Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 18:12:08 +0100
From: "steve.devos" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.com>
Subject: Re: [New Scientist Essay] Global Brain -- nouveau hocus pocus....



I read the original artical in New Scientist, the article made as much
sense as
that stupid proposal from the evol-psych scientist recently that men are
genetically en-coded, evolved to commit rape... There was absolutely no
attempt
to produce anything but a non-reductionist account of human/machine
intelligence - it confused the notion of an agent that would help find
and
filter information on the net with the science-fiction idea that a
critical
point the mass of computing machines would chaotically reach a critical
mass
and become intelligent. However since the net is, like all media
increasingly
full of garbage, it will probably turn into a medium like TV which has
an
endlessly decreasing amount of intelligence within its programming, in
which
case the likelihood of intelligence generating chaotically may decrease
over
time. Presumably like ants reaching a critical mass...

There are times when Dennett quotes make me despair... the article in NS
was
one of these occasions...

regards

steve.devos

"Brad McCormick, Ed.D." wrote:

> Arun-Kumar Tripathi wrote:
> >
> > Greetings technology list,
> >
> > [Hi, recently I have received the below essay on Global Brain philosophy
> > including the issues discussed of Daniel Dennett, Heylighen (of Principia
> > Cybernetica) -thought -this might interest you **Excerpts from the
> > essay** "The longer I work on it, the more I become convinced that this
> > will be reality very soon--much sooner than most people might think."
>
> Let's keep things in perspective, folks: *Brains* are objects
> which we look at, poke at, etc.  *We* are the perceivers, pokers,
> etc. (we have, to speak that unspeakable word: CONSCIOUS).
>
> [snip]global intelligence, or callously exploited?
> >
> > The global brain's self-adapting intelligence could quickly surpass our
> > ability to understand it. Or perhaps it already has. According to Daniel
> > Dennett, director of the Centre for Cognitive Studies at Tufts University
> > in Medford, Massachusetts, "the global communication network is already
> > capable of complex behaviour that defies the efforts of human experts to
> > comprehend". And what you can't understand, he adds, you can't control.
> [snip]
>
> Heck! We don't even understand the behavior of automobile
> exhaust gases, which I don't think anyone has yet proposed are
> a higher life form than humans, even though they may have
> more impact on human life.
>
> And, if Prof. Dennett reads this, I would like to ask him
> if he has assimilated the corpus of work in transcendental
> phenomenology and hermeneutics: Husserl (esp. _The Crisis
> of European Sciences_), Gadamer, Husserl and Fink's
> _Sixth Cartesian Meditation_, Enzo Paci's _The Function of the
> Sciences and the Meaning of Man_, etc.?
>
> Brains are objects of consciousness -- or, to be more precise:
> brains are objects for consciousnesses which have been
> childreared (an d schooled) under the particular circumstances
> of the tradition of European philosophy and science.  I believe
> that anthropologists have found cultures which believe they
> have/are hearts (that does sound ironic, doesn't it?).
>
> The Global Brain may finally expunge consciousness from
> the planet earth, and then, once again, to paraphrase
> Wittgenstein: the ether will be filled with
> electromagnetic waves, but all will be dark, since man's
> seeing eye will have been shut irrecusably.
>
> To hammer this point in even farther: Let's say that
> a personal Old Testament-type God (Y-w-h) exists, and Y-w-h
> tells me to cut my son's throat: I can reply: "You may be
> superior to me in force, but you cannot make me do what I believe
> is unworthy of a conscious, ethical agent.  Here I stand,
> I can do no other (although you can hack me to bits if
> that's your idea of how the world should be -- You kill the
> kid if you're determined to have him dead, Y-w-h... --
> but why not try to rise to a higher level of *universal
> cooperative and nurturing conversation", instead?  I'll
> try to help you.....)
>
> I read somewhere that "God reigns in sorrow".
>
> "Yours in discourse [until a greater power
> silences me!]...."
>
> +\brad mccormick
>
> --
>    Let your light so shine before men,
>                that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
>
>    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
>
> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / bradmcc-AT-cloud9.net
> 914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua NY 10514-3403 USA
> -------------------------------------------------------
> <![%THINK;[XML]]> Visit my website: http://www.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
>
>      --- from list technology-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


     --- from list technology-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---