(Reflectivity and Consciousness Part 2 - Strategies For Attacking The Puzzles)

Consider the two hypotheses put forward. I have suggested that an effective communication system, consciousness and reflectivity are all the same thing. This is the means through which the sub-agents of the mind talk to each in order to integrate their behaviour. And so intimate does the link between mathematics and knowledge appear to be - when we consider algorithms as 'dynamical mathematical objects' the picture we are drawn to suggests a network of 'knowledge nodes' with consciousness itself as the DP Modelling Language of the mind. Bring together the ideas suggested and a new strategy for solving reflectivity suggests itself. Solving Reflectivity *Firstly, stop searching for the oxy-moronic 'Reflective Decision Theory'. There isn't one. Reflectivity, we have established, is not in the decision making business, it's in the communications business. The tools we should be deploying to solve reflectivity are the tools of Communication Theory, *not* the tools of Decision Theory. *Secondly, bring to bear the tools that already exist for an analogous field: the field of data communications. Deploy the language of nodes, time messaging and networking. *Thirdly, investigate further the connections between the computer science and the pure mathematical sciences to obtain further insights and unifications of helpful concepts. Model mathematics using the object oriented paradigm and consider algorithms as 'mathematical objects' which can have states, identities and behaviours. This approach leads naturally to the big idea that consciousness is 'The DP Modelling Language Of The Mind' *Draw analogies to other fields of mathematics to obtain clues about specific tools for use in attacking reflectivity puzzles. For instance, concepts from Calculus are suspected to be relevant. Recall that Reflection was considered to be 'a network of interacting knowledge nodes' and 'a system of interacting dynamical mathematical objects'. These are concepts roughly analogous to physical objects moving through fields, which is modelling using Calculus. The concept of a 'Limit' looks important. Considering again our cognitive network of interacting sub-agents, unified behaviour involves moving the system towards an optimal 'Limit'. This again, brings to mind the concept of a 'Limit' from the branch of calculus, for calculus itself is the science of limits. Conclusion A sketch of some new perspectives was here suggested for attacking the puzzles of consciousness and reflectivity. It was suggested that reflectivity is not what it is believed to be. It is not, it was here argued, a part of Decision Theory, but instead should be thought of as part of Communication Theory. Two core hypotheses were suggested. (1) That the function of consciousness is as an internal communication system of the mind which enables sub-agents to interact effectively and (2) That reflectivity can be considered as a network of interacting dynamical 'mathematical objects' (knowledge nodes) which points to an equivalence between reflectivity and consciousness and suggests that conscious itself is the 'DP Modelling Language Of The Mind'. A few more specific ideas were suggested, namely that the mathematics of Calculus (and especially the concept of a 'Limit') could be highly relevant to the solution to the twin puzzles of consciousness and reflectivity. -- (Whew). Done. (Marc winks at the world and grins) 'Reflectivity and Consciousness' by Marc Geddes 22nd August, 2007 Auckland, New Zealand --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---