RESEARCH · RESEARCH · #1525
Essay argues human brains are feedback-control systems and ill-suited to AI's cognitive effects
A media essay critiques the dominant computational view of mind in the AI industry, arguing that brains are better modelled as feedback-control systems (an approach advocated by neuroscientist Paul Cisek) and warning that current AI tools act like "cognitive junk food," tempting but ultimately harmful to human cognition and cultural systems. The piece contrasts the computational/reverse-engineering framing with an evolution-informed control-based perspective and cites several thinkers (Turing, von Neumann, Wiener, Dewey) and industry figures (Demis Hassabis, Elon Musk).
KEY POINTS
- A media essay critiques the dominant computational view of mind in the AI industry, arguing that brains are better modelled as feedback-control systems (an approach advocated by neuroscientist Paul Cisek) and warning that current AI tools act like "cognitive junk food," tempting but ultimately harmful to human cognition and cultural systems.
- The piece contrasts the computational/reverse-engineering framing with an evolution-informed control-based perspective and cites several thinkers (Turing, von Neumann, Wiener, Dewey) and industry figures (Demis Hassabis, Elon Musk).
- Frames an alternative, evolution-informed neuroscience model that challenges common AI metaphors and highlights potential cognitive and cultural harms from current AI tools.
WHY IT MATTERS
Frames an alternative, evolution-informed neuroscience model that challenges common AI metaphors and highlights potential cognitive and cultural harms from current AI tools.