Nick your article reminds of Elizabeth Culotta. She says in her Science article 
that anthropomorphism is a natural property of humans that contributed to the 
rise of religions. She quotes Oxford University psychologist Justin Barrett who 
argues that "Humans have a tendency to see signs of agents—minds like our 
own—at work in the world" and Yale University psychologist Paul Bloom who says 
"We have a tremendous capacity to imbue even inanimate things with beliefs, 
desires, emotions, and consciousness,... and this is at the core of many 
religious beliefs".Elizabeth Culotta, On the Origin of Religion, Science (2009) 
Vol. 326, Issue 5954, 784-787-J.
-------- Original message --------From: Russell Standish 
<[email protected]> Date: 6/28/20  10:12  (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday 
Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 
[FRIAM] God Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to 
the nth detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective 
anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:1) What exactly is 
priveleged about introspection?2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism 
starts from anidentity between the target behaviour and the observers 
behaviour,which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching 
ata door to get in.In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege 
inintrospection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -that 
information is simply now available to external observers.In terms of the 
identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn'tneed to be identical, but 
it does need to be analogical. The mostimportant application of this skill is 
prediction of what other humanbeings do. People aren't the same, but they are 
similar - and humansociety functions because we can predict to some extent what 
otherpeople are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evovedin the 
first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, whichare social pack 
animals. We have also evolved the ability to "putourselves in somebody else's 
skin", taking into account the obviousexternal differences. So we can imagine 
being a dog, and wanting toget through a door, what would we do. We know we 
cannot stand up, andturn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what 
would we do,given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a 
likelybehaviour then. That, then is analogical.So, I'm not exactly convinced 
:).CheersOn Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, [email protected] 
wrote:> Sorry Russ.  It was in a hyperlink: > > 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti> 
ve_anthropomorphism> > 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 Russell Standish> Sent: 
Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee 
Group' <[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God> > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 
09:59:37PM -0600, [email protected] wrote:> > Hi Russ,> > > >  > > > > 
Hawking my wares again.  I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this > > crap.  
The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is > > actually in the 
other direction.  We model our view of ourselves on our> experience with 
others.> > > > What paper? What argument?> > > -- > > 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------> 
Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)> Principal, 
High Performance Coders     [email protected]>                       
http://www.hpcoders.com.au> 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------> > 
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...> 
... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...> 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/ > > > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. 
.- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- 
. .-. ...> 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/ -- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------Dr 
Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)Principal, High 
Performance Coders     [email protected]                      
http://www.hpcoders.com.au-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .FRIAM Applied Complexity 
Group listservZoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriamun/subscribe 
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comarchives: 
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/ 

Reply via email to