Artificial Stupidity 0.2

This is the second version of the attempt to encapsulate the aspect of thought responsible for irrationality first suggested.

There are 3 players:

  1. the_minds_needs represents all the things that the mind is trying to do
  2. all_past_experience represents thinking that is enabled through experience garnered
  3. newObservation represents new sensory information, sight, smell, hearing, touch etc. Its the new input that goes into the system

The main point that this encapsulation tries to make is that different needs might contradict each other. And that this contradiction is not reconciled by thought… and this causes irrationality.

When thought is processing stuff that serves need A but then comes across something that better serves need B then it will switch to serving need B even if that means moving in the opposite direction to need A. This looks like irrationality … because suddenly thought starts concluding things that contradict need A. But there is nothing broken … it just happens to be serving an other need, need B.

The real problem is just the contradictory needs. Which looks like irrationality. This is what I am postulating.

What I’m not convinced by is that needs are processed in some order. I wonder if perhaps there are some needs which have a natural greater priority.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in artificial stupidity. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Artificial Stupidity 0.2

  1. Bogus Name says:

    You defined a need as something the mind is trying to do. Apart from being a bit vague, this also separates thinking from doing. You also need to fit in emotions, as these will be the driving force to satisfy a need. Also, the modern view is that body and mind are different facets of the same single system. (See, for example, “Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain” by Antonio Damasio.) Given this, you might want to look at Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, see:
    http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/hierarchyneeds.htm

    I wonder whether you appreciate the size of the jar you have just opened.

    Regards,
    Martin

  2. Hi Martin,

    I appreciate the size of the jar … but I opened it over 15 years ago and it never occurred to me that its contents could be applied to art … until studying Xenakis’ compositions which are essentially sonic structures in time that reflect his view of the world. My view of the world has long been centred on the functioning, or malfunctioning, of human thought.

    To be honest, I know exactly where I am going 🙂 Or at least I think I do.

  3. Pingback: Artificial Stupidity (v3) | Etienne Deleflie

  4. Pingback: Artificial Stupidity: needs that cant be met? | Etienne Deleflie

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s