The Brain

I'm pretty sure most of you have heard about the world's most prominent chess player Garry Kasparov and his controversial match against IBM's Deep Blue in 1997. For those who haven't it's essentially the first time a computer was able to so soundly beat a chess master in an official six game match. There are still people arguing over the legitimacy of the match but I won't get into that now. I won't really say it's a measure of intelligence for a computer either because it was programmed to beat Kasparov by other chess masters. It was a feat to get a computer to a point where you could program it that far but it's just a natural progression really.

As a chess player it's kinda hard to admit that simple computing power and decision making algorithms are enough to beat what takes us years to learn much less master. So it got me thinking about how our brains are set up, how we learn, how we think and store memory, why some people are smarter even though we are so very similar. We use electrical signals just like computers and we only communicate with the outside world through our bodies which are essentially peripherals. So why is it we can program a computer and not a person?

Wouldn't it be interesting if we could send electrical signals through a persons brain and use that to essentially program them to be smarter or more or less something or other? The theory isn't too far fetched because you can manipulate a body with electricity and you can hook an mechanical arm up to a nervous system. It's only a few steps from going the other direction and computers are designed in our brains image so everything is more intuitive and similar to how we think to begin with. Maybe I'm just wrong, maybe I'm crazy.

Well, I was just kinda bored and decided to see what you guys thought about this kinda thing.

 

Hm. An odd thing to think about but I suppose it's not entirely impossible. It'd be weird to see that although with enough time they could make something like that.

 

I have heard this idea before....i can't remember where, but i do remember talking about it before......it sounds like a plausible idea to me....

 

Personally I don't feel people are "smarter", but rather they have a much better operating system (pun) in terms of sustainability and efficiency, allowing them to algorithmically or otherwise organize things and present information. It might be in a huge quantity, like Bobby Fischer. -shrugs-

Though, you can program a person. It's very easy. You're being programmed all the time. When you interact with anything around you, it is programming through association and other mechanisms which familiarize you with things. When you try to "control" or "program" someone and it doesn't work, why doesn't it work? Because they probably understand they can't be controlled. But at the same time they are being programmed because they are still being familiarized with what isn't working on them (controlling/programming/etc).

I think, if you want to make someone smarter, making their brains operate on a more efficient level is necessary. That's why children with large doses of vaccines tend to be autistic, have speech impediments or other physiological disorders; the ethylmercury preservative thimerasol has been shown to kill mental passage ways during crucial developmental periods for them. So obviously, physiologically doing something would be ideal in order to make someone more intelligent, thus, making them smarter.

That's briefly what I think.

 

Though I wouldn't call the natural progression of conditioning and learning programming as you have, you are right that it is tantamount to it whether I'd like to call it that or not.

You also mentioned how people's brains are formatted differently, more or less efficiently, limited by chemical passages or whatever the case may be. I hadn't actually considered that, oddly enough, which I'm kinda feeling dumb for since brain chemistry is what allows the electricity to flow to begin with and controls the paths that are opened and closed like the circuit boards on a computer. So you can send different messages to a brain but without the capacity to organize it in any way the programming system I imagined would probably be impossible. So thanks for the catch.