behavior: 1) the way in which one acts or conducts oneself, especially toward others 2) the way in which an animal or person acts in response to a particular situation or stimulus. 3) the way in which a natural phenomenon or a machine works or functions
Ignoring the first definition, is there a qualitative difference between the behavior attributed to a human being or animal and that attributed to the machine or natural phenomena? I believe there is. Machine "behavior" is either a metaphor or an error of anthropomorphism. This is true, I believe, whether one speaks of a computer's UI (the computer is but a lump and sans any behavior) or a robot. Alan Kay and Seymour Papert speak of the "user illusion" — the illusion that the computer is thinking or behaving or acting as if it were intelligent, a turtle dragging its tail to draw a line, etc. The key word is "illusion." Papert, incidentally was a student and protege of Jean Piaget, a psychologist. This does not advance an argument against the possibility of a computer thinking — merely an assertion that "behavior" is not a valid basis upon which to argue that they do. davew On Tue, May 5, 2020, at 9:45 AM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, Dave, > > So the same may be said of brains, right? Brain’s don’t behave. > > Where are you going with this? > > N > > Nicholas Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > Clark University > thompnicks...@gmail.com > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 5, 2020 5:27 AM > *To:* friam@redfish.com > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve > > Allow Nick to say "a computer behaves as if it is thinking, therefore it is > thinking." > > How does a computer behave? Or, what is a computer's behavior? I am looking > at my computer - actually four of them (iPhone, tablet, laptop, and desktop) > and the only behavior I see any of them exhibiting is precisely identical to > the behavior of the glass paperweight that also occupies space on my desk. > > What is this thinking behavior y'all are ascribing to the computer? Am I the > only one that cannot see it? > > davew > > > On Mon, May 4, 2020, at 9:34 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: >> Yup. That’s what he would say. What **persuades** you that a super competent >> computer can’t think? Can a dog think? How would a Martian convince you that >> it (he, she) can think? >> >> Nick >> >> Nicholas Thompson >> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology >> Clark University >> thompnicks...@gmail.com >> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ >> >> >> >> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Frank Wimberly >> *Sent:* Monday, May 4, 2020 9:08 PM >> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> >> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve >> >> Maybe I missed something that makes this redundant but if a highschool >> student asked me what the *hard problem* is I would say: There appears to be >> no limit to how competent computers can be. They seem to be able to do just >> about anything that people think requires thought. But I am persuaded that >> they can't think. What makes the difference between thinking people and >> hypercompetent computers? >> >> Nick would say if it behaves as if it thinks then it thinks. I think. >> >> Frank >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:50 PM Steven A Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: >>> I thought this was a support group for recovering (or just >>> self-indulgent) metaphorists... you mean it's not? Why do I feel like >>> I'm in a scene from "Fight Club"? I guess that would make me more of >>> an allegorist? >>> >>> > Is it? You people can't help yourselves. It's compulsive. You might want >>> > to get some help for that. >>> > >>> > On 5/4/20 10:47 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote: >>> >> Choosing one's rifle is so concrete. It makes me want to run out and >>> >> blow away a few cacti. Oh, it's a metaphor! >>> >>> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... >>> .... . ... >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> >> >> -- >> Frank Wimberly >> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz >> Santa Fe, NM 87505 >> 505 670-9918 >> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... >> .... . ... >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> > > .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... > .... . ... > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/