Q&A - The Science of Stress: From Psychology to Physiology

preview_player
Показать описание
Vincent Walsh, Joe Herbert, Julie Turner-Cobb and Shane O'Mara take questions from the audience on the science of stress.

Vincent Walsh is a neuroscientist at University College London interested in finding out how the brain works. He is particularly fascinated by the the things we take for granted, like dealing with stressful situations.

Joe Herbert is interested in the role of the brain in adaptive responses, with particular reference to the reciprocal interaction between hormones and the brain. He is a Professor at the Department of Clinical Neurosciences at the University of Cambridge.

Shane O'Mara is Professor of Experimental Brain Research in Trinity College Dublin. His research focuses on the relations between cognition, synaptic plasticity and behaviour, in the context of brain aging and depression.

Julie Turner-Cobb is Professor of Psychology at Bournemouth University. She researches the effects of psychosocial factors, particularly stress, coping and social support, on endocrine functioning across a range of acute and chronic health conditions in adults and children.

Комментарии
Автор

A pleasurable discussion of pain. Thank you Ri.

recklessroges
Автор

"Breaking the will" does seem like a myth after hearing the explanation. However when people used to get a slave to do what they want by basically torturing them, that did seem to work. In that case isn't "breaking the will" another way of saying conditioning by punishment? Thus not rendering it a myth.
I do realise the talk was about getting information through torture nevertheless they did reject the premise of 'breaking will' completely.
By the way I don't in any way endorse torture but that should go without saying

Mearch
Автор

What happened to neurology? Are people still insisting the study of something can be turned into a science?

Honestly, I understand there are plenty of ways to manipulate the economy but that isn't a real science either. There will always be unknown factors because we cannot measure that which we cannot sense.

Like trying to explain the color red to a person who has never known sight. Am I wrong about that? I'm sure I'm wrong about a lot of things, like everyone else, but this all seems pretty anecdotal.

PreciousBoxer