[FRIAM] Hard problem vs. free will

Sun Jun 28 12:16:02 EDT 2020

There's a difference between predicting another's behavior perfectly and
having some idea of what the other might do.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 8:40 AM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:

> The two questions are related. We cannot predict how someone else will act
> and we don't know what it is like to be someone else because we don't know
> the history of the other person. To use Nick's words we don't know the
> personal slice of the world for this person, how it has experienced the
> world so far.
>
> If we could predict how someone else will act there would be no free will.
> If we could experience what it is like to be someone else directly there
> would be no hard problem of consciousness.
>
> I think intimate knowledge of someone allows you to predict how the person
> will act to a certain degree. You could say two minds have merged into one.
> The two persons still have free will, but they are "similar wills" so to
> speak.
>
> In the same way intimate knowledge of the history of person allows you to
> experience the world as the person does, for example by seeing a movie
> about the life of a person. Watching this movie you experience the same
> events that the person has experienced.
>
> In this sense being married for 25 or more years is like watching the same
> movie, the movie of your life :-)
>
> -J.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net>
> Date: 6/28/20 16:07 (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> I am not sure I agree with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People
> aren't the same, but they are similar - and human society functions because
> we can predict to some extent what other people are likely to do [...]. We
> have also evolved the ability to 'put ourselves in somebody else's skin',
> taking into account the obvious external differences."
>
> But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if we know the
> person really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 30
> years. In whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted
> they way they did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can
> say why people acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand.
> You say hindsight is 20/20 for this in English, right?
>
> We also haven't evolved the ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's
> skin". It is not impossible, but can be very difficult and requires
> detailed knowledge and imagination. This is the reason why Hollywood has
> invented cinemas to show us how what it is like to be somebody else (the
> GoPro cameras in modern days have the same function).
>
> Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements.
>
> -J.
>
>
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com>
> Date: 6/28/20 15:07 (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> Russ,
>
> Your views on these matters are very similar to my own.
>
> Frank
>
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM Russell Standish <lists at hpcoders.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> 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 an
>> identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
>> which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
>> a door to get in.
>>
>> In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
>> introspection. 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't
>> need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
>> important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
>> beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
>> society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
>> people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
>> in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
>> are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
>> ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
>> external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
>> get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
>> turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
>> given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
>> behaviour then. That, then is analogical.
>>
>> So, I'm not exactly convinced :).
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, thompnickson2 at gmail.com 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
>> > ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>> > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
>> > Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
>> > To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <
>> friam at redfish.com>
>> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>> >
>> > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, thompnickson2 at gmail.com
>> 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     hpcoder at hpcoders.com.au
>> >                       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     hpcoder at hpcoders.com.au
>>                       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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200628/a59dd02f/attachment.html>