5 ms·

I always wondered how our brain is pre-wired to recognize 3D objects right after a birth, but this article is saying that eyes are giving fake image-like input

by euske 5y ago

I always wondered how our brain is pre-wired to recognize 3D objects right after a birth, but this article is saying that eyes are giving fake image-like input to our brain so that it can perform "pre-training"? Does this imply that our brain is truly a blank slate if these initial seeds aren't given?

fossuser 5y ago
I don't think brains are pre-wired to recognize 3D objects. There was an example case of a blind man with cataracts getting it fixed at around 50 years old. People were curious if he would be able to know if a sphere was round just by looking at it without touching it. IIRC - not only could he not do that, but he couldn't visually interpret shadows (saw them as black splotches - didn't recognize depth), and was confused why objects got smaller as they were moving away. I think the human visual system trains on a lot of visual input data, but it typically happens at the baby stage where you can't really interact.
- echelon 5y ago
  Fascinating anecdote, and I'd love to see the report on this. I wonder what else they learned from such an interesting case study. But I doubt it's 100% "no pre-wiring". What about gravity and musculature? Surely brains must know or train on these in some way before birth. And what about fight or flight reflexes and presupposing monsters in the shadows? My understanding is that these had a primitive evolutionary basis and that we came hardwired to respond to certain stimuli.
  - fossuser 5y ago
    Yeah - I just meant specifically 3D visual modeling. I think some fears are known to be innate among apes - fear of the dark, snakes, and falling. Also paying attention to faces? The cataracts thing was an article I saw on HN a few years ago, but don’t remember the title.
    - jolmg 5y ago
      > don’t remember the title. Found this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17687533 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17687533 which leads to: https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/people-cured-blindness-see/amp https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/people-cured-blindne... which leads to: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1993/05/10/to-see-and-not-see?intcid=inline_amp https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1993/05/10/to-see-and-not... > TO SEE AND NOT SEE By Oliver Sacks May 2, 1993 > A NEUROLOGIST'S NOTEBOOK about Virgil (pseud.), who lost his eyesight as a child, and regained it at age 50. Tells how he could not adjust to the sighted world, and eventually had to be hospitalized. Unfortunately, it needs a New Yorker account to view.
      - fossuser 5y ago
        Yep - that looks like the stuff I was remembering, nice find.
  - lostmsu 5y ago
    What about musculature? Human babies mostly just violently shake all hands and legs right after birth.
    - jolmg 5y ago
      Gravity is probably also learned at the same time we learn how to use our muscles from how we must compensate for it when moving, also from seeing how things have a tendency to approach the ground unless something gets in the way, and from the sound things make when they hit the floor. I don't think there's much opportunity to experience gravity before birth in order to train it, and I can't think of anything the brain would need to know about gravity beyond how we experience it with our senses. > And what about fight or flight reflexes and presupposing monsters in the shadows? My understanding is that these had a primitive evolutionary basis and that we came hardwired to respond to certain stimuli. Maybe pre-wired behaviors can depend on non-pre-wired stimuli, like a function that's conditioned on an undefined function and evaluates to false on exception.
Davidzheng 5y ago
sorry but I don't think there is any sense in which the infant brain is a blank slate. Definitely not for vital functions (as seen by the "instinctual" abilities noted elsewhere in this thread, not in language/cognition, and IMO not even culturally/morally.

by euske 5y ago

fossuser 5y ago

I don't think brains are pre-wired to recognize 3D objects. There was an example case of a blind man with cataracts getting it fixed at around 50 years old. People were curious if he would be able to know if a sphere was round just by looking at it without touching it. IIRC - not only could he not do that, but he couldn't visually interpret shadows (saw them as black splotches - didn't recognize depth), and was confused why objects got smaller as they were moving away. I think the human visual system trains on a lot of visual input data, but it typically happens at the baby stage where you can't really interact.

echelon 5y ago
Fascinating anecdote, and I'd love to see the report on this. I wonder what else they learned from such an interesting case study. But I doubt it's 100% "no pre-wiring". What about gravity and musculature? Surely brains must know or train on these in some way before birth. And what about fight or flight reflexes and presupposing monsters in the shadows? My understanding is that these had a primitive evolutionary basis and that we came hardwired to respond to certain stimuli.
- fossuser 5y ago
  Yeah - I just meant specifically 3D visual modeling. I think some fears are known to be innate among apes - fear of the dark, snakes, and falling. Also paying attention to faces? The cataracts thing was an article I saw on HN a few years ago, but don’t remember the title.
  - jolmg 5y ago
    > don’t remember the title. Found this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17687533 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17687533 which leads to: https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/people-cured-blindness-see/amp https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/people-cured-blindne... which leads to: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1993/05/10/to-see-and-not-see?intcid=inline_amp https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1993/05/10/to-see-and-not... > TO SEE AND NOT SEE By Oliver Sacks May 2, 1993 > A NEUROLOGIST'S NOTEBOOK about Virgil (pseud.), who lost his eyesight as a child, and regained it at age 50. Tells how he could not adjust to the sighted world, and eventually had to be hospitalized. Unfortunately, it needs a New Yorker account to view.
    - fossuser 5y ago
      Yep - that looks like the stuff I was remembering, nice find.
- lostmsu 5y ago
  What about musculature? Human babies mostly just violently shake all hands and legs right after birth.
  - jolmg 5y ago
    Gravity is probably also learned at the same time we learn how to use our muscles from how we must compensate for it when moving, also from seeing how things have a tendency to approach the ground unless something gets in the way, and from the sound things make when they hit the floor. I don't think there's much opportunity to experience gravity before birth in order to train it, and I can't think of anything the brain would need to know about gravity beyond how we experience it with our senses. > And what about fight or flight reflexes and presupposing monsters in the shadows? My understanding is that these had a primitive evolutionary basis and that we came hardwired to respond to certain stimuli. Maybe pre-wired behaviors can depend on non-pre-wired stimuli, like a function that's conditioned on an undefined function and evaluates to false on exception.

Davidzheng 5y ago

sorry but I don't think there is any sense in which the infant brain is a blank slate. Definitely not for vital functions (as seen by the "instinctual" abilities noted elsewhere in this thread, not in language/cognition, and IMO not even culturally/morally.