Look Thinking in the eye (week 1)

My thinking process in two directions. Given the stimuli is interesting or uninteresting my reaction will differ. Most often I enjoy the flow of connections that create an idea that I would enjoy translating (via 5 senses). To grow more connections or enhancement in every  is the   admit sometimes I can not connect my thoughts to the appropriate word which then create a confusion or misunderstood translations. My general goal is to understand my thought process and I believe technology can help!

First Annual State of the Blog Address (wk 5)

My Fellow Americans,

The state in which my project currently reside is to follow the path of Neurotechnology with a focus toward medical/health advancements. Within the first couple of weeks my focus of research was toward Neurotechnology’s influence between human communication. The idea of Neurotechnology enhancing the style of communication an individual expressed to another was my focus within the third week. Within the fourth week  I stumbled open an article that uncovered Neurotechnology sending electric pulse(s) from the brain to heal an area of the body that is unhealthy rather physically or mentally I find to be incredible. Therefore my project has evolved into the concentration of Neurotechnology and healing. I question that if Neurotechnology were a focus within the medical field, would the health professional be projected as the healer or would the technology control the health professional and the device itself be viewed as the healer.

My research in focus of medical Neurotechnology has been a breeze, it seems biomedical engineers have been working on an advanced piece of Neurotechnology since the 90’s and that it’s progress has been revolutional.

To close, I would like to thank Professor Coats, for his advise. In our conference we discussed what information would benefit my project description. He also guided me to the path of medical Neurotechnology with the example he gave of ‘he and his wife visit to the doctor. His wife was pregnant and they went to have a sonograph of the child . Coasts described there was a Sonographer and a Sonographist, the difference is the Sonographer controlled the imaging machine, translated the information to the Sonographist and the Sonographist translated the information to Mr. and Mrs. Coats. I found this appealing because the monographer had to study the machine which translate information into codes (another form of language) that health professionals will have to learn as Neurotechnology continue to progress.

Tweet Reflection (week 4)

It is incredible to communicate. Especially from the comfort of your home. Twitter is an efficient way to broadcast your ideas as that come to mind. The process is simple which is my favorite quality. I have learned that my peers have a wide variety of inquiry topics which is really motivating because we can still experience a discussion of different topics in one place vs. searching the web for information.  I believe having an understanding of your main interest from different angles and from other personal perspectives is the art of learning.

Helen, is interested in technology and communication as I am. Her focus is toward robotics. I feel our inquiry projects connect because robotics is a form of engineering yet still use technology and communication. We are both interested in understanding if neurotechnology will control robotics.

 

Panning for Nuggets (Wk 4)

Nugget 1: This McNugget is so interesting because it proves in a way that technology is advancing. Scientist has told the public for many years that artificial neuro systems could not be implanted. Having a brainstem implant (which is the area that transmit information to the brain) is a major successful, this nugget keeps me hopeful for future neurotechnology.

Nugget 2: Brain to Brain connects to my above post of the brain stem implant because I assume within future technology a small chip or molecular piece could inhibit the brain stem which is the stem that transmit information to the brain and from the brain to the body. More over the article  discuss the pros and cons of this advancement also the tedious work behind the engineering process.

Nugget 3: My above nuggets all interconnect with this nugget, which describe mind to mind communication. It’s interesting to think of how mind to mind gaming will evolve, the article describe the benefits that medicine will uncover with neurotechnology in which a signal that is induced from the doctor to the area that needs to be improved cured  will be light work vs surgery and the healing  process will happen naturally.

Portable Engelbart (wk 4)

Both Nuggets I have chosen are from

Chapter II, “Conceptual Framework,” parts A (“General”) and B (“The Basic Perspective”)

1. Normonique Williams: “Language–the way in which the individual parcels out the picture of his world into the concepts that his mind uses to model that world, and the symbols that he attaches to those concepts and uses in consciously manipulating the concepts (“thinking”).” II, Part A

My Paraphrase: Learning is in the form of communication. Neurotechnology has the potential to enhance our personal communication inside and outside (how we interpret) our body.

 

2. Mariah Kahn: (general) “The individual does not use this information and this processing to grapple directly with the sort of complex situation in which we seek to give him help. He uses his innate capabilities in a rather more indirect fashion, since the situation is generally too complex to yield directly to his motor actions, and always too complex to yield comprehensions and solutions from direct sensory inspection and use of basic cognitive capabilities. For instance, an aborigine who possesses all of our basic sensory-mental-motor capabilities, but does not possess our background of indirect knowledge and procedure, cannot organize the proper direct actions necessary to drive a car through traffic, request a book from the library, call a committee meeting to discuss a tentative plan, call someone on the telephone, or compose a letter on the typewriter.”

My Paraphrase: Technology and human can never be at one because technology does not have the capability to transform human stimulus/reaction system not interpret the communication purely.

 

I chose to elaborate on Kahn’s nugget because it connects to my topic of Neurotechnology indirectly. I believe Kahn argument is that technology and human can never be one because technology is not the same as the human.  Which will lead to misinterpreted information. While my argument is that learning is formed from communication, in which Neurotechnology can advance communication if there is a bond directly from the brain, for instance mind to mind.

Nugget, Week 4 (Ted Nelson)

Third-Eye

Week 4 Nugget   “For every dream, many details and intricacies have to be whittled and interlocked. Their joint ramifications must be deeply understood by the person who is trying to create whatever-it-is. Each confabulation of possibilities turns out to have the most intricate and exactly detailed results. (This is why I am so irritated by those who think “electronic media” are all alike.)” Pg. 306 Ted Nelson, Computer Lib/Dream Machines. The meaning behind the text is astounding. I see it as an unlimited introduction to a new style of communication. As I proposed in my Dreamer’s Unite blog, technology is allowing people to connect on a broad level. The field of Neurotechnology demonstrate how technology and our mind(brain) is creating a new style of communication. In which everyone has to learn the language to communicate/ engage. This language of Neurotechnology captures my interest because from the passage ‘For every dream many details and intricacies have to be whittled and interlocked.’ Nelson argue that computers will allow people to have a deeper form of communication. What I bottled from this quote is the future ideam of Neurotechnology tapping into the dream world. I believe in the future however far it may be, that people will discover a way to connect with a person’s third eye (their mind). As I dig deeper into this idea it’s terrifying to think how this source of communication can be used for destruction but even more amazingly communication will be untouched, pure. People would not have to translate their ideas/thoughts into language to communicate it would be the action of Neurotechnology that handle this process. As most, understand dreams are our hidden motives, our deep feelings in which we may never allow to surface into communication (or don’t know how) and some dreams are the cause of an individual style of communication and personality. Nelson, goes on to say ‘Their joint ramifications must be deeply understood by the person who is trying to create whatever-it-is.’ I interpret this as, although many individuals have not mastered the art of communicating through technology and creating/proposing the same idea they began with, somewhere through technology the initial message lose value while being translated. This is definitely a con of technology in which I believe Neurotechnology will translate communication clearly, without adaptions, but purely from the sources’ mind.

 

EDIT

 

1.  Kahn, blog was very interesting, I love the expression used ‘ Knowledge is power, so it tends to be hoarded.’ I agree with Kahn on the concept that someone whom is not educated of a topic can teach themselves’ within minutes.

2. Helena and I have contrasting ideas that computers are inhumane,  while I believe if technology/computers are built to aid in humane interactions with one another rather than with the computer/technology itself, it will become humane.

3. Jawad and I agree tremendously that technology can surface a humans’ dream. Jawad make an interesting approach that technology was formed on the basis of human being able to interpret/communicate it’s dreams and fantasies.