Ramachandran’s Phantoms in the Brain

Being one of the world’s top neuroscientists, Professor Ramachandran’s claim to fame stems from his theory surrounding phantoms in the brain. That is, Ramachandran gives us his accounts where brain dysfunction has led to bizarre physiological symptoms.

In his book Phantoms in the Brain, Ramachandran presents several cases supporting his claim such as the part where he discusses “somatoparaphrenia” where the patients manifest symptoms of denying that certain parts of their bodies actually belong to them. More specifically, Ramachandran explains that the Kluver-Bucy syndrome creates a lack of discrimination with regard to what is eaten what is considered sexual which is seen as a product of a damage to the temporal lobe.

            Ramachandran’s book is an easy read and makes it points across very efficiently. Because of this, one can easily understand the cases described by Ramachandran in the book as he presents the symptoms of his patients with detail as well as some of his seemingly cruel experiments with some of his patients in order to find out exactly what is happening.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified writer

Proficient in: Brain

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Moreover, readers can easily observe that Ramachandran does not refer much to theory as he largely focuses on the actuality of the symptoms of his patients.

That approach, however, may be misleading simply because there is hardly any discernible differences between what is established and accepted and what is purely a product of human speculation. One case is when Ramachandran further extends his theory behind the mechanism of the phantom limbs to foot fetishes thereby placing hints of speculations into the subject matter of his book.

            The cases of phantom limbs—limbs described to be “the amputee’s experience of the continued presence of a limb which has been lost (Simmel, 1958, p. 492)”—may have obtained an initial break into the medical field during the World War eras and the years that followed. As Feldman (1940) observed, “so large was the number of limb-amputations in the World War—it was estimated at 60,000—that psychologists were called upon to help deal with the many problems growing out of this mass-mutilation (p. 590).”

            As Ramachandran tells us, “the study of phantom limbs offers fascinating glimpses of the architecture of the human brain, its astonishing capacity for growth and renewal (p. 38).” Thus, Ramachandran gives us the implicit observation that ‘phantom limbs’ is perhaps a gateway for us understand the capacities and limitations of the human brain. By giving a careful consideration into the things which involve the mind, then there may be a reason to believe that the case of phantom limbs is just one part of the complex whole which mystifies our beliefs in many ways.

            More importantly, Ramachandran’s study regarding phantom limbs also touches not only on those ‘limbs’ but on occasions where certain sensations of pain are felt on those phantom limbs. In fact, the expositions of Ramachandran are not the first of their kind because “for over a hundred years, physicians have reported that amputees not only continue to feel their amputated limbs,” observing that “they often suffer cramping, burning, and shooting pains in specific regions of those limbs (Seachrist, 1995, p. 62).

” Thus, it won’t be of any surprise on the part of Professor Ramachandran to actually take notice of existing previous studies and records concerning phantom limbs. It must be the case that prior to his work on the book Phantoms in the Brain, Ramachandran must have had read earlier accounts of phantom limbs apart from his direct dealing with individuals who have experienced limb sensations even after undergoing amputation.

            Even though there is an increasing interest over what appears to be one of the neglected areas in the sciences which study the human brain, the reasons behind phantom limbs “remain uncertain, and medical attempts to ease phantom-limb pain usually fail (Bower, 1995, p. 357.”

Perhaps the importance of studying phantom limbs in general or more specifically the importance of the book of Ramachandran can be seen in the light of the increase in the discovery of actual cases of people with phantom limbs. It is therefore of equal significance to give a heightened sense of interest in investigating phantom limbs and other instances of phantoms in the brain in order to provide a thorough and substantial information explaining these things.

            There is at least one important question that Ramachandran posits in his book: “is it possible that their brains undergo some form of remapping as seen in phantom limb patients? (Ramachandran, 1998, p. 196)” It is a question that, when rightfully answered, can recreate the way in which we understand the capabilities of the human mind and the manner in which we comprehend the sensations and perceptions that our minds have been giving us all these times. While studying phantom limbs may inevitably touch on the scope of the functions of the human brain, it also gives way to possible remedies in relieving the pain and suffering of those who experience phantom limbs.

            Phantoms in the Brain gives a fascinating view of the workings of the human brain as well as the unusual beliefs of individuals who experienced brain damage in several distinct cases. In some cases, the book explores how human brains were ‘remapped’ because of limbs that were amputated. Not only does the book give a straightforward narration of the cases involved.

It also gives a lighthearted, and oftentimes entertaining and philosophical insight concerning the essence of the most-often debated concepts of ‘self’ and ‘consciousness’ of human beings. The book also provides graphical illustrations of the human brain in order to further give the readers a closer perspective of what the book is tackling. There are also a number of interesting visual experiments which the readers can replicate on their own, thereby giving the readers a personal ‘feel’ of the experiments of Ramachandran.

            One interesting implication point in the book is that while it espouses the idea that our brain is at the center of everything in our lives, from sensory feelings to consciousness, it also brings about the idea that all the sensory perceptions of human beings are mere illusions. That is, the spiritual feelings towards God, feelings of pain as well as the sense of certainty derived from the temporal lobes of the brain are illusions from the interactions of the numerous functions of the brain.

            In general, the book offers the readers a glimpse of some of the most unusual syndromes caused by injuries inflicted on the brain. One instance is when Ramachandran gives the example of HM who, after undergoing surgery on his temporal lobes, has been cured of epilepsy.

As a result, HM has experienced permanent anterograde amnesia. Another instance provided by Ramachandran is the case of Phineas Gage whose frontal lobes were removed due to a tamping iron made him a nasty person. In both cases as well as with the others, Ramachandran covers numerous areas resulting from the neuroscience components of medicine, giving a series of explanations for these syndromes by the use of neuroanatomy. He also gives a fair reference and bibliography sections to support his ideas and arguments in his book.

Works Cited

Bower, B. (1995). Brain Changes Linked to Phantom-Limb Pain. Science News, 147(23), 357.

Feldman, S. (1940). Phantom Limbs. The American Journal of Psychology, 53(4), 590.

Ramachandran, V. S., Blakeslee, S., & Sacks, O. (1998). Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publisher Inc.

Seachrist, L. (1995). Mimicking the Brain. Science News, 148(4), 62.

Simmel, M. L. (1958). The Conditions of Occurrence of Phantom Limbs. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 102(5), 492.