CLASSMATE #-1–K. P.
Throughout history, there has been much fascination with the human mind and overall cognition. In the 1990s, Stephen Kosslyn set out to analyze cognitive neuroscience. “Stephen Kosslyn established the concept of the wet mind which refers to the idea that the mind is what the brain does: a description of mental events is a description of brain function and facts about the brain are needed to characterize these events.” (Kosslyn & Koenig, p.16 1995). “Kosslyn explains that the focus is to not replace a description of mental events with a description of brain activity.” (Kosslyn & Koenig, p.16 1995). It is important to remember that the brain is a truly unique organ in its processing abilities (Kosslyn & Koenig, 1995). The human brain/mind has to process a significant amount of information daily, similarly to a computer. Human brains can store information and compartmentalize information, which is also similar to a computer. However, Kosslyn’s research explains that the brain can figure out new strategies to resolve something, meanwhile, a computer only processes information the way it was programmed to do so (Kosslyn & Koenig, 1995). It can be thought of as a computer handles the black and white, literal matters, meanwhile the brain can handle the confusing gray areas of life. Kosslyn phrases it as computers are rule-based association games, with input and output ( Kosslyn & Koenig, 1995). A computer and the minds are similar in their complexity and networking capabilities. However, I would argue that minds are far more complex than a computer due to our deeper thinking abilities and self-awareness. If computers begin to gain true self-awareness, we may end up in a situation like something from a Science Fiction movie. It comical but you never know what the future holds. There is still more research that needs to be conducted on the mind, brain and all their abilities.
Kosslyn S., Koenig, O., (1995) Wet Mind The New Cognitive Neuroscience. The Free Press.
Reply Reply to Comment
————————————————————————————————-CLASSMATE #-2—T. S.-C.
Person as a Processor
In understanding the theory of the “wet mind” vs. “dry mind” Kapczinski and Passos explain the difference as “The more advanced ideas in the field consider the activity of the human mind as emergent from the brain, but not tied to its ‘wet’ component” (Kapczinski, 2015)this helps to understand that the tissues of the brain do not help in understanding complex ideas like appreciating art, or learning a craft or skillset or have an effect on mental health standing. On the other side of the comparison there is (Kapczinski, 2015)“the human mind has a ‘dry’ component that in some sense works outside the boundaries of the brain” this is where skills sets can be learned outside of the brain, potentially learning skill sets like playing a music, or a trade skills.
The text shares that as computers have an input-output reasoning to create algorithms from patterns in behaviors for certain situations. “Computers and the brain share some complex information-processingoperations” (Lecci. & Magnavita, 2013) As algorithms are more predictable, so can humans develop algorithms that are called “heuristics”, but they are less predictable” (Lecci. & Magnavita, 2013)These heuristics traits can be influenced by environment, personality factors, and the consistent exposure to the same context of action. In other words, depending on how many times you are exposed to a situation and how you react each time, this will create the heuristic rhythm that becomes part of your personality.
In understanding these theories and pros and cons. When thinking about the brain and learning and its rhythm of learning, I would think although the heuristic pattern is not as dependable as the predictability of a computer algorithm, the brain has an unlimited capacity for learning, where the computer can maximize in what it can do and define. Training the brain to retrieve information as needed is necessary for survival. “Incomputing science, these are mathematical operations often in the form of algorithms”. These static information building will only recite or produce a pattern over time. As humans, we only have potential patterns of behavior, and that will depend on personality, environment, and the contexts of the situation. There is strength in each theory, but neither dominates.
Kapczinski, F. &. (2015). Wet minds, dry minds, and the future of psychiatry as a science. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. , 7-8.
Lecci., L. B., & Magnavita, J. J. (2013). Personality Theories: A Scientfic Apporach. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
Reply Reply to Comment
Respond to at least two of your classmates’ postings by Day 7.
When responding to your peers, review the outcomes reached by your peers and determine how you agree and disagree with them.