Re: the role of metaphor in scientific thought
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/the-role-of-metaphor-in-scientific-thought-tp7590080p7590111.html
Marcus -
This is about the time when I expect Dave West to jump in with his rant about how broken the metaphor of "mind as computer" (or perhaps venn diagram) is. Though he may not be cross-subscribed here.
Ignoring those arguments for a moment and giving over to the metaphor, let me offer this observation:
To the extent that the only and precise goal is to efficiently,
unambiguously, and accurately serialize the contents of one's mind
and transmit it to another mind which de-serializes with the goal
of syncronizing the internal states of Bob's mind to that of
Alice's, perhaps what you say is spot on. A technical manual, a
scientific paper, those might very well call for that level of
precision.
From
Other Tongues - Mary Strong Jackson
It just so happens, I am reading this poetry collection just now...
I think this all "begs the question" <grin> that Owen
brought up about shared ontologies. If Bob and Alice have a
*precisely* shared ontology (and therefore lexicon?) then this is
quite tractable. If they do NOT share an ontology (much less
lexicon) then there is likely (surely?) to be a mis-registration
(if I'm using Glen's term correctly) in any such
serialization/deserialization. One might suggest that
developing/obtaining a perfectly shared ontology is the primary
goal of communication (coming to a common understanding?) and I
think that is a significant part of the reason we
commun(icat)e... but I would claim there is also a *creative*
aspect of communication which is to explore the differences
between our ontolologies and look for interpolations between and
extrapolations *beyond* them which *might* yield a larger, richer,
more expressive and apprehensive ontology for *understanding the
world as it is*. Science is a very elaborated and formal system
for pursuing the more observable phenomena of the world and I
don't argue that in the phase of science where we might be
buttoning down a well explored concept/phenomena that precision
and accuracy and lack of ambiguity are crucial. Thus the
reserved lexicons of every scientific (sub)discipline. But what
explains the Tower of Babel that is Science as it is practiced?
Is it merely sloppy thinking and language that causes each
subfield to (mis?)use terms from other (sub)fields? Or is there
something more afoot?
I would contend that this is one of the things that divides
Science from Engineering. Engineering is generally interested in
highly reproduceable results, while in a paradoxical sense,
Science is often more interested in the anomalous results?
That aside, my good friend and colleague Tom Caudell (UNM) has
been working on a book with Mike Healey (UW) for what seems like
decades now, building up a theory (and surrounding arguements) for
a Neuronal Model of Mind which is ultimately grounded in category
theory and informed by neural net theory. I am likely
mis-describing this effort, but I think I've captured the gist.
In any case, I think that their level of formality is useful, but may miss the true nature of consciousness and importantly creativity.
Just SAyin,
- Steve
< Your comparison of "closure" to Nick's idea of "surplus" (intentional or not) meaning. I accept that in programming a computer, "closure" is a useful tool, to avoid unintended "side effects".> If one thinks of the mind of two people as two circles in a Venn diagram and the intersection as their communication, meaning is still in reference to each complete circle; it is subjective. This may often lead to ambiguity and contradiction, but doesn't mean that language itself should be inherently ambiguous. Specifically, a closure would imply that while each agent was bringing to bear their experience on the interpretation of the communication, to the extent their mind is in flux from that communication, in a functional programming approach it would be modeled as transactions within each agent. It's simply a question of being precise about what is going on. Marcus ============================================================ 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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
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-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |