Toggle light / dark theme

The Neuroscience of Creativity, Perception, and Confirmation Bias.
Watch the newest video from Big Think: https://bigth.ink/NewVideo.
Join Big Think+ for exclusive videos: https://bigthink.com/plus/

To ensure your survival, your brain evolved to avoid one thing: uncertainty. As neuroscientist Beau Lotto points out, if your ancestors wondered for too long whether that noise was a predator or not, you wouldn’t be here right now. Our brains are geared to make fast assumptions, and questioning them in many cases quite literally equates to death. No wonder we’re so hardwired for confirmation bias. No wonder we’d rather stick to the status quo than risk the uncertainty of a better political model, a fairer financial system, or a healthier relationship pattern. But here’s the catch: as our brains evolved toward certainty, we simultaneously evolved away from creativity—that’s no coincidence; creativity starts with a question, with uncertainty, not with a cut and dried answer. To be creative, we have to unlearn millions of years of evolution. Creativity asks us to do that which is hardest: to question our assumptions, to doubt what we believe to be true. That is the only way to see differently. And if you think creativity is a chaotic and wild force, think again, says Beau Lotto. It just looks that way from the outside. The brain cannot make great leaps, it can only move linearly through mental possibilities. When a creative person forges a connection between two things that are, to your mind, so far apart, that’s a case of high-level logic. They have moved through steps that are invisible to you, perhaps because they are more open-minded and well-practiced in questioning their assumptions. Creativity, it seems, is another (highly sophisticated) form of logic. Beau Lotto is the author of Deviate: The Science of Seeing Differently.

BEAU LOTTO:

Beau Lotto is a professor of neuroscience, previously at University College London and now at the University of London, and a Visiting Scholar at New York University.

His work focuses on the biological, computational and psychological mechanisms of perception. He has conducted and presented research on human and bumblebee perception and behavior for more than 25 years, and his interest in education, business and the arts has led him into entrepreneurship and engaging the public with science.

In 2001, Beau founded the Lab of Misfits, a neuro-design studio that was resident for two years at London’s Science Museum and most recently at Viacom in New York. The lab’s experimental studio approach aims to deepen our understanding of human nature, advance personal and social well-being through research that places the public at the centre of the process of discovery, and create unique programmes of engagement that span the boundaries between people, disciplines and institutions. Originally from Seattle, with degrees from UC Berkeley and Edinburgh Medical School, he now lives in Oxford and New York.

Why do some people love Impressionist paintings like Claude Monet’s “Water Lilies” (1906) while others can’t understand the hype? The question of aesthetic taste has stumped scholars for centuries. Now, neuroscientists at the California Institute of Technology (CalTech) say they have come closer to decoding how the brain decides which artworks it deems good or attractive.

In a study published in the scientific journal Nature Communications, CalTech Professor John O’Doherty and other researchers propose that the mind creates an opinion of an artwork after dissecting it into discrete elements. Basic features, such as color and texture, and complex qualities, like style, are ranked and weighed individually to make a judgment.

“People on metformin have 30% lower rates of almost every kind of cancer. It delays cognitive decline. Even people with diabetes who are obese and have more disease to start with but are on metformin have lower mortality rates than people without diabetes who aren’t on the drug.”

What he says is born out in numerous studies. Overall, this safe, super-cheap, decades-old drug not only treats diabetes, but it also seems to delay and compress the years of chronic illness associated with the final stage of life and extend what geroscientists call the “healthspan.”

Metformin is just one of many medications, including other old ones and some brand new inventions, that academic researchers and biotech startups are exploring to slow, stop, or perhaps even reverse aging.

► Twitter: https://twitter.com/weirdworldtv.
► Subscribe to Weird World: http://bit.ly/WeirdWorldSub.

NEW VIDEOS EVERY FRIDAY & SATURDAY!

#universe #weirdworld #science.

From the smallest atom to the largest galaxy, everything in the universe obeys the laws of physics, where our brains are made of the same atoms and molecules as the rest of the universe. So could we take this theory further and ask whether consciousness could be part of the underlying fabric of the universe. Humans have also managed to extend this to the internet where there is an eerie pattern between the universe the brain and the internet where experts have been asking the question whether the internet could one day develop its own consciousness. Maybe in the distant future all three will unite into one giant mind. Humans have always been fascinated with the thought that the universe somehow reflects us and whether the universe could be a giant brain. Let’s delve deeper into the trinity that is the universe, the brain and the internet.

Credits:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/universe-grows-like-a-giant-brain/

Your Brain, the Internet and the Universe Have Something Fascinating in Common

Music From AudioBlocks.com, Pond5.com.

While the mental has often played second fiddle to the physical when it comes to longevity research, this is changing – and not a moment too soon.

The physical and mental aspects of aging are interconnected, and given the strong connection between psychology and the physical pace of aging, poor mental health is starting to be recognised as a major driver of aging.

A raft of developments have demonstrated that physical lifespan and healthspan can be extended and improved, and now it is time for the longevity industry to achieve similar success when it comes to mental health. Sergey Jakimov, the CEO of Swiss investment group LongeVC agrees, and tells us why it’s time for VCs to get excited about backing startups delivering cutting-edge solutions for mental healthcare.

Elon Musk/courtesy of Yichuan Cao/NurPhoto via Getty Images

In 2022, Elon Musk’s Neuralink tried – and failed – to secure permission from the FDA to run a human trial of its implantable brain-computer interface (BCI), according to a Reuters report published Thursday.

Citing seven current and former employees, speaking on the condition of anonymity, Reuters reported that the regulatory agency found “dozens of issues” with Neuralink’s application that the company must resolve before it can begin studying its tech in humans.

Conor russomanno, founder and CEO of openbci eva esteban, embedded software engineer at openbci

Galea is an award-winning platform that merges next-generation biometrics with mixed reality. It is the first device to integrate a wide range of physiological signals, including EEG, EMG, EDA, PPG, and eye-tracking, into a single headset. In this session, Conor and Eva will provide a live demonstration of the device and its capabilities, showcasing its potential for a variety of applications, from gaming to training and rehabilitation. They will give an overview of the different hardware and software components of the system, highlighting how it can be used to analyze user experiences in real time. Attendees will get an opportunity to ask questions at the end.

John Danaher, Senior Lecturer in Law at the National University of Ireland (NUI) Galway:

“Understanding Techno-Moral Revolutions”

Talk held on August 24, 2021 for Colloquium of the Center for Humans and Machines at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin.

It is common to use ethical norms and standards to critically evaluate and regulate the development and use of emerging technologies like AI and Robotics. Indeed, the past few years has seen something of an explosion of interest in the ethical scrutiny of technology. What this emerging field of machine ethics tends to overlook, however, is the potential to use the development of novel technologies to critically evaluate our existing ethical norms and standards. History teaches us that social morality (the set of moral beliefs and practices shared within a given society) changes over time. Technology has sometimes played a crucial role in facilitating these historical moral revolutions. How will it do so in the future? Can we provide any meaningful answers to this question? This talk will argue that we can and will outline several tools for thinking about the mechanics of technologically-mediated moral revolutions.

About the Speaker:

John Danaher is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the National University of Ireland (NUI) Galway. He is the author of Automation and Utopia (Harvard 2019), co-author of A Citizen’s Guide to AI (MIT Press 2021) and the coeditor of Robot Sex: Social and Ethical Implications (MIT Press 2017). His research focuses on the ethics and law of emerging technologies. He has published papers on the risks of advanced AI, the meaning of life and the future of work, the ethics of human enhancement, the intersection of law and neuroscience, the utility of brain-based lie detection, and the philosophy of religion. His work has appeared in The Guardian, Aeon, and The Philosophers’ Magazine.

Summary: After discovering the importance of cell metabolism in neurogenesis, researchers were able to increase the number of neurons in the brains of adult and elderly mice.

Source: University of Geneva.

Some areas of the adult brain contain quiescent, or dormant, neural stem cells that can potentially be reactivated to form new neurons. However, the transition from quiescence to proliferation is still poorly understood.

The Big Bang is the name we have given to the moment at which the Universe began. While the idea is well known, it is often badly misunderstood. Even people with a good grasp of science have misconceptions about it. For instance, a common question is, “Where did the Big Bang happen?” And the answer to that question is a surprising one. So, let’s dive into it and try to understand where the misunderstanding arises.

When people are told of the Big Bang, they are commonly told that “all of the mass of the universe was packed into a point with zero volume called a singularity.” The singularity then “exploded,” expanding and cooling and eventually resulting in the Universe we see today. People draw from their own experience and analogize the Big Bang with something like a firecracker or a grenade — an object that sits in a location, then explodes, dispersing debris into existing space. This is a completely natural and reasonable mental image. It is also completely wrong.

The theory that describes the Big Bang is Einstein’s general theory of relativity. In it, Einstein describes gravity as the very shape of space as it bends and stretches. Near a star or planet, space is distorted; far from any celestial body, space is flat. If space is malleable, as the theory says it is, it can also be compressed or stretched.