Information processing at its core reminds me of
computers. That analogy is used often in
information processing literature. If
humans are like computers, than we rely on certain input, receptors,
translators, storage systems, and output to function correctly. Pinker and the third lecture discussed how
humans rely on sensory input to make sense of the world. However, we have to be careful because
sometimes our sensory perception does not match up with reality. Fortunate for us, we have a strong computer
for a brain that is able to help us figure out that our perception may not line
up with reality and even help us shift our perception as necessary.
Pinker also spent a great deal of time talking about
language. We usually view language
development as something that sets humans apart from other intelligent animals
and computers. Our ability to express
thoughts is seen as unique. Pinker
indicated, though, that language is not the best measure of thought because
thought is not limited by linguistic abilities.
For me, this reminds me of the issue of determining a student’s
abilities when the student does not have strong language skills. It is difficult to assess intellect without
the use of language.
I think the reason we tend to overestimate the role of language as a pure reflection of thought is that it is our easiest (only?) means of knowing what someone else is thinking and understanding. I think this was what Pinker was trying to remind readers of as well.
ReplyDelete