To: | "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Sat, 13 Aug 2011 12:22:23 -0700 |
Message-id: | <2B1593EF01874DC5B1BFA8E389EAE655@Gateway> |
Dear John, You wrote: But adding personality to the bacteria creates complications that we should avoid in the definitions at the lowest levels.
Working in AI over the decades, I have learned that people rampantly anthropomorphize EVERYTHING, even inanimate objects. It is easier for us to project our own personalities onto these other forms than to treat them as cogs and gears. But I agree that the REASON why Strepta did her own functions without "knowing" the other bacteria is not due to her sterling personality.
-Rich Rich Cooper EnglishLogicKernel.com Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
-----Original Message----- Rich, Richard, Avril, and Azamat, I'll start with the following point by Azamat: AA > I believe these human issues are more actual than the talks about > the microorganisms self-interests... Aristotle definitely considered politics, which he discussed in his books on ethics and in his treatise on the constitution of Athens. In addition to Athens, he and his students compiled studies of the legal and political systems of all the cities and states in the ancient world. But in his analysis of psychology and motivation, he treated the human psyche as one end of a continuum from the vegetative psyche of plants up to the rational (human) psyche. If he had been aware of bacteria, he would be been delighted to add another level. He very well understood the importance of recognizing and analyzing the differences at each level. RC > One bacterium, Strepta, senses a chemical gradient she associates > with problems to come. So Strepta sends a chemical message M to > the film at large. > > Further away in the film, Chlamy identifies the message... An important reason for going all the way down to bacteria is that we need to consider messages and message interpretation as processes performed by living things without having to consider consciousness and other complications. That enables us to develop a definition of purpose that can be generalized to robots as well as living things. But adding personality to the bacteria creates complications that we should avoid in the definitions at the lowest levels. RV > I do not necessarily think an “ontology of self-interest” is what has > the most utility. I find it more useful to think about an “ontology > of knowledge” itself, where knowledge is an emergent property of > an evolutionary system. I agree. That is a reason why Aristotle started with the vegetative psyche at the bottom and asked what more was needed at each level to support added functionality. AS > The hierarchy of levels is central to e.g. David > Bohm's ontology and a good intro to that can be found e.g. from Paavo > Pylkkänen's Mind, Matter and the Implicate Order. I think Aristotle would agree. There's much more to be said, and I'll write more later. John
_________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
_________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Self Interest Ontology going offline, Rich Cooper |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] FW: Self Interest Ontology - Bacteria Use Case 1, Obrst, Leo J. |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology of Self Interest, John F. Sowa |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology of Self Interest, doug foxvog |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |