“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):||11 August 2017|
|PDF File Size:||6.45 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.48 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Remember me on this computer. Maybe not, but my objection is that this idea of “interiority” is not shown to be the only meaningful expression of consciousness or “souledness. It’s clear that he was deeply moved not only by the death of his wife, for which reason he would naturally be inclined to believe, like R. At the University of Michigan and Indiana University, he co-authored, with Melanie Mitchell, a computational model of “high-level perception” — Copycat — and several other models of analogy-making and cognition.
Oct 12, Jane rated it it was amazing. Except that plants don’t usually kill other beings in order to live. Every now and then, we humans, despite knowing we looop come to any definite conclusion, need to sit back and wonder what it all means, in a new way each time.
It’s not an easy book. But if I make people want to be better, I love it. Since he doesn’t believe in a persistent “soul” he yearns for some sort of lifelike afterimage of the departed.
Maybe, in the face of existence, we were mercifully left to choose the happier philosophical position. Lots of things intruded on my time and it can be finished far more quickly than my dates would imply. And while perhaps some will find the long and length discursions into Hofstadtter personal life such as the early death of his wife due to cancer to be enlightening, I don’t see that they really add anything to the objective of the book. For a mathfreak like you, sure.
But I can’t explain it.
His attention to a reader like me, studying consciousness for first time, is thoughtful and steady. The only immortality we get is pseudo, but we do get it.
I did not find that Hofstadter compellingly demonstrates that this strange loop is the entirety of consciousness. Ultimately, my first complaint keeps wringing true–the whole premise is flawed. Jul 13, Pj rated it did not like it. View all 9 comments.
Not only that, he is mistaken on a number of his assumptions, including the foundation of his argument — that physical external stimuli cause the same internal neural reaction. OK, I finished Hofstatder’s book months ago and I have been pondering his ideas.
He has numerous recursive sequences and geometric constructions named after him. Logically, there is no real answer to this contention, but pragmatist G. Douglas grew up on the campus of St Douglas Richard Hofstadter is an American academic whose research focuses on consciousness, thinking and creativity. It was shared by Ancient Greek philosophers, pre-industrial tribal groups, perhaps some Shinto sects, and St. Skip loip main content.
The purpose of this book is to explain the mystery of consciousness. He is a master of metaphor and analogy, eschewing a microscopic understanding of how the brain works to giving a sensible, rational though revolutionary macroscopic explanation hofshadter what we commonly refer to as “the soul”. Anyway, I am a self-referent loop that talks about itself.
But whether he believes this or not, it’s problematic for me, because conflating “interiority” with “soul-size” is basically begging the question of what things have big souls by defining “souls” as essentially the thing that we think humans have the most sfrange, and if he’s a, making that point, then why all of the animal comparisons and asking the readers to admit that animals don’t have souls as big as those of humans?
FARG models also have an overarching philosophy that What do we mean when we say dougllas Still Hofstadter plays enough mind games to make the going entertaining and challenging.
I’m not sure off the top of my head to do it but Hofstadter has had since some time in the s to think of a way We, not just human beings strrange all that exists, have no soul whatsoever until someone like Hofstader, or Plato, or Thomas Aquinas comes along and sets up a criterion for assessing it.