I think regret is more affective than that. I should have asked my deceased father about his mother.
--- Frank C. Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918 Santa Fe, NM On Thu, Jun 25, 2020, 1:26 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Sometimes I feel, for a moment, that I understand some aspect of the > argument you-guys are having and then I want to participate. Without > knowing jack-squat about neural networks, it just seems to me that > coherence is something that a neural-net could be designed to care about. > And so, if I do something, and, as a consequence, learn something about > contingencies I did not know before, it would seem to me that a network > might go about reorganizing in terms of the new information and that THAT > is what we might mean by "regret." "Did that once; ain;t going to do it > again." > > N > > Nicholas Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > Clark University > [email protected] > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of ? u?l? > Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 8:37 AM > To: FriAM <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] falsifying the lost opportunity updating mechanism > for free will > > Well, first, I'm not making a claim, only tossing a wet noodle mechanism > at the wall to see if it'll stick. > > I think canalizing flow is missing 2 key components of the mechanism I > proposed: 1) composition and 2) dampening edits or negative reinforcement. > (1) is less important. I think I could steelman your weaker form of > composition well enough say it's a member of this class of mechanisms. But > (2) is important. Canalizing flow is positive reinforcing. But the point of > a feedback loop (and iteration as opposed to instantaneous composition) > trying to capture *lost opportunity* is to lower the chances of following > the same path next time and raise the chances of following a different path > next time. > > To map back to a vernacular "free will", this mechanism implements it by > *regret* and post-hoc rationalization. So, to coerce it into some kind of > canalization, at a bare minimum, the mechanism would need some force for > mixing or heat, some way to scramble *against* positive reinforcement. But > that would only be a force for neutral distributions ... e.g. "If I had the > chance to do it all over again FRESH". That doesn't go far enough. To > capture lost opportunity and regret, we have to have "If I had the chance > to do it all over again KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW". > > This is why I included the scaffolding for pattern matching and iteration. > The mechanism has to be able to exhibit negative feedback. > > On 6/20/20 9:31 AM, Jon Zingale wrote: > > Glen's Claim: > > a) a mesh of parallel processes evolving in time > > b) each process has a local branching structure > > c) these branches (and the events that walk them) compose > > d) that composition is monitored and remembered within some scope > > e) that monitor/memory is used by a controller to edit the branching > > structures > > > > Heraclitus says: "No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's > > not the same river and he's not the same man." > > > > From the Eulerian perspective, fluid flowing through a river delta has > > many of the characteristics of Glen's theory. We can imagine the river > > delta as a mesh of composed local branching structures, whose /events/ > > are the ensemble particles of the flow (a,b,c). The flow /monitors/ > > the river delta directly, it experiences the changes in gradients and > shear (d1). > > The flow /memories/ the river delta by acting on the delta directly, > > it frees sediment at one stage only to deposit it at a further stage > > (d2). Through time, the flow's monitoring and remembering /edits/ the > > branching structure of the river delta, giving rise to phenomena like > > distributaries and important to our /free will/-discussion delta > switching (e). > > > -- > ☣ uǝlƃ > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> > http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> > http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
