After witnessing the result of this lab, I realized just how similar to machines we are. It's like the nerves of our bodies are the wires of a machine, and the electrical impulses that travel along them certainly do take time to travel to their destination. By studying the results, I can clearly see a correlation between them and the view of humans as a machine. For example, a machine requires the input of a particular condition to which it responds with a particular reaction. The human nervous system corresponds with this model because it responds to a stimulus with a particular reflex. In this experiment the dropping of the ruler was teh stimulus and the catching of the ruler was the reflex. Therefore, this experiment supports the model of humans as machines.
I agree that we are similar to machines, but I think we are somewhat less accurate than they are. A machine, such as a computer, that is programmed or "trained" to give a certain response to a certain stimulus would perform the same response in the same manner each time. Humans however are not like this: I don't know about you, but the number of inches my finger landed on each time was not consistent; it would fluctuate, even after I had properly "learned" the skill.
Although I agree that the mechanics of reflexes and nerves work similar to that of a machine, my ruler lab results led me to believe that machines and humans are ultimately different. My results of the lab were inconsistent, and my reaction time did not improve over time. I did multiple "practices" before I actually started collecting data; and even with these practices, my reaction time did not improve both for my dominant and non-dominant hand. Machines would output constant data unlike my lab results, and it would act in a consistent pattern it was programmed to behave as.
