The Evidence
Shenk notes that “great minds don’t recall more raw data
than others; rather, they recognize patterns faster and form chunks more
efficiently” (52). Essentially, Shenk is saying that intelligence is merely
using more of your brain, rather than being born with a more advanced brain. Analyze
the extent to which strategic thinking is favored by natural selection. Does
the human mind have limits that cannot be removed by strategic thinking? Explain
why these limits do or do not exist by using a biological theme as support for
your answer.
- Akshay Ramachandran (ramachandran.akshay11@gmail.com)
Strategic thinking can possibly be considered one of the most useful advantages an organism can have. Any organism’s ultimate goal is to survive and reproduce. With the advancement of strategic thinking, an organism can, to some extent, anticipate future conditions and plan accordingly so that it may live in a more favorable environment and produce offspring. Mark A. Davis, Professor of Biology at Macalester College, explains “since all species need to reproduce, eat, and [avoid predation], all species exhibit some type of reproductive behavior, foraging behavior, and defensive behavior.” Strategic thinking is the basis for survival; it is not whether an organism can strategically think, it is which organism can formulate and execute the most beneficial results for survival.
ReplyDeleteMemory or the concept of Chunking— where one must group important concepts to create a plan-- is important in developing an effective strategy for survival. For example, a human’s ‘plan’ for survival would be a schedule. A schedule is a list of needs that are ordered in such a way that is most optimal for the planner. Granted, in most cases, this may not mean life or death but the idea of a schedule in humans can be analogous to a schedule of a bird where finding food and distributing the food to offspring is scheduled to be most optimal for both the progeny and the parent. If such a schedule is not followed in a bird’s daily routine, it could mean death of the progeny. The capability to determine whether an organism is most fit for ”maximum reproductive success” (Campbell 1185) is a selective advantage for a K-selected species.
Going along with the concept of Chunking, as put forth by the studies of Ericsson and Chase, those who have greater capability of grouping and chunking details together can possibly have the same problems S. had. It was “noted that S. came across as generally disorganized, dull-witted and without much of a sense of purpose or direction in life” (239). It could be that because of a disability in one hemisphere of S.’s brain, the other hemisphere had the chance to benefit. The amount of data he can recall from a list he read even twenty years ago makes his case sound as if there are no limits at all to his memory. The graph Shenk provides on S.F.’s memory lab sessions proves otherwise. If there were no limits to S.’s chunking ability, there would never have been any drops in the total number of recalled digits. The fact that the net recall rose is to be attributed to the fact S. had more time to process and lock on to the information he had received. Seeing as that no hemisphere of the brain can malfunction completely and allow for survival, it is not a mutation that gives S. this chunking capability, but rather it is a magnification of what one hemisphere of our brain can possibly accomplish. In the experiment, S. was able to continue and, even though there were drops in his net recollection, his overall recollection rose. If he is capable of that rapid growth with the help of his abnormally useful skill, then on a toned down scale, were his abilities to be regulated and adjusted for the capabilities of a normal brain, it should be possible for humans to use this concept of Chunking and strategic thinking to overcome any limits the human mind could possibly have.
In the concept of the biological theme of Evolution, what S. has may or may not be a selective advantage. Since the early stages of man, when language was yet to be developed and tribal units were beginning to form, humans have come a long way in being able to collect data, remember it, and analyze it for the purpose of survival. The development of the experiment on S. shows that going beyond the limits of the mind of what is possible, was and is an integral part of human evolution through the eons. Since advancing beyond the ‘limits’ is so natural, it would make sense that there are no ‘limits’ to begin with.
Article: www.biologyreference.com/Ar-Bi/Behavior-Patterns.html
Jesse Pukshansky (jesse.pukshansky@gmail.com)
Short term memory on the surface seems to be a selective disadvantage for humans because it severely limits the potential for human memory. Shenk points at the limitations on short term memory to be caused by "the average healthy adult can reliably juxtapose only three to four new, unrealted items" (53). Based on these data, it seems humans have constraints on their short term memory because it has a limited potential holding capacity. However, short term memory is in fact a selective advantage because of how it works. Shenk concludes a short term memory experiment by Ericsson with, "there is seemingly no limit to memory performance" (55). This conclusion was brought on by training a man from scratch to be a mnemonist. Campbell describes how humans "hold information for a time in short term memory locations and then release it if it becomes irrelevant" (1079). These new data show a positive function of short term memory in humans. So, it does not place a limit that seemed to be in place because insignificant information is replaced with newer, more relevant data. An experiment from PNAS explains,"The ability to hold multiple objects in memory is fundamental to intelligent behavior" (Siegel). http://www.pnas.org/content/106/50/21341.full?sid=56d12cd5-ee62-49a5-bef9-85644b277990 Restructuring Siegel's claim, I would say "hold multiple 'relevant' objects" as a more accurate assertion for short term memory. The ability to throw out unnecessary information gives humans an advantage because short term memory seems limitless for the most necessary and important parts of life.
ReplyDeleteLong term memory in essence is just as significant a selective advantage as short term memory is because it makes out memories and capacity for knowledge seemingly limitless. Shenk describes the importance of long term memory: "Many crucial changes take place over long periods of time. Physiologically, it's impossible to become great overnight" (66). Shenk's conclusion explains how important long term commitment, like memory, is to human survival. Physiological changes can't occur overnight and neither can long term memories. They implant deep in the brain where Campbell delineates "If we later need to recall the name or number, we fetch it from long term memory" (1079). This shows long term memory is critical for human survival. We depend on out long term memory to remember key information that help us live. In the case of Alzheimer's, long term memory is shown to be critical. Although, "as Alzheimer’s disease progresses, short term memory loss worsens," long term memory seems to be intact in early Alzheimer's. (http://www.nia.nih.gov/alzheimers/publication/alzheimers-disease-fact-sheet) Long term is more deeply rooted, which is why people with memory loss still can recall long term memories.
Josh LeVay (blevay@comcast.net)