Theorigenic blindness ++
Building courseware is an intense learning experience. Every time I run into a function that needs an animation, I have to study and understand the mechanism first. I don't need to study the pieces that were well known before 1980; I already studied those. But a surprising number of mechanisms weren't even SEEN before 1980, let alone understood.

One such is the cochlea's automatic gain control and automatic frequency emphasizer. Magnificently complicated, with some 'firmware' in the neural pathways, some 'software' in the cortex, some big visible 'hardware' to tighten the eardrum, and a lot of 'hardware' at the microscopic level of the hair cells.** The big tensor tympani has been seen and understood for a century; the other pieces have only been seen in the last 20 years, and are only partly understood.

Most of the researchers are proper Carverian scientists. Take hold of the THINGS THAT ARE HERE, talk to them, let them talk to you. Or in this case, listen to them and let them listen to you.

Some of them are blinded by Darwin, and doubly blinded by their own fixed prejudice about Nature.

From a pretty good Wikipedia article:

The strength of the reflex is weakest for pure tones, and becomes stronger as the bandwidth of the sound is increased. ... Animals with the strongest MOC reflex sustain less hearing damage to loud sounds. This proposed biological role of the MOCS, protection from loud sounds, was challenged by Kirk and Smith (2003), who argued that the intensity of sounds used in the experiments (≥105 dB SPL) would rarely or never occur in nature, and therefore a protective mechanism for sounds of such intensities could not have evolved.

Kirk and Smith are blinded by Darwin. If the mechanism couldn't have evolved, it doesn't exist. And they are doubly blinded by a preconception.

Ideally science should abandon all theories. If you MUST use a theory, you should use it to predict unknown situations.

Proper Darwin syllogism:

1. Experiments show that the feedback mechanism kicks in at 105 dB.

2. It must have evolved to increase fitness.

3. Therefore we need to find a situation where loud sounds make survival difficult. [Hint: an animal that owns a larynx can easily produce far more than 105 dB inside the skull with an ordinary 'conversational' noise.]


Instead, Kirk and Smith believe they know the Savannah Sabertooth world based on David Attenborough and TED Talks. Their TV version of Nature is quiet, so the mechanism couldn't exist.

= = = = =

** New thought: This pattern repeats in many different areas of nature from human senses to plants. A purpose is achieved by three or four unrelated categories of design. Software, firmware, mechanisms controlled by software, and self-regulating machines. This pattern suggests that the designers were a team, not a single intelligence. Five or six intelligences competing to solve the same problem and achieve the same purpose. Sometimes two or three of the solutions faded out but remained in the Grand Blueprint for later use.

Labels: Carver, Experiential education, Grand Blueprint

  ¶ 7:54 AM