINATED IN MODERNIST VIENNA IN 1900 HAS THREE PHASES, EACH OF WHICH I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON. THE INDEPENDENT DISCOVERY IN VIENNA OF IT DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF UNCONSCIOUS MENTAL PROCESSES, I'M ONLY GOING TO SPEAK ABOUT FREUD, BY COMMON SOURCE, BY MEDICINE, HEAD OF THE VIENNA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE. THE FIRST ATTEMPT TO BRIDGE ART TO SCIENCE, SCIENCE BEING PSYCHOLOGY, THEY DID THIS BY FOCUSING ON -- WILLY TALK MORE ABOUT LAY IT TER. THE FURTHER BRIDGING OF ART AND SCIENCE WAS THROUGH A BIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF -- ANALYSIS THAT CONTINUES TO THIS DAY. THE FIRST STEPS WERE TAKEN IN THE 1950 1950s BY ONE OF THE HEROS OF OUR FIELD WHO ORIGINALLY TRAINED IN THE VIENNA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND LEFT BECAUSE HE WAS A SOCIALIST AND BECAUSE HE WAS PART JEWISH. HE GOT OUT JUST IN TIME. SO LET ME BEGIN WITH THE FIRST PHASE MEDICAL SCIENCE. IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE BUT UNTIL THE BEGINNING OF THE 18TH CENTURY, YOU'RE NEEN MEDICINE WAS IN LARGE PART PRESCIENTIFIC IT. THE FIRST ATTEMPT AT EMPIRICALLY BASED MEDICINE WAS TAKEN IN IT PARIS AT THE UNIVERSITIES AND HOSPITALS INITIATED BY THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. BUT BY 1840, THIS IMPACT BEGAN TO FADE AND THE CONSERV CONSERVATIVISM DECREASED IN ORIGINALITY IN SCIENCE AND THE MOMENTUM IT OF FRENCH CREATIVITY IN MEDICINE BEGAN TO DECLINE. THE FOCUS NOW SHIFTED FROM PARIS TO VIENNA, ITS UNIVERSITY, ITS MEDICAL SCHOOL, AND THE -- THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE -- WHICH YOU CAN STILL SEE IN VIENNA TODAY. IT HAS A FASCINATING HISTORY. THE EMPRESS, 1740 TO 1780, REALIZED THAT TO HAVE A GREAT ARMY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HEALTHY ARMY. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE GOOD MEDICAL CARE. SHE REALIZED THAT THEY DIDN'T REALLY HAVE GOOD MEDICAL PRACTICE IN VIENNA. THE GREAT SWEETEN I SWEETEN CAN DISH SWEDI SH -- HE ULTIMATELY UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF MARIA'S SON INITIATED THE OPENING OF THE VIENNA GENERAL HOSPITAL IN 1784. THIS IS A REMARKABLE PLACE. LET ME TELL YOU WHY IT WAS SO REMARKABLE. TO BEGIN WITH, THE MEDICAL SCHOOL WAS PART OF THE UNIVERSITY. THE HOSPITAL WAS PART OF THE MEDICAL SCHOOL. SO THE HOSPITAL WAS PART OF THE UNIVERSITY. SO THE HIGH ACADEMIC STANDARDS THAT WERE PRACTICED AT THE UNIVERSITY FILTERED DOWN THROUGH THE WHOLE SYSTEM TO AFFECT THE CARE OF PATIENTS. THIS WAS NOT WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE UNITED STATES AT THE TIME, THIS WAS NOT WHAT WAS GOING ON IN MOST COUNTRIES OF EUROPE. NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO DIED THERE WAS AUTOPSIED. THIS WAS UNHEARD OF. EVERY SINGLE PERSON WAS AUTOPSIED. AND THE THIRD POINT, ALL THE AUTOPSIES WERE DONE BY ONE INDIVIDUAL, THE HEAD OF PATHOLOGY. SO YOU HAD ACCUMULATION OF KNOWLEDGE THAT WAS REALLY QUITE IMMENSE. THIS BECAME PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT WHEN -- RECRUITED TO BECOME HEAD OF PATHOLOGY, ULTRAMULTI-LY BECAUSE HE WAS SO OUTSTANDING, BECAME HEAD OF THE MEDICAL SCHOOL, ULTIMATELY BECAME A MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT, SO HIS VIEWS WERE BROADCAST THROUGHOUT AUSTRIA AND HUNGARY. WHAT WAS SO EXTRAORDINARY ABOUT HIM? HE SAID YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING AROUND TREATING PEOPLE AND WE HAVEN'T THE FOGGIEST INSIGHT INTO WHAT'S CAUSING THEIR IT DISORDER. DISORDER. WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THEIR DISEASE? SO HOW ARE WE TREATING THINGS WHEN WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE KAWFS OF THEI CAUSE OF THEIR PROBLEM I S? SO BEFORE WE CAN TREAT, WE MUST HAVE AN ACCURATE DIAGNOSIS. THEY HAD STETHOSCOPES, THEY COULD TAP ON CHEST, THEY DID THAT BUT DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE SOUNDS MEANT. SO THEY WOULD LISTEN TO THE HEART, THEY WOULD HEAR SOME PECULIAR SOUND COMING OUT, THEY COULDN'T BE SURE WAS IT THE ACOR THE AORTIC VALVE OR THE MITRAL VALVE, SO THE ONLY WAY THEY COULD FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON WAS FOR A CLINICIAN TO DO A VERY CAREFUL PHYSICAL EXAMINATION, AND THEN WHEN THE PATIENT DIED, DO AN AUTOPSY. ROKI IT TANSKY IN HIS CAREER PERFORMED 60,000 AUTOPSIES. BEFORE YOU HAVE A NERVOUS BREAK DOWN, DON'T WORRY, HE HAD HELP. HE DIDN'T DO THIS ALL BY HIMSELF. HE GOT A COLLABORATOR, FIRST OF ALL, THAT DIDN'T HELP WITH THE PATHOLOGY DIRECTLY BUT HE WAS A CLINICIAN. HE ITHEY IT DID THE CAN DIDTHEY IT DID THE AUTOPSIES TOGETHER. IF THEY SAW A MAY TRAL VALVE THAT WAS DEFORMED, THEY WOULD RUN FLUID THROUGH THE MITRAL VALVE TO SEE WHETHER THEY COULD PRODUCE THE SOUND. SO THIS WAY, THEY BEGAN TO DEVELOP A BASIS, A BASIS FOR CLINICAL MEDICINE, FOR MEDICAL PRACTICE. SO HE MADE AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF CONTRIBUTIONS. IN A SENSE, WE ALL PRACTICE TODAY. YOU'VE GOT TO IT DIG DEEP IN ORDER TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. HE MEANT IN TERMS OF AUTOPSY BUT HE REALIZED THIS WAS A METAPHOR THAT APPLIED TO MANY AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE. THE TRAINED THE LEADERS OF ACADEMIC MEDICINE. MORE IMPORTANTLY, HE STARTED THE SUBSPECIALTY OF OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY, UROLOGY, OPHTHALMOLOGY, ALL STARTED AT THE UNIVERSITY OF OF VIENNA, STIMULATED BY CARL ROKITANSKY. ONE OF THE PEOPLE HE HAD PARTICULAR INFLUENCE ON WAS SIGMUND FREU DID D. THERE WAS A RULE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA MEDICAL SCHOOL THAT EVERYONE WHO DID RESEARCH HAD TO PRESENT THEIR RESEARCH TWICE A YEAR, AND THE DEAN HAD TO SIT IN AND APPROVE THE PRESENTATION. AND FRE DUPEUD ON TWO OCCASIONS -- WHEN HE DIED, FREUD WENT TO HIS FUNERAL, HIS FRIENDS WROTE WHAT A TRAGIC DAY THIS IS FOR AUSTRIAN MEDICINE, THIS GREAT MAN HAS LEFT US. AND WHEN FREUD DIED, PEOPLE SAID, ISN'T IT WONDERFUL, HE CAME WITH ROTIKANSKY BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A SPECULATIVE DISCIPLINE, IMAGINE WHERE IT WOULD HAVE GONE IF IT WASN'T FOR HIM. DON'T ANSWER THAT ONE. AND HIS IMPACT WAS REALLY QUITE GREAT. LET ME JUST SHOW YOU HIS INFLUENCE ON FREUD. IN PART STIMULATED BY HIM, FREREUD STARTED OUT AS -- THE FIRST PERSON IT TO SHOW INVERTEBRATE NEURONS RESEMBLES THE NEURONS IN YOUR BRAIN AND MIND, SO THE CONCEPTS OF EVOLUTION APPLY TO THE BRAIN AS WELL. HE WROTE A VERY IMPORTANT BOOK ON CEREBRAL PALSY, A BOOK ON APHASIA, HE DID EXTRAORDINARY STUDIES. HE WANTED TO DO BASIC SCIENCE, BUT IN THOSE DAYS, YOU COULDN'T DO BASIC SCIENCE UNLESS YOU HAD A -- AND HE DIDN'T HAVE THAT. HE WANTED TO MARRY MARTHA, REALIZED HE TO GO INTO CLINICAL PRACTICE. HE IT FIRST THOUGHT ABOUT NEUROLOGY, FOUND THAT THERE WERE TOO MANY NEUROLOGISTS IN VIENNA. HE HAD A FRIEND WHO WAS A PSYCHIATRISTMENT WELCOMEPSYCHIATRIST. WELLWELCOME, WE WERE WAITING FOR YOU. TALKING ABOUT SIGMUND FREUD, ONE OF YOUR CLOSE FRIENDS. SO ROYA HAD A FASCINATING PATIENT THAT REALLY CAUGHT FREUD'S INTEREST. HE HAD A WOMAN WHO CAME TO HIM WITH PARALYSIS OF HER RIGHT ARM. HE WAS ALSO A COMPETENT NEUROLOGIST, THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH HER NEUROLOGICALLY, HYSTERICAL PARALYSIS OF THE RIGHT ARM. SO HE COULD HYPNOTIZE HER BUT HE FOUND AMAZINGLY, MANY PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THIS, THAT THE WOMAN PATIENT BEGAN TO TALK TO BROYA AND HE BEGAN TO TALK TO HER AND FREE ASSOCIATION WAS GOING ON. AND AS THIS EMERGED, I FREUD BEGAN TO GET AN IDEA AND CONVEY THAT ON WHAT MIGHT BE GOING THROUGH HER MIND. HER FATHER LIKED TO REST ON THIS ARM, WHEN HE WAS TIRED, AND WHEN HE WAS ILL, HE IT DID THI DID THIS VERY OFTEN. AND WHEN HE DID SO, SHE HAD POSITIVE THOUGHTS ABOUT HIM AND NEGATIVE THOUGHTS ABOUT HIM. AND HE ULTIMATELY DIED IN THIS POSITION. AND SHE FELT VERY GUILTY ABOUT THESE NEGATIVE THOUGHTS. AND THIS IT PARALYSIS DEVELOPED. AS SHE SPOKE ABOUT THIS, THE PARALYSIS RESOLVED. WELL, FREUD THOUGHT THIS WAS JUST FABULOUS. RAN ACROSS TO PARIS, LEARNED HYPNOSIS, CAME BACK AND STARTED TO DO THIS. THEY REALIZED THAT HYPNOSIS WAS NO NECESSARY, BUT FREE ASSOCIATION INTERACTING WAS ESSENTIAL. AND HE DECIDED WHAT HE WANTED TO DO IS TO TRY TO EXPLAIN WHAT HE WAS NOW WORKING OUT, SORT OF A NEW VIEW OF THE MIND, EMPHASIS OF UNCONSCIOUS PROCESSES AND REPRESSION. THESE ARE SOME OF THE IDEAS THEY PLAYED WITH, BUT HE PUT THIS TOGETHER IN A NEW CONTEXT. THIS PROVIDES A NEW WAY OF THINKING ABOUT THE MIND, AND HE WANTED TO PUT THIS IN BIOLOGICAL TERMS. HE WROTE AN ESSAY, 1895, CALLED PSYCHOANALYSIS FOR THE NEUROLOGIST. HOW MANY OF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE, MICHIGAN, HAVE YOU READ THIS? I KNEW YOU WOULDN'T HAVE READ IT. IT'S A WASTE OF TIME. IT'S INKREE HENCIBLE INCOMPREHENSIBLE. I SPENT A FEW MONTHS JUST RE-DRAWING ONE DIAGRAM. YOU REALIZE, AND THIS IS WHY I NEVER PUBLISHED IT, THAT HOW COULD THEY POSSIBLY HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE BRAIN IN 1895 THAT WOULD ALLOW ONE TO DEAL WITH UNCONSCIOUS TYPE OF -- WE'RE JUST BEGINNING TO START OFF WITH LOCALIZATION OF ANY KIND OF DID -- SO HE DEVELOPED A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT APPROACH. HE SAID LOOK, I HAVE THE PATIENT'S SYMPTOMS AND OBSERVABLE BEHAVIOR. I'M GOING TO DEVELOP A THEORY. THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN MENTAL PROCESSES IN TERMS OF INTERNAL REPRESENTATIONS OF CONSCIOUS AND UNCONSCIOUS PROCESSES IN CONFLICT. SOMEDAY, A GENERATION AT THE NIH IS IT GOING TO EMERGE THAT'S GOING TO HAVE THE TOOLS, THE INSIGHTS, THE CREATIVITY TO TACKLE SOME OF THESE PROCESSES. AND NORA SITTING HERE IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE WHO IS DOING THIS REALLY QUITE REMARKABLY. SO IN A SENSE, HE WAS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER HE WOULD HAVE ARGUED THIS IF HE WAS STILL ALIVE TODAY, HE SAID I'M ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT MANY OF MY IDEAS ARE WRONG AND BIOLOGY IS GOING TO -- TRYING TO SUMMARIZE FREUD'S SCIENTIFIC CONTRIBUTIONS IN THREE KEY IDEAS IS RIDICULOUS BUT THAT HAS NEVER STOPPED ME IN THE PAST SO LET ME TRY NOW. ONE IS HUMAN BEINGS ARE NOT RATIONAL CREATURE, THEY'RE DRIVEN BY IRRATIONAL UNCONSCIOUS MENTAL PROCESSES. IT ADULT CHARACTER CAN BE TRACED TO THE MIND OF A CHILD. NO MENTAL -- NO MENTAL EVENT OCCURS -- MENTAL -- SCIENTIFIC -- AND FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHIC DETERMINATION -- THE WHOLE IDEA OF PSYCHOANALYSIS -- RELATE TO ONE ANOTHER. THEIR CAUSALLY RELATED TO ONE ANOTHER. HAS EMERGED AS SORT OF THE MAJOR SOURCE OF THE ROTIKANSKY OF THE MIND BENEATH THE SURFACE OF BEHAVIOR. NOW, HE MISSED A NUMBER OF THINGS. ONE OF THE THINGS FREUD FAILED TO NOTICE THAT OTHER MODERNISTS CAN DID, THIS IS WHY THEY COMPLEMENT EACH OTHER IN SUCH AN INTERESTING WAY, FREUD DID NOT HAVE VERY MUCH INSIGHT INTO FEMALE SEXUALITY. IT WOULD TAKE A SEPARATE LECTURE FOR ME TO EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY IT DIDN'T HAVE -- BUT ONE CLUE WAS THERE'S A DEEP DISCUSSION IN THE LITERATURE WHETHER HE SLEPT ONLY WITH ONE WOMAN THROUGHOUT HIS WHOLE LIFE OR WHETHER HE HAD EXPERIENCE WITH TWO WOMEN. I'M SCEPT TALL ABOUI'M SKEPTICAL ABOUT THE IDEA OF TWO WOMEN BUT HE HAD -- IN CONTRAST, HAD SLEPT WITH SEVERAL HUNDRED WOMEN AND HAD ENORMOUS SEXUAL EXPERIENCE. HE LEARNED FROM HER DAD HOW TO INTERACT WITH HIS MODEL. RODAN TOLD HIS MODELS, DON'T -- JUST HANG AROUND, DO THINGS THAT INTEREST YOU, AND IF I BECOME FASCINATED BY WHAT YOU'RE DOING, I'LL DRAW WHAT I WANT TO DRAW. AND THIS -- HE HAD MOST OF THEM FEMALE MODELS HANGING AROUND AND AFTER A WHILE THEY WOULD UNDRESS, THEY WOULD MASS I MASTURBATE, IF MEN CAME IN THE ROOM, THEY MIGHT COUPLE WITH THE MEN, AND AND HE DEPICTED THIS IN THE MOST DELICATE WAY THIS, IS IN NO WAY PORNOGRAPHIC, HIS DRAWINGS ARE REMARKABLE FOR DEPICTING A LIBERATED FEMALE SEXUALITY. SO HERE HE DEPICTS THIS WOMAN MASTURBATING. IT'S A REVOLUTION AND DEPICTION OF FEMALE SEXUALITY. LET ME PUT THIS INTO PERSPECTIVE FOR YOU. I SHOW YOU FOUR FAMOUS EXAMPLES OF NEWS IN WESTERN ART. FIRST OF ALL, THESE ARE ALL MYTHOLOGICAL WOMEN. VENUS, THIS IS NOT THE GIRL NEXT DOOR. NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, IN ALL CASES, THE WOMAN IS LOOKING AT THE BEHOLDER. USUALLY A MALE. AS IF HER ONLY FUNCTION IN LIFE WAS TO SATISFY HIS SEXUAL CURIOSITY. AND THIRD, IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY, YOU SEE IN THREE OUT OF FOUR CASES, THE WOMAN IS COVERING HER PUBIC REGION WITH HER LEFT HAND. NOW ONE DOESN'T KNOW, IS SHE BEING MODEST OR IS SHE MASTURBATING? YOU KNOW IMMEDIATELY. WHAT IS EVEN MORE REMARKABLE, WHICH I THINK IS HIS GREATEST PAINTINGS, IS JUDITH. I'M SURE MANY OF YOU KNOW THIS STORY. IT WAS AN ASSYRIAN GENERAL WHO LAID A SIEGE ON A SMALL TOWN AND AFTER SEVERAL WEEKS, THIS SIEGE BECAME IMPOSSIBLE, THERE WAS NO FOOD, THE SANITARY CONDITIONS BROKE DOWN. JUDITH, A MODEST WIDOW, AGE 26, THOUGHT SHE WOULD TRY SOMETHING TO SAVE HER PEOPLE. SHE TOOK HER HOUSEKEEPER, SLIPPED OUT FROM THE SIEGE AND FOUND -- HE HAPPENED TO BE ENJOYING A GLASS OF WINE AFTER DINNER. SHE ENCOURAGED HIM TO HAVE A SECOND AND THIRD GLASS OF WINE. SHE THEN ENCOURAGED HIM TO TAKE HER TO HIS TENT. WHICH HE IT DID. DID. AND THERE, THEY HAD SEX TOGETHER, AND HE FELL ASLEEP EXHAUSTED FROM DRINK AND SEX. SHE TOOK THE SWORD OFF THE WALL OF HIS TENT AND SHE CHOPPED OFF HIS HEAD. REPEATEDLY DEPICTED IN WESTERN ART, THIS MODEST WIDOW, SACRIFICING HERSELF FOR THE CAUSE OF THE PEOPLE. THIS IS NOT THE WAY KLINT DEPICTS IT. THIS IS A FUSION OF E EROTICISM WITH AGGRESSION. JUDITH HAS HER LIPS OPEN IN A POST COITAL TRANCE, HER BREASTS EXPOSED AND FONDLING HIS HEAD IN THE CORNER OF THE PICTURE. THIS IS JUST AMAZING. BUT WHAT IS EVEN MORE AMAZING IS THAT KLIMT GOT A LOT OF HIS INTEREST THROUGH MEDICINE. HOW DID ROKITANSKY INFLUENCE KLIMT? YOU MET THE HEAD OF THE NIH, YOU MED THE HEAD OF THE NSF, YOU MET ALL THE IMPORTANT PEOPLE, YOU MET BUSINESS PEOPLE, YOU MET SCIENTIST, YOU MET -- THEY ALL CAME TOGETHER THERE. AND HER HUSBAND, EMIL, FOR WHICH THE ORGAN IS NAMED, WAS A GREAT -- WHO WAS A CLOSE ASSOCIATE OF ROKITANSKI. AND KLIMT COMES TO THESE THINGS, BECOMES FASCINATED WITH BIOLOGY, STARTS TO IT READ DARWIN. WHEN HE DIED, THERE WERE FOUR VOLUMES OF DARWIN IN KLIM IT T'S LIBRARY. WOULD YOU RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU HAVE FOUR VOLUMES OF DARWIN IN YOUR LIE WREAR? THANK YOU. GOOD FOR YOU. ONE PERSON IN THE WHOLE NIH. ISN'T THAT MARVELOUS. SO HE BEGAN TO LOOK IN THE MICROSCOPE AND BECAME FASCINATED WITH CELLS AND SPECIFICALLY, NOT SURPRISINGLY, IN SPERM AND EGGS. AND HE BEGAN TO INCORPORATE THIS INTO HIS ART. SO WHO'S COMING TO DIANA, IN A SHOWER OF GOLDEN RAINDROPS. YOU CAN SEE THIS DEPICTION OF DIANA, BUT IF YOU LOOK VERY CAREFULLY, YOU SEE AMONG THESE GOLD RAINDROPS, THERE IS A WRECK RECTANGULAR SYMBOL. WHERE YOU EVEWHEREVER YOU SEE THIS, IT'S SPERM. WHEREVER YOU SEE THESE, THESE ARE OVA. SO HERE, KLIMT IS DEPICTING DIANA AS A REPRODUCTIVE MACHINE, CONVERTING SPERM INTO OOCYTES. IF YOU LOOK AT THE FAMOUS PAINTING, "THE KISS," YOU SEE THTHE MALE'S COAT IS DECORATED BY THESE SYMBOL, THE FEMALE'S COAT IS CAN DECORATED B DECORATED BY CIRCULAR SYMBOLS. WHAT WAS ALSO WONDERFUL ABOUT KLIMT WAS THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE GREAT ARTISTS WHO MOVED AWAY FROM HIM, HE, AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS CAREER, HE NEVER TRAINED THEM, SUPPORTED THEM STRONGLY, SO HE HAD THE ABILITY TO REALIZE THAT ARTISTS HAVE TO DEVELOP THEIR OWN IDENTITIMENT LET ME BEGIN WITH KO CAN KOSCHKA BECAUSE HE'S THE OLDER OF THE TWO. HE OF MOVED AWAY FROM THE -- STYLE TO AN EXPRESSIONNIST ART NOUVEAU STYLE AND HE HAD THREE MAJOR THEMES. HE FELT HE DISCOVERED THE UNCONSCIOUS -- OF FREUD. THIS IS BALONEY. YOU COULDN'T WALK DOWN THE STREET IN VIENNA WITHOUT HAVING A DISCUSSION OF FREU IT DD, SO EVEN HAVE YOU HADN'T MET HIM -- HE HAD A DEEP INTEREST IN UNCONSCIOUS PROCESSES, WHICH KLIMT IN HIS DEPICTION OF PORTRAITS DID NOT CONVEY VERY MUCH, AND HE ALSO WAS INTERESTED IN HIMSELF. HE THOUGHT THAT THE INITIAL STUDY FOR UNDERSTANDING SOMEBODY ELSE IS TO UNDERSTAND YOURSELF. AND HE SORT OF ANALYZED HIMSELF A GREAT DEAL. HE ALSO WAS INTERESTED NOT TO SEE FACES BUT IN HANDS AND ARMS BECAUSE THEY CONVEYED EMOTION AND ALSO WAS INTERESTED IN CHILD AND ADOLESCENT SEXUALITY. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. KLIMT WAS AN ART NOUVEAU ARTIST, REMEMBER THE SYMBOLS, SPERM, THE LINEAR ONES, THE CIRCULAR ONES ARE THE OVA. BUT NOTICE HOW THE BACKGROUND IS ARTIFICIAL. HE WAS INFLUENCED BY -- HE LOVED TO WORK WITH GOLD, HIS FATHER HAD BEEN A GOLDSMITH. THIS IS NOT THE WAY HE WORKED. HE USED BOLD COLORS AS A BACKGROUND TO CREATE MOOD, NOT NATURALISTICALLY BUT EMOTIONALLY. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU SEE THE RED IN HIS EAR, ON HIS FINGERTIPS, DEPICTING EMOTION. KLIMT NEVER IT DID A PORTRAIT OF HIMSELF, HE NEVER PAIFNTED PORE TEMPERATURES OF MEN, HE WAS ONLY INTERESTED IN WOMEN. AS MANY OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW, HE HAD AN AFFAIR FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS WITH A WIDOW AND HE WAS ALWAYS SURE DURING THAT PERIOD THAT HE WAS GOING TO LEAVE HIM. AND HE WAS ALWAYS TERRIBLY INSECURE ABOUT THAT. THIS WAS ACTUALLY DONE AFTER THEY HAD BROKEN UP BUT HE STILL CONTINUED TO BE HAUNTED BY IT BECAUSE DURING THIS PERIOD, HE DID SOME OF HIS MOST INTERESTING WORK. THERE'S A VERY FAMOUS PAINTING CALLED THE TEMPEST IN WHICH TWO OF THEM ARE IN A SMALL BOAT, SHE'S SLEEPING PEACEFULLY, THINKING OF HER NEXT LOVER, AND HE IS ABSOLUTELY SURE HE'S GOING TO BE UNFAITHFUL, HE'S RE IT DI OH JUMP OVERBOARD. BUT HE ALSO EXPRESSED TO OTHERS. FOR EXAMPLE, AND HE WAS VERY LUCKY, HE HAD A GUY WHO WAS A GREAT ARCHITECT, HE SAID LOOK, I LIKE YOUR WORK SO MUCH, I THINK IMPORTANT PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THEIR PORE TEMPERATURES PAINTED BY ME. AND IF THEY DON'T LIKE IT, I'LL TAKE IT BACK. GREAT VISUAL SIGN IT TIS, PIONEERED THE STUDY OF INTACT BEHAVIOR -- YOU DESERVE TO HAVE YOUR PORTRAIT PAINTED AND FEW ARE LIKE -- I'LL TAKE IT BACK. SO HE APPROACHED MANY PEOPLE LIKE THIS, THE HEAD OF THE GREAT PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE, AND HE SAID, YOU SHOULD HAVE YOUR PORTRAIT PAINTED BY HIM, IF HE DOESN'T LIKE IT, I'LL TAKE IT BACK. AND HE FELT -- I COULD PREDICT THEIR FUTURE. SO HE PAINTED THE PORTRAIT, TOOK HIM ABOUT TWO WEEKS TO DO IT, HE WOULD COME IN IN THE EVENING AFTER DINNER, AND WHEN HE WAS FINISHED, HE LOOKED AT HIS FAMILY, THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T LIKE IT. LOOKS ODD. THE EYES ARE ASYMMETRICAL AND LOOK AT THE RIGHT HAND. IT'S DROOPING. IT LOOKS LIKE HE HAD A STROKE. WE DON'T LIKE IT AT ALL. HE TOOK IT BACK, SOLD IT TO THE MUSEUM. TWO MONTHS LATER, HE HAD THIS IDENTICAL STROKE. NOW WE CAN'T BE CERTAIN WHAT HAPPENED, BUT PEOPLE WHO ULTIMATELY GO ON TO HAVE A STROKE, SOMETIMES HAVE ISCHEMIC EPISODES EARLIER AND THOSE ISCHEMIC EPISODES -- DEPICT THE CLINICAL PICTURE. NO ONE HAD EVER DEPICTED A FEMALE ADOLESCENT NUDE UNTIL HE CAME ALONG, AND THIS IS A WOMAN HE LIKED VERY MUCH BUT NEVER HAD A CONSUMMATED SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH HER, BUT DEPICTED HER AS THE FIRST ADOLESCENT NUDE THAT WAS DEPICTED, FEMALE NUDE, THAT WAS EVER DEPICTED IN ART. AND HE ALSO REALIZED NOT ONLY ADOLESCENTS BUT EVEN YOUNGER CHILDREN HAVE SEXUAL -- THIS IS A VERY FAMOUS PAINTING -- HE'S TRYING TO PULL HER CLOSER AND SHE'S CLENCHING HER FIST, READY TO PUNCH HIM. THIS PAINTING FASCINATED -- WHO THOUGHT THAT WAS THE GREATEST PORTRAIT PAINTER OF HIS ERA. IN THE PAST, A CHILD IN A PAINTING HAD LOOKED PRETTY INCONTENTED, GROWNUPS IT DID NOT WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE SORROWS AND AGONIES OF CHILDHOOD, THEY RESENTED IT, IF THIS ASPECT OF IT WAS BROUGHT HOME TO THEM. BUT HE WOULD NOT FALL -- WE THINK HE LOOKED AT THESE CHILDREN WITH DEEP SYMPATHY AND COMPASSION. THE AWKWARDNESS OF THEIR MOVEMENTS, OF THEIR GROWING BODIES IS ALL THE MORE TRUE TO LIFE FOR WHAT IT LACKS IN CONVENTIONAL ACCURACY. FINALLY, LET ME TURN TO THE MOST RADICAL OF THEM ALL. SCHIELE USED THE WHOLE BODY TO COMMUNICATE HIS FEELINGS. THE EX-ITHE HE'S REALLY THE KUFKA OF PORTRAIT PAINTING. HE NOT ONLY THOUGHT IT WAS NECESSARY TO USE HIS WHOLE BODY BUT THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO EXPLORE HIS BODY IN THE NUDE. SO EVEN WHEN HE DEPICTS HIMSELF MAKING LOVE, BOTH HE AND HIS LOVE -- LOOK LIKE THEY'RE ABOUT TO DIE, THEY'RE SO FRIGHTENED. AND SELF PORTRAITS -- IN ONE YEAR, 1910 TO 1911, HE PAINTED 100 SELF-PORE TEMPERATURES. NOSELF-PORTRAITS.REMBRANDT -- 100 SELF POR TRAITS IN ONE YEAR. MANY OF THEM WERE NUDE BECAUSE HE FELT HE NEEDED TO EXPOSE HIMSELF IN ORDER TO CONVEY TO YOU EXACTLY WHAT HIS FEELINGS WERE. AND SOME OF THEM WERE OUTRAGEOUS. HE DEPICTED HIMSELF MASTURBATINGMENT THIS IS KLIMT SHOWING WOMEN WERE MASTURBATING, HE IT FELT WHY NOT USE HIMSELF. WHY WEIGHS SO OBVIOUSLY CONFRONTATIONAL AND DEFIANT? I THINK ONE IDEA THAT BEGINS TO EMERGE ACTUALLY SORT OF ADVOCATED, AND THAT IS HE WANTED TO CHANGE THE VIEW THAT WE HAD OF THE ARTIST IN SOCIETY. SIMPLY TO REMIND YOU, IN THE REN RENAISSANCE, YOU BOUGHT A PAINTING PRIMARILY BECAUSE WHAT WAS BEING DEPICTED, THE OBJECT OR THE PERSON. SO YOU WANTED YOUR CHILDREN, WHEN THEY GOT MARRIED OR WHATEVER, TO BE COMMEMORATED IN SOME WAY, YOU HAD THE PAINTING -- THE IMAGE PAINTED, THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO YOU. THE ARTIST'S NAME ITSELF WAS LESS IMPORTANT. VELASQUEZ, WHEN HE PAINTED HIS FAMOUS PORTRAIT, ACTUALLY A PAINTING THE OF THE ROYAL FAMILY, THIS IS THE CANVAS, YOU SEE THEM IN THE MIRROR BEHIND. THIS IS ONE OF THE CHILDREN OF THE ROYAL FAMILY WITH THEIR PLAY MATES, BUT WHAT IS REALLY CALLED ATTENTION TO IS VELASQUEZ STANDING THERE IN THE CENTER SAYING THAT I AM THE PAINTER WHO DID THIS. THE REASON YOU'RE BUYING THIS PAINTING IS BECAUSE I AM THE GREAT VER VELASQUEZ WHO'S ASKED THE ROYAL FAMILY TO PAINT THEM BECAUSE I'M THAT GOOD, AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT SCIELE WANTED TO COMMUNICATE. OSCAR WILD SAID EVERY PAINTING IS A PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST. LET ME GO ON TO THE SECOND POINT, THE PSYCHOLOGY OF ART AND THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE. RIEGL, REALLY A GREAT ART HISTORIAN, POINTED OUT AT THE TURN OF THE CENTURY THAT ART IS GOING TO DIE UNLESS IT BECOMES MORE SCIENTIFIC, AND THE SCIENCE IT OUGHT TO ALIGN IT SELF WITH IS PSYCHOLOGY AND THE TOPIC IT OUGHT TO FOCUS ON IS THE BEHOLDER SHARE. HOW DOES THE VIEWER RESPOND TO A WORK OF ART? HE POINTED OUT THAT THE WORK OF ART IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS THE PAINTER PAINTS IT AND THE BEHOLDER RESPONDS TO IT. THIS IS WHAT'S OBVIOUSLY IN THE WORLD, BUT NO ONE HAD REALLY POINTED IT OUT. SAID TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE MIND OF THE BEHOLDER IS A GREAT CHALLENGE TO ART HISTORY, AND THIS IS REALLY EMERGING AS A MAJOR THEME. IT HAS FASCINATED ME, FASCINATED A NUMBER OF PEOPLE NOW TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE BEHOLDER RESPONDS TO IT A WORK O A WORK OF ART. EVERYTHING FROM NOW ON IS CONCERNED WITH THAT. THIS STIMULATED HIS STUDENTS AND TWO OF HIS STUDENTS, NOT DIRECT STUDENTS BUT THE NEXT GENERATION, WERE -- ERNST KRIS SAID IT SHOULD HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF AMBIGUITY AND RESPOND THOUGH THAT AMBIGUITY DIFFERENTLY. THAT MEANS THAT THE BEHOLDER IS UNDERGOING A CREATIVE EXPERIENCE THAT RECAPITULATES THE EXPERIENCE OF THE ARTIST IT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT A PAINTING, YOU PLAY IN YOUR MIND EXACTLY WHAT THE ARTIST MEANS, WHAT KINDS OF EMOTIONS HE'S CONVEYING WITH THE COLOR HE USES, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. THIS RECRUITS YOUR OWN CREATIVE PROCESSES, AND I THINKMUSIC, BECAUSE YOU RESPOND TO IT WITH YOUR OWN IDEAS. THUS HE POINTED OUT THE BEHOLDER RECAPITULATES IN HIS BRAIN A CREATIVE PROCESS WHICH PARALLELS THAT OF THE ARTIST. -- BEGAN TO READ ABOUT COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, ACTUALLY BEGAN TO CARRY OUT EXPERIMENTS ABOUT THIS, AND REALIZED WE NEEDED A COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF PERCEPTION AND HE READ -- IT -- A VERY FAMOUS ESSAY ON THE INVERSE OPTICS PROBLEM. HE SAYS WHEN YOU LOOK AT A PERSON, THE INFORMATION YOUR RETINA RECEIVES FROM THAT PERSON IS GROSSLY INADEQUATE TO RECONSTRUCT THAT PERSON. BUT ONE DOES IT SUCCESSFULLY AND WE ALL AGREE THAT WE'RE PRETTY MUCH SEEING THE SAME THING. SO WHEN I LOOK AT NOR, THE ONLY THING THAT MY RETINA SEES IS THE PHOTONS COMING OFF HER FACE. THAT INFORMATION IS INADEQUATE, THERE ARE ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS, WHAT THE SIZE OF HER FACE IS, EXACTLY WHAT ANGLE THE FACE IS, THERE ARE ALL DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THAT, SO I MUST HAVE OTHER SOURCE OF INFORMATION BESIDES THE PHOTONS COMING UP FROM HER FACE THAT MY RETINA SEES. HE SUGGESTED TWO OTHER POINTS OF INFORMATION WHICH YOU CALL BOTTOM UP AND TOP DOWN. BO OM UP IS THIS BRAIN EVOLVED OVER MILLIONS OF YEARS. IT HAS LEARNED CERTAIN RULES OF WHAT TO EXPECT IN THIS UNIVERSE. YOU SEE A SOURCE OF LIGHT, YOU ASSUME IT'S ABOVE. THAT'S THE SUN. IF YOU SEE THAT ONE PERSON IS MUCH TALLER THAN THE OTHER, YOU CAN ASSUME THAT MAYBE THAT PERSON IS SITTING IN FRONT OF THE OTHER PERSON. SO THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE BORN INTO OUR BRAIN WITH. BUT IN ADDITION, WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES, WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES WITH ART, WE SEE DIFFERENT ART, SO WE'VE LEARNED CERTAIN THINGS. IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT THE BRAIN HAS EVOLVED TAKES VERY INTELLIGENT GUESSS THAT IT CORRECTS 90% OF THE TIME, 99% OF THE TIME. THERE ALSO IS LEARNED KNOWLEDGE THAT IS DISTINCTIVE FOR THE INDIVIDUAL THAT INFLUENCES THEIR PERCEPTION. IF THIS IS TRUE, ONE WOULD MAKE PREDICTIONS THAT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO TRICK THE BRAIN. THAT IF THE BRAIN IS USING THIS BOTTOM-UP PROCESSES THROUGH EVOLUTION, IT MUST BE TAKING GUESSES HERE AND THERE, AND SOME OF THOSE GUESSES MIGHT BE WRONG. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR THEM, VERY HARD TO FIND THEM. THIS IS ONE UNSUCCESS PULL ATTEMPT. THIS IS A KANIZSA SQUARE. YOU SEE THIS BLACK SQUARE IN THE CENTER, FOUR WHITE CIRCLES, YOU ALL SEE THAT? DOES EVERYONE SEE THE GLAK SQUARE VERY CLEARLY? PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU SEE IT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. NONSENSE! BALONEY! YOU'RE MAKING THIS UP. THIS IS ALL IN YOUR HEAD. IF YOU ROTATE THESE FOUR CIRCLES, YOU'LL SEE THAT THIS BLACK SQUARE DISAPPEARS. YOU HAVE FILLED THIS IN, IN YOUR IMAGINATION. IT SIMPLY IS NOT THERE. AND THESE TEXTBOOK ILLUSIONS ARE JUST EXAMPLES THAT ALL VISUAL PERCEPTIONS ARE TO SOME DEGREE ILLUSORY. THE TEXTBOOK EXAMPLES REPRESENT THE EXTREME CASE. SO HE SUGGESTED A THREE-STEP SOLUTION VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT FREUD DID THAT THEY CAN GI BEGIN TO DESCRIBE -- BUT THEY'RE WAITING FOR THE NIH GROUP TO GET TOGETHER AND SOLVE THIS PROBLEM ON A VERY FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL. THIS BRINGS ME TO THE FINAL PHASE, BIOLOGY OF ART. WHAT ARE THE BRAIN MECHANISMS UNDER DIDLYING THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE? SO I WOULD LIKE TO ARGUE IN VERY ELEMENTARY TERMS THAT WE'RE BEGINNING TO GET A PRIMITIVE FLOW DIAGRAM OF THE NEURAL CIRCUITS INVOLVED IN THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE. SO WHEN I LOOK AT ANOTHER PERSON'S FACE, I ANALYZE THE FACIAL CONTOURS, THERE'S A REPRESENTATION OF THE FACIAL DETAIL, REPRESENTATION OF THE BODY OF THE PERSON, WHETHER IT'S STATIONARY OR IN MOTION, THERE ARE CELLS THAT RESPOND TO THE PHYSICAL MOVEMENT OF THE PERSON, THERE ARE CELLS THAT RESPOND TO WHAT IS GOING -- WHAT THE VIEWER PERCEIVES IS GOING ON IN THE PERSON'S MIND, THEORY OF MIND, AND ULTIMATELY, WE GET PSYCHOLOGICAL INSIGHT INTO THE OTHER PERSON. SO I WANT TO DOCUMENT SOME OF THESE POINTS. LET ME BEGIN WITH THE ANALYSIS OF FACIAL CONTOURS OF A PORTRAIT. AND THAT HAS TWO COMPONENTS, PSYCHOLOGICAL RESPONSE AND BIOLOGICAL RESPONSE. DARWIN EMPHASIZED FACES, HE SAID FACES ARE ESSENTIAL FOR SOCIAL INTERACTIONS, WE USE FACES TO COMMUNICATE EMOTION IN FINDING A PARTNER, EVEN IN BUSINESS NEGOTIATIONS, THE FACIAL EXPRESSION OF THE PERSON YOU'RE NEGOTIATING WITH IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. AND FACES ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY BY THE BRAIN THAN ANY OTHER OBJECT. THERE'S A LARGER, MORE DETAILED REPRESENTATION OF FACES THAN ANY OTHER OBJECT IN THE WORLD. COMPUTERS ARE EVEN BETTER AT IT BUT THEY HAVE GREAT DIFFICULTY RECOGNIZING FACES. WE ARE TERRIFIC AT IT. LITTLE KIDS CAN RECOGNIZE HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF FACES. YOU CAN TAKE KIDS AND PUT THEM IN A MONKEY COLONY AND THEY WILL, WITHIN WEEKS, RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HUNDREDS OF MONKEYS. THEY WILL ONLY DO THIS WHEN THEY'RE VERY YOUNG. TO US, ALL MONKEYS LOOK ALIKE. IN FACT, ONE OF THE REASONS RACIAL TENSION ITS OFTEN OCCUR IS BECAUSE YOU SEE, YOU GO TO CHINA, EVERYONE LOOKS ALIKE, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE'RE NOT SUPPLE ENOUGH WHEN WE'RE MATURE TO LEARN TO DISTINGUISH DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE FACES. BUT WHEN WE'RE YOUNG, WE HAVE ENORMOUS CAPABILITY OF DOING THAT AND CAN SEE THIS IN THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH. AND MOREOVER, IF YOU MAKE A DRAWING OF THE PERSON AND IF YOU MAKE A DRAWING THAT IS A CARTOON, IF YOU EXAGGERATE CERTAIN FEATURES, YOU RECOGNIZE IT EVEN MORE. SO YOU RECOGNIZE A CARTOON OF PRESIDENT NIXON BETTER THAN THE PHOTOGRAPH BECAUSE THE CARTOON DEPICTS HIM SO ACCURATELY MANY TIMES. THIS IS QUITE INTERESTING. MOREOVER, THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT ARE UNIQUE TO FACES IN THE WAY THE BRAIN HANDLES IT. IF I WERE TO TAKE THIS GLASS OF WATER AND TURN IT UPSIDE-DOWN, I WOULD SPILL IT. BUT YOU WOULD STILL RECOGNIZE IT AS A CUP. BUT WHEN YOU TURN A FACE UPSIDE-DOWN, THE SPHI TI CATS IN IT THE AUDIENCE WILL REALIZE THAT THIS IS MONA LISA BILLY BY LEONARDO, AND WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL? BUT WHEN I TURN IT UPSIDE-DOWN, YOU REALIZE THAT ONE OF THEM IS, IN FACT, THE ONE THAT HAS THE ENIGMA TICK SMILE, BUT UPSIDE-DOWN, YOU HAVE ENORMOUS DIFFICULTY DOING THAT. THIS IS ONLY A CHARACTERISTIC FEATURE OF FACES. HOW ARE FACES REPRESENTED IN THE BRAIN? THE FIRST PERSON WHO BEGAN TO APPROACH THIS PROBLEM IS JOACHIM BODAMER. SIMPLY TO REMIND THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO BELIEVE IN HAD AUDIENCE, BUT WE HAVE FOUR LOBES IN THE BRAIN, AND BODAMER FOUND PATIENTS WHO WERE FACE BLIND AS A RESULT OF DAMAGE IN THE WAR, INFLICTED, AND HE FOUND THAT IF THE LEAGUES WAS IN THE BACK OF THE BRAIN, AND HE FOUND THAT THE REGION THAT WAS INVOLVED IN FACE BLINDNESS WAS THE TEMPORAL CORE IT TEXT, YOU DON'T RECOGNIZE THE FACE -- THE MAN WHO MISTOOK HIS LIFE FOR -- A WOMAN TAKES A HER HUSBAND TO A PHYSICIAN, WHEN THE INTERVIEW IS OVER AND THE PHYSICIAN DISMISSES THE PATIENT, HE PICKS UP HIS WIFE, THINKING IT'S HIS HAT, AND TRIES TO PUT HER ON HIS HEAD. HE REALLY DOESN'T RECOGNIZE A FACE THE AT ALL. THAT IS VERY RARE. THE MORE COMMON THING IS A LEAGUES IN THE ANTERIOR PART OF THE POSTERIOR -- INFERIOR TEMPORAL -- IN WHICH YOU RECOGNIZE THE FACE BUT YOU DON'T RECOGNIZE A SPECIFIC FACE. THAT IS A CONGENITAL EFFECT, 10% OF PEOPLE HAVE IT TO SOME DEGREE. SO CHUCK CLOSE AND OLIVER SACHS BOTH SUFFER FROM FACE BLINDNESS. RECENTLY THERE'S BEEN TERRIFIC PROGRESS IN UNDERSTANDING HOW ACE FACES ARE REPRESENTED IN THE BRAIN. FIRST WITH CHARLIE GROSS, THEY FOUND SOME CELLS RESPOND TO FACE, BUT RECENTLY MARGARET LIVING TON AND DORIS TSAO AND ANOTHER, TWO IT OF HIS STUDENTS, COMBINED -- IN MONKEYS TO MAKE TREMENDOUS PROGRESS IN THIS AREA. SO WE DID IMAGING AND THEY FOUND THAT IN THE MACAQUE, THERE ARE SIX AREAS THAT LIGHT UP WHEN YOU SHOW THEM FACES. IN MONKEY, YOU COULD PUT ELECTRODES INTO THESE AREAS AND YOU FIND TWO THINGS. ONE IS, IF YOU STIMULATE THESE CENTRAL AREAS, YOU LIGHT UP ALL THE OTHERS. INDICATING THIS IS A SYSTEM FOR PROCESSING FACES. MOREOVER, IF YOU RECORD FROM THEM, YOU SEE 90 ODD% OF THE CELLS RESPOND TO FACES. LET ME JUST GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. YOU RECORD FROM A SINGLE CELL HERE AND SHOW THEM THE PICTURE OF A MONKEY, MONKEYS LIKE PICTURES OF MONKEYS. SO YOU GO -- THE CELL RESPONDS. IF YOU SHOW A CARTOON OF A MONKEY, IT RESPONDS EVEN MORE. MONKEYS LIKE CARTOONS LIKE WE DO. IT GOES -- BUT EVERY ASPECT OF THE FACE HAS TO BE THERE EXCEPT THE NOSE. WE DON'T QUITE KNOW WHY NOSES ARE NOT IMPORTANT. PERHAPS BECAUSE NOSES DON'T CHANGE AS MUCH WITH FACIAL EXPRESSION. AS MUCH AS EYES AND MOUTH DO. SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE MOUTH, NOTHING. YOU DON'T HAVE THE EYES, NOTHING. THE EYES, THE MOUTH, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE THE WHOLE -- IF YOU HAVE NO -- IF YOU TURN IT UP SIDE IT DOWN, NO RESPONSE, IF YOU EXAGGERATE, A DRAMATIC RESPONSE. SO YOU SEE IT AT THE CELLULAR LEVEL WHAT YOU SEE AT THE PSYCHO PHYSICAL LEVEL. GIVE YOU A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT'S GOING ON AND FOCUS ON ONE OR TWO PARTICULARLY INTERESTING POINTS. SO INFORMATION COMES IN TO THE BACK OF THE BRAIN, STRIATE CORTEX. THERE IS AN AREA RIGHT HERE WHICH WE DISCUSSED BEFORE WHICH IS INVOLVED IN THE FACE PROCESSING, TEMPORAL CORTEX. THERE'S AN AREA, THE LATERAL OWE SIPT CAL CORE IT TEXT, THAT ALSO IS INVOLVED IN THE RESPONSE TO PAINTERS, BECAUSE OFTEN PAINTERS STIR ON THE PAINT. YOU SEE THIS IN A NUMBER OF PAINTERS IN WHICH YOU ACTUALLY HAVE A TACTILE FEELING TO THE IMAGE, AND THIS AREA GETS RECRUITED FOR THAT. IN ADDITION THERE IS AN AREA INVOLVED IN RESPONDING TO THE BODY, WHEN IT'S IN MOTION. THIS AREA WILL RESPOND NOT ONLY TO THE BODY BUT ALL KINDS OF MOTION, BICYCLE IN MOTION, A CAR IN MOTION, BUT THERE'S AN AREA THAT RESPONDS ONLY TO BIOLOGICAL MOTION. DYING NOS IDIAGNOSTIC IT TOOL FOR AUTISTIC KIDS, WHO WILL RESPOND TO CARS MOVING BECAUSE THEY HAVE DIFFICULTY WITH SOCIAL INTERACTION. THERE ARE TWO AREAS HERE, THE INFERIOR -- WHICH ARE CONCERNED WITH MIRROR RESPONSES. WHEN I PICK UP THIS GLASS OF WATER IT, HE'S AREAS FIRE, THEY'RE PART OF THE MOTOR SYSTEM. THAT'S THEIR JOB CAN. WE PAY THAT MOTOR SYSTEM TO DO THIS JOB. BUT THE INTERESTING THING IS, THOSE CELLS ALSO RESPOND WHEN YOU DO IT. THEY RESPOND WHEN ANOTHER PERSON IS PICKING UP A GLASS OF WATER. WE HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT A CLASS OF IMITATED BEHAVIOR IS MEDIATED TO THESE TWO EA PEOPLE ARE EXPLORING HOW EXTENSIVE IS THIS. WHEN A MOTHER TALKS TO THE CHILD, HOW THE FACIAL MOVEMENT, IN ADDITION TO THE VOCAL COMMUNICATION, ALSO ARE INCORPORATED, FINALLY, THERE'S AN AREA THAT IS CONCERNED WITH THEORY OF MIND. I REALIZE -- THEIR OWN ASPIRATION, IT DIFFERENT THAN MIND. KIDS WITH AUTISM HAVE IT DIFFICULTY WITH THEORY OF MIND AND -- CAN OFTEN DETECT THAT. FINALLY, WE KNOW A LOT OF AREAS ARE INVOLVED IN EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO PORTRAIT UR. , THE DOPAMINE IS AN IMPORTANT MODULATOR OF EMOTION. WE TALKED BEFORE ABOUT THIS AMAZING PAINTING, THAT WOMEN, LIKE MEN, CONFUSE E EROTICISM WITH AGGRESSION. HOW TO YOU EXPLAIN THAT? HOW DO YOU TAKE THESE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF EMOTIONAL STATES AND FUSE THEM TOGETHER? RECENTLY DAVID ANDERSON HAS GIVEN US SOME INSIGHT. HE FOUND THAT IN THE VENTRAL HYPOTHALAMUS, THERE ARE NEURONS THAT CONTROL MATING, SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, AND NEURONS THAT CONTROL AGGRESSION. THOSE TWO POPULATIONS ARE CONTIGUOUS WITH ONE ANOTHER AND THERE'S A 20% OVERLAP. SO THERE ARE MATING NEURONS, FIGHTING NEURONS AND NEURONS THAT OVERLAP. AND YOU CAN GET THOSE NEURONS IN OVERLAP TO BE INVOLVED IN ONE OR ANOTHER CAN DEPENDING ON STIMULUS TRACTS. YOU COULD PUT CHANNEL -- IF YOU ACTIVATE THEM WEEKLY, MATING. YOU ACTIVATE THEM STRONGLY, FIGHTING. YOU CAN SEE HOW YOU CAN GO FROM FOREPLAY TO AGGRESSION. AND I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE CONSIDER HOW EASILY EMOTIONAL FEELINGS GET TURNED INTO AGGRESSION, EVEN IN E -- CAN BRAIN SCIENCE REVEAL SOMETHING ABOUT THE LOVE OF ART? RONALD LAUDER PAYED THE MOST EVER FOR A PAINTING UP TO THAT TIME. THIS IS ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO. WHY DID CAN DID HE PA DID HE PAY THAT MUCH FOR THAT PAINTING? WHAT PARTS OF THE BRAIN GET RECRUITED FOR THIS? THE OSH TO ORBITO-FRONTAL CORTEX AND THE DOPAMINE SYSTEM. DOPAMINE ACTS ON BEHOLDER'S SHARE, MANY OF THESE AREAS, AND IT'S IMPORTANT, AS NORA HAS SHOWN, THE PRIMARY REWARD FOR FOOD, DRINK AND SEX, FOR ADDICTION, FOR ROMANTIC LOVE AND LOVE OF ART. THE AMAZING THING ABOUT THIS IS, MANY OF YOU HAVE PROBABLY HAD THIS EXPERIENCE, WHEN YOU'RE IN LOVE, THE DOPAMINE SYSTEM REALLY GETS TURNED ON. IF YOU COULD REJECT IT IN A LOVE RELATIONSHIP, IT GOES WILD. EVEN STRONGER. YOU CAN'T HAVE IF YOU GET REJECTED, IT GETS TURNED ON EVEN MORE. COMES TO VIENNA EVERY YEAR, LOOKS AT THE PAINTING, COMES FROM A VERY WEALTHY FAMILY, THE MUSEUM WON'T EVEN HAVE THEM TOUCH IT, HE BECOMES AMBASSADOR TO AUSTRIA, DYING TO GET THIS PAINTING, NOT A CHANCE IN THE WORLD. HE WOULD GIVE ANYTHING FOR THIS. SO THIS DOPAMINE IS GOING OFF SCALE HERE. HE WOULD HAVE PAID NOT 135 MILLION, HE WOULD HAVE PAID $140 MILLION IN ORDER TO GET THE PAINTING. HE WAS GLAD HE GOT IT. I MUST SAY, THOSE OF YOU WHO KNOW, THIS PAINTING HAS MADE A MAJOR IMPACT ON THE GALLERY. VERY FEW PEOPLE USED TO GO TO IT. NOW, IT'S A STOP-OFF POINT FOR ANY VISITOR INTERESTED IN ART COMING TO NEW YORK. SO LET ME CONCLUDE. MANY PEOPLE HAVE MADE THIS POINT THAT THE GREATER ENTERPRISE TO THE HUMAN MIND HAS BEEN AND ALWAYS WILL BE ATTEMPT TO LINK SCIENCES AND THE HUMANITIES. THE MODERNISTS WERE AMONG THE FIRST TO LINK BY ESTABLISHING THESE LINKAGES, AND IT CONTINUES AT THE NIH WITH THE SPIRIT OF MODERNISM CARRIED FORWARD TO THIS DAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE] >> YOU CAN TELL BY THE ENTHUSIASTIC APPLAUSE HOW MUCH THIS GATHERING IN MASUR AUDITORIUM HAS ENJOYED YOUR PRESENTATION AND NOW THERE'S TIME FOR PEOPLE TO TWEAK YOU WITH OBSERVATIONS AND QUESTIONS IF THEY WANT TO CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION FOR A BIT BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME TIME. THERE ARE MICROPHONES IN THE AISLES, AND SO I'D ENCOURAGE PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIKE TO POSE A QUESTION TO DO SO IN THAT WAY BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS BEING VIDEOCAST AND THAT'S THE WAY PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING REMOTELY WILL HAVE A CHANCE ALSO TO HEAR THEIR QUESTION. DON'T BE SHY. I DON'T THINK OUR SPEAKER HAS PROVED TO BE VERY SHY. [LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT. A LITTLE ENCOURAGEMENT. >> I DON'T THINK ENCOURAGEMENT IS QUITE THE RIGHT DESCRIPTION HERE. YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT THE STRIKING VISUAL ILLUSION. BUT ISN'T THERE THE POSSIBILITY THAT THERE'S A MORE STRIKING VISUAL ILLUSION IN THAT WHEN SOMEONE LOOKS AT THE PAINTING, THEY NEVER SEE THE WHOLE PAINTING AT ONCE? THAT THEY CONCENTRATE ON ONE PART WITH THEIR PHOBIA, AND THEY MOVE THEIR PHOBIA AROUND, AND YET YOU SEE IT AT A SINGLE PERCEPT, WITHOUT ANY IDEA THAT YOU'RE NOT EVER SEEING THE WHOLE XENO. SCENE. >> I THINK THAT PROBABLY DEPENDS ON THE SIZE OF THE PAINTING. IF IT'S A FIGURATIVE PAINTING -- AND IF IT'S A PAINTING OF A FACE, FOR EXAMPLE. TYPICALLY, PEOPLE HAVE DONE LOTS OF STUDIES INTO EYE MOVEMENTS, LOOKING AT WHERE PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT WHEN THEY LOOK AT A WORK OF ART. THEY START BY LOOKING AT THE FACE, BEGINNING PARTICULARLY WITH THE EYES AND EXPLORING THOSE, AND THEN GOING ON. BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, THEY'VE RECONSTRUCTED IT IN THEIR HEAD, WHAT THEY POINTED OUT IS THE BRAIN IS A TREMENDOUS RECONSTRUCTIVE DEVICE. NO WONDER -- YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. LOOK, I CAN SEE IMAGES OF PAINTINGS THAT I LIKE. RIGHT NOW, EVEN WITH MY EYES OPEN, I CAN RECALL CERTAIN PAINTINGS, EVEN PAINTINGS I DON'T LIKE, SO WE HAVE THIS CAPABILITY -- WE'RE MEMORIZING THE PAINTING, IT'S NOT JUST A PERCEPTUAL THING, IT'S A MEMORIAL -- [INAUDIBLE] >> PROFESSOR, I HOPE YOU EXCUSE THE SILLY QUESTION BECAUSE IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IMAGES, BUT YOU GAVE THE EXAMPLE OF HYSTERICAL PARALYSIS. IN THE BEGINNING. COULD YOU EXPLAIN TO US, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN ANYMORE IN OUR TIME? WHY WAS THIS A DISEASE OF THE TIME? WHY DON'T WE SEE DID -- >> INTERESTING, IT IS A SOCIOLOGICAL PHENOMENON. I THINK IN THOSE DAYS, PEOPLE MUST HAVE UNCONSCIOUSLY FELT THAT THIS WAS A DISEASE STATE THAT IS RECOGNIZED, AND AFTER ALL, WHEN PEOPLE REALIZED THAT THERE'S NOTHING WRONG, THEY USED OTHER FORMS OF DISORDERS, PSYCHOSOMATIC IT DISORDERS, IN ORDER TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE FAMILY AND PHYSICIANS. PEOPLE HAVE ALWAYS UNCONSCIOUSLY USED CERTAIN DEVICES TO GET HELP. IT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION. IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE IN CULTURES THAT ARE LESS -- IN WHICH THERE'S LESS COMMUNICATION, LESS SOPHISTICATION, IF THAT HYSTERICAL PARALYSIS STILL OCCURS. >> DOES THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE'RE GENETICALLY AND EPIGENETICALLY DISTINCT BASED UPON WHAT WE INHERIT AND WHAT WE EXPERIENCE SUGGEST THAT NO TWO OF US CAN EVER HAVE THE SAME BEHOLDER EFFECT OF A WORK OF ART, A PORTRAIT? >> IN THE LIMIT, YES. I DON'T THINK THE RESOLUTION IS GOING TO BE THAT FINE, BUT CERTAINLY THAT'S TRUE. BUT I THINK IN ADDITION TO THE GENETICS, NO TWO OF US HAVE HAD THE SAME LIFE EXPERIENCE. AND THE RESULT, NO TWO OF US HAVE THE IDENTICAL BRAIN BECAUSE EXPERIENCE ALTERS THE STRUCTURE THE OF THE BRAIN. SO THERE ARE TWO REASONS, TWO CLASSES OF THINKING WHY THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE BETWEEN DIFFERENT PEOPLE. THERE IS BY AND LARGE CONSENSUS ON WORKS OF ART, PEOPLE FALL INTO A GROUP, LARGE GROUP OF ENJOYING CERTAIN KINDS OF THINGS. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS INTERESTING, THIS IS REALLY VERY INTERESTING, WHEN ABSTRACT ART FIRST EMERGED FROM THE TEAM, THERE WAS DISCUSSION, BUT NOT ENORMOUS DIFFICULTY, MANY PEOPLE LIKED IT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING BEGINNING. BUT WHEN ABSTRACT MUSIC EMERGED, IT WAS SO DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO ENJOY IT THAT THEY COULDN'T DO IT. SO THERE IS AN INTRINSIC SPOT THAT LIMITS -- BECAME MUCH MORE CONSERVATIVE. >> THIS ATTEMPT TO LINK THE SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES, IT SORT OF STARTED IN ANCIENT GREECE, THE FIRST PHILOSOPHERS, MATHEMATICIANS AND PHILOSOPHERS, AND NOW WE'RE SORT OF GOING TO AN ERA WHERE THAT'S HAPPENING AGAIN, DO YOU THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE OF AN ATIB TEMPT FOR ATTEMPT FR OM THE PHILOSOPHY ASPECT TO ANSWER THE MORE SCIENTIFIC QUESTIONS? >> I SEE IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. I THINK THAT WITH RARE EXCEPTION, PHILOSOPHY OF MIND HAS MERGED WITH COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY INTO A SINGLE CAN DISCIPLINE, AND -- I THINK THOSE PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS, THE NATURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS, WE SEE A CORPUS OF NEUROBIOLOGY, THE PEBEHOLDER'S SHARE, WE SEE AS THE CORPUS OF NEUROBIOLOGY. I DON'T THINK I'VE GIVEN DEEP INSIGHT INTO IT, I'VE JUST STARTED TO PROBE IT, BUT I THINK THERE IS A CONSENSUS THAT THERE IS A COMMON SCIENTIFIC APPROACH THAT HAS A FILL OF SOF CAL QUESTION BUILT INTO IT THAT IS -- BY MOST THINKING SCIENTISTS. >> PROFESSOR KANDEL, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE BOOK YOU HAVE WRITTEN. I REALLY ENJOY IT. OF COURSE I APPRECIATE TO HAVE ART WE HAVE TO HAVE A BODY THAT HAS A SOUL. STUDYING YOUR BOOK ON THE AUTO MEMORY AND IN PARTICULAR HOW MEMORY RESIDES WITHIN YOUR BODY, SOMEWHERE, NEURONS, SO ON, AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT'S YOUR DEFINITION OF SOUL? WITH SOUL, WE HAVE TO BE RESIDE WITHIN THE BODY AND OUTSIDE THE BODY. AND WHAT'S YOUR DEFINITION OF SOUL IN RELATION TO YOUR RESEARCH? >> YOU REALIZE THAT THIS IS A PHILOSOPHICAL RELIGIOUS QUESTION OF WHICH THERE IS NO SIMPLE ANSWER. I CAN TELL YOU MOST SCIENTISTS BELIEVE AND MOST BRAIN SCIENTISTS, WE FEEL THAT THE SOUL IS A REFLECTION OF A FUNCTIONING OF THE BRAIN, SO WE THINK THERE IS NOT A -- BETWEEN A SOUL AND A BRAIN, THE BRAIN CONTROLS REFLEX BEHAVIOR AND ALL THE WON IT DER FULL QUALITIES OF BEING LOVED, HAVING LOVE, IS CARRIED OUT P BY SOMETHING ELSE, ALL OVER THIS IT PART OF CENTRAL MACHINERY THAT REPRESENTS THOSE HIGHER ASPIRATIONS. THEY'RE JUST AS WONDERFUL BUT THEY'RE ALL BIOLOGICALLY BASED. THIS IS WHAT MOST OF US THINK. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> SIR, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE THEORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS VERY, VERY BRIEFLY, BUT ALSO IN PASSING, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE DIFFICULTY OF COMPUTERS DOING FACE RECOGNITION. DO YOU HAVE VIEWS -- FURTHER ADVANCE WHETHER THERE WILL BE SOME THEORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS, OF SOME ACTUAL CONSCIOUSNESS REACHED BY NON-BIOLOGICAL ENTITIES? >> I WOULD BE SKEPTICAL BUT IT'S UNLIKELY. BUT YOU CAN'T PREDICT. AT THE MOMENT, I TELL YOU, AND THIS IS NOT AN AREA I'M REALLY COMPETENT IN, SHALLOW KNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE. COMPUTER SCIENTISTS HAVE LEARNED A SURPRISING AMOUNT FROM BRAIN SCIENTISTS. FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE THINGS THEY CHARACTERIZE AS BRAIN SCIENCE IS SOMETHING CALLED PARALLEL PROCESSES. TWO STREAMS IN THE VISUAL SYSTEM, ONE CONCERNED WITH THE ANALYSIS OF THE IMAGE -- CONCERN WITH WHERE THE IMAGE IS. THIS PARALLEL PROCESS SPEEDS UP THE PROCESSING -- THE DISCOVERY OF PARALLEL PROCESSING THE BRAIN STIMULATED COMPUTER SCIENTISTS TO START USING PARALLEL PROCESSING, MORE EXTENSIVELY THAN THEY HAD BEFORE TO SPEED UP COMPUTER PROCESSING. SO I THINK THIS IS A VERY PRODUCTIVE DIALOGUE. I THINK WE HAVE A LOT TO LEARN FROM COMPUTER SCIENTISTS, TO BUILD MODELS, NEWER BIOLOGICALLY -- MIGHT GIVE NEW IDEAS -- [INAUDIBLE] BUT WHETHER -- WILL BE THE POSSIBILITY TO HAVE THE IDEA OF INDEPENDENT CONSCIENCE EXPERIENCE -- I'M SKEPTICAL BUT WHO KNOWS. >> THANK YOU. >> BY THE WAY, I SHOULD SAY ONE THING. THERE WAS A GUY CALLED -- WHO WAS AT THE NIH, WHEN I WAS HERE, '57 TO '60, WAS ONE OF THE EARLY PEOPLE IN THIS FIELD AND THAT IS TO TRY TO COMBINE SORT OF MATHEMATICAL BIOLOGY WITH NEUROSCIENCE. OR JUST SORT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE. THEORETICAL NEUROSCIENCE, IN THE EARLY DAYS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THIS ONE GROUP HERE, MOST THE OF THE -- IS NOT VERY GOOD BECAUSE YOU CAN DEVELOP MODELS OF ANYTHING, YOU'VE GOT TO SHOW THAT IT'S RIGHT, AND WHAT YOU DO IS TO MAKE PREDICTIONS THAT YOU CAN TEST BIOLOGICALLY IN SWORD OF A FEET BACK BETWEEN THE FEEDBACK BETWEE N THEORY AND -- THIS HAS CHANGED. WHICH IS HAVING A TERRIFIC IMPACT. THE EUROPEAN -- WHICH FELT WE SHOULD GET A COMPUTER MODEL OF THE HU HUMAN MIND. MOST -- FAR OUT, ALMOST RIDICULOUS -- HERE BECAUSE OF OUR LEADERSHIP, WE'VE TAKEN A MORE CONSERVATIVE APPROACH TRYING TO DEVELOP A ME HOD ITOLOGY TO WORK OA METHOD TOWORK ON NEURAL CIRCUIT, THE SOLUTION IS THE APPROPRIATE WORD FOR AN ENORMOUS TASK. >> THANK YOU, SIR, FOR THE PRESENTATION, THE TALK. REFERRING BACK TO E.P. SNOW THAT YOU MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING, AND YOU'RE TALK INCLUDED A LOT OF EXAMPLES WHERE THERE ARE ARTISTS OF 1900s, VIENNA, TOOK A LOT OF IDEAS THAT -- FREUD OR VIENNA MEDICAL SCHOOL. ARE THERE ANY EXAMPLES WHERE THE IDEAS FIRST AN ART AND THEN THE SCIENTISTS TAKE IT IN AN OPPOSITE DIRECTION, THE BRIDGE THAT WAS IN THE INTRODUCTION IN BOTH WAY, EITHER IN 19TH CENTURY VIENNA -- >> DOES ART STIMULATE SIGH ?ENS >> THE WAY KLIMT TOOK IDEAS FROM SCIENCE INCLUDED IN HIS IMAGES, A LOT OF -- >> I'M LOOKING AT THIS THING THINKING, BEHOLDER'S SHARE, THAT'S AN INTERESTING PROBLEM. MANY PEOPLE ARE DOING THAT. BUT I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO RAISE ANOTHER ISSUE. I DIDN'T IN THIS TALK EMPHASIZE THE EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH USED BY ARTISTS. I'VE RECENTLY BECOME INTERESTED IN THE NEW YORK EXPRESSIONIST, JACKSON POLLACK -- YOU CAN SEE AS THEY MOVE FROM CONFIGURATION, ABSTRACTION, THEY'RE PLAYING AROUND ALL THE TIME, VERY MUCH AS WE DO IN THE LAB. SO I THINK E.P. SNOW'S -- IT'S A LONG TIME AGO, BUT THAT DICHOTOMY IS TOO HARSHLY DRAWN, AND BOTH -- AND IT'S GREAT I'VE HAD SEVERAL EXPERIENCES LIKE THIS. ARTISTS WANT TO INTERACT WITH SCIENTISTS IN ORDER TO LEARN FROM. I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. WHICH INVOLVES ME. DO ANY OF YOU HERE KNOW JEFF KOONS' WORK? EXCELLENT. HE ASKED ME TO WRITE AN ESSAY FOR HIS CATALOG FOR RETROSPECTIVE -- AND I IT TURNED IT DOWN, I FELT I DIDN'T KNOW HIS ART WELL ENOUGH, AND WHEN I KNEW -- I WASN'T THAT IMPRESSED WITH -- SO HE CAME BACK AT ME A SECOND TIME AND HE SAID, I HAVE TWO SMALL EXHIBITIONS GOING ON IN NEW YORK, WHY DON'T YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THEM. AND THEY WERE VERY INTERESTING. THERE WERE ST STATUES HE HAD DONE, AND THEY CONTAINED A SOBERING FORM. WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE STATUE AND YOU SAW THE BALL, YOU SAW YOURSELF IN THE BALL. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? >> HE SCULPTED YOU. >> THE BEHOLDER BECOMES PART OF THE WORK OF ART. I WROTE THAT TO KOONS, HE WENT OFF THE WALL. SO WE ACTUALLY HAD A DISCUSSION IN STOCKHOLM, HE NOW HAS -- SO WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS. SO THERE IS INCREASING INTERACTION, AND I THINK HISTORICALLY, ARTISTS HAVE WORKED ON CAMPUS AND NOW I THINK THEY'VE GOT TO WORK ON SCIENTIFIC CAMPUSES. WE HAVE A FAIRLY LARGE BUILDING COMING UP WITH -- SCIENCES, AND WE HOPE -- MUSICAL ARTISTS AS WELL AS WITH PAINTERS. >> THANK YOU. >> THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AUDITORIUM HAS COME TO LIFE. PLEASE. >> WELCOME. >> THANK YOU. GREAT TALK. YOU'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE IN ART BUT I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD COMMENT A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE OF SIGH EBBS, SAY IN DATA RESULTS OR THINGS LIKE THAT. >> OH, MY GOD. I THINK WE'RE ALL DI -- [LAUGHTER] >> I THINK THE SIGN OF A SCIENTIST IS HIS ABILITY TO REALLY GENERATE THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE. I THINK ONE OF THE PLEASURES OF SCIENCE IS BEING PART OF A MOVE MOVEMENT. SEE THE -- MOVE NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THE LITTLE STEPS THAT YOU MAKE, BUT THE LITTLE STEPS WE ALL MAKE WHICH TOGETHER MAKE SIGNIFICANT MOVEMENT. LOOK WHERE NEUROSCIENCE HAS MOVED IN OUR GENERATION. WE DIDN'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT -- AT ALL AND THERE'S BEEN ENORMOUS PROGRESS. EACH OF US HAS CONTRIBUTED A SMALL AMOUNT, BUT WE GET PLEASURE, THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE OF THE WHOLE THING. AND THAT, YOU GET TO ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS OF BELONGING TO IT A SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. >> ONE MORE QUESTION OVER HERE. >> YOU HAVE ISSUE OR PERCEPTION OF A BEAUTIFUL PICTURE. SO HOW MUCH OF IT IS IN THE CONSCIOUS MIND VERSUS SUBCONSCIOUS MIND? I THOUGHT THAT I WILL HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE IN TERMS OF THE -- AND THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THESE TWO SO THAT SOMETIMES IN MY DREAMS, SOME OF IT MIGHT COME UP. SO HOW DOES THE SUBCONSCIOUS MIND -- >> WHEN YOU RESPOND TO SOMETHING, YOU DON'T KNOW TO WHAT DEGREE YOUR UNCONSCIOUS IS INFLUENCING THAT. IT'S PROBABLY DOING THAT A GREAT DEAL. YOU SEE SOMETHING WHICH IS VERY PRETTY -- MUCH OF YOUR THINKING IS UNCONSCIOUS. SO THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE HAS A LARGE UNCONSCIOUS COMPONENT. I THINK WE'RE IN A POSITION NOW TO SEPARATE THOSE THINGS OUT BUT I THINK -- >> IS THERE ANY WAY TO SEPARATE THESE? ARE THEY PART OF THE BRAIN, ULTIMATELY THE INFORMATION STORED SOMEWHERE, SO BY -- THE HIPPOCAMPUS, COULD YOU BELIEVE THE FUNCTION OF THE SUBCONSCIOUS AND UNCONSCIOUS MIND? >> I DON'T THINK -- WE'RE BEGINNING TO GET SOME UNDERSTANDING, WE KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE -- A GREAT SCIENTIST IN WHICH HE EXPOSED ACTUALLY LIKE A WORK OF ART, HE SHOWED AN IMAGE OF YOU VERY BRIEFLY -- IF YOU'RE ONLY EXPOSED FOR A COUPLE OF MICRO SECONDS, I DON'T SEE YOU, BUT IF YOU IMAGE MY BRAIN, THE BACK OF THE BRAIN, WHERE THE VISUAL INFORMATION COMES IN, SO IT REACHES THE -- CORE EX-IT, COMPLETELY UNAWARE. SO UNCONSCIOUS PROCESSES INVOLVE CORTEX AS WELL. IF I REPEAT IT AND YOU ALLOW ME TO SEE YOU, DISTINGUISHED AS YOU ARE, STANDING THERE, THAT INFORMATION SPREADS FROM SITE OF INITIATION TO COVER THE WHOLE CORTEX, AND THIS IS THOUGHT TO BE A CONSCIOUS FEATURE, SO IT INVOLVES OTHER AREAS OF THE BRAIN. SORT OF A GLOBAL WORK SPACE. -- HAS DONE THIS, STUDIED WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE -- AND THE GENERAL THINKING IS CONSCIOUSLY YOU CAN ONLY DECIDE BETWEEN SORT OF TWO ALTERNATIVES. UNCONSCIOUSLY -- IT'S A DIFFERENT -- BUT IT'S A FASCINATING AREA, I DON'T THINK -- BUT THIS IS CERTAINLY IT GOING TO MOVE ALONG IN THE NEXT IT DECADES. >> SO NEXT TIME I LOOK AT THE PICTURE WITH THE WHOLE BRAIN. >> YOU'RE ALWAYS LOOKING WITH THE WHOLE BRAIN. THE QUESTION IS WHICH PART IS DOING WHAT. >> YEAH. >> OH, HECK, WE'LL TAKE ONE MORE QUESTION. >> IT'S A GOOD TALK. SOMETIMES, MAYBE MOST OF THE TIME, ARTISTS ALREADY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO PAINT, THE PAINTERS, SO LET'S SAY SOMETIMES IF WE GIVE SOMEBODY TO PAINT IMAGE AND HE IT DRAW SOMETHING, IS IT POSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND THIS STATE OF MIND, SUBCONSCIOUS OR THE CONSCIOUS MIND, AND TO UNDERSTAND SOME KIND OF DISEASE OR SOMETHING? IS THERE ANY STUDY OF THAT KIND? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> IS IT POSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND THE STATE OF MIND BY LOOKING AT SOMEONE'S PAINTING AT A CERTAIN POINT OF TIME? >> OH, THIS IS FASCINATING. I SPENT THE HOLIDAYS IN EUROPE. MY WIFE IS FRENCH SO WE SPEND TIME IN PARIS. ON THE WAY THERE, WE STOPPED OFF TO GIVE A LECTURE IN HEIDELBERG. HEIDELBERG, THERE'S A WONDERFUL MUSEUM THERE THAT WAS STARTED BY A PSYCHIATRIST WHO COLLECTED PAINTINGS OF PSYCHOTIC PEOPLE. AND HE DIDN'T JUST USE THOSE FROM HEIDELBERG, THERE WERE SEVERAL, BUT HE ASKED -- HE SAID THERE ARE 500 -- PAINTINGS AND THEY'RE QUITE AMAZING. AND THAT IS -- PUBLISHED A BOOK ON THIS, IN 1920s, 19 AGAIN TWO, AND -- THE ARTISTIC COMMUNITY BECAME FASCINATED WITH IT. WE NOW REALIZE THERE'S A DISEASE CALLED FRO FRONTOTEMPORAL DEMENTIA, WHICH IS AMAZING, ON THE LEFT SIDE, OUTBURST OF CREATIVITY, IT FITS IN WITH THIS WHOLE THEORY WHICH MANY PEOPLE -- INTERACT WITH ONE ANOTHER AND INHIBIT ONE ANOTHER, SO THE LEFT HEMISPHERE IS THOUGHT TO BE LOGIC AND LANGUAGE AND THE RIGHT HEMISPHERE TENDS TO BE MORE CREATIVITY WITH EMOTION. THE FRONTOTEMPORAL DMEN IT SHA, THE LEFT HEMISPHERE IS DAMAGED IN THE -- REGION. -- INCREASED OUTBURST IT TO IT USE NEW COLORS, NEW DEVICES TO PAINT. SO YOU SEE WITH MANY KINDS OF DISORDERS -- FLIES AROUND, WASHINGTON, D.C., HELICOPTER FOR A HALF AN HOUR, ONE MONTH DRAWING EVERY SINGLE BUILDING WITH EVERY SINGLE WINDOW IN AMAZING DETAIL. SO PEOPLE WITH BRAIN CAN DISORDERS HAVE CAPABILITIES. SO ONE THING IT MEANS IS THAT CREATIVITY IS SO BROAD -- AREAS DAMAGED, OTHER AREAS CAN STILL BE USEFUL. AND THAT THERE'S A GREAT DEAL TO BE LEARNED. >> THANK YOU. >> SO ALL OF YOU INTERESTED IN LEARNING EVEN MORE ABOUT THESE INSIGHTS, I SHOULD POINT OUT THERE ARE SIGNED COPIES OF THE BOOK AVAILABLE IN THE BOOK STORE AS ERIC HAS PUT HIS NAME TO PICKING ONE UP, FOR A PRICE, OFTEN, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE FREE, BUT I THINK WE ALL REALLY ARE IN YOUR DEBT FOR A FASCINATING TIME HERE, AND YOU HAVE ALLOWED US TO BE PART IN A VERY PLEASURABLE WAY OF THE BEHOLDER'S SHARE OF YOUR ART AND YOUR SCIENCE. LET US THANK AGAIN PROFESSOR KANDEL. [APPLAUSE]