lobitc.blogg.se

• NOBODY SAVES THE WORLD FISH CURE QUEST SOFTWARE

Known as the "social brain hypothesis," this idea posits that the reason we think at all has to do with our embeddedness in social life. The evolution of larger social groups among primates required and benefited from the evolution of a larger neo-cortex (the outer, thinking part of our brain), and managing social complexity in turn required and benefited from the evolution of language. Indeed, our brains likely evolved their capacity for intelligence in response to the demands of social (rather than environmental) complexity. This is probably even true for those of us who spend our lives as scientists. In fact, how often-unless we are ten-year-old boys-do we even think or talk about predators or navigation, which have ostensibly been important topics of thought and conversation for quite some time? Mostly, we think about, and talk about, each other. A strong indicator of this fact is that the intellectual content of most conversation is trivial, and it certainly is not focused on complex ideas about philosophy or mathematics. To the extent that I participate in such things (and I do), my thinking and I are both affected by the Internet.īut most thinking serves social ends. One widely appreciated and important example of both is the way the Internet facilitates hive-mind phenomena, like Wikipedia, that integrate the altruistic impulses and the knowledge of thousands of far-flung individuals. To be clear, the Internet is assuredly changing quite a few things related to cognition and social interaction. But did it change the way I think? Did it change my brain? The answer is mostly no.

The math surely changed how I think about the world. But, like other students, I did this with the same brain we've all had for millennia. It has taken centuries for humans to accumulate mathematical knowledge and I learned geometry and calculus in high school in a way that probably would have astonished mathematicians just a few centuries ago. Another apt analogy is perhaps mathematics. In fact, I would say that it is much more correct to say that our thinking gave rise to the Internet than that the Internet gave rise to our thinking. The Internet is no different than previous (equally monumental) brain-enhancing technologies such as books or telephony, and I doubt whether books and telephony have changed the way I think, in the sense of actually changing the way my brain works (which is the particular way I am taking the question before us). In this regard, the Internet is both mind-expanding and atavistic. The Internet thus facilitates an age-old tendency of the human mind to benefit from our tendency as a species to be homo dictyous (network man), an innate tendency we all have to connect with others and to be influenced by them. What especially attracts my attention, though, is that the more complex types of external software-including the Internet-tend to involve communication and interaction, and thus they tend to be specifically social: they tend to involve the thoughts, feelings, and actions of many individuals, pooled in some way to make them accessible to individuals, including me.

I've had personal experience with most of these-save cave painting and the more esoteric forms of hardware-and I think I can say with confidence that they have not changed my brain.

NOBODY SAVES THE WORLD FISH CURE QUEST SOFTWARE

And external software includes things like calendars, voting systems, search engines, and the Internet. Internal software includes things like education, meditation, mnemonics, and cognitive therapy. Internal hardware includes things like mind-altering substances, cochlear implants, or intra-cranial electrical stimulation. External hardware includes things like cave paintings, written documents, eyeglasses, wristwatches, wearable computers, or brain-controlled machines. They can be either hardware or software, and they can be either internal or external to our bodies. Brain enhancers come in several varieties. Efforts to change the way we think-and to enhance our cognitive capacity-are ancient.