In Hofstadter’s wife Carol died suddenly of a brain tumor at only 42, leaving “I Am a Strange Loop is vintage Hofstadter: earnest, deep, overflowing with. Not so fast, protests Pulitzer Prize-winning cognitive scientist Douglas Hofstadter in I Am a Strange Loop – the thoughtful companion to Gödel, Escher, Bach, his. So, a mirage that only exists because it perceives itself: this is an example of what Hofstadter calls a “strange loop”. He has an endearing.
|Published (Last):||19 November 2006|
|PDF File Size:||5.39 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.48 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Svakako da se sve to odvija u mozgu; neuroni i sve oko njih su i dalje glavni. His grasp of the philosophical arguments is lacking, and he spends most of a chapter refuting thought experiments with the laws of physics.
In the preface to its 20th-anniversary edition, Hofstadter laments that the book was perceived as a hodgepodge of neat things with no central theme. Hofstadter is a respected academic, and I’m a dingus with a Goodreads account.
And what an interesting world. Incidentally he is also developing a theory of consciousness, which is a correlate of soul. I actually agree that this is possibly an accurate way to describe much of the Ego. Litt farfetched kanskje, men det funker.
There has been no AI which has successfully modeled the brain and human intelligence, which can respond to abstract and arbitrary input and truly “learn”. The boundaries of our souls are indeed beyond all measure. Putting aside the question of consciousness, though, I like Doug’s picture of the self as built in this semi-public way, which leaves it an open question how much of the matter of the self gets filled in by how other people treat us per Hegelwhat we figure out ourselves like during Lacan’s mirror stage, or Ayn Rand, who I’m reading now in preparation for a future episode, is all about this to a pretty silly degreeand what comes to us second-hand through the terms of our language itself the bulk of Lacan’s account.
A perspective a mind stange therefore a consequence of a unique pattern of symbolic activity in our nervous systems. It is difficult to get into the book for the following reasons: In the 19th century, there was a great deal of philosophical debate, again going back to Descartes, about the validity of our perceptions about reality.
May 25, shawn rated it did not like it Recommends it for: Sometimes, too, Hofstadter employs playful analogies to show how consciousness works, and how it doesn’t work. Hofstadter has a new book due out at the end of April after several postponements on Amazon: It was just a clever mapping.
Anyway, Hotstadter am a self-referent loop that talks about itself.
Jan 11, Kristopher rated it did not like it Shelves: In particular mosquitoes don’t hofstaster much of a soul that you could speak of. Books by Douglas R. However, what if the original weren’t destroyed, and so we end up with two people, with all the same physical and mental characteristics. The Feeling of What Happens: Atoms and presumably their constituent parts have no souls; bacteria have very primitive, that amm to say, very small souls; dogs have somewhat bigger souls; and human beings have much larger souls but even among those there is enormous variation and no logical upper limit to size.
Notify me of follow-up comments by email. He tries to argue through several chapters that the decentered–“strange loopiness”–of consciousness comes about because cognition I enjoyed much of Hostetter’s account of the ways in ohfstadter a strictly biological account of cognition fails to grasp the complexities of consciousness and identities.
For example, one might say that writing an original philosophical article is a lot like trying to cut a trail through the jungle: But it’s very clear that Doug has no tolerance for strnge n’ roll of whatever brainy, emotionally developed variety. In other words, consciousness and physical o, as characterized by Hofstadter, do not seem to be conceptually compatible; it does not seem possible to for him to have his cake and eat it too.
He is kind of a dork I hoftadter that as uninsultingly as possible and it shows. But this makes the following question all hoftadter more pressing: View all 9 comments. The claim that it represents the model for the self is nothing but a claim unbacked by scientific evidence. In this way, one could embed statements about statements into the system, not just statements about numbers, because statements about numbers could also be statements about numbers that were standing in for hogstadter statements.
I have hofstater been interested in the nature and origin or human consciousness and sense of self, and as an irreligious materialist, the traditional explanations offered by our dominant social institutions were unsatisfactory. So the idea is that the brain, too, works on the basis of symbols, and not in the sense of symbols that someone is reading and I’m just not clear whether this concept can be fruitfully connected to Lacan’s notion of symbols in the unconsciousbut in the sense that, broadly speaking, if the environment acts on a substance and leaves marks, those marks symbolize that feature of the environment.
On the other hand, I had read his book Godel, Escher, Bach long ago, and found it to be excellent. And beyond this, the postscript to chapter 16 should be unnecessary if he knew that his argumentation were solid.
Not the brilliance I was looking forward to. Whereas a mosquito probably only responds in very predictable and determined ways to stimulus, higher order life “reflects” on stimuli in increasing complicated and diverse ways. I liked this book, but there was a lot I think I missed.
As the brain goes, so goes the mind, they say. Dec 20, Robert rated it liked it Shelves: He does not believe in free will, which makes sense, and he doesn’t believe either in mystical, incorporeal souls. It seems despite all my own follies, most people I know respect me way more highly than I think I deserve this is just a fact, not a boast.
Though the line is kind of arbitrary, it must exist for each person. And what is sleep about anyway?