On May 21st and 22nd 2007, the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study at George Mason University in Fairfax, VA, hosted a Symposium entitled Decade of the Mind. Ist mission statement was later published as a letter in Science magazine [1].
Ten eminent neuroscientists signed the letter in Science calling for an interdisciplinary research initiative "across disparate fields such as cognitive science, medicine, neuroscience, psychology, mathematics, engineering, and computer science." The authors propose that this research initiative should focus on four areas, i.e., mental health, research on high-level cognitive functions, education, and computational applications (such as intelligent machines). The agenda proposed is based upon the assumption that "such an understanding will have a revolutionary impact on national interests in science, medicine, economic growth, security, and well-being," and, in consequence, "improve our lives and our children's lives." And why now? Because "a deep scientific understanding of how the mind perceives, thinks, and acts is within our grasp."
The "Decade of the Brain" [2], has quite naturally led to the "Decade of the Mind". When we think of brain functions, we think of perception, motor control, thought and action. We hardly think of mind functions such as trust [3], love [4], or gratitude [5], let alone the stock market [6], the justice system [7], schools [8], or social norm compliance [9]. But these are all domains where neuroscience not only makes progress, but also breaks through traditional boundaries between the sciences and the humanities.
The "Decade of the Mind" initiative calls for translational research in order to transform knowledge into health, education, and social well-being. The history of medicine may serve as an example of how this can be achieved: 200 years ago, medicine was little more than a mixture of bits of knowledge, fads and plain quackery. In the middle of the nineteenth century, Hermann von Helmholtz, Ernst Wilhelm von Brücke, Emil Du Bois-Reymond and a few other great minds got together and drew up a grand scheme for what medicine should be: applied natural science. This happened at a time when – from our perspective – very little was known: cellular pathology, microbiology and pharmacology hardly existed as domains of scientific investigation, let alone as tools for physicians. But the idea – medicine is applied science – caught on and led to improvements so dramatic that today we can hardly pay for them but nonetheless want them for everybody.
