Matt,
I like the way you stated this concept of mind-to-world vs. world-to-mind.
It's not exactly the same point, but here's something that is very similar I
thought you might find interesting.
----
If the goal of cognitive psychology is to understand how the mind
works/processes, which is a stretch because I don't think people generally
agree on what the goal of Cognitive Psychology is, then one must break down
these 'mental processes' into component parts and understand them
individually in order to understand the workings of the whole. I call these
component processes 'Knowledge Interactions' because these interact with
each other to create the whole mental process. These include:
· Knowledge storagememory and recollectionamount stored equals
intelligence
· Learning and instruction
· Ignorance
· Knowledge creation (includes innovation, creativity, invention, problem
solving, and theory)
· Exposure
· Compilation
· Language design
· Collaboration, sharing and connectivity
· Expression and non-expression
· Questions and anti-knowledge (cumulative questions antithetical to
knowledge)
These interactions work both at the individual level and at the social
level. For example, the individual utilizes learning to garner knowledge,
but society can also 'learn' in the sense that it can also garner knowledge
as a social unit.
Knowledge interactions can be utilized by any level of social unit, for
example, groups, virtual communities, associations, enterprises, nations, or
world. Working within the construct of these interactions, the 'global
mind/brain' operates in exactly the same way as the individual mind/brain
and these two interact as well. In other words, knowledge working scales
beautifully.
Most of these interactions are fairly well understood by society, with the
exception of knowledge creation and questions, which are not understood and
are often confused with other knowledge interactions. In my opinion, people
are straining to understand things they already understand fairly well while
trying to skip entirely over the interactions that they understand very
little about, which are questions and knowledge creation. As long as these
are skipped over, one can't possibly make sense of these mental processes,
individual, social, or mechanical.
In other words, a full understanding of questions and knowleddge creation is
the step required to realize 'artificial knowledge creation,' which is
singularity. Within the construct of these interactions, 'artificial
intelligence' already exists as knowledge stored and recalled artificially.
Kind Regards,
Bruce LaDuke
Managing Director
Instant Innovation, LLC
Indianapolis, IN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hyperadvance.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Nathan Barna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [singularity] Re: Intuitive limits of applied CogPsy
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 08:17:20 -0500
Matt Mahoney wrote:
I thought the goal of cognitive psychology was to understand behavior.
Yes, and there's more to its application. Understanding behavior, and
nothing else, is predominantly a mind-to-world direction of fit. Using
that understanding, and thence fully exploiting cognitive psychology,
is a world-to-mind direction of fit.
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
