Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: Re: the Skeptical Meme

2017-08-14 Thread Marcus Daniels 
< 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. >


I don't deny that communication could well have evolved through this correlated 
mode switching, but once it exists the difference between animals and, 
hopefully, modern humans is that we can inhibit or modulate these things.

Actually I think my dog can even modulate them.   The dog can learn rules and 
carry on without constantly looking at me to see if I am approving.If 
someone like Hillary acts more like R2/D2, that's fine.   It is even good.   
She (the person in such a role) doesn't need to make me glow or buy me a beer.  
 I can grasp she is self-interested and calculating.


Marcus


From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of gⅼеɳ <geprope...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:25:19 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: Re: the Skeptical Meme

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

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

[FRIAM] Fwd: Re: the Skeptical Meme

2017-08-14 Thread gⅼеɳ 
Oops.  Accidentally sent this direct.


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] the Skeptical Meme
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 09:24:17 -0700
From: gⅼеɳ 
To: Marcus Daniels 

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