I’ve long maintained that music composition and computer programming have a •huge• overlap in the brain, at least in my own experience — and that overlap has something to do with spatial relationships.
Interesting remarks on the topic from @adamshostack: https://infosec.exchange/@adamshostack/113901574936360113
(First post in the thread, which got disconnected from the others: https://infosec.exchange/@adamshostack/113901572725807543)
@inthehands Musicians were very highly represented amongst WWII cryptographers. I always thought about that was more about patterns and variations than about space.
@adamshostack @inthehands those all appear to be related, from what I've seen. Also, I've noticed that people on the autism spectrum seem to be overrepresented in cryptography as well.
@adamshostack
I would venture (in my cognitive science ignorance) that our brains might use structures that evolved to do spatial reasoning in order to think about patterns and variation.
@inthehands My next book shall be titled "Led astray by Dan Kahneman." It shall be very, very short. ;)
@adamshostack
I'd read it (given that I just had to search “kahneman”)!
@inthehands His Thinking Fast and Slow is a freaking masterpiece on many levels, including accessibility, clear science writing...
@adamshostack
Oh, I know the title. Gotta pick it up one of these days.
@inthehands @adamshostack My lay theory is that good music and good code (for my definition of good!) are similar in that they need enough common structure to be understandable, enough novelty to be interesting. Also: the deeper and broader ones understanding of theory (music, programming), the less structure is required.
@inthehands @adamshostack
Music and mathematics - and coding, and puzzles - do seem to use much the same kind of abilities.
But different people seem to deploy very different strategies. I think spatially; whether music or code I see it laid out in my mind's eye.
But my wife doesn't think spatially *at all.* And she is a graphic designer - a profession you'd think spatial reasoning is pretty important.
@jannem @adamshostack
For sure. I think I've even seen reporting on some studies that found using fMRI that while some brain tasks are situated in similar locations for most everyone, others vary wildly from person to person? Can't remember whether I'm making that up….
@inthehands @jannem about 15 years ago I read a book by a Berkely prof who had some very principles critiques of fMRI study designs, and advocated that a lot of our thinking is embodied. I really wish I could find it.
@adamshostack @jannem
Sounds like good stuff. I probably already agree with it.
@adamshostack @inthehands
So; I'm a former computational neuroscientist - but not a specialist in imaging or gross anatomy.
At a larger scale, with otherwise intact brains, everybody has the same areas in much the same place. Much like with limbs, organs and so on. Yes, things can occasionally be mirrored, or vagaries of genetics or injury means you may have lost some functionality, but overall it's true.
And during an experiment you're not really relying too much on the exact position.
1/2
@adamshostack @inthehands
You look at the difference in activation between stimuli or no stimuli, and you don't get too hung up on exactly (by mm) where the activation is.
But there are real limits to imaging, and they do include simplifying assumptions that are not always true. A good research program controls for that. With a bad one you get results from a dead salmon.
But that is true for all research - and all human activity. If you do stuff badly, the results won't be good.