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 <profw...@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 <profw...@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 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/
