Marr and Reductionism

David Marr's three-level method for completely understanding a cognitive system and the importance he attaches to the computational level are so familiar as to scarcely need repeating. Fewer seem to recognize that Marr defends his famous method by criticizing the “reductionistic approach.” This sets up a more interesting relationship between Marr and reductionism than is usually acknowledged. I argue that Marr was correct in his criticism of the reductionists of his time—they were only describing (cellular activity), not explaining (cognitive functions). But a careful metascientific account of reductionistic neuroscience over the past two decades reveals that Marr's criticisms no longer have force. Contemporary neuroscience now explains cognition directly, although in a fashion—causal-mechanistically—quite different than Marr recommended. So while Marr was correct to reject the reductionism of his day and offer an alternative method for genuinely explaining cognition, contemporary cognitive scientists now owe us a new defense of Marr's famous method and the advantages of its explanations over the type now pursued successfully in current reductionist neuroscience. There are familiar reasons for thinking that this debt will not be paid easily.     

The effect of Origanum majorana tea on motor and non-motor symptoms in patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease: A randomized controlled pilot study

AimsThe effect of Origanum majorana tea consumption on motor and non-motor symptoms was investigated in patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease, measured by validated tools.MethodsSixty patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease and under conventional medication were enrolled voluntarily in the study. All participants were randomized on double-blind to placebo or Origanum majorana. Clinical assessment with validated tools (UPDRSIII, NMSS, and BDI) was done before Origanum majorana or placebo consumption (Day 0) and at the end of the experiment (Day 30).ResultsThe treatment groups were similar at baseline on demographic and clinical variables. During the course of study, nine participants withdrew for reasons of noncompliance and inability to follow-up. Fifty-one participants completed the study. Upon completion of 30 days of treatment, Origanum majorana tea consumption did not decrease the UPDRSIII score ([UPDRSIII^] D0 = 18.76 ± 8.58, D30 = 16.52 ± 7.96, p = 0.069) at the p value was 0.07. However, a statistically significant improvement was noted in NMSS and BDI scores (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively). Assessment of the UPDRSIII, NMSS and BDI scores of the patients did not reflect any improvement with placebo. No side effect was detected during the study^.ConclusionThese findings show improvement of depressive and non-motor signs in patients with Parkinson's disease in the group that consumed Origanum majorana tea in combination with conventional therapy. Improvement of motor signs may need an extended treatment period. However, more research with a large number of participants and lasting longer than 1 month is needed to argue these findings.