The Human Machine

It is taught to modern up and coming adults that cognitive psychology is the dominant approach in psychology today. It is quite widely noted that Cognitive psychology views the human brain as an information processor and is likened to the greatest information processor available to humanity: the computer. The metaphors used by psychologists have a pattern of mirroring mans greatest technological achievements of the time: first it was the telephone exchange, then the microchip and now the computer. Is it not strange that the more and more man becomes aware of itself and it’s tool of life then the more and more it compares itself to an objective, unfeeling creature? Surely these must be insightful developments i.e. man is becoming more aware that the brain is just a processor which can obtain information, connect variables, draw conclusions and learn. While there are questions here of man making machines in it’s own image (!) the focus here is on something different.
So the brain sees the physical world around it and can attempt to judge distances. The brain controls the body also and has a lot of work to do when, for example, trying to throw a ball at a given target on the ground. A lot of information must be processed such as: the amount of strength (muscle in the arm!) should be used to propel the ball, what throwing arc will be used?, gravities effect, the learnt knowledge that the ball will bounce, how will the ball bounce using the current throwing estimate?, how far will the ball roll?, the effect of any wind etc. and a judgement must be made. These are all things that must be taken into account for the brain to be successful in its throw. A lot of things must be considered for the simple task of throwing a ball at a target. Some of these things will have been learnt through practice and some of which must be estimated i.e. the brain cannot know exactly how the wind will effect such a throw as it has no real knowledge of what the wind speed or precise direction is at that time (and as such has no recall if it has ever experienced the same simultaneous variables before). Besides there are too many other different variables to take into account so some judgement must always be used. The ‘best’ Intelligence tests now use such things such as spatial awareness and memory as a measure of intelligence. Basically it seems that the experts are accepting (have accepted?) that the human brain is like a computer and the speed or capacity of the individual’s processor is a good indicator of the person’s cognitive ability or intelligence. I mean to be fair if one brain can hold more information and recall it more accurately than another then surely it is a superior processor?! If one brain can take into account many different variables at a time and judge something such as a distances and velocities correctly then surely this processor is superior in this way?! It seems that footballers in general must have significantly higher processing abilities when it comes to area’s of distance judgements, velocity judgements, wind effects, power judgements, balance, spatial awareness (i.e. players around them) as well as being able to control their own body. Not every pass is precisely accurate and neither is every shot but even when making a simple thing such as a pass the player must take all of the above into account as well as other things such as the movement of the team mate the pass is being made to and the movement of the opposition players who will try to intercept the ball. Whether these skills have come from a great deal of practice or pure talent is also not in contention but the fact is that their processors must be highly tuned! Should they not get the money they get for having such highly tuned brains? Apart from this they also have highly tuned bodies too which are needed to work in conjunction with the brain.
While this may not be this may not be strictly true the fact is that those who do not question things and get ‘stuck into’ life, those who accept what they see with their eyes and feel with their hands, the children whose processors have awakened and have accepted the physical world and questioned none other turn out to be the ones who live a life of luxury and heaven. The beautiful women, the fast cars, the big houses, the big money, the fame, the glory, the celebrity, the pride, the security, everything! While not all footballers lives are like this and I’m sure that behind closed doors they each have their own problems, they are surely in a much better position than those who spend so long questioning things that life passes them by. While it is probable that Charles Darwin has discovered the truth he doubtless had a more struggle-some life than the man who ran around a field kicking a ball around and indulging in hedonistic activities with no thought or consequence. At the end of the day (and their lives!) they both went back to become part of the soil and had no judgement to pass, no price to pay, they just went back to the earth. It’s just a question of who got the most out of their time.

well, i'm not sure if there is a question in all of that. I like the first part, i don't know what you're trying to say with the 2nd part.

The whole computer ananlogy is just that. an analogy. not all cogpych people think that the brain is no more than a biological computer. but there are some approaches based on this, like nueral networks, that have made some headway(despite me not liking them). It is interesting to look at the history of pychology to see how the views of the human brain have changed. Especially lately when the comupter analogy became more popular.


oh, and about footballers being better at spatial things, sure. I would think that whatever alows them to know exactly when and how hard to make a pass to hit a guy 30yrds downfield while he's running could be descibed as some sort of spatial intelligence or ability.

It is an analogy (i think it could be a metaphor though) but i think it says something about mankind though. I think the fact that we have made computers or have been able to shows that there is at least part of that objective, reasonable, basic processor in us. If that wasnt part of us then we wouldnt know how to build it surely? If someone had never seen a square and they were asked to draw (or build one) then i dont think they would be able to (i dont think that knowledge or recognition of shapes is innate). The fact that our technology has come to such an efficient processor shows that there must be part of us in that. I think the technological mirroring just shows how much more we are becoming aware of our own minds/brains.
I was also saying that those who live life without questions could be the smart ones. At the end of the day this could just be a physical world we are living in with no judgment at the end. I see people, idiots, who live life with no questions and i cant see any judgment coming to them. No divine judgment even during their lifetime so why should anyelse worry.

I cant see the neural network explaining everything though. Does it include the brain and information storage areas?

:D break that thought up into paragraphs and i promise i'll read it.

Doesnt matter. Ill re-phrase.

Certain things such as shapes and pattern recognition may not be innate but they are here and they came from us. Does this mean that we created the shape or is there something within the 'collective unconscious' that denies us the credit for such things? I would say that shapes and technology do not have to be humanity expressing itself and it's visions but revolution can come from mistakes i.e. the square may not have been built because a person had the image of a square in his mind but the person may have had no idea about 'squares' but was trying to build another shape that was in mind but created a square by accident.
The Wheel is surely a great advancement for mankind not just because of the implications to the 'real world' but because of its conception. The circle does not really apear in the natural world apart from a few natural occurences: the sun, the moon, ripples in water etc. The inventor may have been trying to mimic this shape but we can build other shapes such as polygons (shapes with many different sides) that do not appear in the natural world. These shapes must have come from us yet how is this possible?! Our ability to imagine things that are not real must surely be the real creator? It is this ability that allows us to create computers and other advancements but this does not neccasarily mean that they are 'within' us as was previously thought. Humanity does not merely impose itself on the world but does try to make sense of it first (most of us do anyway ;) )