Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Mark Changizi | June 21st 2009 01:00 PM | 11 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
Your color vision is not for seeing red sunsets or green grass; rather, it evolved as a kind of empath sense, optimized to detect the changes in blood physiology in the skin of the faces (and rumps) of others, thereby sensing their emotions.

Your forward-facing eyes are not for seeing in depth, but, rather, for significantly enhancing how much you can see in the cluttered forest habitats of your ancestors.

Perceptual illusions are not errors your visual system makes in trying to make sense of three-dimensional scenes, but, instead, are due to your brain attempting to foresee the near future, so that by the time the brain generates a perception – which takes a tenth of a second – your perception is of the present.

And you have the ability to read not because you’re an especially smart ape (no offense), but because writing has culturally evolved to look like nature, just what your ape visual system is good at processing. 

My new book, and my column, is about these four stories; about why we see as we do; about our evolutionary origins; about how our visual capabilities mesh with the world around us. It is about the visual powers you never knew you had.

I need to implicitly make a broader point about scientific progress in understanding the brain. Outsiders to the cognitive and brain sciences can sometimes get the impression that we brain scientists have nearly unraveled the riddles of the brain. While it is true that we are making great strides, the real question is, How far away from the finish line are we?

Alas, I believe we are nowhere near the finish line; I put my money on several hundred years of brain-slogging left to go. Keep in mind that your brain is more complicated than the rest of the universe combined (minus all the other brains).

Truth is, relative to what needs to be known, we don’t know jack.

The reason we have so much work left is that we’re not built like the Arnold Schwarzenegger robot in the "Terminator" movie. Inside the Terminator’s body – or at least back in a lab where he was designed and manufactured (by other robots) – there are design specifications indicating what all his parts are for. If the Terminator were to become curious about what one of his brain parts is for, he could just gander at the “user’s manual” wherein all his capabilities are enumerated. And many of the Terminator’s perceptions have transparent functions, because his perceptions are often explicitly labeled with what they’re for (e.g., “body-heat sensing camera activated”).

Our brains aren’t nearly as scientifically friendly as the Terminator’s. Try as you might, you’ll find no user’s manual in our heads listing our capabilities. You’ll just find gray meat of questionable palatability. And when we perceive, we do so without the benefit of internal written labels explaining to us what the perception is for.

Evolution didn’t select us to have user-friendly parts; we weren’t designed to wear our functions – our powers – on our sleeves. What is missing in our understanding of the brain is this enumeration of our functions. Put simply, we don’t even know what we humans can do! And if we don’t know our powers, then we don’t even know what we need to explain. You can’t figure out how the brain carries out X if you don’t yet know we can do X! 

The four stories above are, as I mentioned earlier, about four powers we didn’t know we have: color is an empath power like that of the annoying Deanna Troi character in Star Trek; forward-facing eyes gives us a kind of “x-ray vision” power to see much better in cluttered habitats; illusions are the signature of our future-seeing power which allows us to perceive the present; and reading itself is a power, only made possible via a clever strategy culture used to make writing easily absorbable by our illiterate visual system.

These four heretofore undiscovered powers fundamentally change our view about what our brains can do, and consequently lead to fundamental shifts in the questions we must ask about the underpinnings in the brain. But if these fundamental human powers have only recently been uncovered, one can only imagine the teems of powers that are waiting to be discovered!

The brain sciences are filled with brilliant people, but most are not looking to answer such “why” questions. I hope that THE VISION REVOLUTION will excite more people to set their eyes on discovering our enigmatic powers.

Only then will we understand what needs to be explained in the brain, a necessary step toward an eventual “brain revolution.”

Comments

Interesting, I have always heard that color vision was an evolutionary adaptation to pick out ripe fruits among the background of greens and yellows found in the canopies that our ape ancestors inhabited.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Forward facing eyes are also the adaptation of predators (also for depth perception) since it is quite difficult to judge the distance to potential prey without it (be it weapons or direct attack).

Is that true? What about sharks, dinosaurs, hawks or snakes? Why don't they have forward facing eyes? You can't be right, that's got to be speculation.

Gerhard Adam's picture
There is going to be some variation depending on whether the predator is an "ambush" or "attack" predator.  In the latter case, the binocular vision becomes important to accurate judge the distance, whereas in the former case, the field of view may not need to be quite as precise, although I suspect greater accuracy is still required over prey animals.

http://library.thinkquest.org/28030/physio/stereo.htm


http://vetmed.illinois.edu/petcolumns/index.cfm?function=showarticle&id=116

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Bridge/4602/theropod_binocularvision.pdf

http://www.ruevideo.com/pdf/predatorsinaction.pdf

For the future sight. Do u know any way to help make it stronger. Like knowing what is really going to take place. When it is going to happen/ How long befor it is going to happen. Besides small clips then gets stronger and replaying 2 3 times before it happens. So that the person can prevent it to happen. And how does one tell someone that something is going to happen without knowing all the details?

Hi,

The color vision is not only to see the color and differentiate them.In my perception the color vision should also have the mean that we should also see the other thing of life in very colorful manner becoz all the nearby things has the scence and now strt to think in scenceful way.The god has given us the abiility to think, feel,listen,touch,watching etc so we should all those things very properly.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Mark;

As an addition to your comment about color vision and emotions, do you suppose this might also have to do with detecting deception?  After all, with the addition of language, the role of lying becomes a more significant (and costly) effect and given some of the work by Paul Ekman in detecting such deceptions, it seems that this may facilitate that kind of information.

Mark Changizi's picture
Well, color vision precedes language by some tens of millions of years, so not linguistic lying. Although for deceit generally, perhaps. Color signals are more honest signals.

Gerhard Adam's picture
Sorry, I should've clarified.  It's not so much the issue of color vision as it is the human hairless state which allows better interpretation.  As a result, issues like blushing, embarassment, and other expressions are easier to detect without all the hair.

The colors are in line with your statement regarding emotions, since that's part of the deception issue.

Mark Changizi's picture
Ah, I see.  Well, my *personal* opinion is that our hairless human state long precedes language, as I believe that language is an artifact that culturally evolved to be optimized for our non-linguistic brains (by mimicking nature). 

Gerhard Adam's picture
Actually, I realized after I posted this that it doesn't actually make much sense from an evolutionary perspective.  It would be hard to envision a natural selection criteria that would tie those elements together.  I suspect that whatever benefit was derived would've occurred after such a state.

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.