<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div dir="auto">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\u2014minds like our own\u2014at 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".<br><br>Elizabeth Culotta, On the Origin of Religion, Science (2009) Vol. 326, Issue 5954, 784-787</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">-J.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div><br></div><div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000" dir="auto"><!-- originalMessage --><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Russell Standish <lists@hpcoders.com.au> </div><div>Date: 6/28/20 10:12 (GMT+01:00) </div><div>To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam@redfish.com> </div><div>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God </div><div><br></div></div>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:<br><br>1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?<br><br>2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an<br>identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,<br>which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at<br>a door to get in.<br><br>In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in<br>introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -<br>that information is simply now available to external observers.<br><br>In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't<br>need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most<br>important application of this skill is prediction of what other human<br>beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human<br>society functions because we can predict to some extent what other<br>people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved<br>in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which<br>are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put<br>ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious<br>external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to<br>get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and<br>turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,<br>given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely<br>behaviour then. That, then is analogical.<br><br>So, I'm not exactly convinced :).<br><br>Cheers<br><br>On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnickson2@gmail.com wrote:<br>> Sorry Russ. It was in a hyperlink: <br>> <br>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti<br>> ve_anthropomorphism<br>> <br>> Nicholas Thompson<br>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology<br>> Clark University<br>> ThompNickSon2@gmail.com<br>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: Friam <friam-bounces@redfish.com> On Behalf Of Russell Standish<br>> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM<br>> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam@redfish.com><br>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God<br>> <br>> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, thompnickson2@gmail.com wrote:<br>> > Hi Russ,<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this <br>> > crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is <br>> > actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our<br>> experience with others.<br>> > <br>> <br>> What paper? What argument?<br>> <br>> <br>> -- <br>> <br>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)<br>> Principal, High Performance Coders hpcoder@hpcoders.com.au<br>> http://www.hpcoders.com.au<br>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> <br>> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...<br>> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...<br>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe<br>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com<br>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/<br>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <br>> <br>> <br>> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...<br>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam<br>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com<br>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/<br>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <br><br>-- <br><br>----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)<br>Principal, High Performance Coders hpcoder@hpcoders.com.au<br> http://www.hpcoders.com.au<br>----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .<br>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam<br>un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com<br>archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/<br>FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <br></body></html>