> According to Chater, our minds can only do one thing at a time — that is, that we cannot have two thoughts at once, and the idea that we can is an illusion.

> According to Chater, our minds can only do one thing at a time — that is, that we cannot have two thoughts at once, and the idea that we can is an illusion. On a pure neurological basis, this is just untrue. It's well-established in research that the brain is massively parallel and one of the main differences between it and a digital computer is that it is doing a lot of different things all at once, not switching between different things quickly. Here are some references: [0] https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/1946/difference-between-parallel-processing-done-by-human-brain-and-by-computers https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/1946/differen... (good lay explanation) [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4387515/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4387515/ [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/parallel-processing https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/parallel-p... [3] https://esmed.org/parallel-processing-in-problem-solving-a-new-perspective/ https://esmed.org/parallel-processing-in-problem-solving-a-n... (For the papers, I'm not necessarily advocating for their conclusions, but they're a good jumping-off point to see all the things they cite, which shows a consensus about how the brain works neurologically.) I suppose that doesn't mean that our conscious cognition must also be parallel, but there's not really a lot of good reason to assume it _wouldn't_ be, other than that it fits Chater's position.