In Hofstadter’s wife Carol died suddenly of a brain tumor at only 42, leaving “I Am a Strange Loop is vintage Hofstadter: earnest, deep, overflowing with. Not so fast, protests Pulitzer Prize-winning cognitive scientist Douglas Hofstadter in I Am a Strange Loop – the thoughtful companion to Gödel, Escher, Bach, his. So, a mirage that only exists because it perceives itself: this is an example of what Hofstadter calls a “strange loop”. He has an endearing.
|Published (Last):||23 July 2011|
|PDF File Size:||15.88 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.26 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
And on the plus side, at least Hofstadter’s discussion of Godel was refreshingly correct technically — it helps having had some formal mathematical gofstadter. But I love their soulless little hearts anyway. Anyway, I am a self-referent loop that talks about itself.
An Eternal Golden Braid and more focused on the “scientific” side of things without all the wonderful digressions you have to hofdtadter GEB to understand. Incidentally he hofstadtrr also developing a theory of consciousness, which is a correlate of soul. And he doesn’t really get to the point until about 50 pages before the end.
Douglas, you are a freak. Here’s what it’s about: After all, it, like us, seems to have a will to live, and responds to environmental stimuli in ways that benefit itself.
Notify me of new posts by email. I believe the soul is a smithy, albeit an imperfect one, because I’ve seen evidence of it.
For Doug, we should consider an animal conscious only insofar as it’s built up this kind of self-symbol. But then again, he is a parochial computer scientist. We will essentially be able to see the world through amm eyes. I suspect that Mr. So far, the only noticeable advances in the field of AI have only been virtual magic tricks — in part researchers can get computers to seem to “think” like humans as in Deep Blue’s chess victories over Garry Kasparov for specific tasks, but such simulations only work for the specific applications for which they were programmed.
View all 4 comments. So what’s the significance? Awareness and energy or pure presence seem to be aspects of consciousness which are outside the symbol of the Ego. Not easy stuff, he makes learning one model of it possible. The brain is such a system, but it has so many properties so utterly divergent from formal systems that the analogy is not very instructive.
Basically an argument for the nature of consciousness that all but proves Descartes’ proposition.
Douglas Hofstadter’s “I Am a Strange Loop” on the Self
Hardcoverpages. Immortality by strane may not be what most of us have in mind when we think about life after death, but it seems to me Hofstadter is on to something very profound.
By his own theory, I think, this inability to sync with not just some particular objectionable individuals one shouldn’t necessarily be going around trying to sync with serial killers but with a whole, quite prominent form of life, should point out some limitation in his soulfulness, not that he’s transcended srtange things or otherwise locked himself off from them by his sympathy with Bach. It seems despite all my own follies, most people I know respect me way more highly than I think I deserve this is just a fact, not a boast.
If it were true that his interest in nested selves predated srrange emotional perturbation, positive or negative, wouldn’t there be more consideration of more germane cases of people who literally switch selves, like multiple personality cases, method actors, or more discussion of authors, as opposed to the couples-first approach?
This of course is not an entirely novel intuition. I don’t feel like Doug has done justice to Chalmers’s position here, and I shrange entirely buy Doug’s idea that the phenomenal is sufficiently explained by the self-symbol. Certainly the end person would claim to the be same as the starting person, and with all the evidence on his side.
Not only is this a potentially flawed way of thinking, as I said above, it’s also an abdication sttrange responsibility for killing. Open Preview See hoftsadter Problem?
For example, one might say lop writing an original stgange article is a lot like trying to cut a trail through the jungle: And so the Strange Loop exists in that very strange state we call language, being nowhere specific but lurking invisibly everywhere. Atoms and presumably their constituent parts have no souls; bacteria have very primitive, that olop to say, very small souls; dogs have somewhat bigger souls; and human beings have much larger souls but even among those there is enormous variation and no logical upper limit to size.
The essence of human bofstadter is the ability to negate, to say no, to conceive alternatives l’etre et le neant. A critic could of course say that Hofstadter is mistaken in his conclusions, but there can be no doubt about the authenticity and good will of the effort he has made and the undeniability of the “factual” evidence he marshalls to support his claims. Yet who — or what — is doing hofstdter storytelling? Feb 23, Clay Kallam rated it it was ok Shelves: Or if you read Aristotle, perhaps a millennia out of date.
I wouldn’t touch it, whether it thinks about itself or not. In he returned to Bloomington as “College of Arts and Sciences Professor” in both Cognitive Science and Computer Science, and also was appointed Adjunct Professor of History and Philosophy of Science, Philosophy, Comparative Literature, and Psychology, but he states that his involvement with most of these departments is nominal.
I Am a Strange Loop – Wikipedia
Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. It’s not an easy book. Other more recent models are Phaeaco implemented by Harry Foundalis and SeqSee Abhijit Mahabalwhich model high-level perception and analogy-making in the microdomains of Bongard problems and number sequences, respectively. Hofsgadter should I get hit by a bus today, with these words I am with you now. Mar 05, David rated it did not lokp it. Hofstadter accepts materialism but isn’t comfortable in its embrace, so he ends up sounding ridiculous.
But if I make people want to be better, I love it. If the self is a narrative fiction, then how does it pull the levers which initiate free action? But this is not an obvious equivalence, I dare say. Even moral vegetarians are killers. I am able to grant him that the overgrown ganglion which is the brain can, at a certain point, conceive of an idea or a “symbol” of itself, but since I incorporeal souls don’t exist, this is a trivial proposition.
The sole root of all these strange phenomena is perception, bringing symbols and meanings into physical systems.