[FRIAM] Does Dusty Love Dave, and VV.
steve smith
sasmyth at swcp.com
Thu Jul 18 13:13:25 EDT 2024
Nick, et alii behavioristae -
We have been using "self-conscious" roughly in place of what I
understand to be "self-aware". I don't think of *many* animals to be
self-conscious even though I grant warm-bloodeds for sure and other
vertebrates maybe self-awareness. I've known *domesticates* to
demonstrate self-consciousness... in the sense of "dancing like someone
is watching"... showing off, being shy, etc.
I can add a new character to my gallop of characters here. Yesterday I
went to the tiny-fish-slave-market (known as PetCo) and purchased for
about $7 20+ goldfish whose breeding was intended for the "feed other
pets" market. Snakes and ??? not sure what these little guys are
normally fed to. So now I have a whole cohort of characters called
"little fishies"... one died in the water/air-filled bag on the way
home (just 30 mins, but apparently too much shock)... and once
acclimatized and released into a smaller pond above the main pond (where
the bigger fish live), all "little fishies" quickly found their comfort
zone swimming "upstream" in the circulating current (generated by the
pump/recirculation feeding from the main pond). One got caught near
the spillway swimming upstream continuously to avoid going over in the
spirit of "swam and swam all over the dam, oh damn!" .
A few hours later, a new character enters the tableau: Garter the
Snake... not a big one, maybe 2 feet long and a body not much thicker
than a fat pencil. This little fellow panicked when he saw Hank and I
approach... the thrashed around and around the top pond (2' diameter,
surrounded by stones) looking for a "way out" that didn't include
exposing himself yet-more to me (and Hank). After he finally raised his
need to flee over his fear of direct encounter, I tried counting little
fishies, but they were too elusive and too busy to really count... but
there were still "plenty" there. I know snakes to be able to open wide
and gulp things half again too big for their jaws when closed... The
range of size of "little fishies" seemed to be between "too big" and
"way too big" for Garter... but probably not. This morning Hank and
I went to count again and the small pond had no evident fish in it.
Fortunately the big pond showed a good number of the little guys, maybe
all of them? I'm guessing they all gave up one, by one, resisting
"going over the waterfall"... or maybe Garter ate all the ones who
didn't take the plunge? I've seen both Garter's bigger brothers and
their second cousin RedRacer in the ponds before which may be a better
explanation than "Racoons" for why the numbers of live fish always
dwindle over time without any evident floaters (or frozen fish-sticks
which do happen in winter if I fail to keep the circulation going in the
coldest periods).
From what I know of *proper* pond culture, if these little guys (or the
2-3 times bigger cousins) ever get to be big enough, I will likely name
them individually and begin to project onto them all kinds of
sentience/consciousness/self-awareness that is easy to not-do when they
are still tiny (<1" long)? Maybe because they are young and still
ignorant of everything but their immediate here/now with little
experience to expand that. On the other extreme, last time I was at
the Rio Grande after a big flood period, there were a number of huge (2'
long?) carp caught in the drift/detritus and they didn't strike me in
the least as self-aware (maybe I'd have felt different if I'd met them
while they were still alive?).
As suggested elsewhere in the thread "the ability to model the world and
run that model forwards and backwards in time" and elaborated in
Friston's various extrapolations/expansions (Free Energy Principle,
Dynamic Causal Modeling, Active Inference
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_J._Friston>).
I'm about to launch two other characters into the pond, a leaf-lettuce
rootlet and a celery rootlet, both started in a bowl on my windowsill.
Just to see if they can continue to grow aquaponically if I find a way
to help them float with their roots underwater and their growing
leaf-cores to reach for the sun. They do have sensations (albeit
slower/duller? than mine or the fishes) and they do execute responses
(growing their roots into the water, growing their leaves into the
sunlight/air), albeit slower? Conscious? Self-aware? Not really, or
if so barely, or perhaps just "foreignly and slowly"? I don't imagine
they are much if at all aware of me, much less my intentions of pulling
them apart limb from limb to eat them (like I did their clone-parent?).
Mary, on the other hand sings to her houseplants, and they do seem to
thrive compared to when I am in charge of their water-offerings. I
look forward to little fishies nibbling on their roots while offering
them nitrogen-rich nutrients in the way all animals do.
The little (and middle) fishies dance like someone (predators?) are
watching... the celery and lettuce-lets, not so much? BTW, for all the
birds visiting the pond, none of them appear to prey on fish... though
some are big on insects...
(typing like nobody is reading)....
- Steve
On 7/18/24 10:33 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> Thanks, Dave. Sorry if I don]t hold up my end. I am falling behind
> in everything except my capacity to be stirred up by ideas. Bad
> combination. Maybe it's time for Caleb to come and take away my
> keyboard.
>
> So, I now see a new problem in our anecdotal method here: How to
> continue without spinning off into vague agreement. Along with a
> desire to achieve agreement comes a desire to delimit it. We agree
> that all the characters in the story are conscious; I am trying to see
> how we could explore the degree of our agreement on the proposition
> that we are all self-conscious.
>
> That's what I am thinking about now, but I am late to THUAM so I am
> going there now.
>
> N
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 4:41 PM Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm>
> wrote:
>
> Dusty is conscious of Dusty. One reason: I give Jackson (my
> other dog) a treat and observe body language and facial
> expressions exhibited by Dusty that I interpret as, "where's
> mine?" This indicates to me some kind of Dusty
> self-awareness/consciousness of self.
>
>
> /*Could you say more about the body language and facial
> expressions. Imagine that I am going to take care of your two
> dogs for a weekend; what would you tell me to look for?*/
>
> the above is the quote from me email to the list the bold-italic
> is your request. around the 15th of July.
>
>
>
>
> Dusty and Jackson have their own idiosyncratic (notice the
> attribution of a self-aware consciousness in that word) way of
> asking for / obtaining what they want.
>
> Dusty's way is silent, Jackson's almost always involves a
> gentle-bark/yip. E.g., Dusty wants a head rub so she comes over
> and places her chin on my knee and looks soulful. Jackson sits
> close to my knee, establishes eye contact and vocalizes his request.
>
> Both come to my bed at the earliest sign of sunrise (around 5:30
> these days) and stare at me. Jackson will eventually vocalize and
> I get up. Dusty has observed this, daily, for the past N-months
> but has never been tempted to vocalize herself.
>
> if she ever does vocalize, even by accident, I will immediately
> rise and see if she learns the stimulus-response pattern.
>
> I may be seeing nothing more than early training. Dusty's previous
> owners demanded that she be seen and not heard, and to wait,
> indefinitely, for explicit invitations. I have no idea about
> Jackson's early training.
>
> davew
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024, at 10:18 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
>> David, and all.
>>
>> I am trying to keep this thread as clean of the meta as I can.
>> So I will answer your general critique on the other thread.
>> Suffice it to say here that behaviorism is way in the rear view
>> mirror at this point and I certainly am not trying to teach it.
>> Suffice it to say, also, I am sure I have done all the bad things
>> you point to; I am blundering about here trying to find a way
>> toward shared understandings of experiences.
>>
>> */Dusty will look up, at Jackson, as he is receiving a treat,
>> then stand, in a position I interpret as 'being on alert' and
>> look at Jackson, then at me, then Jackson, then me (sometimes as
>> many as 4-5 times), then 'staring' at me. Jackson does something
>> similar, but he will also utter a small bark/yip while staring./*
>>
>> My command of gmail bring what it is, I cannot find the email
>> where I prompted this elaboration from you. I am sure there is
>> one. i just cant find it. Ok, so lets say we are groping toward
>> a method here, call it critical anecdotalism. Person A tells a
>> story which, intuitively he feels is an example of some
>> experience-type. Person B agrees or disagrees with that
>> attribution. Together we work out what other experiences would
>> follow if this attribution was correct. Here, we might discover
>> that we disagree about the boundaries of the experience-type.
>> But it if we find that we agree on those boundaries, then we
>> search through our experiences for other anecdotes that fall
>> within -- or out of --the type. So, as I read your description,
>> I think, this is an example of "trying to figure out what the
>> heck I have to do to get a treat, around here?" You might then
>> do an experiment, which I understand in this context to be a
>> procedure that provokes an experience that we both would take as
>> decisive. Let's say you start to feed Jackson ONLY when he yips.
>> If, after a few days of that, Dusty doesn't begin to yip, I would
>> be less inclined to my original attribution.
>>
>> It's kind of you to help me with this, Dave.
>>
>> It's quite possible I am just sliding into dementia. Always a risk.
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>> davew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 10:27 AM Prof David West
>> <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>> From the beginning, I believed this thread was, in
>> substantial part, Nick's attempt to 'teach' us to think as
>> behavioralists and see how far we could go in achieving some
>> kind of consensus. I tried very hard to couch all of my
>> responses in such terms. I did express, early on, that I had
>> serious doubts about how far we could go without deviating
>> into other questions—and the answer appears to be not far.
>>
>> First I copped to blatant anthropomorphism with seem to be
>> accepted with no concern.
>> Then Nick introduced metaphysics followed by a quick mea culpa.
>> Then a flood of additional metaphsysics (inside/outside),
>> inter-species (human-whale, human-machine) illustrations,
>> definitional nuances (consciousness, awareness,
>> intelligence), and my challenge to the 'approach' because it
>> excluded 'evidence' from meditation or drugs.
>>
>> Although Nick keeps saying he is 'pleased' with responses, I
>> am curious as to whether or not we are really making progress
>> towards consensus of any kind.
>>
>> But, just in case, responding to Nick's last question to me:
>> Dusty will look up, at Jackson, as he is receiving a treat,
>> then stand, in a position I interpret as 'being on alert' and
>> look at Jackson, then at me, then Jackson, then me (sometimes
>> as many as 4-5 times), then 'staring' at me. Jackson does
>> something similar, but he will also utter a small bark/yip
>> while staring.
>>
>> davew
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024, at 11:59 AM, steve smith wrote:
>> > Nick -
>> >> I must say, I am grateful and pleased by all these
>> testimonials and I
>> >> am beginning to sense method in my madness.
>> > I'm glad you were willing able to wade through my gallop of
>> > observations/reflections/experiences with these two highly
>> central
>> > creatures in my household.
>> >> I notice you are much vaguer about Cyd than you are about
>> Hank.
>> > Very much so, as I experience with many cats, she does not
>> reach as far
>> > into human psyche/nature to meet me as most dogs (Hank in
>> particular) does.
>> >> So, in your assertion that Cyd is both conscious and self
>> >> conscious, I am inclined to ask for more details. So the
>> method goes
>> >> something like this
>> >>
>> >> We statt with the intouition that because Cyd does X, Cyd
>> is conscious.
>> >
>> > I think you know from my pan-consciousness self-diagnosis
>> that all of
>> > the things I am inclined to report about Cyd also applies
>> to the
>> > hummingbirds, the lizards she stalks, and the fish Hank
>> barks at.
>> >
>> > Cyd has a very highly adaptive sensorimotor system which
>> not only allows
>> > her to be good at stalking and catching lizards but also at
>> begging her
>> > people to let her out to do so, or to give her a helping of
>> "second
>> > dinners" like the hobbit she channels. She observes,
>> considers, acts,
>> > observes the consequences of her acts (the book falling
>> from the top of
>> > the bookcase when she traverses it too rambunctioiusly, the
>> way Mary
>> > jumps up and lets her out when she hits the right note of
>> plaintive
>> > meow, the way the lizard freezes when it senses her).
>> This is an
>> > overwhelming indication of consciousness in my apprehension
>> of the world.
>> >
>> > We were implying that an animal's "Love" or "loving
>> relationship with" a
>> > human familiar had something to do with consciousness. I
>> think that is
>> > a red-herring, I don't think the lizards love Mary when
>> she frees them
>> > from Cyd's jaws, but I do think they are acutely conscious.
>> >
>> >> From our prior usage of the term, we know that if Cyd
>> is conscious,
>> >> he will do things A, B, C, D, ....N with greater frequency
>> than
>> >> otherwise. We check t o see if this is true. Does Sbe?
>> Ifso, we now
>> >> add Cyd to the list of conscious beings. Now we check
>> to see if
>> >> other conscious beings do X with greater frequency than
>> non conscious
>> >> ones. If so, we have added to the list of things that
>> conscious
>> >> beings do.
>> >
>> > See above... A==sense, B==process, C==respond. I don't
>> know that A,
>> > B, C singularly without both of the others even makes sense.
>> >
>> > The fish in the pond are almost continuously in some level
>> of motion,
>> > they appear to be sensing with their photon and olfactory and
>> > vibration/pressure-wave sensors. They respond to signals
>> (shadow of
>> > human or dog looming over pond, insect landing on the
>> surface of the
>> > pond, bit of high-nutrient food sinking in the pond) by
>> bolting or
>> > gulping or seeking more input (curiosity). While a lot of their
>> > processing may be prewired/instinctive, I do believe that
>> part of their
>> > processing is in support of "learning". The dragonflies who
>> like the
>> > high-ground of the tips of everything they can alight on
>> seem yet more
>> > automatic/instinctual yet they appear (because I project?)
>> to learn...
>> > they appear to become more and more tolerant of my
>> approaching them the
>> > more I do it? They likely recognize that despite the
>> appeal of the tip
>> > of my car antennae, the tips of the cat-tails in the pond
>> seem to be
>> > more appealing given the likely food-flux they can spy and
>> grab from
>> > that vantage (but this is a just-so projection since I'm
>> not a very
>> > disciplined naturalist, I really have nothing but anecdotal
>> observations).
>> >
>> > So perhaps D might be "learn"...
>> >
>> > Which takes me to the trees and bushes I feel a strong
>> > affinity/familiarity with. Do they A, B, C (and even
>> D?). I say yes.
>> > They don't have lenses over their photo-receptors, but
>> since their
>> > primary/singular energy gathering activity is
>> photonic/light, they
>> > clearly sense light. They also seem to be able to extend
>> root growth
>> > toward water and nutrients, or along same said
>> nutrients... this
>> > represents A and C as does growth "reaching" growth out
>> from under the
>> > shade to gather more light? What about B? B would seem to
>> be entirely
>> > pre-wired processing, not adaptive at the scale of the
>> individual
>> > single-lifetime organism? Which spills over to "learning"
>> (D) which
>> > maybe isn't happening at the scale of the individual...
>> does a branch or
>> > root keep "reaching" even if it gets stymied over and
>> over? I'm not
>> > sure. So if B and even D are required for "consciousness"
>> then perhaps
>> > it is only a population of such organisms and the germline
>> phenotypic
>> > expression which we must acknowledge some level of
>> "proto-consciousness"
>> > to?
>> >
>> > To go on down the line of lower-and lower complexity
>> entities or systems
>> > i'd have to grasp further and seek the existing guidance of
>> others in
>> > the pan-consciousness world who have worked through this in
>> their own ways.
>> >
>> > Bottom line, is that the "bottom line" of consciousness
>> feels very hard
>> > for me to even begin to want to draw between Hank and Cyd
>> or where it
>> > excludes Lizzy or Fishy or DraggyFly or any and all of the
>> > yet-less-familiar creatures they stalk and eat. Interesting
>> that all of
>> > these are predators, no?
>> >
>> > Yet another free-associateve gallop?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-.
>> --- -.. .
>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
>> > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> > to (un)subscribe
>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> > archives: 5/2017 thru present
>> > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>> > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>
>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. ---
>> -.. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p
>> Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> to (un)subscribe
>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives: 5/2017 thru present
>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
>> Clark University
>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> to (un)subscribe
>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives: 5/2017 thru present
>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
>
> --
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
> Clark University
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoomhttps://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribehttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIChttp://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru presenthttps://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20240718/28f967fb/attachment.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list