In the novel Vehicles, Braitenberg suggests that systems are always more complicated to an observer than what is actually happening inside the system. Braitenberg describes this as the “law of uphill analysis and downhill intervention.” This can be compared to when looking down a killer ski slope it looks like an impossible height to ski. While walking up the hill one can see it is not nearly as steep. When the mind sees erratic behavior it immediately assumes that the system is very complicated. However as Braitenberg suggests and shows this is often not the case and that there are often simple and easy ways to explain these erratic processes.
Braitenberg can use just motors and sensors to create robots whose behavior is associated with more complicated life like animals. For instance his robot with one senor for temperature and one motor was able to move more quickly in warm temperatures and less quickly in cool temperature. To an off-hand observer it would look much like a bill bug who likes damp cool areas and will move faster in warm temperatures to reach them. With the use of positive and negative feed-backs the robots can exhibit the fight or flight responses and show a maximum efficiency at certain environmental levels. For instance a temperature sensor with motor will try to find an area where the temperature is 700F and will move away if it is hotter or colder to find the right temperature. In addition with positive and negative feed-backs as well as multiple thresholds with several sensors these robots will find appropriate environments but also will continue searching for better environments while in already acceptable environments. Thresholds are a stop on sensors that only allow a motor to run with a certain amount of stimulus more or less will cause either no effect or an all effect. If someone has a glass leaning on the edge of a table and I gently touch the glass nothing will happen because I did not reach the threshold. However if I punch the glass it falls to the floor causing the same effect as if I just had pushed the glass, once the amount of the stimulus hits a certain point it has the same effect. With the appropriate number of thresholds a robot can even retain a simple memory. In other words everything within nature can be explained with a few simple ideas, however when seen all together are absolutely mindboggling.
Our own vehicle is very similar to this account because the Lego robot has two sensors and two motors. These work together with certain threshold potentials and internal programming or simple instincts that are carried out by the motors. All of the motor movements and sensors are simple by themselves but together can solve and navigate a difficult course. From the outlook of it this could be mistaken as knowledge. The advanced movements would most definitely look like the programming was much more complex than it actually was.
Braitenberg’s view cannot be discredited when it comes to human knowledge and processes. This is definitely true in that sense that the human mind and body is a collection of smaller sensors, thresholds, and motors. When they form together they form complexities that look unexplainable. It appears that the human behavior is simple as long as you start small and add slowly. No doubt this does yield important information of how and why the body works and thinks. However, even when building up the mind and body from small parts, the machinery is still complicated. Notice humans have yet to be able to conquer how the mind works. In Braitenberg’s explanation he builds complex organisms with a few sensors and a few motors. The human body uses numerous motors, thresholds, feedbacks, and sensors. Not only does this occur but the human body is a product of evolution, our machines were not just simply put together, they were self-assembled by nature.
People tend to shy away from Braitenberg’s explanation because they feel it would reduce humanity itself but in a way it just makes more incredible. Considering the amazing results of simple sensors and motors it makes the human body even more complex. However, if one were to argue with Braitenberg there may be some things that simply cannot be reduced in the human body and mind. Experience itself would be hard to explain in this model. Although Braitenberg can explain memory, he would have a hard time explaining how a person experiences these memories. My sensors can pick up the frequency of red light and this is explainable. However the actual feelings that are conveyed to my brain and how I experience this red color is not explained under this theory. Human knowledge itself is not just a connection of memory but it appears to be something greater altogether. Our wisdom passes memory it goes into a realm that altogether is different by nature. I haven’t memorized every addition rule or problem but I understand why addition works. This understanding of concepts not just rules and solutions is something that by nature does not reduce to mere motors and sensors. With just these few examples, I believe Braitenberg would be hard-pressed to reduce them according to his theory. Experience has no basis, it is us feeling our own feelings and movements and this does not conduce itself to reducing. Braitenberg could not fully explain this phenomenon. I do believe that his theory is valid in most cases and that although the human body cannot be completely build up, much of our complexity can be reduced to more simple mechanisms.