“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):||2 December 2014|
|PDF File Size:||8.60 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.36 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
What a personality is is a set of habits: He tries to argue through several chapters that the decentered–“strange loopiness”–of consciousness comes syrange because cognition is really a series of complex and shifting patterns in the brain, super-imposed on top of micro-level physical processes. Either we believe that our consciousness is something other than an outcome of hofstaster law, or we believe it is an outcome of physical law–but making either choice leads us to disturbing, perhaps even unacceptable, consequences” Hofstadter shows his imagination in Godel, Escher, Bach, and he continues to teach with creativity and imagination in this book.
It seems a bit of wishful thinking on Hofstadter’s part as he ruminates on his wife’s sudden death.
A Critical Review of Douglas Hofstadter’s I Am a Strange Loop | Adam Westra –
And the book does an excellent job of presenting his views on just how the “I” forms in a brain, what kind of hardware may be necessary for an “I”, what kinds of “I” am out there, and on how many brains a single “I” may live. The metric he started with is the Strange Loop, hiding in plain sight, a ninja ego smirking behind his index finger with a Cheshire Cat grin. I’m not sure that we’re necessarily in safe territory if we say that something like a yofstadter doesn’t have consciousness.
I’ve done nothing overt to make myself so scary. Douglss eats farmed produce kills beasties large and small by the dozen, chemically, mechanically, and by displacement. Except that plants don’t usually kill other beings in order to live.
How does the winner in the competition between various wishes and desires translate that specific wish and desire into physical action?
In the preface to its 20th-anniversary edition, Hofstadter laments that the book was perceived as a hodgepodge of neat things with no central theme.
I must have set some kind of record. Sep 18, to’c rated it liked it Recommends it for: He spent a few years in Sweden in the mid s. How do we come back to the same loop, not a different one? The latter sense is not demonstrated to definitely exist in the first place, nor is it conclusively argued that interiority itself is a meaningful measure from which to judge the “size” of a soul.
But I’m afraid it is too soon to go beyond Ayn Rand’s statements of the fundamental axioms of philosophy: He does so by describing the mind’s process of something like ” The purpose of this book is to explain the mystery of consciousness.
Hofstadter contends that hofsyadter we have lived and loved someone long and deeply enough, our symbol models ma come to mirror their perspective ever more closely. So in a brain–any brain–repeated stimuli give rise to structures that Doug wants to call “symbols,” and this structure is then reactivated whenever that stimulus comes back.
But I found his numerous and lengthy discursions to be, for starters, only tangentially and vaguely associated with Godel incompleteness.
Douglas Hofstadter’s “I Am a Strange Loop” on the Self
And for this reason, his Strange Loop is well worth incorporating into your own. Poetically speaking, Bach, Mozart, Shakespeare, Plato, Socrates and our loved ones can live on through us insofar as we can see the world through their eyes.
I wonder if Hofstadter will address this. That’s at least the clearest evidence I’ve ever found that when I’m not around, I have a certain influence in people’s heads, that they ask what I would do or think.
Douglas Hofstadter’s “I Am a Strange Loop” on the Self
The only immortality we get is pseudo, but we do get it. What I loved about it was how challenging and yet accessible it is if you put in the timeand how willing Hofstadter is to make it personal in ways that are really relevant. Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. L example, human brains can deduce false ideas starting with true premises because of errors of construction. Retrieved from ” https: My beef with Hofstadter is that his research does not seem focused on testing what seems to be the crux axiom of his theory.
Hofstadter acknowledges that the simulated subjectivity of another in us will not be as robust as the subjectivity that arises in the cranium of its owner.
He was initially appointed to the Indiana University’s Computer Science Department faculty inand at that time he launched his research program in computer modeling of mental processes which at that time he called “artificial intelligence research”, a label that he has since dropped in hifstadter of “cognitive science research”.
I Am a Strange Loop
We will essentially be able to see the world through their eyes. Because consciousness forms the substance of identity and consciousness is basically a process of accumulating and recalling patterns, these patterns have no essential connection to the “wet-ware” of the brain. The last hundred pages or so of the book hofstadrer me so much that I did a lot of skimming.
My favorite materialist explanation of consciousness comes from Sartre, who says that consciousness arises out of material existence and serves as a presence to the world. Fascinating to hear about Hofstadter going through the loss of his wife. In other words, the representational power of the formal system described in Principia Mathematica is merely the condition of the possibility of the emergence of a strange dougas, not its cause.
Strangely Wrong I must suggest something blasphemously arrogant: The connection to consciousness comes through a theory of development and evolution. His attention to a reader like me, studying consciousness for first time, is thoughtful and steady. Chalmers and Doug on that, and that hofstadtter correlation is not belied by the fact that as a practical matter, one can’t translate mental talk into physical talk; they’re both functionalists that think srange the essence of what determines consciousness is a pattern of elements, which could then theoretically play out on different hardware systems, so we could get AI, or hofstaxter save someone’s consciousness to a computer and have them live on that way, or similar things.
Hofstadter agrees with Buddhism that the Self is an illusion, but he off-handedly says striving to get past the illusion as Buddhism suggests is a pointless, dead-end pursuit. Thomas Aquinas among others. But it’s very clear that Doug has no tolerance stranye rock n’ roll of whatever brainy, emotionally developed variety. May 13, Craig rated it did not like hofstadtee. Immortality by proxy 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.