For a couple of decades, many have made the analogy that the brain is like a computer. The idea is that the brain takes data from the senses and runs it through a number of "programs", providing everything from visual identification to numerical problem solving. Behavioral psychologists talk about our emotional responses being the result of "programs" that were created by our experiences. The developing brain of a child creates neural pathways to catalog every bit of sensory data. Repeated instances of certain stimuli strengthened already existing pathways and these are the basis for our very personal emotional reactions. There is even research on "re-programming" those emotional responses by changing speech patterns.

National Geographic's March issue cover story looks at some of the new ideas in brain research. One of the ideas that came out in one of the articles is that the brain really doesn't function as a single computer.

"In the old days, people said the brain is like a computer. I'd say no... It's very distributed, closer to the Internet."
-Arthur Toga, Director of the Laboratory of Neuro Imaging at UCLA

That insight is interesting. Maybe not earth-shattering, but interesting nonetheless. To me, though, what was more though-provoking was how this relates to Vannevar Bush and the paper that led to the whole of idea of hypertext. Bush's concept of all the knowledge possessed by humankind stored in an array of "computers", each piece of information cross-referenced to other related data was entitled "As We May THINK" (emphasis mine). Not only did this man conceive of was to become the Internet in 1945, but he seems to have also inadvertently defined brain activity in a way that wouldn't be understood until the next century.