The “brain-as-computer” metaphor: Representing neuroscience in social practices
DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2026-1-159-170
The computational metaphor, which compares the brain to a computer, is used in both scientific and public discourse to link abstract phenomena of neuroscience with familiar concepts and experiences. It demonstrates how metaphorical comparisons and analogies shape the language and cognitive frameworks for describing complex brain functions. However, there exists another metaphor – the computer is a brain – which also helps to reduce complex ideas to more comprehensible ones. Both metaphors influence thought processes by uniting rational and creative elements. Metaphorically simplifying the complexity of the brain for non-specialists, describing it as a computer opens up possibilities for the practical actions of neurohackers – enthusiasts of self-monitoring and self-improvement. Scientific literature identifies several types of neurohacking, among which, in the context under consideration, practices aimed at cognitive, emotional, or behavioral enhancement of healthy individuals and at uncovering the fundamental mechanisms of brain function are of interest. One of the key drivers of neurohacking is the pursuit of a competitive advantage in the modern information world, where brain-computer interfaces are used to transcend biological limitations. These interfaces, in a sense, correlate with expanding the functional capabilities of a computing device through external drives or memory modules. The metaphorical comparison allows for examining brain research and attempts to enhance it from a new perspective, one related to the practical applications of analogies and not limited by the disciplinary framework of biomedical sciences. While providing a useful tool for conceptualizing the processes of thinking and memory, the computational metaphor carries inherent theoretical biases and risks of oversimplification. This underscores the need for a critical examination of concepts that are often used by non-specialists to describe neuroscience. Figurative metaphors are a vital tool for scientific communication, bridging the gap between science and society. They are actively used in the media, on digital platforms, and in public outreach programs to adapt complex concepts for a broad audience and to enhance overall scientific literacy. As science and technology advance, our understanding of the brain and computers will improve. This will not only allow for a re-evaluation of this metaphor but will also lead to the emergence of new analogies or models. These new frameworks will aid in better understanding human consciousness and thought, potentially elevating discussions about the relationship between technological development, human enhancement practices, and the human mind and consciousness to a new level.
Keywords: metaphor, neuroscience, neurohackers, social practices, communication between science and society
References:
Abrahams, N. (2018). The historical context of the computer metaphor of the brain. Humanity. https://novaojs.newcastle.edu.au/hass/index.php/humanity/article/view/49/53
Baria, A. T., & Cross, K. (2021). The brain is a computer is a brain: Neuroscience's internal debate and the social significance of the Computational Metaphor. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.14042
Borrione, L., & Brunoni, A. R. (2017). Primum non nocere or primum facere meliorem? Hacking the brain in the 21st century. Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 39(4), 232–238. https://doi.org/10.1590/2237-6089-2017-0076
Dresler, M., Sandberg, A., Bublitz, C., Ohla, K., Trenado, C., Mroczko-Wąsowicz, A., Kühn, S., & Repantis, D. (2018). Hacking the brain: Dimensions of cognitive enhancement. ACS Chemical Neuroscience, 10(3), 1137–1148. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.8b00571
Ienca, M., & Scheibner, J. (2020). What is neurohacking? Defining the conceptual, ethical and legal boundaries. In F. Jotterand & M. Ienca (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in brain and mental health: Philosophical, ethical & policy issues (Vol. 3, pp. 203–231). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74188-4_12
Kurzweil, R. (2013). How to create a mind: The secret of human thought revealed. Penguin.
Naddaf, M. (2023). Europe spent €600 million to recreate the human brain in a computer. How did it go? Nature, 620(7975), 718–720. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02600-x
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1990). Dve velikie metafory [Two great metaphors]. In N. D. Arutyunova & M. A. Zhurinskaya (Eds.), Teoriya metafory: Sbornik [Theory of metaphor: A collection] (pp. 68–81). Progress.
Richards, B. A., & Lillicrap, T. P. (2022). The brain-computer metaphor debate is useless: A matter of semantics. Frontiers in Computer Science, 4, Article 810358. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2022.810358
Riddell, P. (2016). Metaphor, simile, analogy and the brain. Changing English, 23(4), 363–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2016.1228442
Taylor, C., & Dewsbury, B. M. (2018). On the problem and promise of metaphor use in science and science communication. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1538
von Neumann, J. (2018). The computer and the brain. AST. (In Russian).
Wexler, A. (2017). The social context of "do-it-yourself" brain stimulation: Neurohackers, biohackers, and lifehackers. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, Article 224. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00224
( 341.05 kB ) 
( 333.48 kB )
Issue: 1, 2026
Series of issue: Issue 1
Rubric: ESSAYS
Pages: 159 — 170
Downloads: 265