Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Then we have nothing more to argue about. You understand the hard problem. Maybe this thread can rest in peace, now. On 5/1/20 4:16 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > Absolutely.  If strong AI people are in the "quacks like a duck" school, than > I am a strong AI person. -- ☣ uǝlƃ .-. .- -.

Re: [FRIAM] At the limits of thought

See! Now I *have* to buy the Kindle copy of the Kernberg book, remove the DRM, and ascii-fy it, so I can feed it into megahal . Damn you people. On 5/1/20 4:03 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > Tiz Frabjious and the boregos did gyro gimbal in the mame. [...]

Re: [FRIAM] At the limits of thought

Tiz Frabjious and the boregos did gyro gimbal in the mame. Or something like that. Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University thompnicks...@gmail.com https://wordpress.cl

Re: [FRIAM] At the limits of thought

What you're overlooking is that the hypercathexis of the narcissistic libido is impossible where the object is an entity without a physical instantiation of an organism which resembles the parent imago, especially the undifferentiated other which is eventually differentiated from the self and over

Re: [FRIAM] At the limits of thought

So Frank has been harassing me with psychobabble >8^D and during the course of it, I finally snapped and thought again about this paper: Experience Grounds Language https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.10151 The idea is that WS3 and higher *ground* the algorithm such that it's mechanism and output wi

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Excellent! Now we're getting somewhere. So the problem of qualia and, say, whether or not we could build a machine that *enjoys* playing the piano, you fall in the camp of the strong-AI people. We can definitely build a machine that thinks and feels just like a human. Is that right? (Full discl

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Perhaps I misspoke. I certainly agree that working out an entity's point of view is a problem. I just don't see why it's a hard problem. In otherwords, when Chalmers asserts that there is a Hard Problem of consciousness, him implies that he is pointing to some problem unique in its hardness.

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

I don't know if it's any harder or not. That's above my pay grade. But I don't *have* to answer the question to understand the question. Chalmers et al are *asking* the question. Some of them speculate on the answer. Some don't speculate on the answer. You said you didn't understand the *problem

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Well, is it any harder than working out what my point of view is? "hard" is a relative term. Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University thompnicks...@gmail.com https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ -Original Message- From: Friam On Behalf O

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Ha! Again, you contradict yourself. You've said repeatedly that you haven't gained the computational skills you thought you might gain by engaging with the complexity club. So, it's *not* easy for you, even if you claim it is. I suppose we might say that, when first presented with a perspectiv

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

G I agree that the problem is the same as the problem of working out what your point of view would be from where you are standing. If that is a hard problem for you, I trust your judgement, for the moment, until more evidence is in, that its hard for you. However, it doesn’t seem hard for me

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Excellent! So you *do* understand the hard problem. On 5/1/20 1:13 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > I can't see any substantive difference in our positions. ''So, let's just > say, for the purposes of argument that I'm right, and move on." -- ☣ uǝlƃ .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- -

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

G I can't see any substantive difference in our positions. ''So, let's just say, for the purposes of argument that I'm right, and move on." n Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University thompnicks...@gmail.com https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ ---

Re: [FRIAM] New information on COVID-19

Thank you, Frank, I stand corrected. -- rec -- On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:50 AM Frank Wimberly wrote: > Roger, > > It's Coumadin not Heparin that's used as rat poison. I've taken both. > Thank God, I'm not a rat in that sense. > > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 8:43 AM Roger Critchlow wrote: > >> An "

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

On 5/1/20 8:41 AM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > First, remember, a proper monist shouldn't talk about his "stuff",whatever it > is, as if it is distinguishable from other "stuff",  because that is dualism, > full stop.  So I really shouldn’t be doing this at all. That's just nonsense. Even

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

I (kindasorta) agree with the /that/ below. But I disagree with Dave's explicit statement, which was: On 4/30/20 12:41 PM, Prof David West wrote: > We cannot use another (perhaps our internal awareness of being conscious) > instance of consciousness because we do not know/understand it either.

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Yeh. At some point, Eric, you and I are going to have to come to terms with this “formalism” thang that the others keep trotting out. Is it just the reductio of something that is familiar to you and me, or is it something completely different. But I am late for FRIAM. Nicholas Thompson

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Hi, Glen, I have swum (swam? Swimmed?) way out beyond my depth, but I have long wanted to explore this "experience" thing, so thank you. First, remember, a proper monist shouldn't talk about his "stuff",whatever it is, as if it is distinguishable from other "stuff", because that is dualis

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

Glen said: " I've disagreed with this point before... I think we can and do model things we don't understand with other things we don't understand... E.g. if a child uses, say, styrofoam balls to model the solar system..." I think this might be some sort of linguistic slippage here. Do you agree w

Re: [FRIAM] New information on COVID-19

Roger, It's Coumadin not Heparin that's used as rat poison. I've taken both. Thank God, I'm not a rat in that sense. On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 8:43 AM Roger Critchlow wrote: > An "In Depth" appears in Science online today, > https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6490/455, titled "The mystery

Re: [FRIAM] New information on COVID-19

An "In Depth" appears in Science online today, https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6490/455, titled "The mystery of the pandemic's ‘happy hypoxia’". It mentions the NYTimes OpEd in passing. One suggestion is that the blood is clotting in the lung capillaries, which interferes with O2 trans

[FRIAM] climate change initiative open data portal

http://cci.esa.int/data/#dash -- ☣ uǝlƃ .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... . ... 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:

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

I described experience as a comprehension. Then you say it's not that sort of thing. Then you go on to describe experience as a comprehension. 8^) I guess the problem is that I'm relying too much on that jargon? You describe 2 types of comprehension: O∞) the object versus On) the observers of th

Re: [FRIAM] Warring Darwinians for Glen, Steve

I've disagreed with this point before. So, I won't lay the whole thing out again. But I think we can and do model things we don't understand with other things we don't understand. We do this all the time. There are 2 main things that allow us to do this: 1) we understand, or imagine we understan