''EXPLORATORY WORKSHOP FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH & EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS IN COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE & PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY IN EUROPE''

March 8th , 2008, Nivelles, Belgium.

Opening Keynote: Round Table 4 Strategy of dissemination of research results (part 2 the website) Reaching Out: crossing boundaries & the importance of being interdisciplinary by Dr. Vasileios BASIOS (vbasios@ulb.ac.be)
Interdisciplinary Center for Nonlinear Phenomena & Complex Systems, Universit Libre de Bruxelles, CeNoLi-ULB.

Dear Delegates, dear friends and colleagues, In a thorough manner during the previous presentations we went through the objectives and scope of our federation's activities and its raison d'tre. I want to express my thanks for such a clear and rich thinking that went on during the last round table sessions. What has been articulated here is not only important from the point of view of information offered, ideas shared and insight attained it is extremely valuable, also, because it points to what we all aspire our federation to achieve. That is to meet the challenges at hand presented by the contemporary cognitive neuroscience research and development. In the presence of such an impressive array of workers and scholars, which are gathered here, today, as representatives of all the European learned societies of the field, one cannot but feel optimistic for the future of our science within our European family and intellectual heritage. We must now turn our attention to the dissemination of the knowledge stemming from Cognitive Neuroscience and Psychophysiology. Knowledge consolidated in the past, produced right now and -unavoidably- emerging in the future. Of course the sources from which this knowledge emanates and the channels through which this knowledge diffuses within our discipline and towards the other sciences and the society at large are well understood and discussed already during the previous round table discussions. Publications, workshops, symposia and conferences as well as educational materials are all fundamental means absolutely essential to utilize. But the list will be wanting and definitely incomplete if we did not include the dissemination of research results and the reaching out to larger audiences through cyberspace. In our days our active presence on the Internet, the great wide web of information and knowledge is a ''sine qua non'' of any modern scientific endeavour. Especially when this scientific endeavour is almost entirely depending on public funding either at the National or European levels. It is only by reaching out and by enriching the public awareness with what ourselves aspire to comprehend and achieve, as well as informing it about the benefits, applications, milestones and challenges associated with our work, that we can expect continuous support and encouragement for our work. Being actively present and open to academia and public alike would also ensure the necessary feedback and attention of the new generation. This way the students of today would become colleagues and contributors to our science in the future.

This outreach via dissemination possesses administrative, legal and technical aspects. It also has an epistemic or 'strategic' aspect. The legal and administrative aspects have been covered during our previous discussions and constitute points to ponder further on. Moreover, given the fact that far better equipped and more competent experts than myself will talk for the technical aspects of how to efficiently guarantee our dynamic presence in cyberspace, dear friends and colleagues let me share some thoughts of mine about the other aspects of result dissemination, that of an epistemic and strategic concern. In the year 1962, just one year before Sir John Eccles was nominated for the Nobel Prize for his work on chemical transmission at synapses in the spinal cord and brain, the young -then- Maxwell Bennett met the great neuroscientist. Here is how he remembers the encounter 1: He asked me what I was doing and replied 'electrical engineering', to which he responded, 'Excellent, you should join me, as every first-rate neurophysiology laboratory needs a very good solderer' ... and Bennet continues to add something really remarkable ... I believe that every first-rate cognitive neuroscience laboratory now needs a very good critical, analytical philosopher! This demand for a helping hand from philosophy would have come as a great surprise if we were not reminded of the inherent interdisciplinary nature of cognitive neuroscience. Just recall that the classic composite term 'psychophysiology' which our federation retains in its title points to the origins of a science poised on the boundaries of the subjective (psychology) and the objective (physiology). What a greater divide of disciplines than that in our collective intellectual heritage. Yet, from its foundations Cognitive Neuroscience's research imperative was to bridge this barrier. In the course of development of this science one discipline after the other were called to augment the investigative arsenal of research and development. Physics, biology, chemistry, social sciences, linguistics and lately complexity studies were called in to furnish and enlarge the understanding of phenomena in cognition, perception, memory and to combat the dreadful burden of brain diseases -dementia, schizophrenia and depression- to name a few generic categories. NMR, EEG, PeT-scans and the like are by now the tangible powerful diagnostic tools which have become almost household names, due to the distinctive interdisciplinary approach adopted within neurosciences. But this comes with a price, and the price to pay is that of an elevated awareness of the limited universality that each selected approach and proposed paradigm comes along. To use the words of the accomplished neuroscientist Daniel Robinson 1, The cosmos is ablaze with facts, the great plurality of them beyond our senses and even our ken. Out of that fierce and brilliant fire, we pull a few bits the visible or nearly visible ones and begin to weave a story. On rare occasions, the story is so systematic, so true to others, and soon we are possessed of utterly prophetic powers as to which ones will come out next. It is the philosopher, however who must put the brakes on enthusiasms of the story-tellers for, left to their own devices, they might conjure a future that vindicates only our current confusions. The philosopher whom Robinson is invoking though is not necessarily a professional one. In my view it is the active worker on the field who has to raise to the task. It suffices that one becomes aware of one's own conceptual presuppositions. Furthermore to become aware of one's own school, chosen approach or paradigm and the influence of the collective conceptual presuppositions at hand. Different approaches towards comprehending phenomena need not to be exclusive. Once we realize that any other approach reflects a different given and that any given is just a part of the truth carved out by 1Neuroscience and Philosophy, Brain Mind & Language M. Bennett, D. Dennett, P. Hacker, J. Searle,
contributors. Introduction and conclusion by D. Robinson. Columbia University Press, NY, (2007).

our particular choice of approach we immediately become richer. For we can now not only merely tolerate 'the other school of thought' but also celebrate our differences becoming aware of them and becoming open to an ever present dialogue. It is this invaluable dialectic that our website should sustain, encourage and promote fearlessly and vigorously. The practical ways are there and waiting our own adoption of an open mind and our honest desire to engage in discussion. Certain other attractive issues, them being either central or peripheral to the research carried out by the members of our federation could be addressed from our web-presence. It is my understanding that these issues are better served when addressed in an 'ad hoc' manner. That is to say, interested individuals or centers must have the opportunity and the technical support to open and invite to the discussion any other interested party. Here are some of these issues that come to mind, the list being far from exhaustive or complete.

The need for a scientific language capable of describing first as well as third person perspective. Or how to accommodate within a scientific language both subjective and objective experiences. A key issue that Cognitive Neuroscience, as we know, has been is dealing with from the time of its conception. Cognition and Consciousness, Time and Space, Complexity and Emergence, Entropy and Information, are presently at the frontier of fundamental research in the sciences. Despite that, they cannot be defined in exclusively objective quantitative terms. The reason is simple. These areas constitute also the ultimate prerequisites for the observations carried out in their name. As Prigogine once remarked, "you cannot do non-linear mathematics with a linear mind". It is here were the need of developing a new kind of scientific language --and why not new kind of mathematics and logic-- which would touch not only our own field but which would have repercussions to the wider scientific community. The issue of cognition and consciousness of non-human animals as subjects of research. What are the cognitive components that we share with the other inhabitants of our planet, especially the higher developed mammals? The imperative of better comprehending animal nature could only be of the greater benefit of comprehending our own human nature. This, too, will definitely draw the attention of the most active and creative minds form all sciences and sectors of our society. Last but not least is the issue of Complexity (here comes my own professional bias). Complexity emerges as a new, post-Newtonian and post-Cartesian paradigm and as one of the major scientific challenges for the 21st century. As added value beyond its fundamental interest it offers an array of unifying methodologies for an innovative approach. Over the last fifteen years, complex systems research has modified considrable the scientific landscape. The brain has been described as the 'most complex object in the known universe' so it is natural to try to apply tools and methodologies from complex systems to neurosciences. With great success so far nonlinear time series analysis has been a fruitful scientific enterprise when applied to the dynamics of cognitive components. Complex network analysis is emerging strong too. What other applications lay on the road? Indeed, this could be a meeting point pregnant of possibilities.

I am sure that all of you have many more ideas and insights, propositions and strategies that we should and must develop discuss and adopt as common research interests. With the help of our highly capable web-developers I am sure we will find the optimal implementation to a live and emancipating webpresence for our federation's aims. Let our minds to be open, and let us open the floor to the discussion!