As a direct consequence of the evolution of the human social brain, and owing to the importance of our theory-of-mind skills in that process, we sometimes can't help but see intentions, desires, and beliefs in things that haven't even a smidgeon of a neural system. In particular, when inanimate objects do unexpected things, we sometimes reason about them just as we do for oddly behaving—or misbehaving—people. More than a few of us have kicked our broken-down vehicles in the sides and verbally abused our incompetent computers. Most of us stop short of actually believing these objects possess mental states—indeed, we would likely be hauled away to an asylum if we genuinely believed that they held malicious intent—but our emotions and behaviors toward such objects seem to betray our primitive, unconscious thinking: we act as though they're morally culpable for their actions.
1More
Eight (No, Nine!) Problems With Big Data - NYTimes.com - 0 views
1More
Is Coding the New Literacy? | Mother Jones - 0 views
3More
Mathematicians dispute claims that the 'golden ratio' is a natural blueprint for beauty... - 0 views
2More
Why can't the world's greatest minds solve the mystery of consciousness? | Oliver Burke... - 0 views
1More
The Doomsday Invention - The New Yorker - 1 views
‹ Previous
21 - 40 of 44
Next ›
Showing 20▼ items per page