I have gradually converged toward this aesthetical conception of the/my mind based on my phenomenological experience but also on my understanding of PDP/Parallel Distributed Processing models ("ANN"/ "Deep or Machine learning").
The former is obviously related to an attentional drive toward my own psychomotricity through many practical activities (like juggling or doing percussions for ex.) and can be linked to the enaction of sensorymotor recurrent kinesthetic patterns.
I will concentrate here more on the later: understanding PDP models.
The dynamic of these parallel and distributed models can be apprehended through the observation of simulations which is necessary when dealing with complex non-linear dynamics, but more simply by first understanding the basics of their mathematical representation (don't run 😉).
The mathematical language for expressing this distributivity is *matrices*, ie "linear algebra" (cf. PDP book for a nice soft 101 intro). Basically they can be understood as operators to express simple linear movements of an (abstract) object: translation, rotation, etc.
They are used for ex. in 3D games to simulate the changing animated perspective of a subjective camera or move and tranform objects.
The link with gesture should now be obvious.
And it appears that these models also exhibit *generic cognitive-like properties*, like distributed memory, spontaneous generalization or graceful degradation, the relation with also the mind is patent.
So when studying these models of emergence, that is of historical enaction, one can analogically also study the resonance with his own sensorimotor schemes.
This is one technique of how a scybernethician can shape, with cognitive techno-sciences, his embodied mind aesthetics.
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As we are in a time of ontological/formal/space saturation, I think that the tensions will more and more be reported on the time/historical/evolutionary dimension. For me, experienced time should be thought formally of as quasi-bidimensional, 1/
that is coupling the diachronic/linear/cultural conception with the synchronic/experiential present. This is also related coherently to the ana-logic logic circulating deployment, and to the ambijective gesture of knowing.
In the enactive conception of evolution, inner organism biological "selection/co-operation", enabling/inhibiting variety coupled with its ecological active niche construction, are seen as even prevailing the classical Darwinian view, extending it and reversing the priorities.
🪡 Decision-making involves making discrete distinctions in continuous flow of events: it's a reductionist logic based on the need for action. It has already been modeled mathematically by René Thom (catastrophe theory), but is not sufficient to have a rational grasp of events:
More complexity needs to be added to the model. First some refs:
The enactive framework offers a more integrative conception of decision-making for thinking a decision through a PDP modeling (not much to do with the ANN neural metaphor) of a distributed network of "micro-decisions", iteratively enacting a convergent global "decision". So that
[ Understanding the power of LLMs/distributed "AI" & the HPC ] 🪡
One needs four cultural backgrounds:
1. Understanding the enactive paradigm (biocognitive sciences) 2. PDP modeling (technologies of artificial cognition). 3. Phenomenological (scholar) culture 4. Epistemology
One interesting finding of my scybernethics Odyssey was to understand that one could interpret PDP modeling (aka so called "deep/machine learning") as models of *enacted phenomenological intentionality*.
This is a very important finding not only to demystify the psychoactive power of these simulations on our minds, but also scholarly because it open a new way to think a post-Heideggerian technophilosophy.
Scybernethics conceptual dipoles (CD) are a cognitivist hermeneutical tool driven by (self)understanding. They have a second-order formal spacialized corollary: the dia-gram.
As already told, the form/process dipole is a key CD, and the major theme of the scybernethics exposition is the hermeneutical and heuristical circulation between 1st and 3d person perspectives (PP).
Which lead us the crucial dia-gram, which is a second-order spacialized/formalized double conceptual dipole: the form/process 1st/3d PP matrix (think Wilber matrix), a CD².
Toward understanding how meaning & sense-making is linked to this phenomenological perspective tension in every organism (including us, scientist or not), ie the dyn. coupling of a subjective "view from within" with an objective "view from outside":
An essential text by Andreas Weber (again) interpreting Varela's work in a biosemiotic perspective:
>>> The 'Surplus of Meaning'. Biosemiotic aspects in Francisco J. Varela's philosophy of cognition
This conception finds also an echo in the philosophy of Technics, this time with Bernard Stiegler explaining "The fault of Epimetheus"/Prometheus myth (in "Technics & Time", t. 1 for ex.), translated as the "necessary defect".
During my scybernethic adventure, I explored thousands of disciplinary scientific conceptual dipoles (X/Y, like analogic/logic, whole/parts, subject/object, etc).
In the humanities, one essential and tricky is explanation/comprehension.
But in the natural sciences and formal philosophy the most prototypical and abstract happened to be the form/process* one.
* I reserve the term "processus" for non-formal intuitive sense and lived dynamic experience of a process, "before" it's static formal designation.
The dynamical balance between these two polarities in any conception, on top of linguistic constraints, is crucial to enact a rational meaningful coherence.