Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id DAA06724 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 7 Jun 2000 03:34:44 +0100 From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Fwd: The Scientist in the Crib: Minds, Brains, and How Children Learn Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 12:48:00 +1000 Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIMEGMCGAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <393CCCEB.D4DD6E2A@mediaone.net> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Chuck,
it is not so much the NAME/discipline but more the BEHAVIOUR. Looms lead us
to the warp/weft dichotomy and it IS applicable when we view neurons (warp)
and neurotransmitters/neuromodulators (weft). The patterns that emerge from
these processes express 'meaning' where the axon behaviour expresses
discrete concepts (objects) and the dendrites express continuous concepts
(relationships, feedback processes) and the neurochemistry enables the
transmission and generalisation of these concepts. The entanglement of these
processes (e.g. axons working as synchronisation tools when connected to the
neuron's body) leads to more refined processing.
The telephony metaphor took the highly passive, mechanistic process of looms
and added some dynamics including some degree of intent/self-government
within the system. Computers take this further with the emphasis on AI
systems etc.
The telephony metaphor leads into the computer metaphor and so on where we
move from a mechanistic, reactive biased concept requiring external forces
to determine the algorithm/formula to a more electro-magnetic, proactive
biased concept where algorithms/formulas can be determined within the system
independent of external forces.
The loom-telephone-computers development path manifests evolutionary
processes where we move from object-context opposition (initial evolutionary
processes where context is the sole determinant of object survival) to
object-context cooperation where the entanglement is so strong that it is
hard to imagine seperation and, without knowledge of such systems, we see
some sort of teleological element present. (This 'flow' reflects the
dimension of evolution with Darwin at one end and Lamarck at the other in
that both Darwin and Lamarck reflect discrete perspectives of a continuum at
work. Lamarck's 'confusion' was in his determination that his model reflects
initial conditions; it does not, it reflects entanglement, highly advanced
development and so cuts out a LOT of earlier processes.)
In the movement along the evolution dimension there is an ever increasing
utilisation of feedback processes where once the object can survive the
initial conditions so relational processes dominate to lead to the
intergration of object and context. At the current level, with AI systems,
we are getting into feedforward/feedback processes that allow for
self-determination, there is a more proactive emphasis such that the
intergration of computers with humans will eventually lead to a 'egg or
chicken?' perspective (unless we maintain good historical records! We are
Borg?)
Relational processes in technology reflect relational processes in us where
we wish to refine these processes through extending sensory detection (e.g.
ultrasound, infra-red, ultra-violet light etc) and so when a technology
dominates the relational processes are identical to previous technologies
but with better resolution.
I think when people say "mind is like a computer" they are reflecting their
own fears or lack of self-worth, it is computers that 'try' to be like the
mind not the other way around.
best,
Chris.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Chuck
> Sent: Tuesday, 6 June 2000 8:06
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Fwd: The Scientist in the Crib: Minds, Brains, and How
> Children Learn
>
>
> Wade - First - thanx a lot for sending this. We need more reviews
> like this
> on this list. I just hope I get around to reading the original!
>
> Second, I wonder if you or anyone else out there has an idea on the
> following. One of the common ways to denigrate the notion that
> the mind is a
> biological computer is by pointing out that the mind has been
> compared to the
> prevailing technology of the day. The implication is that this is just
> another fad that will pass as another technology comes on line.
>
> I would like to propose that each one was not merely a fad, but actually a
> better approximation of the mind. Pinker says that computers are
> based on the
> principle that a thingamabob must be able to sense dimensions of events
> outside itself and register these through a change in its physical nature.
> Computers are made up of these thingamabobs -- just like brains
> are. We call
> them neurons in the brain.
>
> I don't have time to think this through and do whatever research is
> necessary, but I wonder to what extent we might say that looms and early
> telephones have elements of these properties - or at least suggestions of
> these elements?
>
>
> "Wade T.Smith" wrote:
>
> > The Scientist in the Crib: Minds, Brains, and How Children Learn
> >
> > by Alison Gopnik, Andrew Meltzoff, and Patricia Kuhl
> >
> > Reviewed by Sibylle Hechtel
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 03:35:22 BST