A paradigm that views humans and living beings as information processing devices, treating the body as an interface.


We are still influenced by the interdisciplinary research born around the 1950s called cybernetics. Not only do we consider computers as information processing devices, but often humans as well – devices that process input and produce output.

At that time, if the body is nothing more than an interface to the external world, it should be ideal to learn how to access other devices in the shortest time possible. In design theories like human-centered design, it has been considered beneficial to design in a way that can be operated “intuitively”.

However, is the body really just an interface? For example, when we think about playing a musical instrument or drawing, it takes years to become proficient. If it were merely an interface, it would make sense to make it easier to operate. This could indeed be a valid design theory.

But is the time spent to become proficient in playing or drawing really wasted? Is there no meaning in that process? While it may involve both enjoyable and challenging aspects, humans probably find some meaning in it. Isn’t it common for discussions in engineering and natural sciences to overlook these everyday aspects that are taken for granted when considering daily life?

  • No, that’s true (blu3mo)(blu3mo)(blu3mo)

This reflects how we are trapped in what Mr. Nishigaki called the “Computing Paradigm,” and I have recently been thinking that perhaps we need to consider a different perspective. This post serves as a note on that matter.

  • It seems like the research of yunolv3 deals with a different paradigm.