Oliver Sacks The Mind's Eye Analysis

Oliver Sacks’s “The Mind’s Eye” is a nonfiction essay recounting the author’s work with people who have adapted to becoming blind in different ways. Sacks’s overarching argument with this essay is that the human brain has a great deal of plasticity, meaning that it is not simply “hardwired” (Sacks 330) like previously believed, but can actually change and adapt to its situation or environment. This concept of progressing current beliefs and understanding is echoed in Sherry Turkle’s writing on advanced artificial intelligence or AI, “Selections from Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other.” Turkle’s essay challenges society’s idea of “alive” in light of the progression of “sociable robots” (Turkle 460).

Turkle discusses hybridity as it relates to children and their toy Furbies being biological or mechanical: “If you focus on the Furby’s mechanical side, you can enjoy some of the pleasures of companionship without the risks of attachment to a pet or a person” (Turkle 474). The author’s choice of the word “focus” is associated with being active. Leaving the Furby in the mechanical category requires an active contribution from the child, focus on one side signifies consciously neglecting the characteristics of being “alive” that they could experience with a Furby. This example of purposefully neglecting hybridity dismisses the possibility that Furbies might be alive and thus limits the scope of one’s perception. A limited perception denies new experiences and opportunities for growth which is why having a “hybrid” mind is beneficial. Oliver Sacks presents an example of new found hybridity when he discusses scientific breakthroughs about how the visual cortex processes information: “Mental imagery, they found, activated many of the same areas of the visual cortex as perception itself, showing that visual imagery was a physiological reality as well as a psychological one, and used at least some of the same neural pathways as visual perception” (Sacks 340-341). Sacks’s tone appears to be almost surprised as shown by the

As Turkle works through her argument about the relationship between humans and robots, she comes to a revelation about humans: “We live in the robotic moment not because we have companionate robots in our lives but because the way we contemplate them on the horizon says much about who we are and who we are willing to become” (Turkle 460). Turkle uses this as a platform in which to argue her distain for human complacency, however I believe this is an excellent example of humanity being able to learn about ourselves through our relationship with robots. One can use the way we relate to advanced machines in order to learn about “who we are and who we are willing to become.” Learning about ourselves is a valuable lesson as introspection may offer a mirror image that we do not like, much like Turkle does not seem to be content with humanity’s contentedness. Having this information and using a hybrid mindset allows us to be objective and actively change who we are and mold ourselves to be better without conflicting societal beliefs. This type of learning allows us to reflect upon our actions and grow as individuals and avoid making mistakes that we may have regretted again. Sacks uses a direct example of learning between different individuals when he recounts one of the blind people he was studying, Arlene