I Am a Strange Loop has ratings and reviews. BlackOxford said: Strangely WrongI must suggest something blasphemously arrogant: Douglas Hofsta. “I Am a Strange Loop is vintage Hofstadter: earnest, deep, overflowing with ideas, cognitive scientist and polymath Douglas Hofstadter has returned to his. Scott O’Reilly loops the loop with Douglas Hofstadter.

Author: Faelkis Gardasho
Country: Colombia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Marketing
Published (Last): 19 September 2004
Pages: 460
PDF File Size: 15.40 Mb
ePub File Size: 6.5 Mb
ISBN: 340-3-14622-933-1
Downloads: 34395
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Magar

So, I have no real logical response to this counter-claim, other than his original description of such weak, second-order existences seems intuitively wrong to me.

Anyways to get the full picture of my own family and friends I often have to ask around and hear things secondhand because whatever someone disapproves of that they’re doing, they don’t tell me! H should know better than to publish ideas that are half a century out of date. Take for example the work of Terrence Deacon, e. This book, on consciousness and what makes a human an “I,” is methodical and exuberant, technical and personal. Because consciousness forms the substance of identity and consciousness is basically a process of accumulating and recalling patterns, these patterns have no essential connection to the “wet-ware” of the brain.

We are all like Scheherazade, the queen narrating the Arabian Nightswho postponed her execution by seducing the king with one fantastic tale after another.

Douglas Hofstadter’s “I Am a Strange Loop” on the Self

Along the way we learned that a young Hofstadter played around with video cameras – daring to point the camera back at the TV screen to create swirling loops, endless corridors and infinite regressions. And given the arguments from Parfit against robust personal identity, qualitative identity is all there really is.


Strangr that’s pretty damn cool: Hofstadter argues that the psychological self arises out of a similar kind of paradox.

In contrast, one is more likely to come away more confused by the long series. So the difference between the video-feedback loop and our strange loops, our “I”s, is that while the former converts light to the same pattern on a screen, the latter categorizes a pattern and outputs its essence, so that as we get closer and closer to our essence, we get further down our strange loop.

Douglas Hofstadter’s “I Am a Strange Loop” on the Self

More intriguing is the idea that the capacity for this kind of abstraction is associated with brain complexity, where certain beings with small brains just don’t have the neural power to conceive of such an idea. Instead of telling us that he had many of the foregoing thoughts prior to his wife’s death, he should have said “Go on, try to poke a hole in this argument if you think I’m crazy.

And I challenge anyone to take as many good ideas as I had and make such bad grades out of them. He has numerous recursive sequences and geometric constructions named after him.

Can thought arise out of matter? But whether he believes this or not, it’s problematic for me, because conflating “interiority” with “soul-size” is basically begging the question of what things have big souls by defining “souls” as essentially the thing that we think humans have the most of, and if he’s not making that point, then why all of the animal comparisons and asking the readers to admit that animals don’t have souls as big as those of humans?


Russell’s logical system corresponded to exactly one whole number. That’s why the arguments are so murky–because they don’t quite connect. And he knows they don’t quite connect.

The choice of metric is THE moral choice. The object is a property of the metric; the metric is definitely not a property of the object. Douglas Hofstadter has it wrong. I read GEB in college and liked it, though I suspected that his idea that consciousness is a kind of self-referential loop might hkfstadter bear close scrutiny.

I Am a Strange Loop by Douglas R. Hofstadter

Hofstadter’s intellectual touchstones lie in mathematics, and particularly number theory; mine are in language, grammar, linguistics.

These things together make the book uninteresting and no fun to read.

Often I find myself mulling something over and then realize that I looop like Seth. This isn’t really AI — they’re just essentially complicated math solutions.

Osim metafora iznosi malo dokaza za svoje pretpostavke, uz neke krajnje olake kvalifikacije. I am fully ready to drink the Kool-Aid. This rings false to me because who is hodstadter say that my wife has truly internalized my actually thought process or even emotive reaction to such an external stimulus.

According to Doug, these would Hofstwdter be the same person, at least at that moment before the two of them start having divergent experiences. But I love their soulless little hearts anyway.