ABSTRACT
The way forward for the brain sciences is not entirely clear, but at least some of the problems in defining a psychological central dogma may come simply from a failure to define the level at which a dogma is needed. Some details of the mechanisms of change and constancy in the brain have become known, but the elegance and clarity found in the atomic and cellular 'central dogmas' have not yet been achieved. Empirically the known 'codes' of the brain cover only much smaller segments of what a complete brain code must accomplish. It is of interest, therefore, to consider how the human brain accomplishes this – in order to see what the brain sciences might suggest to the computer sciences. Recognition of the importance of inhibitory processes throughout the nervous system has been growing steadily for several decades – both in terms of the physiology of perception and in terms of computer simulation of brain activities.
