Eric, Nick has said to me that "thought" is mentalist language and that I only think I think. Note the paradox. Surely you've heard him deny the existence of mental life and the private access that I (you) have to mine (yours). I think it happened here recently. No one but me knows the content of this message until i click "send" and they read it.
Frank On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 2:35 PM Eric Charles <[email protected]> wrote: > Frank, > So far as I can tell, no one is denying thought. I'm certainly not. There > are phenomenon at play, and one of the things that happens when you science > a phenomenon is that you end up with descriptions of the phenomenon (and > explanations for the phenomenon) that don't match mundane intuitions about > things,. We should expect that the science of psychology defines its > subject matter different from mundane intuitions in the same way that the > science of physics and the science of biology did for their respective > subject matters: Sometimes those definitions end up pretty close to the > mundane intuitions of a given era, other times you end up with definitions > that are radically different. > > In these contexts, I like to remind people how mindbogglingly unintuitive > Newtonian momentum is. When was the last time you moved an object and it > didn't come to rest? Aristotle's system is much more intuitive. > > ----------- > Eric P. Charles, Ph.D. > Department of Justice - Personnel Psychologist > American University - Adjunct Instructor > <[email protected]> > > > On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 10:46 AM Frank Wimberly <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> As I said to Nick approximately a dozen years ago, people who deny >> thought must not have it. I don't mean that as an insult. It's that for >> me thought is the one thing I can't deny because it's the first *experience* >> At that point Nick dismisses me as a Cartesian. >> >> --- >> Frank C. Wimberly >> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, >> Santa Fe, NM 87505 >> >> 505 670-9918 >> Santa Fe, NM >> >> On Sun, May 10, 2020, 8:34 AM uǝlƃ ☣ <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Ha! Well, by ignoring the poignant example, you've ignored my entire >>> point. And it's that point by which I can't agree with the unmoored >>> distinction you're making. The celery example isn't about being alive. >>> Sorry for injecting that into it. The celery example is about *scale*. >>> Celery's movement *is* movement. An antenna's behavior *is* its movement. I >>> introduced antennas' behavior in order to help demonstrate that behavior is >>> orthogonal to life. >>> >>> Now, the distinction you're making by saying that behavior is a proper >>> subset of movement, would be fine *if* you identify some movement that is >>> *not* behavior. I didn't see that in the Old Dead Guy text you quoted ... >>> maybe I missed it? Anyway, that's the important category and celery and >>> antennas fit right in. >>> >>> But the behavior/movement discussion (including observer-ascribed >>> intention) is a bit of a distraction. What we're actually talking about is >>> *hidden* states (a.k.a. "thinking", maybe extrapolated to "consciousness"). >>> So, the examples of light-following or higher order objective targeting is >>> like trying to run before you can walk. Why do that? Why not talk about, >>> say, the hidden states of an antenna? If we could characterize purely >>> *passive* behavior/movement, we might be able to characterize *reactive* >>> movement. And if we do that, then we can talk about the complicatedness (or >>> complexity) of more general *transformations* from input to output. And >>> then we might be able to talk about I⇔O maps whose internal state can (or >>> can't) be estimated solely from their I&O. >>> >>> We don't need all this philosophical rigmarole to talk about the >>> complexity of I⇔O maps. >>> >>> On 5/9/20 6:17 PM, Eric Charles wrote: >>> > Ok, so it sounds like we agree there is a distinction can be made >>> between behavior and "mere movement". So what is that difference? I would >>> argue, following E. B. Holt, that it is the presence of intentionality. >>> Note crucially that the directedness of the behavior described below is >>> descriptive, /not /explanatory. The intention is not a force behind the >>> behavior, it is a property of the behavior-to-circumstance mapping that can >>> be demonstrated by varying conditions appropriately. >>> > [...] >>> > P.S. I'm going to try to ignore the celery challenge, because while we >>> recognize plants as living, we do not typically talk about them as >>> behaving. And I think the broad issue of living vs. not-living is a >>> different issue. We probably should talk about plants behaving a bit more >>> than we normally do, but I think it is worth getting a handle on what we >>> mean in the more normal seeming cases before we try to look for >>> implications like those. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ☣ uǝlƃ >>> >>> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- >>> ... .... . ... >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC <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 >> unsubscribe 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 > unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > -- Frank Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
