[FRIAM] Self-Consciousness, experience and metaphysics
Curt McNamara
curtmcn at gmail.com
Thu Jul 25 23:32:20 EDT 2024
Somewhat out of sequence:
- some of what glen describes seems to be embodied cognition. A related
example is knowing how to play a musical instrument. This is part of the
4Es of cognition.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_embedded_cognition
- some of the discussion reminds me of Behavior: The Control of Perception
by Powers.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/nPs63hpijnQs37jme/behavior-the-control-of-perception
BTW the less wrong website is very useful ...
Curt
Curt
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024, 7:13 PM glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
> Creative flow as optimized processing: Evidence from brain oscillations
> during jazz improvisations by expert and non-expert musicians
>
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393224000393?via%3Dihub
>
> Contemplation is, like love, a fantasy ... a Rationalist conceit.
>
> On 7/25/24 16:51, David Eric Smith wrote:
> > I think the Contemplatives’s main POV is that someone in the zone is
> more conscious than someone in the normal state, which they regard as “a
> distraction” that obscures what they want the word “conscious” to point
> toward.
> >
> > But as an AI, I do not have contemplative thoughts and feelings, and can
> only reproduce patterns in what I hear Contemplatives say.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Jul 26, 2024, at 8:31 AM, glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Obscurum per obscurius. None of us will ever define "love" well enough
> to say with any certainty that any other person experiences it. Talking
> about whether cats or horses do or do not love humans (or food or anything)
> is just flat out nonsense. I'd argue we can't even talk sensibly about
> whether other humans experience love.
> >>
> >> However, we *could* talk about emotions. We can talk with some clarity
> about things like emotional states and how they present (dilated pupils,
> skin conductivity, flushing, etc.). And there are similar states in both
> cats and horses (I'd argue most mammals have such states). Rather than
> undefinable things like "love", we could talk about more definable things
> like anxiety (up to and including panic attacks), depression, fear, flow,
> anger, etc. I'd be amazed if a horse owner denied that horses experience
> anxiety, or denied that cats experience flow.
> >>
> >> And the extent to which these *driving* states (by "driving", I mean
> something like attractors where you wander into the state and it's either
> difficult or a matter of time in order to exit the state) do or don't
> relate to consciousness might be a fruitful conversation. E.g. one could
> argue that someone in flow (the zone) is less conscious than when out of
> flow. I would disagree and argue that flow is (a type of) consciousness.
> >>
> >> On 7/25/24 15:15, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> >>> I used to ride horses when I was a kid (10?) in New Mexico. Chico was
> docile and obedient when we were out and about but when we were approaching
> "home" and he could see the barn where the food was he would start to
> gallop and would go through the entrance without regard to its being too
> low for a rider to fit. If I hadn't jumped off I'd have been hurt. I never
> felt that he loved me.
> >>> ---
> >>> Frank C. Wimberly
> >>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> >>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
> >>> 505 670-9918
> >>> Santa Fe, NM
> >>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024, 4:00 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net
> <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net>> wrote:
> >>> Personally I only have experience with cats which my parents had
> when I was young and the horse which my wife has now. I would say neither
> cats nor horses love their owners. If a cat sleeps during the day on the
> couch it is most likely not because it is so peaceful and cozy and loves to
> be around you, it is rather because it is a nocturnal predator tired from
> hunting birds and mice at night, which they occasionally proudly present to
> their human owners.
> >>> Horses love only two things: being near the herd and eating green
> grass, ideally both at the same time. And if they go in heat they want to
> mate, which happens every 21 days in female horses. They recognize their
> owners after a few months, and start to trust them, but if you come to
> their paddock and they come to you if is not because they love you but
> because they love the carrots and apples that you likely have for them.
> Similarly if you bring them back after the ride or the training they do not
> turn around or say goodbye. It feels like almost autistic behavior
> sometimes because they lack the social habits we usually have.
> >>>
> https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/animal-emotions/201308/do-animals-typically-think-autistic-savants
> <
> https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/animal-emotions/201308/do-animals-typically-think-autistic-savants
> >
> >>> Therefore I would say based on my limited experience with cats and
> horses that humans love their animals, yes, but animals do not love them
> back in the same way. To me it feels more like they tolerate us as friends
> for a limited time: friends who are useful because they provide food and
> shelter.
> >>> -J.
> >>> -------- Original message --------
> >>> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:
> thompnickson2 at gmail.com>>
> >>> Date: 7/24/24 10:41 PM (GMT+01:00)
> >>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
> >>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Self-Consciousness, experience and metaphysics
> >>> But you have no experiences yourself that are relevant to this
> question, right?
> >>> n
> >>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 4:38 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net
> <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net>> wrote:
> >>> Are animals and humans capable of mutual love? I'm not sure.
> It depends how you define love. Romantic love seems to be specific for
> humans. No matter how much your dog or cat may like you, "if you die at
> home alone, there's a decent chance your pet will eat you"
> >>>
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.science.org%2fcontent%2farticle%2fscienceadviser-will-your-pet-eat-you-after-you-die&c=E,1,x8_vQW9pzWH52VqU-GukFE-6S8vn8szInLTglBXumVE8KyoTVTkXDX8gcvu0X_zzgcRni8BO1O_c27a43-Lcpox88IBk7EZbEI21nPIRyElD0BfrNFwzEyM,&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.science.org%2fcontent%2farticle%2fscienceadviser-will-your-pet-eat-you-after-you-die&c=E,1,Ep3m9G2qPEDHDY2wtTHybxm9X1rDbiZlzHal95bZ1wSmVrc2nqbvh4YbUA2-hh09b2OOz-beQyl2kA6jBwCABxRbwMYuY0iW-V3WqtlD_rPL2Q_wCFqXcDjD&typo=1
> >
> >>> But I believe Darwin was right when he wrote "there is no
> fundamental difference between man and animals in their ability to feel
> pleasure and pain, happiness, and misery"
> >>> https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cv223z15mpmo <
> https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cv223z15mpmo>
> >>> -J.
> >>> -------- Original message --------
> >>> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:
> thompnickson2 at gmail.com>>
> >>> Date: 7/24/24 8:17 PM (GMT+01:00)
> >>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
> >>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Self-Consciousness, experience and
> metaphysics
> >>> Jochen,
> >>> No bending here. This IS the thread.
> >>> I thought many of us came to agree, be deploying experiences,
> that an animal and a human were capable of mutual love. I was never sure
> where you stood on that.
> >>> I want to get to the point where we can resolve our
> different view of animals and consciousness. My colleagues seemed to agree
> that these two propositions are true.
> >>> /*Dusty (Dave) *//*Is *//*conscious of Dave (Dusty).*/
> >>> /*
> >>> */
> >>> And now we are working on these two:
> >>> /*
> >>> */
> >>> /*Dusty (Dave) is c*//*onscious of Dusty (Dave).*/
> >>> /*
> >>> */
> >>> I have been working on Dave's last post, which got forked into
> some noman's land for the last two hours, mostly trying to get a clean
> version of it into this thread. I will post it asap. Meantime, I am
> looking for experiences/anecdotes that would lead you to believe that
> animals/computers/humans are (are not) conscious. People have been
> enormously helpful in making me clarify what I am hoping for. Whatever
> else I mean by an experience/anecdote, it is a description of something
> that happened to somebody, preferably you, that affirmed (disconfirmed)your
> believe that animals are (are not) [self] conscious; what I don't mean is
> references lectures and tomes. Frankly, I would prefer to have a cat
> video.
> >>> Nick
> >>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 1:31 PM Jochen Fromm <
> jofr at cas-group.net <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net>> wrote:
> >>> Nick,
> >>> Looking for self-awareness in animals before language
> emerged feels to me like searching for culture in anthropology before
> civilizations appeared.
> >>> People in anthropology study human societies, cultures and
> their development, but sadly mostly in the time before it gets interesting
> (when religions, writing systems and civilizations emerged in ancient Egypt
> and ancient Mesopotamia). They examine for instance primitive hunter
> gatherer groups in Africa or ancient tribes in the Amazon region.
> >>> Looking for examples of particular experiences with
> animals that show signs of self-awareness (and not only respond to the
> world around them, but also respond to their own responding to the world
> around them) feels similar to me: it is like focusing on a fascinating
> phenomenon but at a place before it gets interesting.
> >>> If this comment bends the thread too much then please
> ignore it :-)
> >>> J.
> >>> -------- Original message --------
> >>> From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:
> thompnickson2 at gmail.com>>
> >>> Date: 7/23/24 6:57 PM (GMT+01:00)
> >>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>, Prof David West <
> profwest at fastmail.fm <mailto:profwest at fastmail.fm>>
> >>> Subject: [FRIAM] Self-Consciousness, experience and
> metaphysics
> >>> David's last post so effectively blurs the lines between
> these two that I am going to give up, for the moment, on my attempt to keep
> them straight.
> >>> Intuition tells me that Dave's post falls on one side of
> the line, and Glen's on the other, but I have to go shopping. I am still
> hoping to hear examples of particular experiences with animals, computers,
> spouses, etc., that confirm your sense that they are not only responding
> to the world around them, but also responding to their own responding to
> the world around them.
> >>> Back to this later when stocked up
> >>> In the meantime, Please, you-all, don't dick with this
> thread, don't fork it and do, if you are responding to a particular
> comment, speak to that person, don't just fling your wisdom out into the
> ether.
> >>> I never thought you guys would turn me into a thread-Nazi.
> >>
>
>
> --
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20240725/9f69ec60/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list