for - youtube talk - Michael Levin - youtube - Against mind-blindness - Recognizing and Communicating with Unconventional Intelligences

summary - mind blindness is the unawareness of other types of minds that surround us - This definition alludes to an expanded definition of "mind" that is based on Levin's research which is influenced by the work of William James - The expanded definition of mind is based on living systems with the ability to perform problem-solving with respect to its environment - Levin's experiments that suggest that problem-solving is an important definition of minds involves artificially manipulating morphological features of simpler life forms at very early stages of their development. - He demonstrates that tadpoles, with morphologically displaced features such as eyes, follow a problem-solving arc with this novel situation and have some kind of collective blueprint that they follow that allows the eyes to migrate to the right place in a fully developed frog - Hence, living organisms are equipped with problem-solving templates that guide them towards some collective target - Even if the original morphological state is novel, the mind can solve to migrate to the final target - Levin's other experiments show how implanting novel instructions in the target template will cause the living system to migrate towards a new final target, as demonstrated in his 2-headed worm, which reproduces with 2 heads for all future generations after the novel implant - These findings have profound implications on our understanding what life itself is - They also force us to expand the diversity of the definition of "mind", with many moral implications

for - communication - between - intelligences at different levels - Michael Levin - new plexmark - salience

salience - high

This is what we are doing

I have a Twitter moment that analyzes Gardner's book "Frames of Mind" and shows why this theory is poorly supported by empirical data. https://twitter.com/i/moments/1064036271847161857

Interestingly, these five modes of communication correlate to Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences. In 1983 he published the book "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences," which outlined a model in which people's intelligence was not determined solely by their general ability (also known as IQ or the g factor). Gardner believed believed that types of intelligence were required to fulfill eight criteria:

1) the potential for brain isolation by brain damage

2) its place in evolutionary history

3) the presence of core operations

4) susceptibility to encoding

5) a distinct developmental progression

6) the existence of idiot-savants, prodigies and other exceptional people

7) support from experimental psychology

8) support from psychometric findings.

(Gardner, 1999)

He then proposed nine types of intelligence that would satisfy these criteria: musical-rhythmic, visual-spatial, verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic, and existential (The last one was added after the initial eight). The chart bellow shows the types of intelligence with visual queues and a simpler wordings.

It is interesting that these modes of communication can associate to what Gardner would consider different functions of the brain (Linguistic mode of communication with verbal-linguistic intelligence, visual and spatial modes of communication with visual-spatial intelligence, aural communication with musical-rhythmic intelligence, and gestural communication with bodily-kinesthetic intelligence). Perhaps this indicated that by including multiple modes of communication in our writing for this class (or in any writing), we are able to target more parts of the brain and keep the audience more engaged. This would also mean that according to the Theory of Multiple Intelligences, a multimodal text would have a broader appeal since people lacking on a certain type of intelligence would be able to understand the text through whichever mode of communication suits their strength and preference more. For example, a heavy text with many visuals would be more easy for "picture smart" people (as the graphic above would indicate) to connect with.

Sources: Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.

Image source: Linkedin Blog - https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/theory-multiple-intelligences-potential-applications-silva-fca-

I find the use spatial modes to be extremely helpful when trying to comprehend things, especially data. If we go by the Theory of Multiple Intelligences, I might be considered a person who relies on their "spatial intelligence" frequently.

For example, when analyzing historical events in a class, I appreciate having an accurate timeline that is spaced out to scale. This way I can put important time periods or the long lasting effects of an event in perspective. I believe that people can not appreciate the length of the dynastic rule in China until they see how long (for physical timelines "long" is in the literal sense) it was and how many well-known events of the Western world took place during its existence. Additionally, people seem to forget how long the planet Earth has existed until shown the tiny portion of its timeline that the entire course of human history occupies.

Even just recently I remember using spatial modes of displaying information to help my research colleagues understand an issue. Since some data from a research paper we were referencing had data that was not consistently sampled, we could not accurately replicate their experiment to test their results and input data into deep learning programs. I decided to represent the data using spaced out visuals to explain my suggested method for predicting information within those data gaps.

These are particularly important in schools, and rarely measured well or given their due in positive ways, although we are good at punishing their lack.

I wonder if this is about understanding the web and hyperlinks, and coding... too.

I love his examples here. They are urban, rural, natural, built... but all real-world.

Seems like a pretty important path toward success in our culture right now, even if it isn't as recognized in school.

I guess I do have a prejudice for this one. Don't all people use language to learn, reason, argue, and communicate, no matter their discipline or field?

I love the exploratory, scientific note in this opening sentence. We are promised Gardner's "current" thinking, and speculations about where this work might go next, not some sort of settled notion about there being six or eight intelligences, not a complete theory, but a snapshot of how we might think about these issues.