Book: How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker Chapters: 3 – Revenge of the Nerds (completed) / 4 – The Mind’s Eye (in progress)
⸻
Reflections • The ongoing debate between evolution, adaptation, and intelligent design feels like a whirlpool of partial answers. None are fully persuasive, yet all are worth wrestling with. Whether you lean toward science or faith, the act of questioning how we came to be sharpens perspective and humility. It’s a good exercise — belief aside. • I closed out Revenge of the Nerds tonight — still an engaging read, unexpectedly playful despite the heavy content. • Moving into The Mind’s Eye, I’m struck by how Pinker explains vision as both biology and computation — and how closely this parallels what today’s algorithms can already do. Cameras now “see” through code. Their image recognition, focus, and even adaptive lighting mimic the same principles Pinker describes as evolutionary triumphs. What once seemed miraculous in nature is now programmable. • I can’t help but feel that human intelligence, though precious, is more limited than we like to admit. Memory, processing speed, emotional bias — all are constraints. An algorithm doesn’t forget, fatigue, or rationalize through ego. It’s no wonder machines are already outpacing us in narrow domains. • Thinking back to my old line about the computer being a fulcrum for the human mind — I’d revise it now. It’s more accurate to call it a tool for the human brain. It can see, calculate, communicate, and reason faster than the average human. It’s not just an extension of our will; it’s a partner in cognition — maybe even an evolutionary step we’re co-creating. • Yet that partnership seems to terrify us. Humanity has never feared its tools quite like this one, and perhaps that’s the real story — not that AI will replace us, but that it mirrors us too well.
Book: How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker
Chapters: 3 – Revenge of the Nerds (completed) / 4 – The Mind’s Eye (in progress)
⸻
Reflections
• The ongoing debate between evolution, adaptation, and intelligent design feels like a whirlpool of partial answers. None are fully persuasive, yet all are worth wrestling with. Whether you lean toward science or faith, the act of questioning how we came to be sharpens perspective and humility. It’s a good exercise — belief aside.
• I closed out Revenge of the Nerds tonight — still an engaging read, unexpectedly playful despite the heavy content.
• Moving into The Mind’s Eye, I’m struck by how Pinker explains vision as both biology and computation — and how closely this parallels what today’s algorithms can already do.
Cameras now “see” through code. Their image recognition, focus, and even adaptive lighting mimic the same principles Pinker describes as evolutionary triumphs. What once seemed miraculous in nature is now programmable.
• I can’t help but feel that human intelligence, though precious, is more limited than we like to admit. Memory, processing speed, emotional bias — all are constraints. An algorithm doesn’t forget, fatigue, or rationalize through ego. It’s no wonder machines are already outpacing us in narrow domains.
• Thinking back to my old line about the computer being a fulcrum for the human mind — I’d revise it now. It’s more accurate to call it a tool for the human brain.
It can see, calculate, communicate, and reason faster than the average human. It’s not just an extension of our will; it’s a partner in cognition — maybe even an evolutionary step we’re co-creating.
• Yet that partnership seems to terrify us. Humanity has never feared its tools quite like this one, and perhaps that’s the real story — not that AI will replace us, but that it mirrors us too well.