Matt McCormick wrote, “Capgras syndrome results from lesions in the occipital, temporal, and frontal lobes of the brain. Afflicted patients have the powerful sense that someone they know, particularly a loved one, has been replaced by an imposter. Vilayanur Ramachandran postulates that the problem arises from a failure of the temporal regions responsible for face recognition to communicate with the limbic system regions responsible for emotional responses.” What is Creator’s perspective?

Here again, the observation is a curious one and seems to tie everything together quite neatly, that there is some part of the brain within which known people are recognized, and that information, stored or accessed normally, is reliable. And when there is damage to a particular location, that information is lost, or perhaps is connecting inappropriately, as the wires are being crossed and someone is seeing one individual, but this is being perceived by the faulty brain as another, as someone else's identifying characteristics are being pulled up, because of the damage to that area of the brain causing the short-circuit, so to speak. Here again, this is a simplistic interpretation of what is taking place. They are simply looking at a damaged detector, that is an end-stage display of consciousness at work, and attributing all of the phenomena that the damage causes as a disruption in the origination of a conscious impression or intention, when that, in fact, is happening elsewhere and beyond the brain itself entirely. This proves nothing from making observations on such individuals, other than the brain is important to experience perception. This is hardly revolutionary, nor the fact that parts of the brain have particular duties, and that is being mapped out. But when you perturb things and strange phenomena happen, you are leaving what is known and engaging in an exploration, but in a crude fashion, with imperfect strategies and tools, much akin to damaging a television set, selectively at various locations, and attempting to make sense of why the picture changed, and assuming the aberration on the screen means that the television program on display originates in those components, because they are not showing the presumed images expected but something altered. So, in itself, this adds nothing to the discussion.