Douglas Hofstadter’s I Am a Strange Loop - Session 3 [Cosmos Café 2022-03-17]

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

@edoubleoo

At this point, your “I” is as much abstracted as your view of the sunset,

And when your “I” is as much abstracted as your view of the sunset, who’s "I "are you abstracting from?

And when your “I” as much abstratcted as your view of the sunset…how much abstracted?

And how do you know that"we" abstracts, like “you”,?

And where does your view of the other’s “I” view of the sunset, come from?

Storytime. This morning I couldn’t remember a dream. I noted this in my journal. At my age, there is a lot that I forget. I try to keep track of what I forget. I couldn’t remember the book I saw at the bookstore, yesterday, that I didn’t buy as it was too expensive. I came home and downloaded the book for free. As I journalled I noted that I could remember that I forgot something that was in short term memory. I don’t assume that the absent memory is in my head orsymbolized somewhere in the folds of my physical brain. I walked back in personal memory into the store and remembered the shelf and pulled the book from the shelf and saw in my mind’s eye, some of the contents and got a strong desire to understand this book. That I couldn’t retrieve the title through working memory made me more curious. Anamnesis, Plato called it. Remembering that we forgot. I close my eyes and saw on the blank screen of my inner mind a spontaneous arithmetic problem, in two columns, 54+36=90. Okay I opened my eyes. I think my mind is still functioning somewhat. I can do simple arithmetic mentally without a notepad or a calculator.

Then, in my waking state bodymind, " I "think about this thread I am a Strange Loop…and I imagine that I am a tired busdriver, who has pulled off to the side of the road at sunset and takes a nap. The others in the bus enter into dialogues and trialogues while I snooze. I can hear and feel their voices, though I can’t understand what they say. When I open my eyes, feeling refreshed, I invite someone else to drive the bus. I want to sit in the back of the bus and watch the scenery go by.

Then, “I” turn from the journal and my reflections upon a vague memory and scroll through this thread, searching for a feeling for the organism. I came across this…

@edoubleoo

Would para & ethical behaviour = para-social;

And then I remembered the name of the book I had forgotten. Simondon by Simon Mills. Notice the double “simons”. I wonder why Ewere’s phrase made me recall this forgotten factoid. Para-social is consceptualized by Simondon as the Trans-individual. Nested concepts within concepts functioning as sunsets do, viewed seperately but impossibly stitched together through words, tones, affects, and a shared memory of a briefly shared reality. Like your first" real" kiss, a walk along the beach, feeling good. Enjoy it while it lasts. It won’t last long.

And which body does " I" belong to?

[edoubleoo (Ewere Owaka)]

@johnnydavis54

And when your “I” is as much abstracted as your view of the sunset, who’s “I “are you abstracting from?

And when your “I” as much abstratcted as your view of the sunset…how much abstracted?

And how do you know that “we” abstracts, like “you”,?

And where does your view of the other’s “I” view of the sunset, come from?

Your “I” is self-conceit & concept personified, but no idea exits in a vacuum the same as no child exists on their own. If you have no abstraction, then this would make you literal/anarchic, and your expression of your view of the sunset would make that very clear to all.

Here is the main difference; I have no belief in the “we” capacity to share my pursuit of thought or reasoning, whether abstraction, conception, abduction, deduction, etc. This leaves me with no view of anothers’ “I”, preception of behaviour; yes, cognition of expression; yes, but at this point I’m limited to that which I know to be true, and away from allusions to the is-ought problem.

At core of my belief that we see the sunset differently stems from my use of the camera. Two cameras side by side capture the world differently, light and shadow fall onto the subject anew, creating new compositions due to the alignment with it surroundings.

Our belief we all see the same subject the same cannot be possible, the nuances of change maybe minimal but present to the enlightened mind. The belief we all saw the same event is because we all saw the same image of the event afterwards, or read the words about the event (article or review), but even my ideology, bias or ones self deceptions colour our preception of the subject at all times.

I respect the other enough to NOT colour their view of the subject or shape their experience to mine. I stay stedfast in my experience of “I” and allow Nature the capacity to express it’s will.

[edoubleoo (Ewere Owaka)]

The article helped me to understand the transcendent pursuit attributed to Plato makes sense in a society where one is supported or expected to be the manifested self. Everyone supports this development and they acknowledge your growth & change.

With the Blackfoot, they demonstrate these factors are manifest in their culture, even in African & Asian indigenous communities these factors are still well pronounced with the expectation of duty, responsibility and behaviour.

It is a Western perspective that removes the individual from this basis of expectant existence, only for the individual to learn more about that which they have forfeited to be free in Capitalism; now this is the foremost ironic turn of the Post-Modern perspective.

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

A message about the message. Before I composed this message the computer informed me that I had already sent Ewere a message three times and suggested I send him a personal message. What I send is not a personal message to Ewere but a second to Ewere’s first, and a multiple message adressed to the group who participate on this thread and remember the events from the previous zoom call. A dyad within other dyads within triads and many in betweens. Can " I " keep track of this mixed messaging produced by the structure of the feedback imposed upon these digitized forums? I’m sure the meta-message from the AI was designed by someone who wanted to help but it is clear that the AI doesn’t get where “I” come from. This meta-message from the computer feels to me like a speed bump and anti-human, trying to standardize and control my expressions. No, not like a speed bump, more like a mosqiito. A low level irritant that I believe is background but can become foreground.

@edoubleoo

I respect the other enough to NOT colour their view of the subject or shape their experience to mine. I stay stedfast in my experience of “I” and allow Nature the capacity to express it’s will.

Good luck with that, Ewere. I am attempting to be as rigourous as you are to share respect for the other by giving attention to actual languge that the other uses rather than para-phrase and change slightly to fit my own perceptual biases. There is a lot more going on with and through the words with intended and unintended para and meta messages that also operates as an invisible “third” between members of a speech community.

Ludwig famously said that if a lion could speak we would not understand him. ( But a lion can still communicate effectively to us.) Ludwig also said, " A man will be imprisoned in a room with a door that is unlocked and opens inwards; unless it does not occur to him to pull rather than push."

This quote from Ludwig brings up the slippery nature of transitive and intransitive verbs…and how the " I" works with subjects and objects. Who is zooming what? When I have an unusual experience, beyond subject and object, how does a communication form in a language that distorts the unique otherness by formulaic propostions and archetypal cliche? ( McLuhan)

Analogy is abductive and moves laterally ( according to Peirce, McLuhan and I believe Hofstader) which is not propositional but is positional. One cannot “NOT” communicate. A silence, following the expression of a first, is a communique. And a smile is not always a sign of friendship. It depends upon whether it is broad or narrow. I notice this when I visit the UK.

And when " I " am not so stedfast with " my I " as you may be with “your I” then what happens? This is the kind of culture we currently live with which is why I object so strongly with the objectivist stance. It is true that we project onto others what may not be there. I found when working with clients that the perceptual space is often cluttered with other people’s psychic baggage. This is called history. It wraps around them and extends into the corners of the room where they are. A few questions can bring this to their attentiion. And this history recorded in perceptual space has a size and a shape, and can become a figure that is psycho-active. The gestalt shifts people can make are impressive. That is why I find modeling symbolic landscapes so compelling but " I " use symbol in a very different way than Hofstader claims he does. It is not" in" the brain although there may be correlations for sure. But like you may not believe he is a materialist, I am not sure he is consistent with how he uses symbol, a notoriously slippery concept.

@edoubleoo

It is a Western perspective that removes the individual from this basis of expectant existence, only for the individual to learn more about that which they have forfeited to be free in Capitalism; now this is the foremost ironic turn of the Post-Modern perspective.

Although addressed to Ed " I " also respect that this is an open thread and feel free to comment as we are playing in our language games something like soccer or jazz. This above observation about the Western perspective reminds me of a story. A man showed a video to an African tribe of the Rockettes dancing in Radio CIty Music Hall. The African men laughed hysterically. When asked what was so funny an elder replied," If you can get your women to do that, you can rule the world." Now, I think that is sad and funny. We Westerners forget how attracted we are to sameness, repitition and routine. Modernism is impossible without it. And it is that paradox that Post-modernism tries to point out with very mixed results. We are doing our best to help the fly get out of the fly-bottle.

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

@Douggins

he often fights with the little “i” at the expense of the larger “we”. His transcendence is the exponential AI “I” that doesn’t quite grasp immanence.

Yes, I catch this vibe, Doug, and I enjoyed this post. In my opinion you peform at your best here. You perform for the group a balanced third and with a voice that feels like it is coming from you rather than a simulation of you. Thanks.

[Michael_Stumpf (LaughingCryingDancing)]

@edoubleoo

I respect the other enough to NOT colour their view of the subject or shape their experience to mine. I stay stedfast in my experience of “I” and allow Nature the capacity to express it’s will.

This may not be related to what has been shared,& in terms of “Sharing”
why does Difference in Experience have to Close off a Relational Come From ( maybe because there’s a lack of Relationality that is lacking in Skillfulness not based in just a Rational/Mathematical Belief?)

Life on the Edge – Lions Roar

Too Include without Reducing to a Binary?

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

@Michael_Stumpf

why does Difference in Experience have to Close off a Relational Come From ( maybe because there’s a lack of Relationality that is lacking in Skillfulness not based in just a Rational/Mathematical Belief?)

I don’t think difference closes off a Relational Circuit but creates one. I have a first, you respond with a difference. That is a second. A third could then acknowledge what the first and second have in common, which is a difference. As you may recall Bateson defined information as difference that makes a difference. Human bodyminds process information in unique ways through a busy perceptual system. We never percieve exactly the same. Most of our language games probably allow us to make short cuts so we don’t have to re-invent the wheel at every moment. We can write it down, create a ryhme scheme , dance a jig, draw a map, to galvanize attention. We learn faster. The problem is that there is always some wise guy who wants us to board his sinking ship for a nominal fee. He will give you a gun to fight a war that protects his assets.Sells you a bond. Gives you a discount on your first $100 purchase. Give you a loan to shop in his store only. Our digital age is full of such fast talkers with fake news. A small group can become group think but with a circulation of firsts, seconds, and thirds, playing with and for each other we can learn different lessons than the pre-packaged ones we were taught to rely upon. A second to your first while reheasing a third.

[Michael_Stumpf (LaughingCryingDancing)]

@johnnydavis54

I don’t think difference closes off a Relational Circuit but creates one

I take your response as very nuanced…

@johnnydavis54

Bateson defined information as difference that makes a difference.

What I am attempting to focus on is the Relationship of one’s
Quality of Attention, when interacting both internally & externally with the Edges of Differences and Especially
the one’s that make a Difference, which can have a whole lot of
Shaking/Uncertainty Going on. That’s probably why my
Metaphors tend to be about Movement and the training
of Attention one needs to:

@johnnydavis54

Human bodyminds process information in unique ways through a busy perceptual system.

And YES this applies to language games which for me is
a wonderful life giving source and sometimes it is Good
to Float instead of swim in …Sense Make? One learns to
Relax at\into\with the Edges of Body-Mind and the Ecology
of Sentences as Tim Morton says

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

Yes and how we handle transformations of differences without creating exploitation? Many attempt to control and withhold information. I gave up reading print news years ago. I watch a handful of websites and avoid scrolling through videos. I try to create a new perceptual collage everyday. Different tempos are needed, faster and slower. The part of the loop that is uncontained, joins the part that is contained. I’m working on this, too.

[Michael_Stumpf (LaughingCryingDancing)]

Another Indigenous Take that brings in a Westerner Goethe with a different take on Science as a way of Knowledge?

…And They are Seeing You: Making Culture with the Help of Goethe’s ‘Exact...

…And They are Seeing You: Making Culture with the Help of Goethe’s ‘Exact Sensorial Imagination’ and Miriam-Rose Ungunmerr’s ‘Dadirri’

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

The news is shocking. It appears that China, Russia and India are creating their own form of globalization as the West is trying to re-enter itself through a re-modeled NATO. Archetypes, as McLuhan points out, become cliche. We are no longer becoming what we were becoming. As my proposal for a workshop that I wanted to offer at the end of the month was postponed due to scheduling conflicts I have accepted that I must re-direct my attention to projects that are more local and sustainable during these troubled times. The mood to study Hofstader’s strange loop has vanished into thin air.

Social research that is driven by the amatuer rather than the expert can benefit the " I" that is “we” and I endorse such social research that has been conducted here at the Cafe. I praise the amateur practitioners for they practice for love, unlike the professionals who practice for money. But lack of funding can be a problem. I realize others have to work for a living in a system that they do not love and time is a precious commodity. Broken relational circuits, shifting markets, and medical snafus disrupt supply chains as well vibrant social networks. So, with all of that, my mood to explore Hofstader this week has vanished and my mood is a good indicator of what my gut is processing. I share this relational disconnect with my Cafe collegues as the main reason for withdrawing my attention from Hofstader at this time. I do hope that many creative differences will emerge out of your conversations that will enhance your meaning making together. Happy trails to all of you and I trust that your reading of Hofstader will provide to each of you a creative result. I am open to new possibilites and re-groupings as the new topologies re-form and the contained and the uncontained reanimate future collaborations. Thanks to all.

[madrush (Marco V Morelli)]

@johnnydavis54

Most important for me, in these threads between zoom calls, is that we create a sense of collaborative flow.

Thanks for doing your best, John. I have not been able get into the flow at all for the past few weeks—too many other forces pulling on the strings of my attention. I appreciate you’re going with your gut and attending to local concerns. I am working on letting my heart, gut, and “I” become synchronized, and seeing what that opens up.

@johnnydavis54

Why reduce something as ephemeral as mind to something even more ephemeral such as matter? No one knows what matter is. How could Dennet and Hofstader not notice this?They end up in a naive realism.

This names the issue I continue to have with Hofstadter. He undermines consciousness by identifying it with the pattern we observe in material entities. I think he confuses self-referentiality (via the strange loop pattern) with self-awareness, actual consciousness.

He wants to be substance-agnostic with regard to consciousness, arguing that all it requires is a sufficiently self-referential special pattern, regardless of the substrate. This has yet to be empirically demonstrated at all—it is pure imagination—whereas everywhere we encounter consciousness (as the consciousness we are) it is in some form of biological life, never in a machine or other object we’ve created.

I do not believe a mosquito and a flush toilet can be categorized together as simple feedback loops without appreciable consciousness. He constantly wants to erase the line between organisms and artifacts. This strikes me as perverse, even mean-spirited.

Sure, we all want to swat the annoying mosquito, and maybe it only has a very “small soul” and barely knows it exists, if at all. That does not mean that a mosquito is just a tiny machine. It is still a creature of the universe, which we did not make. And no matter how complex we make the toilet, it will never be become conscious and alive because life was never there and it never had the spark of consciousness to begin with; it IS merely a pattern which the mind has imposed on matter.

@edoubleoo

With regards to Hofstadter, I’m still unsure he is a materialist.

I don’t believe Hofstadter is a materialist either, actually. I think he is a mentalist—he wants to regard subjectivity as a feature of the thinking mind. Unless there is some mental symbolization going on, there is no consciousness or sense of being. I would say that meditative experience demonstrates otherwise. There is such a thing consciousness without mentation and there is undifferentiated awareness, and indeed, this forms the background field to our mental events.

Also, Wilber believed that there is important distinction between HOLONS (organic emergent patterns with consciousness “all the way down”), HEAPS (which are aggregates of holons that do not have an integral structure—such as a big pile of rocks, or clouds in the sky), and ARTIFACTS (which are made by holons and take on the patterning we given them). The difference between a holon and an artifact is a crucial thing to miss.

One of the nice things about HOLONS is that they are whole/parts. What if an “I” (which is whole) is made of many other “I’s” (as parts) through a mixture of internalized patterns, and if we interact with each other, we may become entangled (like quantum particles) but rather through the field effects of language? I did appreciate (in a talk I heard) Hofstadter’s thoughts on how our souls are connected because of the way we internalize each other. I thought this softened his otherwise somewhat-verging on solipsistic stance (which I think results if the I is limited to the activity of the brain).

The Deep Interconnectedness of Human Souls

@Douggins

Maybe the question to ask is how am I my best self? How are we our best selves?

Those are good questions, Doug. Let’s say (to offer a triad) I have a best, worst, and middling self. My whole self includes them all, but part of myself wants to be more of the best, less of the worst and middling. Which part wants this? The best part or some other?

Is the West the best? Better than all the rest? This reminds of something one of the old Zen masters said: that it is only the ego that wants to get rid of the ego. I think will be really interesting to compare and contrast Hofstadter’s thinking on human subjectivity with Graeber’s in The Dawn of Everything.

[johnnydavis54 (john davis)]

My mood has improved enough for me to show up at the Cafe and hopefully shine some light upon the vast darkness of this subject.