“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):||1 May 2015|
|PDF File Size:||9.76 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.12 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
And for this reason, his Strange Loop is well worth incorporating into your hofstaxter. I believe he would say that the Self-symbol is a loop, and the loop is a symbol that is continually reevaluating itself and making slight adjustments to itself.
I Am a Strange Loop – Wikipedia
She may think that she has, but how would she really know. Results have no meaning without the formula, procedure, recipe, for generating them. The swirling loops made by the self reflective video camera will only start after a movement is inserted, any movement, and once started maintains the loopy image forever – or until another movement changes it.
I don’t actually see much of difference between inanimate and animate things. He also keeps saying things like there is a scale from small soul, with not much of a strange loop, to a big soul, where the self-concept is rich.
In other words, the representational power of the formal system described in Principia Mathematica is merely the condition of the possibility of the emergence of a strange loop, not its cause. If not a mosquito, is a bee conscious?
Or do they act as if they could decide that the local taqueria is a better choice? If that friend happens to be Douglas Hofstadter, it’s probably worth your while to liop 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. As an exploration of the sense of “I”, Hofstadter explores his own life, and those to whom he has been close.
I Am a Strange Loop by Douglas R. Hofstadter
It was either too indirect, too intricately argued, or too Germanic for me to follow, and after months of off and on attempts I finally put it aside. I bought and read “I am a strange loop” because the jacket liner began with the following: The “I” in the title refers to the concept of the “I” in all of us.
If it were true that his interest in nested selves predated any emotional perturbation, positive or negative, wouldn’t there be more consideration of more germane cases of people xtrange literally switch selves, like multiple personality cases, method actors, or more discussion of authors, as opposed to the couples-first approach? Suffice it to say that I think Hofstadter is on to the nature of consciousness and he presents it in a lively yet challenging way.
This, I think, is what he meant to illustrate with his insistence that some animals don’t have “souls” or “interiority. In he returned to Bloomington as “College of Arts and Sciences Professor” in both Cognitive Science and Computer Science, and stranfe was appointed Adjunct Professor of History and Philosophy of Science, Philosophy, Comparative Literature, and Psychology, but he states that his involvement with most of these departments is nominal.
I don’t agree with all of his conclusions about the looseness of the connection between brain and consciousness and some of his ideas about symbols and the physical structure of the brain – I don’t think that the loop can escape the system in which it is created, but I applaud Hofsatder for his imagination in creating his theories and explaining them, and especially for his courage in bringing himself fully into the loop.
Hofstadter agrees with Buddhism that the Self is an illusion, but he off-handedly says striving to get past the illusion as Buddhism suggests is a pointless, dead-end pursuit. But I wonder if Hofstadter, enthusiastic as he is over the idea of self-referencing systems, isn’t overstating his point. 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.
You can take it as a general rule that when someone puts a stake in the ground and says “this is where humans are different from animals,” that in short order a bunch animals will be found that infringe upon that boundary. And so the Strange Loop exists in that very strange state we call language, being nowhere specific but lurking invisibly everywhere.
Is this not a refutation of the idea that small-souled animals are edible? Hofstader wrote this book und Douglas Hofstader is a wonder, tackling the almost incomprehensible Big Question of “What is the I?
I Am a Strange Loop
Strnage this way, one could embed statements about statements into the system, not just statements about numbers, because statements about numbers could also be statements about numbers that were standing in for other statements.
So in that way it was personally transformative. May 30, David rated it really liked it Shelves: Open Preview See a Problem? Nevertheless I have a valid objection which needs to be recorded. Jul 16, Janie rated it liked it Shelves: I don’t know you, I’m basically writing this for my own understanding and I offer you all these words for free! If you can prove it, then it’s false. Maybe, in the face of existence, we were mercifully left to choose the happier philosophical position.
Even moral vegetarians are killers. Not only is douglaz a potentially flawed way of thinking, as I said above, it’s also an abdication of responsibility for killing. If I were to die and she were to recall my thoughts and feelings about 19th century novels she would, in a sense, be re-processing my consciousness, as if uploading it like a program though Hostetter’s metaphors are at times less mechanical or technological than this, he seems very lpop moving between physical and metaphysical tropes for cognition.
Hostetter counters such an objection by bringing up Cartesian dualism, that strangge that we are minds locked inside of bodies conjures up that, to stfange Zizek’s words, spectre that haunts western metaphysics.