development
processes of humans as they move from infancy to adulthood. We will consider
this parallel in more detail just a bit further on.
We have been
considering human and computer memory. We have expressed memory as a
representation of the sensori-motor system that we can reference over time. We
use memory to establish context and within that context, we can store and then
correctly interpret the recollection of the experiential stimuli and the motor
action responses of our mind and body. As we have noted, we do not yet fully
understand the basic unit of memory storage within the mind. Moreover, humans
apparently do not have an instinctive facility for conveying such units, that
is, our memory recollections, between individuals. Thus, it was certainly a
mutational event when the species developed the means of such conveyance. In
essence, an additional facet was added to the concept of memory. We represent
certain contextual interpretation of sensory input and motor action response
through language and we are then able
to convey this interpretation among individuals. We discussed some of the basic
characteristics of language in Chapter 4. Along the way, we have alluded to
computer programming by referring to formal languages. It might be useful at
this point to take at least a cursory look at the concepts and characteristics
of these programming languages as an illustration of the bridge between human
and computer approaches to cognition.
The march of
computers from the time of their emergence until the present follows a path
well marked by the progression of languages that have been used to effect their
inner workings. All of these languages have been formal languages, but there
has been a constant striving to match the natural language facilities of
computers’ creators. In so doing, there has been a corresponding effort to
expand the sensori-motor framework for the metaphorical understanding that
accompanies language. With the emergence of secure cores as a derivative but
highly specialized form of computer, the spectrum of languages was revisited,
with all of the same considerations behind the march and with all the same results
in the passing.
Given the small
size and relatively slow processor speeds of the earliest secure cores, their
initial languages were tightly coupled to the processor foundation of the
integrated circuit chip that is the heart and soul of the token. Any processing
unit has its basic instruction set grounded in the sensori-motor world that
forms its metaphorical base. In the case of secure core systems, this
encompasses a vision constrained by very slow and simple input/output to the
external environment and an ability to manipulate binary bit patterns in small
and slowly accessed memory units. This said, we would now expand on general
computer languages.
The basic
sensori-motor environment of a general-purpose computer is that of a string of
bits, zeroes and ones that can be addressed, accessed and manipulated. The
basic instructions required to perform computer-level cognitive functions are
bit-manipulation, bit-test and transfer to specific address for the next
instruction; different computer processors will make use of a variety of these
basic operations. Through these basic operations, the computer must build up a
symbolic repertoire of objects and operations on those objects that it knows
how to deal with. So, let’s consider some of the panoply of programming
languages, not to learn any significant number of details about specific
languages, but rather to understand some of the very broad characteristics of
each that made it useful for addressing certain types of problems.
|