Well cited in the book I referenced (It's amusing to me how many people attempted to call me out on 'psuedoscience' and how I'm at -1 on the original post, despite the book I cited being a well-known, well-respected, and blisteringly well-cited authoritative work that covers both biochemistry and neuroscience. The dogma here and lack of scientific knowledge is incredible).
Pages 199 - 136 covers it and the root problem of "how do you divide up the brain in the first place, in an accurate and meaningful way" which turns out to not be as easy as it sounds (obviously) and is certainly not as easy as neuroscientists apparently treat it. You can find the original papers from the 1800s and 1980s in the bibilography.
fao_|4 years ago
Pages 199 - 136 covers it and the root problem of "how do you divide up the brain in the first place, in an accurate and meaningful way" which turns out to not be as easy as it sounds (obviously) and is certainly not as easy as neuroscientists apparently treat it. You can find the original papers from the 1800s and 1980s in the bibilography.