To begin to understand the brain, we need to first identify what we don’t know

In trying to brainstorm a list of unsolved problems in neuroscience, I read the a multitude of sources and asked around. This yields a predictable list ranging from ‘how can we cure psychiatric illness?’ to ‘what is consciousness?’. Asking Caltech faculty added entries about how networks function and what neural computation is. Caltech students had things figured out and got straight to the point (‘how can I sleep less?’, ‘how can we save our species?’, ‘can we become immortal?’). Next, I distill my own idiosyncratic list from all of this (admittedly biased towards cognitive neuroscience). Note that some future questions build on prior ones: we need to understand psychiatric illnesses before we can cure them, and whole-brain microscopic-resolution imaging of the zebrafish brain (100,000 neurons; done, although temporal resolution will improve) needs to come before we do the same for the mouse brain (70,000,000 neurons), let alone the human brain (80,000,000,000 neurons).

Some argue that we can only understand the brain once we know how it could be built. Both evolution and development describe temporally sequenced processes whose final expression looks very complex indeed, but the underlying generative rules may be relatively simple (for an interesting approach to discovering these rules). Perhaps knowing how to build a brain will enable us to glean general principles that cut across the many individual questions, and across species. Or might there instead be a huge diversity of specialized and baroque mechanisms, a giant ‘bag of tricks’, that serves each organism very well for specific problems in its niche, but that share no illuminating larger themes? Probably there are both general principles as well as specific constraints and local solutions, and an engineering view would force us to map this out. There is also the hope that understanding how evolution or engineering could build a brain would help us understand what problems brains are designed to solve: what is their proper function?

Read full, original article: The unsolved problems of neuroscience

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Sep-10-2026-10_36_07-AM
Viewpoint: Even lousy scientific articles can shield authors when they hype dubious health claims and products
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
sorghum farmers in kenya FARMERS TREND
Here are all the ways CRISPR gene editing is transforming Africa’s staple crops—and there’s a lot more innovation to come
Screenshot-2026-10-01-at-11.21.27-AM
Vaccine hesitancy, like malaria, surges globally, topping 35% in some countries
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-30-2026-01_25_34-PM
Blood tests for Alzheimer’s? The latest grifter, social media scam.
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-30-2026-01_38_36-PM
Viewpoint: Died “with measles” vs. died “from measles”: RFK, Jr.’s dangerously subversive word games
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-30-2026-01_11_07-PM
How U.S. teamed with Russia to block global human AI weapons oversight
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-21-2026-03_15_09-PM
Viewpoint: Chipotle-inspired lesson: 10,000 sick customers suggest that processed foods can be safer than fresh ones
Screenshot-2026-09-28-at-1.16.38-PM
Defying public perceptions, U.S. cancer deaths plunged 35% since 1991
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.