Yes, the topography is a metaphor, but, as I noted, simply one I like, mostly 
because it only tries to explain one piece of the "innards" you referenced.

I am in Saint Paul, Minnesota and, apparently unemployable. If you wish another 
substack within which to lurk, explore profwest.substack.com

davew


On Fri, May 9, 2025, at 11:49 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> Aw Dave.  How great it is to hear from old friends!  Where are you.  How are 
> you!?
> 
> But isn't the neural net itself a metaphor ... a model, if you will, of the 
> relation between input and output?  And could I not generate another model, 
> just a useful that treats the input as the ocean and the out put as the 
> streams. Like water falls spilling over the edge of a filled caldera?
> 
> On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 7:27 AM Prof David West <[email protected]> wrote:
>> __
>> OK Nick, You asked for it:
>> 
>> I totally agree with you.
>> 
>> As I believe you do, I think metaphor is absolutely essential, generalizing 
>> a bit on Quine's statement "at the fringe of science only metaphor can guide 
>> us" I would replace science with understanding. But when it comes to the 
>> brain, Mind, Consciousness, and Intelligence—no one has produced a useful or 
>> even usable metaphor that increases our understanding.
>> 
>> The only point of departure, is I would find less fault with 
>> anthropomorphism than I do with the computational metaphor that dominates 
>> the conversation about brain-mind-intelligence. Mary is a mere imp compared 
>> to that Satan.
>> 
>> I do like Hopfield's metaphor of a topographic surface that channels 
>> "rainfall" (inputs) to "oceans" (outputs) as an explanation for the 
>> operation of one possible bit of "innards," i.e., a neural net.
>> 
>> davew
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, May 9, 2025, at 5:16 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> Oh Gosh, Jochen.  On the one hand I am deeply indebted to FRIAM members for 
>>> allowing me to noodle in areas of thought where I have no business; on the 
>>> other hand, I feel obligated not to hide from you how very, very bad I 
>>> think Mary C. Lamia’s thinking is.  In the first place, lover of metaphors 
>>> that am, I think the anthropomorphism of the brain is one of the most 
>>> dangerous metaphors a human can bring to psychology, because it sets off an 
>>> eternal loop of thought from which there is no escape.   Meteorology and 
>>> Psychology have much in common.  They both have to do with objects with 
>>> innards operating in environments.  With Psychology, the objects are human, 
>>> the innards are the guts and brain, and the environment is the people and 
>>> things around us.  In Meteorology, the objects are the storms, the innards 
>>> are the fronts and other structures of cyclones, and the environment is the 
>>> earth’s surface and the larger circulation of its atmosphere.  Perhaps I 
>>> feel drawn to Meteorology just because it seems so like a behavioral 
>>> science.  (Or, to get the order of events right, I was drawn to Psychology 
>>> because it was so like Meteorology.)   But we must keep our levels of 
>>> organization straight.  And if we, like Mary C., are to make metaphors 
>>> between the whole (the person) and the part (the brain) and then to say 
>>> that the part is manipulating the whole, she ought to be damn clear what 
>>> kind of metaphorical world she his let herself into or she will never get 
>>> out alive. I don’t think she knows anything she is talking about.  I would 
>>> be terrified if one of my college-aged grandchildren were to fall into the 
>>> hands of such a person. 
>>>  
>>> I am deeply sorry if I am being a jerk.  (And will no doubt deeplier 
>>> sorrier when one of you points out both that I am both being a jerk and  
>>> that I am wrong).  If you were tempted to carry on this conversation 
>>> further, now I have been a jerk, I would love to explore with you how some 
>>> aspect of Mary’s thought accorded with your experience and perhaps gave you 
>>> comfort or insight because of that.  When she talks of the brain, what is 
>>> she actually talking about for you.  Because, if one thing is damned sure, 
>>> it is that when people talk about their brains, they are talking about 
>>> something they have never touched or seen or heard or felt.  They are 
>>> talking about a beetle in a box, a nothing.  Or they are using the brain as 
>>> a model of behavior. 
>>>  
>>> OK, Russ, Dave, Glen, Marcus, Erics, have at me. 
>>>  
>>> Nick
>>>  
>>> *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Jochen Fromm
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 24, 2025 2:10 PM
>>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>
>>> *Subject:* [FRIAM] Your personal truth
>>>  
>>> If Nick shares his struggles with weather I can share my unqualified 
>>> thoughts about psychology :-P I was thinking about the orange menace, how 
>>> he deceives everyone and how he manipulates his followers by controlling 
>>> their emotions and I was wondering if emotions deceive us in general. Do 
>>> emotions deceive us by creating a reality distortion field that paints the 
>>> objects they have identified as desirable (primarily food & mates for 
>>> supper and pairing time) in the brightest colors? 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> Emotions certainly need to manipulate us in order to control us. Their 
>>> purpose is to influence our behavior and interactions. Psychologist Mary C. 
>>> Lamia writes "Without any deliberate effort on your part, your brain 
>>> evaluates every situation you encounter and decides if an emotion should be 
>>> activated to alert and protect you" [1]. They are in a sense the PR machine 
>>> and advertising agency of the body. As if the body would create an 
>>> advertising agency that highlights the objects it should seek. 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> Emotions deceive us because they exaggerate. If we are in love they turn 
>>> the desired object of person into some kind of wonderful dream. We only 
>>> perceive positive traits while negative ones are overlooked. If we hate 
>>> something we only perceive negative traits. These distortions act on top of 
>>> your beliefs which "create a cognitive lens through which you interpret the 
>>> events of your world" [2]
>>> 
>>>  
>>> They exaggerate to alert and protect us. Mary C. Lamia writes "By creating 
>>> anxiety, anger, sadness, fear, guilt, shame, disgust, embarrassment, or any 
>>> number of emotional responses that your brain has at its disposal, your 
>>> emotional system attempts to inform and protect you by making you feel 
>>> whatever it is you need to know." [1]
>>> 
>>>  
>>> Emotions deceive us because they can be misguided based on your previous 
>>> experience, for example in anxiety disorders or addiction: "Your emotional 
>>> system has no reason to lie, although it can be misguided based on your 
>>> previous experiences in the world that have informed it." [1]
>>> 
>>>  
>>> Apparently emotions create a personal truth for each of us which shows us 
>>> the world as they (on behalf of our selfish genes) want us to see it. A 
>>> kind of personalized, distorted version of reality that reflects the 
>>> importance of each object based on our personal longings and desires. Mary 
>>> C. Lamia writes "nevertheless, your emotions will tell you the truth - your 
>>> truth - even if you don't want to listen." [1]
>>> 
>>>  
>>> [1] 
>>> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/intense-emotions-and-strong-feelings/201208/do-emotions-lie
>>> 
>>>  
>>> [2] 
>>> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/living-forward/202009/how-your-thinking-creates-your-reality
>>> 
>>>  
>>> -J.
>>>  
>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / 
>>> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
>>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>>>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>> 
>> 
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / 
>> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
> 
> 
> --
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
> Clark University
> [email protected]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... 
> --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
> 
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... 
--- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to