Can we agree that trying to describe the characteristics of whole system behavior, relating the simple to the complex, is a difficult challenge that prompts each of us to stretch the meanings of words in ways others feel uncomfortable with? I think the simplest property all ordinary whole systems have, air currents to orangutans, is loops of organization which give operational meaning to inside & outside. I know how to find lots of them, but can't figure out what to call them.
Phil Henshaw ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 680 Ft. Washington Ave NY NY 10040 tel: 212-795-4844 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] explorations: www.synapse9.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nicholas Thompson > Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 9:37 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: echarles > Subject: [FRIAM] Intentionality is the mark of the vital > > > Jochen, > > Thanks for your kind response. > > Your question churns my head. I was keen to argue that > intentionality is a property not only of thinking things but > of any biological thing. But I never imagined that > intentionality could be used as a criterion of vitality. I > do believe that every living system displays intentionality, > but I now have to think about whether I think that all > intentional systems > are living. I guess NOT. However, my reasons for holding > this belief are > probably robotophobic. > > Nick > > > PS My first response to your question was to write the > following 100 words of baffle-gab, like the good academic I > am. It might be marginally interesting in and off itself, > but it didnt seem to answer your question. > I had put too much effort into it to throw it away, so I > stuck it below. > Feel free to ignore it. > > BEGIN BAFFLEGAB > ======================================================= > > Intentionality is one of those words that leads to endless > confusion. It can refer to having an intention or it can > refer to a peculiar propert to assertions containing verbs of > mentation, wanting, thinking, feeling, etc. > The sentence, "Jones's intention was that the books be placed > on the table" is intentional in both senses: intentional in > sense one because it tells us something about what Jones is > up to, and intentional in the second sense > because it displays the odd property of referential opacity. > Unlike the > statement "the books are on the table" , the statement about > Jones's intentions cannot be verified nor disconfirmed by > gathering information about the location of the books. > > The two are intimately connected. Any statement one makes > about the intentions of others in sense one is inevitably an > intensional utterance in sense two because the truth value of > the statement lies in the organization of Jones's behavior, > rather than whether Jones's intention is ever fulfilled. > > It was in this second, perhaps strained, philosophic sense, > that I think the cue relation is necessarily intentional. > When we say that C is a cue to X, we mean that from the point > of view of the system we are interested > in, C stands in for X. ("In the Human respiratory system, > Blood acidity > is a cue for blood oxygenation") To the extent that robots > use cues, they MUST be intentional in this sense. > > =========================================================== > end BAFFLEGAB. > > Nicholas Thompson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson > > > > [Original Message] > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Date: 7/14/2006 12:00:29 PM > > Subject: Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 17 > > > > Send Friam mailing list submissions to > > [email protected] > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: 100 billion neurons (George Duncan) > > 2. Re: 100 billion neurons (Jim Rutt) > > 3. Re: 100 billion neurons (Frank Wimberly) > > 4. Intentionality - the mark of the vital (Jochen Fromm) > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 10:38:47 -0600 > > From: "George Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group" > > <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > Shall this conversation be neuronic rather than neurotic? > > > > Or try this > > > http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17164&ch=infotech > > > > > > On 7/13/06, Giles Bowkett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I'm inclined to agree. The model I use is nonlinear fluid > dynamics. > > > Say you've got a thought which you began thinking when you were > > > young. That thought is a fluid in motion. Over the course of your > > > life you revisit certain ideas and revise certain opinions. The > > > motion continues for decades. The way you think is like an > > > information processing system which evolves over the > course of your > > > life, and it's true enough to call that software, not > hardware, but > > > the flow of data through that system is entirely organic, and > > > creating an exact copy of a given flow in nonlinear fluid > dynamics > > > is impossible. The structure of your mode of thinking -- your > > > "software" -- is shaped tremendously by the things that you think > > > about; therefore replicating the processor without > replicating the > > > data can only be of partial usefulness, if the processor > is shaped > > > by and for the data. It's like copying a river by duplicating > > > exactly every last rock and pebble, but leaving out the water. > > > > > > On 7/10/06, Frank Wimberly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Back in the 1980's Hans and I had offices next to each other in > > > > the Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon. Over a period of a > > > > couple of years we had numerous arguments about whether > machines > > > > could realize consciousness; whether a human mind could be > > > > transferred to a machine, etc. I remember saying that > if somehow > > > > my "mind" were transferred > from > > > > my body to some robot--which I felt was impossible--it might be > > > > that everyone else would agree that it was a remarkable > likeness > > > > but that I would be gone. Hans replied that I undervalued > > > > myself--that I am software not hardware. After many arguments > > > > along these lines I said, "Hans, I now understand why you don't > > > > understand what I am saying > about > > > > consciousness--you don't have it." This was all in > good humor and > later > > > > when I was teaching a course in AI to MBA students I > invited Hans > > > > to continue our debate in class. A good time was had by all, I > > > > hope. > > > > > > > > Frank > > > > > > > > --- > > > > Frank C. Wimberly > > > > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz (505) 995-8715 or > (505) 670-9918 > (cell) > > > > Santa Fe, NM 87505 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > On Behalf Of Martin C. Martin > > > > Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 7:16 PM > > > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > > > > > > > I suspect you'd like Hans Moravec's books: > > > > > > > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674576187 > > > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195136306 > > > > > > > > He uses Moore's law and estimates of the brain's > computing power > > > > to calculate when we'll have human equivalence in "a > computer." I > > > > forget the date, but it's not far. He also talks about > a number > > > > of very interesting consequences of this. > > > > > > > > - Martin > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > > > archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > > > archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Giles Bowkett > > > http://www.gilesgoatboy.org > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > > archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > George T. Duncan > > Professor of Statistics > > Heinz School of Public Policy and Management > > Carnegie Mellon University > > Pittsburgh, PA 15213 > > (412) 268-2172 > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: > /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060713/bcb8105c/att > achment-0001.h > tml > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:57:49 -0600 > > From: Jim Rutt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > as an interesting argument that the old hardware/software argument > > about > > consciousness is often malformed, take a look see at: > > > > > > > > Damasio, Antonio: _The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in > > the > > Making of > > Consciousness_ > > > > > > > > > > At 07:30 AM 7/10/2006, you wrote: > > >Back in the 1980's Hans and I had offices next to each > other in the > > >Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon. Over a period of a > couple of > > >years we had numerous arguments about whether machines > could realize > > >consciousness; whether a human mind could be transferred to a > > >machine, etc. I remember saying that if somehow my "mind" were > > >transferred from my body to some robot--which I felt was > > >impossible--it might be that everyone else would agree > that it was a > > >remarkable likeness but that I would be gone. Hans replied that I > > >undervalued myself--that I am software not hardware. After many > > >arguments along these lines I said, "Hans, I now > understand why you > > >don't understand what I am saying about consciousness--you > don't have > > >it." This was all in good humor and later when I was teaching a > > >course in AI to MBA students I invited Hans to continue > our debate in > > >class. A good time was had by all, I hope. > > > > > >Frank > > > > > >--- > > >Frank C. Wimberly > > >140 Calle Ojo Feliz (505) 995-8715 or (505) > 670-9918 (cell) > > >Santa Fe, NM 87505 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > >Behalf Of Martin C. Martin > > >Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 7:16 PM > > >To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > >Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > > > > >I suspect you'd like Hans Moravec's books: > > > > > >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674576187 > > >http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195136306 > > > > > >He uses Moore's law and estimates of the brain's computing > power to > > >calculate when we'll have human equivalence in "a computer." I > > >forget the date, but it's not far. He also talks about a > number of > > >very interesting consequences of this. > > > > > >- Martin > > > > > >============================================================ > > >FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > >Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > >archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > >============================================================ > > >FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > >Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > >archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > =================================== > > Jim Rutt > > voice: 505-989-1115 > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: > /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060713/3f05e21d/att > achment-0001.h > tml > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:59:23 -0600 > > From: "Frank Wimberly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" > > <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > At the risk of being neurotic, here is link to a review of Damasio's > > book: > > > > > http://dir.salon.com/story/books/review/1999/09/21/damasio/index.html > > > > > > Frank > > > > --- > > Frank C. Wimberly > > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz??????????????(505) 995-8715 or (505) 670-9918 > > (cell) Santa Fe, NM [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Jim Rutt > > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 4:58 PM > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > > > as an interesting argument that the old hardware/software argument > > about consciousness is often malformed, take a look see at: > > > > > > > > Damasio, Antonio: _The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in > > the Making of Consciousness_ > > > > ? > > > > > > At 07:30 AM 7/10/2006, you wrote: > > > > Back in the 1980's Hans and I had offices next to each other in the > > Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon.? Over a period of a > couple of > > years we had numerous arguments about whether machines > could realize > > consciousness; whether a human mind could be transferred to > a machine, > > etc.? I remember saying that if somehow my "mind" were transferred > > from my body to some robot--which I felt was impossible--it > might be > > that everyone else would agree that it was a remarkable > likeness but > > that I would be gone.? Hans replied that I undervalued > myself--that I > > am software not hardware.? After many arguments along these lines I > > said, "Hans, I now understand why you don't understand what I am > > saying about consciousness--you don't have it."? This was > all in good > > humor and later when I was teaching a course in AI to MBA > students I > > invited Hans to continue our debate in class.? A good time > was had by > > all, I hope. > > > > Frank > > > > --- > > Frank C. Wimberly > > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz????????????? (505) 995-8715 or (505) 670-9918 > > (cell) Santa Fe, NM 87505?????????? [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Martin C. Martin > > Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 7:16 PM > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] 100 billion neurons > > > > I suspect you'd like Hans Moravec's books: > > > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674576187 > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195136306 > > > > He uses Moore's law and estimates of the brain's computing power to > > calculate when we'll have human equivalence in "a > computer."? I forget > > the date, but it's not far.? He also talks about a number of very > > interesting consequences of this. > > > > - Martin > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > =================================== > > Jim Rutt > > voice:? 505-989-1115?? > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 4 > > Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:42:14 +0200 > > From: "Jochen Fromm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [FRIAM] Intentionality - the mark of the vital > > To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" > > <[email protected]> > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > > > I have finally read the article "Intentionality is > > the mark of the vital". It contains interesting > > remarks about the mind/body problem, about the > > relationship between mental and material "substance", > > and nice illustrations (for example about lions and gnus). > > Well written. > > > > If "intentionality is the mark of the vital", > > are artificial agents with intentions the first > > step towards vital, living systems ? Agents are > > of course used in artificial life, but in the > > context of the article the question seems to > > gain new importance. > > > > -J. > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Nicholas Thompson > > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 3:20 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [FRIAM] self-consciousness > > > > For those rare few of you that are INTENSELY interested by > the recent > > discussion on self consciousness, here is a paper on the subject > > which asserts that every organism must have a point of view. > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/id14.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Friam mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > > > > End of Friam Digest, Vol 37, Issue 17 > > ************************************* > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
