“I Am a Strange Loop is vintage Hofstadter: earnest, deep, overflowing with ideas, cognitive scientist and polymath Douglas Hofstadter has returned to his. Scott O’Reilly loops the loop with Douglas Hofstadter. 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):||14 April 2018|
|PDF File Size:||4.62 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.95 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
And given the arguments from Parfit against robust personal identity, qualitative identity is all there really is. And somewhat like Gilbert Ryle and the other black-box philosophers who believe that mental states are unimportant phenomena, and all that matters is physical behavior, Hofstadter concludes that there is no I there at all.
This “higher order theory” of consciousness seemed to me as of our philosophy of mind episode to be the best bet to explain consciousness, but now Wes and Chalmers have just about convinced me otherwise. This self-reference at a more complex level of representation is the eponymous “strange loop. What was already to me a shaky book collapses completely in the final few chapters, when Hofstadter devotes a significant portion of his efforts to refuting only tangentially related philosophical claims.
He also keeps saying things like there is a scale from small soul, with not much of a strange loop, to a big soul, where the self-concept is rich.
Svest je stvarna samo onoliko koliko i duga. Here’s what it’s about: May 30, David rated it really liked it Shelves: The human body, being the only unit associated to each self-aware person, is clearly capable of conceiving of itself, because we all conceive of ourselves.
So you could, in effect, say “This statement is unprovable” by making a hofstadtet statement about the whole number that uniquely identifies the very statement in question. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. It was either too indirect, too intricately argued, or too Germanic for me to follow, and after months of off and on attempts O finally put it aside. After all, when we kill, it’s not really the ‘I’ of the victim that we’re hurting-it’s those who survive who valued that thing that we should care about, if the injunction is to not cause pain.
But I can’t explain it. The connection to consciousness comes through a theory of development and evolution. The boundaries of our souls are indeed beyond all measure. As he observes, each of us is a more than just a self; we are a collection of selves.
A bit redundant hofxtadter prose, and just GEB lite when all is said and done. What is the mechanism that bridges the gap between the world of spirit and the world of flesh?
Douglas Hofstadter’s “I Am a Strange Loop” on the Self
The Letter Spirit project, implemented by Gary McGraw and John Rehling, aims to model the act of artistic creativity by designing stylistically uniform “gridfonts” typefaces limited to a grid. He does so by describing the mind’s process of something like ” The purpose of this book is to explain the mystery of consciousness.
I bought and read “I am a strange loop” because the jacket liner began with the following: His epiphany came back in the 70’s when he took a video camera and began shooting it directly at the TV monitor which itself was displaying the video feed, thus showing an infinite number of reflections which gradually fade to a single point. Hofstadter also believes that the pattern of symbolic activity that makes me who I am, that constitutes my specific subjectivity, can be instantiated within the brains of others.
Ignore how long it took me to read the book. Finally, in his conclusion, Hofstadter tries to bucket all people into two categories an annoying habit he has: 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.
The philosophical world he describes about midway through the book, Twinwirld, was extremely fun to play with. As reading experiences go, I’d rate this a 4-star book. Osim metafora iznosi malo dokaza za svoje pretpostavke, uz neke krajnje olake kvalifikacije.
For instance, he argues that concepts like free will make no sense in terms of scientific explanations of matter at the most fundamental level. Also Hofstadter HATES mosquitos because they bite him and I think that he subconsciously believes they have no minds simply because of this!
It seems a bit of wishful thinking on Hofstadter’s part as he ruminates on his wife’s sudden death. Douglas Richard Hofstadter is an American academic whose research focuses on consciousness, thinking and creativity. I found it strange that Hofstadter is trying to so hard not to admit this point.
Nov 17, Annie rated it it was amazing Shelves: In both universes Dave talks about his possession of consciousness but in universe Z he is lying without knowing it, sound familiar?
Why am I defending myself to you? Computers don’t have opinions or preferences, for example. Thus the patterns that represent my love for 19th century novels can easily to replicated in another’s brain–my wife’s for instance–which results in a part of identity having a kind of weak, second order existence in my wife’s brain.
Awareness and energy or pure presence seem to be aspects of consciousness which are outside the symbol of the Ego. Ultimately, my first complaint keeps wringing true–the whole premise is flawed. That’s why the arguments are so murky–because they don’t quite connect.
But I love their soulless little hearts anyway. It amounts to listening to some friend who got stoned and had an amazing idea. I’ve done nothing overt hoftadter make myself so scary. In the index to his book the word ‘meditation’ is not listed, neither is ‘yoga. We invent this Self-symbol in our minds over our lifetime as it constantly accretes bits of other symbols to it—it provides feedback on itself constantly.
I Am a Strange Loop by Douglas R. Hofstadter
Instead, there are just a bunch of competing desires that he says, using one of his many analogies, compete in the brain for votes, and the one with the most votes gets hlfstadter see that desire translated into action. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please.
He’s thought about this for a long, long time and has come up with some rather surprising opinions on the matter. I would have loved to be your mom because you were obviously the kind of kid you could leave in a house alone for dayslike a cat, and come back to find you sitting in the exact same spot you left them staring fixedly at his own hands. As the brain goes, so goes the mind, they say. Goedel, DH’s guiding muse, is rightly lionized in this and other DH books; Russell — standing in for Whitehead as well — is all but judged a moron for failin As reading experiences go, I’d rate this a 4-star book.
This is merely a re-hash of Hofstadter’s justly famous Godel, Escher, Bach: As Sartre puts it, consciousness is a primary feature of our experience and the self is built later.