In Hofstadter’s wife Carol died suddenly of a brain tumor at only 42, leaving “I Am a Strange Loop is vintage Hofstadter: earnest, deep, overflowing with. Not so fast, protests Pulitzer Prize-winning cognitive scientist Douglas Hofstadter in I Am a Strange Loop – the thoughtful companion to Gödel, Escher, Bach, his. 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 May 2017|
|PDF File Size:||17.15 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||4.46 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
If hkfstadter cannot, then how can you or I be here? Is this not a refutation of the idea that small-souled animals are edible? The “I” concept is just something that seems to be uniquely developed in “higher” strangee, so it’s a convenient standard to take up as a measure of worth, because we as humans are sure to come out on top. Incidentally he is also developing a theory of consciousness, which is a correlate of soul.
After all, it, like us, seems to have a will to live, and responds to environmental stimuli in ways that benefit itself.
It is basically an argument against dualism through a celebration of how we can still have souls or greatness or whatever even though we are only made of particles. You get a level-crossing feedback loop whose apparent solidity dominates the reality of everything else in the world SL,my emphasis in bold. I say this because he explains that for Video Voyage II when he pointed a camera at the TV screen which displayed its feed, creating an infinite feedback loop he spent twelve hours with his friend just playing with that.
Not only is this a potentially flawed way of thinking, as I said above, it’s also an abdication of responsibility for killing.
The mirage that Hofstadter writes about is that the things we measure have the characteristics that we measure. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please. The self is not, and cannot be, some indivisible, indissoluble and immaterial phantom that nonetheless inhabits the physical body. Yet thanks to the infinite extensibility of concepts we perpetually manage to make useful comparisons between seemingly disparate ideas.
Easier to understand than Godel, Escher, Bach, especially if you read that one first. 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 favor of “cognitive science research”.
If that friend happens to be Douglas Hofstadter, it’s probably worth your while to stick around for a wh I got about three-quarters of the way through and by then it seemed like Hofstadter had completely lost the plot. My beef with Hofstadter is that his research does not seem focused on testing what seems to be the crux axiom of his theory. Na niskom nivou nismo svesni ideja i simbola, na visokom nivou nismo svesni biologije.
So in that way it was personally transformative. It seems a bit of wishful thinking on Hofstadter’s part as he ruminates on his wife’s sudden death. Hofstadter’s many interests include music, visual art, the mind, creativity, consciousness, self-reference, translation and mathematics.
I Am a Strange Loop
Where is the something-it-is-like to be me? The Feeling of What Happens: My boss said that whatever people say about you when you’re not around is your reputation. It’s not an easy book.
Hofstadter always has an intriguing and playful way to present his thinking. When you get down to it, as far as Hofstadter is concerned, the self is the Ultimate Illusion — or even a hallucination, as he straange it.
To other people, these two men will appear in every way the same. Still there’s plenty of thought-provoking stuff in the earlier sections, even if much of it is a retread of material he’s covered before it’s been long enough that I was ripe for reruns. In particular mosquitoes don’t have much of a soul that you coul I’m writing this review as I go along because the book is long.
He is working on a book exploring the philosophical dimensions of the music of the band Yes. He does not believe in free will, which makes sense, and he doesn’t believe either in mystical, incorporeal souls.
After about pages of reading I still was unsure what the point was supposed to be. What is the mechanism that bridges the gap between the world of spirit and the world of flesh? I don’t see human thought as fundamentally different in nature than other physical phenomena such as the orbit of planets or weather, though it’s expressed in a different way.
A Critical Review of Douglas Hofstadter’s I Am a Strange Loop | Adam Westra –
It amounts to listening to some friend who got stoned and had an amazing idea. He spent a few years in Sweden in the mid s. And what an interesting world. In other words, consciousness and physical necessity, loo characterized by Hofstadter, do not seem to be conceptually compatible; it does not seem possible to for him to have atrange cake and eat it too. I read Hofstadter’s “Metamagical Themas” many years ago and was fascinated by the author’s vast area of expertise.
I Am A Strange Loop by Douglas Hofstadter | Issue 78 | Philosophy Now
As well as his odd philosophy of how love of Bach makes you a bigger soul. The self-reference was a tool, not really the end in itself.
Even if they only have one single goal, to reproduce as much as possible before dying, be it pursued by reflex, cognition, or even as in plants by genetic design, it’s that very idea that one violates in swatting the mosquito or eating the chicken strahge pulling out the weed. Jan 29, Mishehu rated it it was amazing. So the idea is that the brain, too, works on the basis of symbols, and not in the sense of symbols that someone is reading and I’m just not clear whether this concept can be fruitfully connected to Lacan’s notion of symbols in the unconscious tsrange, but in the sense that, broadly speaking, if the environment acts on a substance and leaves marks, those marks symbolize that feature of the environment.
This was tough going, but ultimately worth it for this non-mathematician. I found myself cursing the author for the way he circled and circled around the subject, bringing in every thought he has ever had about consciousness, and relying to a disturbing extent on his personal experience.
One author I recently spent time studying through the Not School philosophy of mind group is Douglas Stragewho I’m here going to call “Doug” so I don’t have to type and potentially misspell “Hofstadter” 30 times.
So you could, in effect, say “This statement is unprovable” by making a logical statement about the whole number that uniquely identifies the very statement in question. Hofstadter shows his imagination in Godel, Escher, Bach, and he continues to teach with creativity and imagination in this book. Not easy stuff, he makes learning one model of it possible.
How things would be different if the standard of worth favored a being like the mosquito.