Wednesday, January 24, 2018

Haley Reading Group: The Man Who Tried to Redeem the World with Logic


[The Best American Science and Nature Writing (2016)]

Rae'Jean Spears

Amanda Gefter’s article, "The Man Who Tried to Redeem the World with Logic," gives a biographical sketch of scientist Walter Pitts. Pitts, a self-educated, extremely intelligent man, devoted much of his life to logic and how logic influenced mechanisms of the brain. Unfortunately, a failed friendship and new advances in science challenged his core ideas and sent him into a downward depression, ultimately causing his work to never be finished or published.

Gefter’s discussion of the ending of Wiener and Pitts' relationship was especially interesting. Gefter writes “for Pitts, it wasn’t merely a loss. It was something far worse than that: it defied logic” (61). This is interesting as it highlights that Pitts’ entire life was truly devoted to logic, as something that went against logic essentially ruined his life.

After reading Gefter’s article, at what point of Pitts career did you recognize that he was solely dependent on logic? How did it contribute to his career as a whole? Please provide a page number citation.

59 comments:

Maya Searcy said...

When Pitts announced that he was writing his doctoral dissertation on probabilistic three-dimensional neural networks. I thought this showed how dependent Pitts was on logic because everyone one else said it was very ambitious, there probably wasn't any other scientist who would take on the task. Also at that time Pitts was a professor and he was working with Wiener, so adding on a dissertation shows how dedicated Pitts was to logic and eager he was to prove that it was a central part in the brain.

Asher said...

"He traded his full professorship and his large Hindsdale home for a research associate title and a crappy apartment in Cambridge, and couldn't have been happier about it" (61). I think quote showed how much research and logic meant to Pitts. He was willing to downgrade from his professorship and move into a crappy apartment to further his love of logic and research. I'm sure for other people, that would be a risky thing to do and a big leap of faith. But for Pitts, it felt right and most likely, was where he belonged. And in doing so, this allowed him to further work with McCulloch and the Chilean biologist, Humberto to discovering by attaching electrodes to single fibers in frogs's optic nerves they were able to record what the eye measure before it sent the information off to the brain. They also discovered that it also filtered and analyzed information about visual features. The results of this discovered research changed Pitt's worldview about logic. It also continued to entice the struggle he had with the logic. But all of this help lay the foundations for cybernetics and artificial intelligence later on in his joint research.

Jaleelah Muhammad said...

On page 60, Gefter wrote that Pitts's was homesick and he was "coming to believe that if he could work with McCullock again, he would be happier, more productive, and more likely to break new ground. McCulloch, too, seemed to be floundering without his bootlegged collaborator". For Pitts, it was logical that a reunion with his father-like figure, his original companion in this world of science and mathematics, would solve his problems and allow him to reach new ground breaking discoveries. And this reunion did help both men...for awhile. I think that if Wiener's wife had not been so jealous and did not make up such a repulsive story, these men would have been successful.

Donovan Washington said...

"But three years later, when he heard that Russell would be visiting the University of Chicago the 15-year-old ran away from home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again" (Gefter 53-54). I believe this quote represents the point in Pitts's life when he decided to become dependent on logic. This contributed to his life as a whole in many different ways. If Pitts would not have gone to Chicago, then he would not have met Warren McCulloch who influenced a majority of Pitts's early life. Another reason why this point contributed to Pitts's life as a whole is because he left his family behind, his father may have pressured him to drop out of school for work instead of continuing his education. As a result of leaving his family at such a young age to pursue his dream, Pitts was able to change the world forever through his research.

- Donovan Washington

Aja J said...

I think Pitts dependence on logic started after he met Norbert Wiener in 1943. Wiener “promised Pitts a PhD in mathematics at MIT, despite the fact that he had never graduated from high school…It was an offer Pitts couldn’t refuse,” (57). After enrolling at MIT, I think Pitts really depended on his logic. I think his dependence on logic caused some of the ups and downs to his career as the article described.

Erica K. said...

On page 61 it states, "He never spoke to Pitts again and he never told him why. For Pitts, this marked the beginning of the end... it wasn't merely a loss,... it defied logic" this statement along shows that he dependent on logic for everything, he says something that to me doesn't have anything to do with logic is disobeying logic, which makes me think that he means it just doesn't make sense like logic do.

Kenisha Townsend said...

Despite the fact Pitts ran away when he was only 15 to see a man (Bertrand Russell) who wrote a book about mathematics and logic, I recognized he became solely dependent on logic when he chose to write his dissertation on "probabilistic three dimensional neural network"(60). At this point, he had to find support of this topic to write a long essay about it. If he chose to change his mind on the topic or found information that totally neglected everything he worked so hard to prove, later down the line, then it wold be a mind-blowing, depressing day for him. He nearly spent his entire life studying logic and neuroscience. As seen later in the article, he did find something that negated his claim about logic. This, along with other things, led him to depression.

Fiona Hill said...


From a financial standpoint, the moment where he traded in his job and his home to further his research on logic was the point in his career where I realized he was solely dependent on logic. And, oddly enough, in my opinion, his choice to do this defied the definition of logic- or the definition of logic as I know it. This contributed to his career because it gave him the opportunity to further his research and work with other scientists in the field which ultimately led to his change in views.

Paris Smith said...

I recognized that he was solely dependent on logic on page 61 when it says, "He never spoke to Pitts again and he never told him why. For Pitts, this marked the beginning of the end... it wasn't merely a loss,... it defied logic". That just says that his entire life was dependent on logic and if there was things in his life that was not logical, he would cut it out. That is a crucial moment because there are going to be things in your life that defy logic. Sometimes you are going to choose your heart over your head, it's not logical but you do it. But to give up your entire life to logic and focus only on one thing, it can take a toll and can make you give up some of the important things in life.

Kyla Tinsley said...

The point of Pitts career I recognized that he was solely dependent on logic was at the very beginning: "But three years later, when he heard that Russell would be visiting the University of Chicago, the 15-year-old ran away from home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again (53-54)." He ran away from home and used logic as a survival tool in order to meet Russell and begin his new life as a scientist. If he hadn't run away, he would not have started his career at all; he would have been stuck in Detroit.

J'kolbe Kelly said...

I believe the first sign of dedication to logic that he shows can be found on pg54,"When he heard that russell would be visiting the University of Chicago, the 15 year-old ran awayfrom home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again." Walter Pitts left behind his old life to pursue his passion and emerse himself in logic

Andre Valentine said...

"It was apparent to him after we had done the frog's eye that even if logic played a part, it didn't play the important or central part that one would have expected."(62). After reading this paragraph the reader can see just how much logic meant to Pitts. This added to his already downward spiral and devastated him. Logic had taken a big toll on his life as the article said he suffered depression. It even caused him to leave all his family forever. By the end logic had consumed him

-Andre Valentine

Crystal Rice said...

When Pitts had made an impression on mathematician, philosopher, and founder of cybernetics, Norbert Wiener, that's when I realized Pitts was solely dependent on logic. I chose this part in the article because when they first met, Pitts was already ready to chime in on what Wiener was working out, which had greatly impressed him. This contributed to his career as a whole because he was "promised a PhD in mathematics at MIT, despite the fact that he had never graduated from high school- something that the strict rules at the University of Chicago prohibited," (57). He studied behind one of the most influential scientists in the world which is a really big thing, considering he had no high school diploma and was still so young.

Crystal Rice

Nia Piggott said...

The point in which Pitts career was solely dependent on logic was shown on page 61 where it states " He traded his full professorship and large Hinsdale in Cambridge ... The plan for the project was to use full arsenal of information theory, neurological, statistical mechanics, and computer machines to understand how the brain gives rise to the mind." (page 61) This moment to me showed his dedication and how important logic was to him. This moment also was a significant moment in his career in which he was able to reconnect with McCullough and be innovative with his research.

Jasmin Smoot said...

On page 54, the author mentions how Pitts met a student, Jerome Lettvin, at the University of Chicago. That moment served as the catalyst to a great career. Lettvin introduced Pitts to Warren McCulloch, who was practically a parent, mentor, and more. From there Pitts met very important men and eventually became one of the most important members of the cyberneticians. Just being able to use his networking [skills in order to be recognized for the genius that he is was the foundation his career was built on.

Bianca w said...

On page 61, when Pitts friend and fatherly figure says that the projects that they were working on were now Pitts problem and never contacted them again, it said that it defied logic. I think that is where I recognized where he depended on logic. He didn't just use logic for math or science but he also applied to personal situations that were happening in his life that didn't involve any math or science.

Aleeya Barrolle said...

After reading Gefter’s article, the point of Pitts career that showed that he depended solely on logic is by a friend. "When you asked him a question, you would get back a whole textbook. .. To him, the world was connected in a very complex and wonderful fashion" (59). This quote contributed to his career as a whole because it was an insight of how he become a successful person.

Peyton D. said...

The part of the story that showed how truly devoted Pitts' was to logic was on page 62. Pitts and other scientist subjected frogs to a variety of visual experiences to measure how the eye perceived various experiences before sending the signal to the brain. The results went against everything he had previously believed. The eyes filtered and analyzed the information before sending the information to the brain, meaning "logic" had less to do with the process. This, along with the loss of Weiner, broke his spirit and sent him into depression. I don't believe this scientific breakthrough would have been so devastating for him if he had not devoted his life to logic.

Jeremiah Terrell said...

I recognized that Pitts was solely dependent on logic on page 62 when he was disappointed after finding out logic didn't play the important role he expected. Dependence on logic is what made him so great but it also stopped him from reaching his potential because once he realized that logic was not as important as he thought, he became depressed and threw his career away.

Jasmine Williams said...

When Pitts was first introduced to Norbert Wiener, " Pitts chimed in with questions and suggestions. According to Lettvin, by the time they reached the second blackboard, it was clear that Wiener had found his new right-hand man" (57). The instinct of Pitts to jump right in and offer his opinion to an established mathematician and philosopher shows that Pitts was confident in his ability to use logic in complex situations and that he depended on logic to navigate his way through meeting someone new.

Jasmine Williams

Zaria Whitlock said...

I personally found one of the most interesting quotes in the short story on page 61. Gefter wrote, "He traded his full professorship and his large Hindsdale home for a research associate title and a crappy apartment in Cambridge, and couldn't have been happier about it" (Gefter p.61). I found this quote meaningful because it showed the Pitts' did not care about the monetary value of the things in his life what he really wanted was to be a working logician and be continuing to complete research that he considered valuable.

Zaria W.

Olivia Slater said...

There was a clear point when logic was the major factor:"He traded his full professorship and his large Hindsdale home for a research associate title and a crappy apartment in Cambridge" (61). There is no way one would do this unless there is some form of logic behind it. Although the logic may not be considered "good" logic to all, it is logical to Pitts. Pitts' actions were driven by happiness.

Anonymous said...

The point at which it really sunk into me that he depended on logic was on page 61, "For Pitts, this marked the beginning of the end. Wiener, who had taken on a fatherly role in his life, now abandoned him inexplicably. For Pitts, it wasn't merely a loss. It was something far worse than that: it defied logic." This passage shows that more than a feeling of betrayal or sadness, he was confused because of the defiance of logic. This shows that he puts weight on the logic of a situation more than his own emotions.

-Marcus Underwood

Victoria Wright said...

After reading this article, I realized that Pitts was solely dependent on logic when he decided to run away from everything else in the world and sit in the library reading "Principia Mathematica," and after that, proceeded to write the author informing him of the errors within his piece(p 53). This showed me that logic was important to Pitts even at a young age, which would eventually shape his life.

Sydney Oats said...

He is very dependent on logic for everything in his life. I was surprised when he went as far as to quite his job and sell his home for logic. It does not make since to me. However, when you have a strong passion for something, you typically let nothing get in your way.

Jordan R. said...

On page 59, McCulloch makes a significant statement about Pitts, "[Pitts] was in no uncertain terms the genius of the group...He was absolutely incomparable in the scholarship of chemistry, physics, of everything you could talk about history, botany, etc". This illustrates that Pitts as a logistical thinker sees logic in everything around him, which makes him a critical thinker in every educational aspect.

Jordan R. said...

On page 59, McCulloch makes a significant statement about Pitts, "[Pitts] was in no uncertain terms the genius of the group...He was absolutely incomparable in the scholarship of chemistry, physics, of everything you could talk about history, botany, etc". This illustrates that Pitts as a logistical thinker sees logic in everything around him, which makes him a critical thinker in every educational aspect.

gabby said...

This chapter was very interesting. It showcased a very bright and young individual who relied on logic for virtually everything. It is in logic where he found his identity and meaning in his life (as he had no close family or friends). One part that stuck out to me in the chapter was towards the end of it, "the universiality made it impossible for Pitts to provide a model of the brain that was practical, and so his work was dismissed and more or less forgotten by the community of scientists working on the brain." I found this to be very sad as this setback for Pitts was detrimental as all he had in his life was logic and his dedication to it. It was sad to see that his work was seen as invalid, even though Pitts is a very bright, talented individual.

Kaelyn Blunt said...

There are many moments in his life where one could define as the single moment his whole life revolved around logic. However, there was one moment where I believe that logic would have been the one thing on his mind. When he ran away. No matter the age, or economic standing, one must have a very strong interest, curiosity, and love for logic to leave their life behind to search for the author of a book purely dedicated to the research of logic. To me, that is the moment his life was overtaken with his devotion to logic. Everyone important in his life agrees as they "would [never] think of publishing a paper without his corrections and approval" (59). He is forever a man of logic and numbers, there is no denying that.

JaLeah M . said...

When the text read that Pitts decided to trade his home and career for things much less (61), I believe that was a major aspect that showed how devoted he was to logic. Being so committed to something that you are willing to sacrifice things you've previously worked hard for shows devotion. Although this move may not have been the smartest to some, doing so allowed him to conduct his research and advance with what he committed to.

Zuriah Harkins said...

As I read further into the discussion, I instantly realized that Pitts' life centered around his research of logic. He began studying logic at an early age and jumped at every chance and opportunity that came his way to expand his knowledge. At the beginning of the discussion, Gefter stated, "But three years later, when he heard that Russell would be visiting the University of Chicago,the 15-year-old ran away from home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again," (53-54). Deciding to run away at such a young age was a huge risk for Pitts to take. He left the comfort of his home by himself without even knowing the fate of his future. He was willing to literally give up everything just to become more educated about the idea of logic.

Zuriah Harkins

Brandon Nichols said...

At page 56, Pitts helped McCulloch solve his dead end. He found out how to get out of a loop by taking time out of McCulloch's equation. Pitts solving the problem impressed McCulloch, and attracted the attention of the founder of cybernetics, Norman Wiener. Pitts' dependency on logic got him an education at Cambridge, and a job at MIT.

-Brandon N.

Tatyana Curtis said...

While reading this passage, I felt that Walter Pits became the model of if you do what you love you’ll never work a day in your life. "He traded his full professorship and his large Hindsdale home for a research associate title and a crappy apartment in Cambridge, and couldn't have been happier about it" (61). To me this passage is showing that he wasn’t happy with were he was in life if easily gave it for a research position and an extreme downgrade of living. Making those sacrifices show how important logic is to him and what he’s willing to do to pursue it.

Kytela Medearis said...

The passage that showed his dependency on logic was on page 61, "He never spoke to Pitts again and he never told him why. For Pitts, this marked the beginning of the end... it wasn't merely a loss,... it defied logic." Pitts was so reliant on logic, that he could have never fathomed Weiner not being a friend anymore. He expected everything to go a certain "logical" way, and when it didn't it caused him to second guess his life work and to go into a depression.

-Kytela Medearis

Sierra Taylor said...

What stood out to me in this short passage were the lines, "For Pitts, this marked the beginning of the end. Wiener, who had taken on a fatherly role in his life, now abandoned him inexplicably. For Pitts, it wasn't merely a loss. It was something far worse than that: it defied logic." Sometimes people walk out of our lives, and it just doesn't make sense. I don't think it's always supposed to make sense. I've had family leave, the people who are supposed to always be there. Pitts seemed to be very sensitive and naive with his logic.

Anonymous said...

The first pages shows his clear affection towards logic, but the moment that stuck out to me as a type of dependency on logic was the middle paragraph on page 57, "Pitt's found everything he had needed..." It just seems like logic has to be very much part of the equation when it comes to making a real connection with other people. In a sense, logic is the only thing he feels strongly for.

-Que'rra Mason

Brianna Reed said...

When Pitts leaves the success he has found in a career and stable high level position for a research associate title and a less comfortable lifestyle to fuel his passion, I feel that was the turning point which indicated his dependence on logic (pg 60-61). This passion prompted Pitts to make many sudden and life altering decisions throughout his entire lifetime and his contributions led to many advancements with artificial intelligence and cybernetics.

Joshua Jones said...

I think that Pitts is a great character. On page 61, talking about McCulloch, where "he never told him why." Pitts is changed forever. I think that this was the pivotal point in Pitt's career that would determine his new identity and feelings of business. Logic was a point of question and could not be used to determine the logic of another. It is almost ironic.

-Joshua J.

Mike Dade said...

Near the bottom of page 60, Getter said "Pitts had become home-sick; and home meant McCulloch. He was coming to believe that if he could work with McCulloch again, he would be happier, more productive, and more likely to break new ground." (60) This is the point where I realized Pitts was solely dependent on logic, because he had accredited all his personal growth to this man and their field of study. He felt that without McCulloch, he couldn't think by himself anymore, or grow as a person. He needed him and their studies of logic that they did together in order to feel happy, and to me, that screams dependency.

A. Robinson said...

On page 55, the paragraph that begins with, "Fresh from reading a new paper by a British mathematician named Alan.... chains of propositions to build complex mathematics." At that point, I could tell how heavily Pitts relied on logic. I feel like this is the point in which led him to study logic for the rest of his life and the point which led him to other opportunities in the logical realm.

Sandra Yokley said...

The point in Pitt's career which I believe marked his full dependency upon logic was his decision, at such a young age, to leave his family("But three years later, when he heard that Russell would be visiting the University of Chicago the 15-year-old ran away from home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again"(Gefter 53-54)) to pursue his passion. It had wholeheartedly captured him and informed every decision he made, including, subjectively, on the most difficult decisions a child can make. This decision contributed to his career as a whole because this was the breakthrough moment, the start of the pursuit, and if any other decision would have been made, history would have likely looked way different than it does today.

-Sandra Yokley

Anonymous said...

On page 61, it says "He traded his full professorship and his large Hindsdale home for a research associate title and a crappy apartment in Cambridge." This shows his dedication to his work and logic.
Sydney J.

Kathryn Hatches said...

I think when the author states that Pitts was, "promised a PhD in mathematics at MIT, despite the fact that he had never graduated from high school- something that the strict rules at the University of Chicago prohibited," was the moment he devoted his life to logic (Page 57). The decision to leave behind everything he knew and the life he had in order to have a chance at fulfilling his goal is, albeit reckless, inspiring. With the world today, it would be extremely difficult to completely start over, and I commend Pitts for his bravery.
-Katie Hatches

Tiera Williams said...

I think the point where I realized Pitts career was solely dependent on logic was when he was promised a PhD. On page 57 the text states,"So impressed was Weiner that he promised Pitts a PhD in mathematics at MIT, despite the fact that he had never graduated from high school-something that the strict rules at the University of Chicago prohibited. It was an offer Pitts couldn't refuse." In Pitts mind a degree would make him more credible. The odds that a person without even a high school degree be offered a masters are slim, and so he took advantage. I think his decisions about where to steer his career came from this opportunity.

Tiera Williams

Marcus Barnes said...

After reading this, I thought that the point when Pitts career was solely dependent on logic was when, "he traded his full professorship and his large Hindsdale home for a research associate title and a crappy apartment in Cambridge, and couldn't have been happier about it (p. 61)." This showed that he cared strongly about logic and would give up material things to grow in his knowledge and logical sense. Pitts must have believed that logic was the most important thing to have and use during life, more important than large home and being a honored professor.

Marcus Barnes

Jazsmine Towner said...

I think the point where Pitts realized he was soley dependent on logic was early on in the story, on page 54 the author said "the 15 year old ran away from home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again" (Gefter). I choose this point in the story because Pitts had spent multiple days in the library and learned quite a bit about logic in relation to the real world. This enticed him to stop relying on love, or affections, which he was not getting from his abusive father and depend on something that was tangible and testable, logic. The pain and resentment he felt towards his family, particularly his father, led him to soley depend on logic, and go against all of the things he believed before. Unfortunately, this led to his ultimate demise.
-Jazsmine Towner

Deborrah B. said...

I think that he became solely dependent on logic after meeting with McCulloch the first time and then going to work with him (54-55). After beginning to work with him, Pitts faith in logic grew immensely and solidified his dependence on it. From there his career took off and he was able to meet other famous scientist and work on projects that have contributed to the technology that we have today. Unfortunately, his logic that he depended on from a young age led him to depression when he found that it wasn't completely reliable.
Deborrah B.

Brandy Collier said...

I think point that Pitts became fully dependent on logic was when Wiener disconnected himself from the project. On page 61, Gefter states, "For Pitts, it wasn't merely a loss. It was something far worse than that: it defied logic". His life was so entangled into logic, everything being logically correct and having a reason that when Wiener quit the project out of the blue for no reason, he became sad. His logical lifestyle was altered because he believed logic was what made things make sense until something illogical changed his perspective.

-Brandy Collier

Breanna B. said...

When Pitts gave up his job and home (page 61) to dedicate himself to logic research, I realized just how much Pitts dependended on logic. I cannot imagine giving up the comfort of home and employment for research. However, Pitts' passion led him to make many life-changing decisions and scientific contributions.

Anonymous said...

The point where Pitts let logic rule his life was before he even started his career. Uprooting his life three years after the invitation from Bertrand Russell catapulted him into a world ultimately ruled by logic. He left everything he knew to go into the unknown, filled with possibilities. His dependence on logic, though hindered his career in some ways. He was very successful, but experienced great sadness and difficulty when things appeared logically incorrect. (53-55)
Shelby W.

Anonymous said...

I think the point in Pitts’ career when he and McCullough made a “mechanistic model of the mind” was when he became solely dependent on logic because they said “we know how we know” which shows that they not only understood about the mind but they understood the principles behind science to support them. That shows true logic and not just intuition or speculation. This helped Pitts’ career just because of the simple fact that he was able to study with McCullough who had years more or experience than him and it allowed him to delve deeper into the subject or neurophysiology.
Carlie B.

Alexis A said...

One could say that Pitts relied on logic before starting his career, but you also have to consider what it actually means to start a career. In my opinion, a degree is not required for one's career to start. For example, an undergraduate student working on experiments and research is now a scientist, not after they graduate college. Regarding Pitts, his career began when he opened his first book in the library and found that place to be more like home than his house. On page 53 when he wrote the letter to Russell is where his career really began to take off.
Alexis A.

Anonymous said...

When Pitt made the decision to run away from his current life and family at the early age of 15 to seek after Russel, to me, marked the beginning of his reliance on logic. He had to use his logic to find Russel. The fact he relied on logic for everything was not necessarily only a good thing. Relationships suffered and ultimately his definition and following of just logic was his downfall as well.
Shardai J-H

Cheniya A. said...

I believe that Pitt running away from home marked the start of his reliance on logic. This, to me, is evident, "when he heard that Russell would be visiting the University of Chicago the 15-year-old ran away from home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again" (Gefter 54). This contributed largely to his career because he stopped relying on love and affection from his abusive father and it became his entire life from then on. He then went on to become a professor with a comfortable life - but he gave it up for to be a research associate with a small, crappy Cambridge apartment. This encompasses his willingness to give up comfort in exchange for further developing something he was passionate about - something that became his entire life.

John Kriha said...

Pitt running away from home was the point in the story where I recognized that he was solely dependent on logic. On Page 54 "...the 15-year-old ran away from home and headed for Illinois. He never saw his family again." This move had an ambiguous effect on the story. It led to a successful career for Pitt and also was the root cause of his downfall. In an attempt to explain the complexity of the human brain within the confines of logic and mathematics, it was the emotional bond he shared with McCulloch that destroyed everything he had worked for.

Robert Craig Jr said...

I think the quote on page 61 shows his dedication to research. "He traded his full professorship and his large Hindsdale home for a research associate title and a crappy apartment in Cambridge, and couldn't have been happier about it" (61). I think this dedication is admirable and exemplary.

Xavier Morrison-Wallace said...

From a very young age, Pitts did demonstrate the applied use of simple logic, such as, not going outside when his bullies were out(53). This simple notion of logic helped him jump start his career as a researcher of neurons, and applying "logic" to neurons firing and relating that concept to machines and learning(61).

Kelsey W said...

I would say Pitts's whole life centered around logic, but he wasn't aware of it until he couldn't continue anymore. He seemed like he had a great life while at MIT and seemed to be a huge celebrity in the world of science and math. I think after Weiners left the team Pitts was such a big part of (p.61) it turned Pitts's world upside down and he realized that his whole life centered around this logic and had a complete breakdown until it eventually killed him, and one could argue McCulloch as well.

De'Abrion Joyner said...

On page 58 the author writes about how when Pitt was working at MIT he realized that “there was no way our genes could predetermine the trillions of synaptic connections in the brain the amount of information it would require is untenable”. For him to come up with that is only based on what is logical. I think him looking at things in that way was positively impactful on his career because it allowed him to draw connections through all his work.

De'Abrion Joyner