2008年5月29日星期四

Notes - Faulty Brain Powers

  • The human brain is a less-than-perfect device. A new book explains how our minds work and sometimes don't.

  • Kluge: The Haphazard Construction of the Human Mind," by New York University professor Gary Marcus uses evolutionary psychology to explore the development of that "clumsy, cobbled-together contraption" we call a brain and to answer such puzzling questions as, "Why six percent of sky-diving fatalities occur due to a failure to remember to pull the ripcord, and why hundreds of millions of dollars are sent abroad in response to shockingly unbelievable e-mails from displaced African royalty. "

  • According to Marcus, while we once we used our brains simply to stay alive and procreate, the modern world and its technological advances have forced evolution to keep up by adapting ancient skills for modern uses--in effect simply placing our relatively new frontal lobes (the home of memory, language, speech and error recognition) on top of our more ancient hindbrain (in charge of survival, breathing, instinct and emotion.)

  • It is Marcus's hypothesis that evolution has resulted in a series of "good enough" but not ideal adaptations that allow us to be smart enough to invent quantum physics but not clever enough to remember where we put our wallet from one day to the next or to change our minds in the face of overwhelming evidence that our beliefs are wrong.
    Evolution is conservative and stingy, it uses what it has. It doesn't start over--as a statistical matter, something is much more likely to evolve if it involves tinkering.

  • A kluge (rhymes with "huge") is defined as a clumsy or inelegant solution to a problem.
    In his attempt to define the "klugey-ness" of the human mind, Marcus would have us look no further than our memories, which he describes as "the mother of all kluges." Unlike computers, we cannot readily recollect all that we've remembered. Turns out, our memory is driven by cues. We need hints and context to remember where we put our purse ("Retrace your steps"). To free associate from one memory to the next may, Marcus writes, "lead depressed people to seek out depressive activities, such as drinking or listening to songs of lost love, which presumably deepens the gloom as well."

  • Another problem with our contextual memory is that memories tend to run together and are prone to contamination. You may remember being 5 years old and watching mom hit dad in the face with a cream pie. The only problem is that it never happened. It was a dream that, for some reason, youremember as fact.

  • Marcus believes our memory evolved in this way in an attempt to prioritize memories since our brains are much slower than the memory system available to computers and our neurons cannot keep all our recollections at hand for immediate retrieval. It's a workable system but one that doesn't allow us the time or ability to check memories for accuracy as a computer would be able to.

  • And why are humans so prone to believe absolutely anything from the existence of the Loch Ness monster to Atlantis? Marcus explains that "evolution has left us distinctly gullible … the systems that underlie our capacity for belief are powerful, they are also subject to superstition, manipulation and fallacy. Beliefs, and the imperfect neural tools we use to evaluate them, can lead to family conflicts, religious disputes and even war."

  • He argues our brains didn't evolve in a way that allowed us to thoroughly evaluate how well our beliefs represent reality. Our older subconscious brain moves reflexively ("We're hungry, eat that mushroom now"), while our newer prefrontal cortex struggles to catch up with other alternatives ("Check your guidebook to see if it's poisonous or wait until we get to camp and eat some gorp").

  • Marcus theorizes that "the human tendency to most clearly remember information that seems consistent with our beliefs [or emotions] makes it very hard to let those beliefs go."
    So the next time you get into an argument with your spouse and he or she snaps, "You only hear what you want to hear," you can reply, "We all do. We've evolved that way."


"Kluge: The Haphazard Construction of the Human Mind," by New York University professor Gary Marcus

2008年5月20日星期二

札记 - 爱的异化

马克思与恩格斯在《神圣家族》中有一篇有关 “爱”的短文, 批评了埃德加. 鲍威尔 (Edgar Bauer)对爱的看法.

鲍威尔说: “爱是一个残酷的女神, 她就和所有的神祗一样, 要拥有整个人, 一直到这个人为她献出了灵魂和身体. 这是一个苦行的偶像崇拜教派, 而其最高境界就是自我牺牲.”

马克思与恩克斯的回应是: “ 鲍威尔把爱变成一个女神; 通过了把心里有爱的人( loving man )或一个人的爱 ( love of man )变成爱的人 ( man of love ). 他把爱从人分了出来, 使之成为一个独立的个体. 马克思与恩克斯指出, 这里的关键是用名词取代了动词. 名词的爱是爱这一活生生情感活动的抽象. 爱成了一个女神, 变成了一个人投射他的爱的偶像; 在这个异化 ( alienation ) 的过程中, 他不再主动的经验他的爱, 他只能通过臣服于爱的女神来与他自身爱的能力抱持接触. 他不再是一个拥有自发的活生生情感活动的人, 他变成了一个异化了的偶像崇拜者.
- Erich Fromm

2008年5月10日星期六

汉奸是千年之骂

以身护火炬而被称为中国最美丽女孩的金晶,因对抵制家乐福提出“慎重”的看法,隔夜就被网民骂为“汉奸”。看来,在举国沸腾的时候,就连意见与大家不同的人,此称号也随之而来。

想想看,当年美国有很多人反对美国出战,为什么不会有“美奸”的标签出现?

打倒“汉奸”是中国思想中一个由来已久的观念,是一个数千年来被拥有话语权的统治精英不断倾力建构的社会良知。

瑞士日内瓦大学的汉学家毕莱德(Jean-Francois Billeter)认为,要真正理解一种意识形态,一定要追本溯源。具体到中国思想,则须上溯到中华帝国的初始,也即秦汉时期,才能真正看出本质。

汉朝的开国者一心要免蹈秦历二世而亡的覆辙,400年来力图使皇权得以长久持续。汉朝之于中国,好比罗马帝国之于欧洲。但令罗马皇帝无法比拟的是,汉朝皇帝及大臣的努力最终使中国的帝制持续了两千多年。

像秦始皇那样疯狂无度的统治,本该成为一条歧路而有去无回,但恰是因为汉朝皇帝及大臣的努力奏效,秦始皇最终却成为整个帝国历史的起点。

汉朝的皇帝及大臣将文化一变而成为可利用的工具。他们将旧的秩序彻底熔化,由此铸造出新秩序的基础。中华帝国的初起及其后的命脉,其实全系于暴力与专断。但为了使人们最终可以淡忘这暴力和专断,他们将帝国阐释成是对世间万物所谓大序的顺应。

帝国自始至终都符合这宇宙天地的大序。这个观念成为一切的中心。所有的知识,所有的思想,所有的言辞,所有的表述,都围绕着这一主题,由统治精英游说世人,使他们深信不疑。
西方哲学追求的是宇宙间的真理,而中国哲学的主要关怀却是政治理论与道德,群体和谐远较个人与独特性重要。

忠君爱国至关重大,集体道德议题几乎占据历来知识精英的大部份心力。对比之下,个人理性的拓展与良知的探索,显得黯淡无力。

中国的幅员几乎等同整个欧洲,两千年来却能保持大一统的局面,得力于忠孝观念之处,不可谓不大。


今天中国的民族主义情绪,由于近200年来的历史悲情,再加上崛起期的自信,有日渐增强之势。

现在中西风波渐过,许多有识之士都在担心,这股民族主义的情绪,会不会越演越烈,阻碍中国融入国际的步伐。

要力挽狂澜,实在不易。西方经过了文艺复兴,个人觉醒了;到了启蒙运动,理性探索与宗教信仰/道德的求索才得以分道,不互相干涉;最后取得建立在理性与独立人格的基础上的普世价值。

700年走来,道路崎岖漫长。许多中国民众那种泛道德的思维习惯,情绪容易泛滥的人格结构,是根深蒂固的,能说改就改吗?

联合早报 言论 2008-05-10
http://www.zaobao.com.sg/yl/yl080510_503.shtml