*sigh* I had the long form of the answer all typed out and I
   somehow went "back", losing it.* Brings me back to "why" I
   started researching this: Since I was 11, I have wanted a
   "thought collector". First one was a calculator paper tape on a
   board with a ripoff sheet and a pen attached with a string.*
   Made many versions since then (mostly on the computer, learning
   programming, etc) - but never fully satisfied.* But I figured
   I'd better collect *everything* ( I'm doing it on
   http://icopiedyou.com ) and see what comes up. So, long story
   short; what was my conclusion? a) Embodied Cognition explains
   best my beliefs.* The brain is not a computer in the head/nor a
   telephone switchboard/ nor a database : We model our *idea* of
   what the brain is based on the latest technology. And these are
   all good, effective models, but not "enough" I think the brains
   functions *can* be somewhat mimicked using sparse data sets as
   representation of switches flipped on and off representing
   aspects of a "concept" or "idea" or "function"... that our short
   term memory is NOR and our long term is NAND - and short term
   pulls analogies in from long term (NAND is a serial rather than
   parallel circuit - hence pulling seemingly unrelated things when
   we try to remember stuff) NOR is parallel; why we can MAKE so
   many diverse connections so quickly and trim selectively on the
   fly while decsion-making. But again; these are computer models
   of the brain; our ACTUAL thinking appears to be trinary rather
   than binary; I don't think there is a need to invoke quantum
   stuff to mirror the brain; trinary is enough. But anyway;
   embodied cognition says that we are brains + bodies +
   environments together; none are separate from the others.* They
   may interrelate to different degrees; but they're all one thing.
   I believe we have an error in thinking that goes WAY back to
   Aristotle; including the law of excluded middle; that
   contradictions are "bad things" and should be eliminated.* But
   contradiction is a *part* of our thinking processes; so is
   perspective and subjectvitiy and emotion;* Ignoring those things
   will get us pretty far but someday we'll have to address
   subjectivity to have a complete "science of what it is to be
   human". b) We build our knowledge based on physical analogy; it
   happens *so young* that we don't remember; but it's the best way
   to explain how we learn so quickly; "this is a that, except
   these are the ways it is different". I have more I can say, but
   this is a start.* Thoughts?