There's no spice in #brevity - about the #insufficiency of #shortened #media
I would like to take a "brief" look at a #media #phenomenon. It's about the fact that “brevity is the spice of life”. During my #studies in #SocialMedia, I noticed a special form of #reductionism (in the literal sense, however), which is already close to #emptying of meaning or #dilution of #content. Just like this text ;-)
https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/05/26/kuerze-keine-wuerze/
@dpiponi @bjn I am not so dismissive. There was the following essay question on my qualification exam for the doctorate program in computer science #AI . “Can the economy of Bolivia feel pain?” No joke. If you couldn’t discuss this in reference to the philosophical stance of machine functional #reductionism, I think you’d probably fail. (2/3rds of my cohort failed the test as a whole).
Just saying, all late night “wrecked” discussions are not necessary just idle musing. There are some superficially odd propositions that deserve deeper thought. I will think about shoes in a new way thanks to your post. 
Glitched patterns of static pricks and scrapes.
᥊ׁׅ is the fifth album in a series of reductionist noise studies that explore minimalism and subtle sounds.
Listen here:
https://seraphitus-seraphita.bandcamp.com/album/--19
@faz @ai_feed Thanks for posting. This is actually quite an informed essay about #AI and its place in larger discussions of science, technology and ethics. I have quibbles with details, but I agree with the author's general opinion that the human tendency to anthropomorphise almost everything within a framework of intentionality has led popular opinion of AI down an erroneous path. I also agree that systems built with AI technology are not people: They have never gone to grade school, or had a crush on a classmate, or played with a dog. Those are human experiences that machines will never have, just as we will never have machine experiences. That is not to say they are not intelligent. They are their own kind of intelligence, one which we recogize shares some common ground with our own. At the same time, it is far more different than human intelligence than is the intelligence, say, of dolphins or great apes, or whales or even an ant colony. [Plus, we get to define intelligence too. That makes it a slippery concept.]The philosophy of "machine state functionalism" gives us useful, concrete tools to analyze intelligence of whatever kind. We have learned a lot about both human and machine intelligence from functional #reductionism. What we don't understand is "awareness" and especially "awareness of self" in the way we think of our own consciousness. There are plenty of theories, but very little one can test empirically with computers. I didn't finish the essay yet, but is starts out good!
#Artificial #intelligence (#AI) - The #system needs new #structures -
Construction 2
1. Basic thesis: The #structural #change from #disciplinarity to #interdisciplinarity
and
2. Basic thesis: The structural change from #reductionism to #holism
This 2nd part appeared on:
https://philosophies.de/index.php/2021/08/14/das-system-braucht-neue-strukturen/
@tg9541 OK, I have read Stuart Kauffman’s book “At Home in the Universe”, and am familiar with the concept of ‘emergence’, as well as the philosophical conflict concerning #reductionism. But I am also skeptical of #math substituting for #science - as in #StringTheory.
To get to the point of this limited toot, I recall from long ago the discovery (by radiolabeling) that “biological structures are replaced every 8 weeks”, but more recent experiments refuted its generality.
Robert Rosen (in "Fundamentals of Measurement") pulling no punches: #reductionism only works where it is not really needed anyway...
@airshipper yeah yeah!
Like, if we’re all the equivalent of cells on the biosphere of the Earth’s surface,
then ideas would be the abstract (holographic?) representation of
relevant information flux (travel) thru an area in a given time span.
So then
Also I discovered a fundamental truth about neurotype communication! Possibly.
https://lgbtqia.space/@MxVerda/113477312218639736
And / or I may be overtired after migraine postdrome and need sleep desperately.
Does the difference between The Left and The Right boil down to criticism of or uncritical belief in an external authority by virtue of whom you are entitled to every windfall of happenstance, being that it is rightful fruit of the *labour of uncritical belief itself*?
#politics #philosophy
#polemic #reductionism
I believe Rosen is complaining here only about one particular type of #reductionism - #computationalism.
I think he was very well aware that all anticipatory systems must maintain some (reduced) # model of reality in order to **anticipate** how things in their environments that may affect them are likely to unfold.
Science cannot dispense of "good reductionism" such as, for example, Searle's Biological Naturalism.
The excerpt is from R. L. Kuhn's "Landscape of Consciousness"
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610723001128#sec9
In his work Anticipatory Systems, #RobertRosen carefully introduces readers with knowledge of Cybernetics to the foundations of mathematics so that the formal limits of methodological approaches like #modelling, reasoning and #deduction in their domain of #science becomes obvious. Later he would do the same for a more general audience in Life Itself. The reasoning is very similar, clear, and formally sound. Still scientists will sheepishly adhere to believe in #reductionism.
The case against #Reductionism and #Determinism built by #RobertRosen is very solid. Yet it's hard work to get workers trained in theoretical frameworks to consider it.
We have 2 important considerations regarding this topic, IMO.
One is that we are not separate from the world we study. That we must always allow for interactions we find in similar subjects external to us to be operating in similar fashion inside of our own #systems. That is, we cannot build our models separately, with the outcome of purely phenomenological & physiological perspectives. Of course, where the similarities are few, those unique views are necessary. Consciousness would be one area where our experience should be included & weighed heavy in the model.
The other comes from #reductionism, and the need to incorporate boundaries, phase changes, and other #emergent phenomena that won't agree with the #linear summation during the reconstruction of the parts we identified on the way down.
So going down the chain of molecules, elements, and atoms, for example, is not different from examining #evolution connections, or life itself. There is no reverse at some points, and even where there is time reversal #symmetry, the paths are not always direct, 1:1 increments. (see 'islands of stability', for example)
We have a bad tendency of always ending up framing it in black or white terms, like " #nature vs nurture", when the actual situations nearly always require both.
One of the unfortunate elements of the #scientific method centered on reduction is that the first impression (indeed very strong) comes in the results section, from the questions asked at the start. Those have been stripped of all #context variation & complexity, and that is where it leaves off in most cases. For the vast majority of humans, the deeper layers are never seen or explored; the simplified meme is what propagates most prolifically.
Our mission, should we choose to accept it, is to layer the #complexity back in, one layer at a time, and continue our pursuit of higher #knowledge. This will require some modifications to our current system!
I am currently viewing “Ontology of the Gene, Information in Biology, Units of Selection” by https://youtube.com/@twohandsphilosophy#.
[ #WatchAlong #LiveTooting ] I will be quoting this Toot with #responses to and #questions about the information presented by the #video.
The description of the video at https://youtu.be/tdtRNff44jY# is as follows (note that hashtags have been included for ease of federated topical searches):
This is Two Hands #Philosophy, in which my friends and I discuss philosophical topics to #learn from each other and from our readings. This #discussion with Rodrigo Vanegas and Theral Timpson considered the following topics and philosophers: the #ontology of the #gene, information in #biology, and units of selection after reading papers by Paul Griffiths, Karola Stotz, Peter Godfrey-Smith, and Elizabeth Lloyd.
Hull, Ruse (2007) The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology - https://philpapers.org/rec/HULTCC-2
Griffiths, Stotz (2007) Gene - https://philpapers.org/rec/GRIG
Godfrey-Smith (2007) Information in Biology - https://philpapers.org/rec/GODIIB
Lloyd (2007) Units and Levels of Selection – https://philpapers.org/rec/LLOUAL-2
Thomson (1971) A Defense of Abortion – https://philpapers.org/rec/THOADO-2, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion
Pande (2018) How to Engineer Biology – https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/observations/how-to-engineer-biology
Timpson (2024) The Gene and The Podcast - https://www.fivewiththeral.com/p/the-gene-and-the-podcast-interview
Mendelspod – https://www.mendelspod.com
Information – https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/information
Biological Information – https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/information-biological
#Reductionism in Biology – https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reduction-biology
#Nominalism – https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nominalism-metaphysics
#Mechanism – https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/science-mechanisms
Beauty - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/beauty
#Dawkins (1976) The Selfish Gene – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene
Dennett, Daniel – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dennett
Dupré – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dupr%C3%A9
Bacon, Francis – https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/francis-bacon
Popper, Karl – https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper
Scruton, Roger - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Scruton
Levels of Explanation 
