[MD] loopty-loop

[Ian Glendinning]

Ha yes, his math is quite a struggle ... I mentioned that here ... a long slog.
http://www.psybertron.org/?p=1567

When talking about "consciousness", brains (and the body and other
objects) are realised static patterns pragmatically speaking.

The thing that encourages me to believe he really knows that it is
"patterns all the way down", is the very fact that he spends so much
time searching for "significance" in patterns even in the most
conceptual math. (Think also of Schroedinger and the like ... math in
fundamental matter ?)

I like the fact that you see him being "a nice man" as significant
too. Quality matters.
Ian

On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:44 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> Ian,
>
> That may be.  I would like to read more.  He seems like not only
> an interesting thinker, but a very nice man.  But at this point he
> does seem to consider the brain as something 'real'.
>
> I have to confess, though, I do not share his way of loving math.  I
> have a tendency to want to rip those pages dealing with numbers,
> out of the book with my teeth, shake them back and forth, and toss
> them out of my nest, with a Humpf!   -  I have some lectures coming
> up concerning the wonders of mathematical thinking.  Maybe the
> lectures will seduce me into reconsidering Hofstadter's point-of-view.
> I always loved math, but...
>
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 1, 2010, at 3:26 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>
>> Hi Marsha, that's why I like Hofstadter ... you said
>>
>> "He does plenty of talking about patterns, and I did get a little
>> hopeful, but no he's a materialist.  One wants to ask him why wouldn't
>> he think the same patterns that create the self, creates objects."
>>
>> I believe he does think that too. It's just not the subject of the
>> book you are currently reading.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:42 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Platt,
>>>
>>> Yes, it does seem that way.  He does plenty of talking about patterns, and
>>> I did get a little hopeful, but no he's a materialist.  One wants to ask him why
>>> wouldn't he think the same patterns that create the self, creates objects.  Seems
>>> like an obvious consideration.
>>>
>>> Wonder what it will take?  But you are correct, it is too bad.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 31, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Platt Holden wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Marsha,
>>>>
>>>> Like most academics, Hofstadter buys into SOM hook, line and sinker. Too
>>>> bad, really.
>>>>
>>>> Platt
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 6:50 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  "What would make a human brain a candidate for housing a loop of
>>>>> self-representation?  Why would a fly brain or a mosquito brain not be just
>>>>> as valid a candidate?  Why, for that matter, not a bacterium, an ovum, a
>>>>> sperm, a virus, a tomato plant, a tomato, or a pencil?  The answer should be
>>>>> clear:  a human brain is a representational system that knows no bounds in
>>>>> terms of the extensibility or flexibility of its categories.  A mosquito
>>>>> brain, by contrast, is a tiny representational system that contains
>>>>> practically no categories at all, never mind being flexible and extensible.
>>>>> Very small representational systems, such as those of bacteria, ova,
>>>>> sperms, plants, thermostats, and so forth, do not enjoy the luxury of
>>>>> self-representation.  And a tomato and a pencil are not representational
>>>>> systems at all, so for them, the story ends right there (sorry, little
>>>>> tomato! sorry, little pencil!).
>>>>>    "So a human brain is a strong candidate for having the potential of
>>>>> rich perceptual feedback, and thus rich self-reresentation.  But what kinds
>>>>> of perceptual cycles do we get involved in?  We begin life with the most
>>>>> elementary sorts of feedback about ourselves, which stimulate us to
>>>>> formulate categories for our most obvious body parts, and building on this
>>>>> basic pedestal, we soon develop a sense for our bodies as flexible physical
>>>>> objects.  In the meantime, as we receive rewards for various actions and
>>>>> punishments for others, we begin to develop a more abstract sense of "good"
>>>>> and "bad", as well as notions of guilt and pride, and our sense of ourselves
>>>>> as abstract entities that have the power to decide to make things happen
>>>>> (such as continuing to run up a steep hill even though our legs are begging
>>>>> us to just walk) begins to take root.
>>>>>   "It is crucial to our young lives that we hone our developing
>>>>> self-symbol as precisely as possible.  We want (and need) to find out where
>>>>> we belong in all sorts of social hierarchies and classes, and sometimes,
>>>>> even if we don't want to know thee things, we find out anyway.  For
>>>>> instance, we are all told, early on, that we are "cute"; in some of us,
>>>>> however, this message is reinforced far more strongly than in others.  In
>>>>> this manner, each of us comes to realize that we are "good-looking" or
>>>>> "gullible" or "cheeky" or "shy" or "spoiled" or "funny" or "lazy" or
>>>>> "original", or whatever.  Dozens of such labels and concepts accrete to our
>>>>> growing self-symbols.
>>>>>   "As we go through thousands of experiences large and small, our
>>>>> representation of these experiences likewise accrete to our self-symbols.
>>>>> Of course a memory of a visit to the Grand Canyon, say, is attached not
>>>>> only to our self-symbol but to many other symbols in our brains, but our
>>>>> self-symbol is enriched and rendered more complex by this attachment."
>>>>>        (Hofstadter, Douglas,'I Am A Strange Loop', pp.182-183)
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> A extremely interesting explanation of self-forming, yet ALL in this
>>>>> explanation are patterns and analogs including the concept of a "human
>>>>> brain" (sorry little marsha).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does the concept 'dna' as a pattern have any more substance for the
>>>>> biologist than for the police officer?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ___
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>> Archives:
>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>>
>>>
>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>> Archives:
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>