Josiah, I enjoy viewing things from a philosophical and scientific perspective. I will share some ideas here
An interesting issue (for me) about software is its intrinsically > "determinate"--meaning it HAS to have fixed logic. At machine level its 0 > or 1. Nothing else. The human brain is not like that. The "logic" of > "wetware", physical organic matter, and consciousness, does not work that > way. > This is changing a little with machine learning and pre-Artificial Intelligence systems. Some ways of using computers are less and less determinate and they are getting harder to demonstrate why a computer answers X, and some will even answer Y the second time. However this* intrinsically "determinate"* is generally true. Determinism in computers is something we rely on, and a reason I do not think we will put too much effort to make "conscious" computers like us, except for experimentation. I agree consciousness does not work in a deterministic way and is is part of why it can induct and create so well. The key I believe is abstraction. > > A body is not a car. A mind is not a machine. > > Whilst medical science needs reduction to "parts"/"units"/"fragments" in > order to make sense of the otherwise obscure situation (e.g. > appendicitis/brain fever) its always an APPROXIMATION, not a DETERMINATION. > I agree, but just as we must accept this, we must also accept we can learn more about how it works, it is not an unfathomable system. While some parts of it are most likely non-deterministic due to combinatorial complexity, much is deterministic but is currently undetermined by us. > > What IS interesting in TW is that it's degree of support to "wetware" > functioning is very unusual. Largely that is to do, I think, to do with its > "self-modifying" nature. > Philosophically if we can accept the argument there is a "single Objective Reality", life and the human brain has being built in this "single Objective Reality" and despite chance playing a substantial role, physical and intellectual survival strategies have being honed by the evolutionary process, continuously tested by the "single Objective Reality". This is why we can drive cars, our evolutionary thread has passed through multiple body types, the nervous system has being forcibly generalised as a result. With a little practice we can adapt our proprioception to many body shapes and operate them as if they were our bodies. I would argue that TiddlyWiki has a philosophy behind it, that drives it towards an open and malleable platform, that maintains a generality, that increases its fitness within the software domain, and since we keep it tested in the "single Objective Reality" it will co-evolve with our wetware, and we should not be surprised if it comes to emulate human meaning and shaping. > > BTW, modern genetics is particularly relevant conceptually as its NOT > about strict determinism as that is not how (despite wider ideas) gene > manifestation happens. (see, e.g. Life Unfolding > <https://www.amazon.com/Life-Unfolding-human-creates-itself/dp/0199673543> > ) > Agreed, and supported by my previous comments. TiddlyWiki evolves in an environment of computers and our minds, we add selective pressure to its evolution, and one key pressure is to maintain its plasticity. > > The upshot of what I am saying is that TW, by Quine Behaviour, approaches > a generic problem in Computer Science. I.e.: how to Properly emulate human > meaning shaping. > I am sure you can see from my above notes, I have come to the same conclusion, the philosophy many of us share will keep it going in that direction. My key argument is I am not surprised tiddlywiki approaches a generic problem in Computer Science. There is convergence happening. > > That is about as far as I can get. > Thanks so much for you musings, It allows me to feel momentarily, that my obsession with TiddlyWiki, is justified and not a mental health problem :) Yours Sincerely Tony -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/5bd72470-812c-49b1-8145-1aa5c8b8e0cd%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
