[FRIAM] Does Dusty Love Dave, and VV.
Prof David West
profwest at fastmail.fm
Sat Jul 20 10:47:20 EDT 2024
1) seeking common understanding.
2) sharing anecdotes about cats and dogs, some of which are named.
2a) anecdotes are themed: X just [some observable act] and that makes me believe X "loves" Y.
2a1) anecdotes are themed: if X loves Y, it makes me be believe X is aware/conscious of Y.
2b) anecdotes are themed: sometimes Y is X and that makes me believe X/Y loves itself.
2b1) anecdotes are themed: if X/Y loves itself, it makes be believe that X/Y must be aware/conscious of self.
2b2) anecdotes are themed: X just [some observable act] and that makes me believe X is self-aware/self-conscious
3) sharing anecdotes about humans, all of which are named.
3a) skip the love
3b) anecdotes are themed: A just [some observable act] and that makes me believe that A is aware/conscious of B.
3b1) all of the email exchanges are examples of this whether or not the email contains an anecdote.
3c) anecdotes are themed: A just [some observable act] and that makes me believe that A is self-aware/self-conscious.
4) some anecdotes have been shared involving entities other than domestic mammals, e.g., goldfish, octopi, and dolphins, suggesting that some in the conversation are willing to cede awareness/consciousness and self-awareness/self-consciousness to other species.
Assuming the above is reasonably accurate:
- have we reached a common understanding, among the discussants, that domestic mammals, human beings, and probably a few other species are loving, aware/conscious, and self-aware/self-conscious?
- If so, has our effort resulted in something more than making an implicit common understanding, explicit?
- If so, is there "value" in that result. (I would say yes; but 'baby value' because the conversation was limited to 'baby steps'.)
- Whence from here?
- I assume the 'procedure' would continue as sharing anecdotes; but what themes?
- More difficult question, has our effort provided us with any insights as to the nature of awareness/consciousness, self or otherwise, or is the 'obtaining of insights' even a goal?
davew
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024, at 4:35 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> Thanks, Dave,
> I tried to set two ground rules, here: One is simply that we try to find ways to a common understanding. I recognize that the best way to get there might be to go into battle together, or drink a lot whiskey together, or drop acid together, but my puritan upbringing forbids those methods. So, the second is that we do it by sharing concrete experiences, rather than airy references to philosophers or links to voluminous publications, or, in my case, vast insertions of my published works. .
>
> So, if you have a better procedure for meeting those rules lets try them.
>
> Nick
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 1:15 PM Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> __
>> Nick,
>>
>> apologize for immediate last post being on this thread - it is indeed veering into metaphysics (oh boy fun).
>>
>>
>> However, what was said, was indeed anecdotes about my 'experiences' vis-a-vis consciousness. Are such impermissible in this conversation? If Dr. Lilly were to join us share anecdotes about dolphin consciousness or, heaven forbid, about dropping acid with the dolphins, would they be useful for our conversation?
>>
>> I am totally sympathetic with the program here, (and do not see it as a game, zero-sum or otherwise) but often feel as if I am constrained by invisible rules. May I share stories only about cats, Dusty, and Jackson? Perhaps the answer is implicit in your baby-steps dictum: yes, for now, with anecdotes about dragons and unicorns deferred until we have obtained some degree of consensus as to domestic mammals?
>>
>> When we do eventually turn to "self-consciousness" I have many anecdotes, but fear they will be deemed "irrelevant" or "metaphysical" or idiosyncratic (Holy Self???) and excluded; making consensus of any kind impossible.
>>
>> davew
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024, at 11:48 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
>>> Hi, everybody. We are veering into meta again. Ugh.
>>>
>>> Where Nick is trying to get is a method for him and David and Jochen to converse productively about consciousness. A productive conversation, for Nick, is one that produces agreement, at least agreement on the terms of disagreement. Anecdotes come in because I am beginning to think that anecdotes lie at the core of how we understand ourselves and our worlds. Every anecdote is a fable with a moral, implicit or explicit. I tell an anecdote which to me means the cat is conscious; if the cat is conscious, than other anecdotes must be relevant. You chime in with your anecdotes. We are building a consensus for what it means for a cat to be conscious. With that agreement in hand we now turn to "self-conscious".
>>>
>>> Of course, lurking behind all of this is the question of whether agreement is desirable or whether we all prefer our Holy Individuality. I hear Dave saying, "I am happy to play your agreement game, but in the end I prefer my Holy Individuality." But in the end, I don't think there is anyway to play "my" game as a zero-sum game, without any hankering for a common outcome.
>>>
>>> Nick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 11:32 AM Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>> __
>>>> I agree with glen that inter-individual interactions/observations will not get to where Nick seems to want to go. Because that was the stated starting point of the thread, I went along, to see if i was wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Nick: *"For me; the heartland of self-consciousness would be an awareness on the part of an agent, that A is one of those that others are. I am trying to think what sort of anecdote would elicit such an experience."*
>>>>
>>>> I can offer no anecdotes to assist. I do have lots of stories about self-awareness in a variety of contexts. All of them lead to the conclusion that, "I" am NOT *"one of those that others are." (obviously there is some marginal overlap)*
>>>>
>>>> Of course this is based entirely on what 'others' are willing/able to publicly reveal about them*S*elves.
>>>>
>>>> davew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024, at 10:02 AM, glen wrote:
>>>> > It still seems backwards to me. The anecdotes about inter-individual
>>>> > interactions don't indicate consciousness at all. [1] The move to
>>>> > self-consciousness would be more appropriate. For example, my cat
>>>> > clearly exhibits a (or several) feedback loop(s) when grooming a grass
>>>> > burr out of his fur. (Or a dog walking in circles for a full minute
>>>> > before finally lying down.) This is a marker for a very high order
>>>> > consciousness. An indicator for lower (but still quite high) order
>>>> > consciousness is the lengthy consideration of the water bowl as he
>>>> > decides whether or not it's quality is proper or if he should go drink
>>>> > out of the ditch. [2] Such reflection is a hallmark of consciousness
>>>> > for me. And it's founded in, composed of, lower order feedback loops of
>>>> > interoception.
>>>> >
>>>> > In fact, I'd go so far as to argue that consciousness is only
>>>> > indirectly relevant to inter-individual phenomena at all. We can get a
>>>> > full panoply of complex behavior out of collections of very stupid
>>>> > individuals. To study consciousness, you need a cohesive system capable
>>>> > of exhibiting allostasis. Using 2 such individuals in such studies
>>>> > explodes the variables you need to consider, obscurum per obscurius.
>>>> >
>>>> > [⛧] Witness concepts like "mansplaining" and "cringe", inter-individual
>>>> > interactions denying (some aspect of) the subjects' consciousness, yet
>>>> > confirming the observers' consciousness. Trans-agent phenomena are ripe
>>>> > for abuse and imputation. This is why the Turing test was designed the
>>>> > way it was. It blurs the analogical replacability requirements across
>>>> > simulation, emulation, and authenticity. Were we to be scientific about
>>>> > this, we'd try to control for/against simulation and emulation, which
>>>> > means eliminating inter-individual contexts to the extent we can.
>>>> >
>>>> > [2] These are not anthropomorphic. I have no idea or projection onto
>>>> > what he's thinking when he does these things. However, I do engage in
>>>> > anthropomorphization when I see him trying to decide whether to stay
>>>> > inside or go outside when I open the door. I imagine some heuristic
>>>> > weighting between interactions with the other animals in the house or
>>>> > those outside the house.
>>>> >
>>>> > On 7/18/24 18:10, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
>>>> >> All,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I want to move things along here, but not sure movement would be. Our shared anecdotes would seem to suggest that we think that these animals we are in interaction with are conscious.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Jochen seemed to disagree. So Jochen, and you all, what should we do about that? I regard it as a state of tension, and I am led to want to resolve it. Am the only one of us who wants a resolution?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Then, I would lke to pass on to self-consciousness. For me; the heartland of self-consciousness would be an awareness on the part of an agent, that A is one of those that others are. I am trying to think what sort of anecdote would elicit such an experience.
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
>>>> >
>>>> > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
>>>> > 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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20240720/8a18f114/attachment.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list