Oops. Accidentally sent this direct.
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:24:17 -0700 From: gⅼеɳ <geprope...@gmail.com> To: Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com> Just to be clear, I don't disagree with some abstraction of "point mutations" on some thing other than a "meme", like a modal pattern of network activation. It's the analogy between ideas and genes, I object to. Where a fast mode switch (or any sync'ed evocation) is more than subjective lies in a shared, grouped, mode switch. Let's say 2 people each have networks with 2 attractors, with no objective mapping between the 2 people or the 4 attractors or the underlying biological structures. But if their mode switching is synchronized (P1.MA & P2.MB = P1.MB & P2.MA -- i.e. when person 1 enters mode A, person 2 enters mode B, and when person 1 enters mode B, person 2 enters mode A), then that synchrony is objective. When I say "nuclear war", Sally feels anxiety and when Sally says "malware in the power grid", I feel anxiety, then our our synchronous mode-switching is objective, regardless of the payload/content or the underlying feeling. It could also be "nuclear war" => Sally.hatred, "malware in the power grid" => Glen.anxiety. But this is where my requirement for both me and Sally to have common physiological structures (neocortex, fingers, knees, etc.). Having R2/D2 say "malware in the power grid" is not likely to give me any hint what R2/D2 might be thinking because its "physiology" doesn't mirror my own. This (objective) reflection is required for the illusion of communication to obtain. On 08/14/2017 08:41 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > If memory has a holographic property -- that there are many correlated > memories with each memory -- then one could imagine that operators against > this compressed representation could change dramatically just with a point > mutation. A smell that triggers memory of a childhood event, a conflict > with a lover, etc. The experience of seeing many things in a new light when > a crucial fact arrives, etc. Now assuming this is not controversial, it is > still not clear to what extent if this can be anything more than subjective. > But, at least in principle there could be concepts shared by many parties > that would display these characteristics, and would similarly evolve in > important ways just from point mutations. The concepts or language > connected to the concepts could impose many constraints on how frequently > certain point mutations would get visited, e.g. the language could just > prohibit them as nonsense. -- gⅼеɳ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
