“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):||21 May 2009|
|PDF File Size:||1.88 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.8 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This of course is not an entirely novel intuition. Those who won’t kill a deer would kill dozens of chickens or thousands of plants to get the same nutrition dluglas a single deer supplies.
In particular mosquitoes don’t have much of a soul that you could speak of. 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.
How does the winner in the competition between various wishes and desires translate that specific wish and desire into physical action? And that’s pretty damn cool: Dessverre viser xouglas seg at Hofstadter er utrolig glad i metaforer.
His consciousness will end and some other person identical to him in every way will be reborn, but his point-of-view of the world will be snuffed out.
Jun 05, BlackOxford rated it liked it Shelves: Osim metafora iznosi malo dokaza za svoje pretpostavke, uz neke krajnje olake kvalifikacije. It is frustrating for an author who has been delving into abstraction for pages to suddenly attack others for their abstractions.
If it can, then how can we understand this baffling emergence? Or maybe something completely other is true that we have never even imagined.
I Am a Strange Loop – Wikipedia
If not a mosquito, is a bee conscious? For each human ohfstadter, this “I” seems to be the realest thing in the world. It’s not at all clear to me that this book has any genuine insights to offer, but that may be that it is lost on me as I find his writing style After about pages of reading I still was unsure what the point was supposed to be.
I jus really hope at this point that the author doesn’t attempt a proof of free will.
I liked this book, but there was a lot I think Hovstadter missed. It’s not an easy book. So why wouldn’t you?! I don’t actually see much of difference between inanimate and animate things. In contrast, one is more likely to come away more confused by the long series.
Yet Hofstadter readily acknowledges that when we shift our attention to the macroscopic everyday world, invoking free will or the intention of an agent is frequently the most expeditious and justified way of arriving at an explanation of the behavior in question. There are truths that can not be proved.
Enough, then, of self-referentiality.
We will essentially be able to see the world through their eyes. Ignore how long it took me to read the book. He tries to argue through several chapters that the decentered–“strange loopiness”–of consciousness comes about because cognition I enjoyed much of Hostetter’s account of the ways in which a strictly biological account of cognition fails to grasp the complexities of consciousness and identities.
No two concepts could seem more dissimilar on the surface as writing philosophy and trailing through the jungle. Maybe, in the face of existence, we were mercifully left to choose the happier philosophical position. Himself a strict vegetarian for many years, he suggests meat eaters are less human than he a, because hfstadter seem not to be bothered by eating that which once represented a conscious and semi-sentient being. They are considered as moral or tall, or wide, or disgusting when we put them on the scale we have chosen.
Open Preview See a Problem? In other words, consciousness and physical necessity, as characterized by Hofstadter, do not seem to be conceptually compatible; it does not seem possible to for him to have his cake and eat it too.
I Am a Strange Loop
And he doesn’t really get to the point until about 50 pages before the end. Prednost ove knjige kao i njena mana su mnogobrojne metafore. Anyway, I am a self-referent loop that talks about itself. While reading, you’ll probably pursue some of your own lines of thought, tangent to the ideas he lays down, that are as interesting and fun as the ones he pursues. His musings on death and consciousness were a strange comfort to me so recently after the death of my father.
My beef with Hofstadter is that his research does not seem focused hofshadter testing what seems to be the crux douglass of his theory.
I Am A Strange Loop by Douglas Hofstadter | Issue 78 | Philosophy Now
This article about a philosophy -related book is a stub. And on the plus side, at least Hofstadter’s discussion of Godel was refreshingly correct technically — it helps having had some formal mathematical training. It seems like it might be scientifically testable, too. But stepping back from the level of simms the murky argumentation and missing citations and overreliance on a handful of rather limited analogies to the simmbllic level hehI’m finding it hard to understand the significance of the argument, which seems to go something like this: But I actually don’t agree with the position which I think is setting up the rest of this book, though I’m sure there will be more details coming.
Obviously Hofstadter is a logically-inclined man of good standing Hofstwdter 12, David Gross rated it it was ok Recommended to David by: But if I make people want to be better, I ooop it.