• Corpus ID: 12140045

The Three Languages of the Brain: Quantum, Reorganizational, and Associative

@inproceedings{Kak1996TheTL,
  title={The Three Languages of the Brain: Quantum, Reorganizational, and Associative},
  author={Subhash C. Kak and Karl H. Pribram and Joseph S. King},
  year={1996}
}

• S. Kak, K. Pribram, J. S. King
• Published 1996
• Philosophy

Progress in science is reflected in a corresponding development of language. The vistas opened up by the microscope, the telescope, tomography and other sensing devices have resulted in the naming of new entities and processes. Quantum theory has led to the supersession of the classical atomic picture and one speaks in terms of tangled processes and non-binary logic. Quantum theory has also led to deep questions related to the definition of the observer and the observed. This has been one path to the examination of the mystery of mind. The other paths are rooted in ancient philosophical traditions and the psychological theories of the past century. The language for the description of the mind in scientific discourse has not kept pace with the developments in the physical sciences. The mainstream discussion has moved from the earlier dualistic models of common belief to one based on the emergence of mind from the complexity of the parallel computer-like brain processes. The two old paradigms of determinism and autonomy, expressed sometimes in terms of separation and interconnectedness, show up in various guises. Which of the two of these is in favor depends on the field of research and the prevailing fashions. Although quantum theory has provided the foundation for physical sciences for seventy years, it is only recently that holistic, quantum-like operations in the brain have been considered. This fresh look has been prompted by the setbacks suffered by the various artificial intelligence (AI) projects and also by new analysis and experimental findings. It is being recognized that stimulus-response constructs such as “drive” are often inadequate in providing explanations; and one invokes the category “effort” to explain autonomous behavior. Karl Pribram’s classic Languages of the Brain (1971) describes many paradoxes in the standard linguistic and logical categories used in describing brain behavior. Since that book was written many new approaches have been tried and found wanting in resolving these paradoxes. The languages used to describe the workings of the brain have been modeled after the dominant scientific paradigm of the age. The rise of mechanistic science saw the conceptu-