[arvinjoar]

A bit of a nitpick (but I guess that's the HN spirit)? Just different levels of abstraction. The dream would be to be able to put all these levels of abstractions together, and have good mappings between them. Basically, I think you're painting a false dichotomy.

Just like the execution of a program can be described in Machine Code, 1's and 0's or even as electricity, or any other layer of abstraction.

[megalodon]

I'm not so sure. The title should be relevant to the layer of abstraction used. You're talking of abstractions as if there is a beginning and an end level, but what if there isn't?

[lutusp]

> Just different levels of abstraction.

From a scientific perspective, it's much more important than that. Neuroscience has empirical evidence, theories, and is a science. Psychology has anecdotes, no testable, falsifiable theories, and, for lack of empirical evidence, cannot be a science.

> Basically, I think you're painting a false dichotomy.

So is the director of the NIMH:

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h

Quote: "America’s psychiatrist-in-chief seemed to be reiterating what many had been saying all along: that psychiatry was a pseudoscience, unworthy of inclusion in the medical kingdom."

> The dream would be to be able to put all these levels of abstractions together, and have good mappings between them.

Yes, absolutely, and I think this will eventually happen within neuroscience. But focusing on the mind, something inaccessible to empirical investigation, is not the road to that goal.