On Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:18:52 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy 
> <multipl...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:32 AM, meekerdb 
> > <meek...@verizon.net<javascript:>> 
> wrote: 
> >> 
> >> On 7/15/2013 2:30 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
> >> 
> >> Would this kind of universality of human sense-making be likely if the 
> >> connections between words, shapes, and feelings were purely 
> computational? 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Why not?  Being a broken line vs a differentiable line is a computable 
> >> property.  The difference between "k" sounds and "b" sounds is 
> computable. 
> >> So I'm not sure what you're getting at.  Or are you asking how "k" came 
> to 
> >> be associated with "broken line" or how the written letter "k" was 
> >> associated with the phonetic sound of "k"? 
> >> 
> > 
> > Right. Almost too easy, which makes me suspicious Craig has some weird 
> > counter play ;-) 
> > 
> > Indeed, why not? Rise and fall in values of acoustics + phonetics, 
> shrill i 
> > of kiki vs. roundness of bouba, are mapped to jagged form vs rounder 
> form. 
> > Spikes vs. curves in values of graphic pattern mirrored by disjunct vs. 
> > conjunct in sound, which you could make visible by frequency response 
> graph. 
> > Spikes vs. curves, odd to even, states of randomness to organization 
> etc. 
> > Full buffet, eat all you can, choice is yours. PGC 
>
> Yup, I see this as further evidence that the brains is a kludge -- 
> btw, this is exactly what evolutionary theory would predict. 
> Computational structures get reused through some path of least 
> resistance. I imagine some abstract pattern matching algorithm that is 
> shared by both the auditive and visual channels. 
>

It's not an abstract pattern matching algorithm, it is a concrete aesthetic 
affinity. There are quantitative algorithms which can be derived a 
posteriori, but they are skeletal and meaningless without the capacity to 
appreciate the sensations which they correspond to. A machine or a 
computation has no capacity to appreciate the difference between soft and 
hard, pointed and curved, it can only measure the degree to which some 
pre-defined criteria of those conditions is satisfied. That is not at all 
the same thing.

Craig


> Telmo. 
>
> > 
> >> Brent 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups 
> >> "Everything List" group. 
> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> an 
> >> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. 
> >> To post to this group, send email to 
> >> everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>. 
>
> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. 
> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. 
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups 
> > "Everything List" group. 
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> an 
> > email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. 
> > To post to this group, send email to 
> > everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>. 
>
> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. 
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. 
> > 
> > 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to