4/ If you study neurophysiology, it becomes very clear that our brains are nothing like our laptops, desktops or smart phones. They don't work the same way, period. @matthewcobb's article describes all this well enough, and on this he's dead right.
-
Show this thread
-
5/ But there can be many other types of computer. A computer is just a device that can compute many different computable functions. Our brain is one such device, so brains are literally computers. I've covered this previously:https://medium.com/the-spike/yes-the-brain-is-a-computer-11f630cad736 …
8 replies 27 retweets 175 likesShow this thread -
6/ You can tell when someone is confused about this right away when they talk about the "brain as computer metaphor", or start making reference to hydraulic pumps and older theories of the brain based on earlier SoTA tech to argue that we're making the same mistake now.
1 reply 4 retweets 46 likesShow this thread -
7/ What this tells you is that the writer/speaker thinks computers are equivalent to Von Neumann machines. So, on some level they're right, since brains aren't like Von Neumann machines.
2 replies 5 retweets 48 likesShow this thread -
8/ But, honestly, I don't know any neuroscientists who think the brain works like a laptop. As such, this is a straw-man. There may still be some people in other disciplines who think brains function like Von Neumann machines, but I suspect they are an ever shrinking demographic.
1 reply 5 retweets 102 likesShow this thread -
9/ So, to
@matthewcobb or any other person who reads his article: take the good stuff, which is the discussions of all the ways in which understanding the brain is difficult and not helped by pat analogy to the sort of computers we use to do our office work on a daily basis.4 replies 2 retweets 50 likesShow this thread -
10/ But, realise that the terminology is being abused here, and brains *are* computers, just a very different kind than our laptops. Neuroscientists are trying to understand how brains compute, and we all know it's not like our laptops, so you don't have to point that out to us.
7 replies 8 retweets 99 likesShow this thread -
Fin/ Neuroscience has a long way to go, but we're not so deeply off-track as this article implies. We know full well that brains don't operate like the device I'm typing these messages on right now. Please don't make our discipline seem more wrong-headed than it is.
17 replies 9 retweets 126 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @tyrell_turing
Totally agree with you - but just wanted to ask - under your definition of a computer, what is not a computer? Doesn't every physical system compute solutions to the equations governing that system?
3 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @SuryaGanguli
Indeed! (I discussed this a bit in the Medium article.) I think we need to look at how the word actually gets used in CS, which is to refer to devices that can compute a wide array of functions, and for which there is a language that is Turing complete. Brains meet this bar.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
I don’t think this level of nuance is necessary to be clear that you’re basically right, but more discussions of this should citehttps://philpapers.org/rec/CHADAR
-
-
This might be of interest. Rich literature in this space.https://philpapers.org/rec/ANDPAT-19
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.