The post-modern mind

[see: the mind is not like a computer and making modern minds]

Post-modern theories of human identity, according to Sherry Turkle (1995, pX), are characterised by terms such as decentred, fluid, non-linear, and opaque. This shift towards a post-modern view of self is reflected in new theories describing human cognition and human psychology. Older models of cognition likened our minds to computers, with our neural systems processing words in distinct stages. Cognition was regarded as being either on or off, and in a static state in between. The new model suggests sensory input is processed continuously you do not have to be in one state or another like a computer, but can have values in between - you can be partially in one state and another.

Another example of a shift in thinking away from the singular and the distinct is that of human psychology. One popular doctrine is that the mind is massively modular containing hundreds of thousands of functionally specialised 'mental-organs', each dedicated to solve a single problem. An emerging (perhaps 'post-modern') theory is that in designing the human brain, evolution hit upon a different solution: a plasticity that allows the brain to adapt to highly variable and often rapidly changing environments.

So here we have models of the brain which describe it as fluid, and adaptable - much like post-modern characterisations of self and identity. I especially like this quote from the New Scientist article: "human psychological evolution was driven by rapidly changing environmental demands, and that the adaptive response to these changing demands was neural plasticity." A plastic self. Clearly scientific theory is influenced by the cultural environment in which researchers find themselves, however it is encouraging that these theories suggest an adaptive and versatile brain - which is not unlike the suggestions endorsed by Sherry Turkle (1995) describing identity, specifically online identity.

The multi-terrained and highly diverse online world selects for those individuals who are flexible and adaptive. This is similar to the Coffield (2004) critique of Learning Styles which grouped learning style models along a continuum - at one end those claiming that learning styles are constitutionally fixed, and the other those which are flexible and open to change. His conclusion was that the flexible learners with the more open learning styles did well irrespective of the the learning situation. [Note: I am paraphrasing. I need to re-read for reliability.]

[tag: identity]