Selective information processing in neural networks is studied through computer simulations of Pavlovian conditioning data. The model reproduces properties of blocking, inverted-U in learning as a function of interstimulus interval, anticipatory conditioned responses, secondary reinforcement, attentional focusing by conditioned motivational feedback, and limited capacity short-term memory processing. Conditioning occurs from sensory to drive representations (conditioned reinforcer learning), from drive to sensory representations (incentive motivational learning), and from sensory to motor representations (habit learning).The conditionable pathwas contain long-term memory traces that obey a non-Hebbian associative law. The neural model embodies a solution to two key design problems of conditioning, the synchronization and persistence problems. This model of vertebrate learning is compared with data and models of invertebrate learning. Predictions derived from models of vertebrate learning are compared with data about invertebrate learning, including data from Aplysia about facilitator neurons and data from Hermissenda about voltage-dependent Ca(2+) currents. A prediction is stated about classical conditioning in all species, called the secondary conditioning alternative, and if confirmed would constitute an evolutionary invariant of learning.

No abstract

There is ample evidence that humans (and other primates) possess a knowledge instinct-a biologically driven impulse to make coherent sense of the world at the highest level possible. Yet behavioral decision-making data suggest a contrary biological drive to minimize cognitive effort by solving problems using simplifying heuristics. Individuals differ, and the same person varies over time, in the strength of the knowledge instinct. Neuroimaging studies suggest which brain regions might mediate the balance between knowledge expansion and heuristic simplification. One region implicated in primary emotional experience is more activated in individuals who use primitive heuristics, whereas two areas of the cortex are more activated in individuals with a strong knowledge drive: one region implicated in detecting risk or conflict and another implicated in generating creative ideas. Knowledge maximization and effort minimization are both evolutionary adaptations, and both are valuable in different contexts. Effort minimization helps us make minor and routine decisions efficiently, whereas knowledge maximization connects us to the beautiful, to the sublime, and to our highest aspirations. We relate the opposition between the knowledge instinct and heuristics to the biblical story of the fall, and argue that the causal scientific worldview is mathematically equivalent to teleological arguments from final causes. Elements of a scientific program are formulated to address unresolved issues. Daniel S. Levine is a professor in the

No abstract

No abstract