Re: Subjectivity, intimacy, experience
Posted by
Russ Abbott on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Subjectivity-intimacy-experience-tp7587205p7587221.html
Thanks Glen. For me even the state machine isn't quite enough. A state machine version wouldn't even in principle distinguish between a robot/zombie and a living being. One might argue that there is no difference, but I'm not ready to go there.
Also, I liked my square-root-of-2 analogy. I hope someone comments on it. I also liked my question about whether a convincing drawing of a cartoon character in pain creates pain. I hope someone comments on that one also.
It seems fairly clear to me that we have 2 competing ways to estimate future behavior:
1) track and collate past inputs and outputs of the person, versus
2) represent the state machine of the person.
The state of the person is a function of its past inputs (and outputs, assuming cycles). So, in essence, representing the state and state transitions does just enough of (1) to solve the problem. The question ensues which of (1) or (2) is the more difficult task.
Russ is asking about (2). Eric is answering with (1).
On 03/02/2016 10:55 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> The behaviorist asserts that your question can be answered completely, and
> without remainder, by explaining how your child’s behavior becomes a
> function of things that happened in the past.
--
⇔ glen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com