Page | 76 experiences in some way or other, and by feeling the emotion, I can understand then integrating in some way the new it. The closer my previous experience is and old together. This integration to the perceived one, the better the requires constant and dynamic changes “understanding”. This principle holds to the brain structures that represent whether one is trying to understand what we know and how we use it.' One objects or people. An important way this could happen is that when we distinction between people and objects perceive something new, we actually re- when trying to understand their actions enact in our mind’s eye the previous is that people, but not objects, have related perceptions. For example, if we intentions. encounter an apple — having encountered The Social Brain many previously -- perhaps we actually 7 imagine (seeing) one or more previous The critical question for apples or episodes involving apples, or neurobiologists is how does the brain imagine (performing) one or more understand. In particular, we want to instances of biting an apple or throwing know whether the same brain circuits one, and/or imagine tasting and smelling that are used when we experience things one. We might also imagine hearing the personally are also used when we try to word “apple”, producing the sounds of understand another person having the the word, seeing the written form of the same experiences, whether these word, or even hearing, seeing, or experiences are concrete, like grasping a producing synonyms or related words in cup or hitting a baseball, or more our first (e.g., “Granny Smith”) or abstract like feeling sad or fearful or in second (e.g., “pomme”) languages. We pain. We also want to know whether propose that understanding an apple is understanding the simple concrete tantamount to executing this entire set of perceptions and these highly complex processes, and thus, that the circuits for emotional states are mediated similarly understanding are very