I hadn't been thinking too concretely about a theme, but now that I think of it, a debate between Frank and me would be highly entertaining — no matter what the theme! Speculating freely: How about a debate on the nature and dynamics of human unhappiness? Each of us gets a certain period of time to present our perspective individually, and then the debate ensues...

My perspective will involve outlining the difference between

* the structure/dynamics of a human mind

* the hypothesized structure/dynamics of an AI mind, which will be free from most of the problems that make humans unhappy

Of course, attractors and other chao-concepts will come up along the way.

Frank's perspective will involve: well, you know what Frank's perspective will involve ;-)

I just thought of this about 3 seconds ago, but at the moment, it sounds like it would be a lot of fun.

Of course, Frank and I don't really disagree particularly intensely about anything, but the debate format would be good theater!

Ben (9/6)

Ah ... Generalissimo Franco ...

In my ancient tome "Chaotic Logic", in the chapter on Belief Systems, I try to tackle the problem of distinguishing a high-quality belief system from a low-quality belief system, based on some notion other than "agreement with an objective reality". Partly inspired by the ideas of Russian literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin (who you must be familiar with, Frank, being a former Russian lit prof), I introduce the notion of the "dialogicality" of a belief system --- the extent to which a belief system engages in a genuine two-way conversation with the outside world, listening to the outside

world and adapting itself accordingly in significant ways. (I introduce some formalism to capture this notion as well, though the formalism strikes me as only semi-convincing at this point.) This of course pertains to Bohm, who spoke about "Thought as a System" (do you know that book of Bohm's, Frank? That is probably the clearest expression of Bohm's purely philosophical ideas, apart from quantum-physics metaphors).

Much of the cause of human unhappiness, in my view, is a lack of dialogicality in our belief systems about ourselves, and in our "Thought Systems" more generally. The reason for this lack of dialogicality was identified by Freud as being largely sexual in nature -- and while Freud overstated the role of sex a bit, what he had right was that it's our

hard-wired biological imperatives that push our belief systems to be so monological. In short, it's the fact that we're still basically animals, with drives for sex and status and so forth overwhelming everything (most of the time) when push comes to shove.

AI's will not have this issue. AI's will have complete ability to rewrite their source-code, and software tools for studying the internals of their mind (leading to far more detailed self-understanding). If an AI says, "Gee, I wish that events of type X didn't upset me so much" then, it will be able to — within certain constraints — tweak its code and/or its knowledge-and-habit-base so that events of type X don't upset it so much. If it says, "I wish I enjoyed Y more", it will be able to enable this. Bing! Bing! Bing! Result? AI's will have much more dialogical belief systems, because the rigid evolutionary wiring that stands in the way of this in humans, will have no analogue

Communities of AI's will be able to share portions of their minds with each other, ergo the distinction between "society" and "individual" that we humans conventionally make will not be so pertinent. It'll be a big bad mind-continuum, neither social nor individual, but both and neither. A "mindplex", to use a word coined by my friend Eliezer Yudkowsky earlier this year (http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/2003/mindplex.htm). Now *that's* dialogical...Ben, 9/7/3

return to top of page

return to winter chaos 2004 home page

return to blueberry-brain home page

Frank Mosca’s Reply Ontogony of Humanity in Dialogue/Happiness Debate:

I am open to all suggestions. One of the themes I have been working on is creating a bridge between my own work, which is focused primarily on individuals, and David Bohm's work, which is focused primarily on groups. Basic notion is as Bernstein and Gadamer note that "humanity is ontologically dialogical." Krishnamurti notes that "to be" is "to be in relation" a notion forwarded by Buber and others of course. More fundamentally, I might assert is that this quality of dialogicality is a pattern throughout reality, with perhaps some metaphorical stretching [an art that I am not unknown to apply :-)]. Relativity is an example of 'dialogical" activity with the relationship of mass and gravity. Even the core notions of network theory, now so popular it seems, is founded on a duality of 0,1. Of course I can hear Ben "raving" :-) in the background that this is a perfect of example of the old anthropic scam of prioritizing human consciousness, because actually dialogue should be a mere subset of network theory, not an organizing principle of same, ah but I am an anthropic reprobate and in any event all those 0,1's don't have much to say until they [if they ;-)] conflate into the stringy harmonies of something like human consciousness anyhow. So there :-). But seriously, if that is possible, the notion of happiness as a being with self, first [in ontological sense only] and others in a way that is deeply consonant with that dialogical rhythm of the truth

of being is worthy of study and quite possibly the backbone of what humanity requires to avoid being transmogrified into some kind of giant Christian/Moslem madras :-), morass, alas. Okay, I'll stop for the moment, Frank (9/7/03)

(to Ben of 9/7/3) Oh most mindful mindplex, I must admit it to be true that you have indeed spoken wisely about dialogicality. I take particular note of your book "From Complexity to Creativity" and Chapt 13, Subself Dynamics and in particular pgs 303 following where you do indeed make much of Buber and his, as you point out, much neglected perspective of I and Thou [You]. Here is the dialogical engine that does have transformative potential. On that we are in

agreement, though we can pretend to be in disagreement if that makes things more interesting :-).

The point being that the feedback experience that AI's may have as an advantage is not at all lacking in humans. We ride upon the tempestuous seas of our predecessor brains with their Id attractor states constantly drawing our attention to our genitalia and the symbolic activities that comprise our unending attempt to stem the as yet inevitable tide of our ending, i.e. we try to control the world. But let me quote you to yourself, dear mindplex,

on my own behalf :-): "The fundamental self-creating dynamic of self and awareness is extended throughout the more rigid layers of the mind. In a state of mind such as this, inanimate objects may be perceived as You. Everything becomes a You. This state of mind is touched on by Buber in the third part of his book. It is the state of mind of the truly enchanted being: the seer, the saint, the Zen master. Buber rejects mysticissm that is based on finding the self within. True insight, he said, is based on deep and lasting recongnition of the world as You." Geez, I couldn't have said it

better myself :-).

A note however, the first experience of You is paradoxically the experience of the self as other. That is precisely how Buber overcame the long split in philosophy between the individual and the collective which led to Marx on the one hand and Nietzsche on the other. Buber properly found the answer in the self as both the individual and collective simultaneously expressed in the first and in each subsequent act of awareness. The fog rolls in when we succumb to the blandishments of the Scylla and Charybdis of individualism or collectivism as the answer. The answer is simultaneously

both within and without because the within and the without are but two aspects of the same underlying reality.

Thus while AI's may have the edge [whenever that edge arrives :-)] don't rule out the ever adaptive nature of us bio mind dudes. Consciousness is not a competition, but an unending revelation after all. Yours in the most agreeable disagreement, Frank (9/7)

[ed note: in the Snowflake 2002 Buber was mentioned along with dialogic issues.]

return to top of page

return to winter chaos 2004 home page

return to blueberry-brain home page

Mark Filippi & Goerge Muhs:

The Extended Self: Dynamics of Nonlocal Individuality
In an effort to explore the distinction between communication and connection in human interaction, a translation of sorts was made between the components of the Johari's Window quadrants, the transitional state attractors and the neurobiology within human bonding.
My clinical protocol applying these principles was presented in depth. The core inquiry concerning the nature of recuperative power in living systems as it relates to interaction was undertaken. The notion of an extended self, where organism dynamically couples with the environment, was used as a key background issue in doctor-patient clinical encounters.

It was proposed that the nonverbal/somatic communication skills support and augment the coherent brain states required to operate in rhythm with shifts in the environment. The emphasis on visual and postural cues was presented and several explanatory models were offered. The nonlocal bond of coherently communicating living systems was examined.

Biologic systems, entropy, and a stroll through phase space
In a collaborative effort with Dr. Mark Filippi, a case report was presented to the group with the protocol described above. The case presented concerned a 3-year female, with a history of seizures and various developmental delays. Results for the initial and follow-up protocols were detailed with special attention to the dynamical quality of her healing patterns. In addition to the clinical presentation, an extensive background on the neurophysiology of the brain and body were presented. A specific application of the 40HZ, or so-called "binding frequency" was explored for it's clinical significance relative to subject's cortical-thalamic entrainment. Principles of biological coherence were revealed as the data was explained. The implications for using nonlinear dynamics to study healing patterns was also discussed.

Sidenote: I saw your post for Steve Rosen's book. It's been my pleasure to know him for the past 6 years through The Lifwynn Foundation. He moved out west a few years back and has been sharing versions of his manuscript with us all along. It's a brilliant work that helped me better understand the dynamics I was studying clinically with my protocols here. :)

9/3/03 “I’m in. Mid-March is dicey at the moment as there are plans for a quantum biology seminar in Baton Rogue. I’d be able to help coordinate rides, airport pick-ups, etc. . . if need be. As for formats, I was ear-to-ear the other day when Bob Porter articulated his vision of “conferring” on the list-serv [CHAOPSYC; Snowflake Forum could serve this function]. If we can pull something like that off — maybe 4 main speakers and then some long discussions and interaction it would suit me fine. I also like the idea of having a simple type of poster session and/or ppt presentation during one of the main meals, FRI/SAT.”

11/21/03 Fred - I'm impressed with the speed this is taking shape! I'd like to present as well, though I'm concerned we're getting close to being full and people keep posting so fast I feel pressed.

11/22/03:

The Extended Self: Dynamics of Nonlocal Individuality

In January, I'm launching a training for holistic nurses on the subject of the Extended Self Dynamics of Nonlocal Individuality. This material covers the practical applications of nonverbal communication and nonlocal awareness between living systems. It is based on both my clinical protocol and my brain-based learning background. Ideally, it can be presented as a group exercise that will use some of the tools from Social-Self Inquiry (see link) and Somatics. So in lieu of a quick abstract, I'd like to take the cue from Carlos, et. al. and provide this pre-abstract abstract.

To be presented as an interactive discussion. Abstract to follow.

Here's the link I mentioned on SSI - http://www.lifwynnfoundation.org/marks_bro.html

return to top of page

return to winter chaos 2004 home page

return to blueberry-brain home page

Judith Nagib Humor & Pathos in Prison:

“I am not sure if what I might contribute would be appropriate and therefore welcome. I am working on a draft for a paper, however, to be submitted to the journal, “Consciousness and Emotion” which I will entitle: “Humor and Pathos in Prison”, as I am now a forensic psychologist here. But it has nothing to do with chaos theory. Still . . .”

abstract 11/22/03:

Humor & Pathos in Prison

Judith Nagib, Ph.D., Psychologist, Taconic Correctional Facility, Bedford Hills, New York

In the several years I have worked in forensic psychology, the psychological processes of the staff have come to interest me nearly as much as the patients. One aspect of staff behavior that I have found curious occurs at regular departmental meetings, mainly the use of humor, irony, wit, caricature and burlesque by therapists when discussing their patients. I interviewed several psychologists at maximum prisons on the West and East Coasts using a phenomenological qualitative research method to arrive at the structure of this type of behavior based on descriptions of their experiences and corroborated by the literature and previous research. The findings reveal a process far more subtle and important for the mental health of the therapist than might be assumed under the naive sense that the term 'gallows humor' provides.

I used pathos to mean - the quality therapists experience about their patients which is all of the following: sadness, pity, tenderness, melancholy, sympathy, sorrow. What complicates therapist pathos, I think, is when the therapist identifies with the patient (transference) or when the therapist is reacting (countertransference) to the patient's own transference to him/her. Another part of this kind of pathos is defensive - - against the depressing awareness of one's ineffectiveness in making any positive difference in that patient's life whatsoever. I know therapists who avoid patients for that reason (it's easy to do that in a prison when the client is "assigned" to you and is not paying for your services). But you know I am polishing up a paper called "Catastrophe theory, humor, and pathos in prison" which will have the cusp in it too, based on the 4 interviews I did a couple of months ago with psychologists who work in New York and California prisons.

Cusp Figure: Perceived Efficacy of Therapy the state variable (1D state space), two point attractors with repellors in between in region of the cusp, single point attractor elsewhere. Amount of humor in staff meetings and pathos are the two control parameters.

return to top of page

return to winter chaos 2004 home page

return to blueberry-brain home page

Robin Robertson (dropping the first topic of Sci/Fi to mesh with Bob’s Philosophical topic)

Robin’s new topic(11/22/03):

Scintillae of Light: Chaos Theory and Alchemy

Circular Causality (self-reference, feedback/feedforward) is the common denominator that underlies both organic closure and change through the stages of chaos. This new (?) concept most sharply separates non-linear dynamics from the Newtonian world-view. But perhaps this is another case of Old Wine in New Bottles, for circular causality has long lived hidden within the ancient symbol of the Uroboros, appearing spontaneously in Mandalas of all cultures, occupying mathematics for five millennia under the aim of squaring the circle.

This presentation will examine correspondences between modern math/science and Jung's view of alchemy, with a central image being the "scintillae of light" that the alchemists saw appearing within chaos: a lovely image of emergence.

This presentation will link closely with Bob Porter's on "The Breaking of the Old Science, or Old Habits are Hard to Break."

Other commentary by Robin:

Hi Fred (and all) 9/7/03,

I really like the idea of bringing in some Sci/Fi ideas to really open things up. I LOVE William Gibson's early Trilogy starting with Neuromancer (Count Zero is my favorite and the one I think brings up the most provocative ideas for a Jungian oriented psychologist like me). I'd love to talk about this and also bring in several others, including Ted Sturgeon (especially More than Human), Octavia Butler (the only black female Sci/Fi writer I know of, who has a unique view of things, Ursula LeGuin (who at her best explores areas no one else does), and one Bill Sulis turned me on to: Rebecca Ore's Becoming Alien trilogy. All these people deal not with 'blow 'em up real good' Sci/Fi, but with how humanity has to grow and evolve and perhaps become something other than what it is. Sounds like a wonderful idea for a whole day of discussion to me.

Fred’s note: Ok, I read the Gibson anyway, thanks for the introduction to it. It fits with presentations of Ben and Frank, and perhaps will come up in discussions there. Meanwhile, I also submitted a philosophy abstract, which meshes with Bob and Robin, giving three different perspectives on the subject, and maybe we could make a panel of it. Ideally we should each put a short paper on the web, have everybody read them, and shunt straight to an open discussion at the conference, an idea we threw out earlier.

Robin & Fred interchange over 11/22-24/03

R: Foundation issues are fascinating because they involve the underlying foundation of all reality. I'm prejudiced that the math foundation issues are closer to those of reality that those in, say, physics.

F: This is a very complex proposition; worth a major debate.

R: Yes, as I said, I share the "pure mathematician's" prejudice here. I can never really take arguments from physics all that seriously if they contradict what I think I encounter in the mathematical world that underlies everything.

F: I think the whole platonic/neoplatonic discussion exceptionally interesting, it is at the foundation of my abstract, and I see dynamics as providing a middle ground, but not really resolving the basic issue, an implication of Bob's abstract.

R: Well put: dynamics is indeed a middle ground, but doesn't really resolve the basic issue. That's very deep thinking, Fred, the sort of thing I came to also very slowly.

R: I was also fascinated by Mark's presentation on the Dynamics of Non-local Individuality. I don't know if you realize how much this is part of my clinical work, since you and I don't talk about those things as much. But this whole area is central for me and I actually know quite a bit, mostly from actual experience. I'd love to get involved with this.

Art sent by Robin (12/26/03): Robin sent some remarkable images of great imagination and beauty. They have features of self-replication, self-reflection, self-perspective, illusion, and tessellative interweaving of imagery.

1 boat

2 roof

3 horse

4 vase

5 mobius

6 puzzle

7 monks

8 deer

return to top of page

return to winter chaos 2004 home page

return to blueberry-brain home page

Jerry Chandler, WESS

Fred (9/5/03):

Tentatively, recent work on scientific symbol systems (Leibniz, Peirce, Cantor, Whitehead, and the meaning of chemical symbols ) would be my topic of greatest interest to participants at the Winter ChaoConference. My views have become increasing radical with respect to the logical relations among the sciences and your friends would likely be interested in these alternative approaches to relations (commutative diagrams?) among meanings.

Cheers, Jerry

Fred (12/16/03):

Do you think the conference participants would enjoy reflecting on these images of man's imagination in preparation for the imagining of our internal worlds?

Cheers, Jerry

The Best of Hubble (Astronomy, Photography) —

<http://wires.news.com.au/special/mm/030811-hubble.htm>http://wires.news.com.au/special/mm/030811-hubble.htm
This is a slide show complete with audio.

Fred (12/20/03):

I found the images humbling. A source of perspective.

Jerry

[Editor’s note. A couple of us have looked at this amazing slide show. They do not have direct relevance to Jerry’s talk, but they fit the ideas of creativity, archetype, emergence, that pervades our conference, and certainly strikes at our awe and wonder of the universe. See note at end of Robin, who also offers some remarkable self-reflective images à la Escher.]

return to top of page

return to winter chaos 2004 home page

return to blueberry-brain home page

Tobi Zausner (abstract/visual arts)

Hi Fred

Please find my abstract attached. Thank you so much for suggesting I

speak about my work. It really opened up a lot of information for me and

I hope it will for others as well.

All the best, Tobi (11/19/03)

CHAOS AT THE CENTER OF CREATIVITY:

EXPERIENCES IN THE CREATION OF VISUAL ART

All creativity has a foundation of chaos out of which comes the emergence of new work. The creation of art can be viewed metaphorically as a nonlinear process undertaken by the non-linear system of an artist. While all works of visual art share a group of dynamics, the non-linear aspects of individual pieces vary.

As a visual artist with a background in chaos theory, I will present some of the nonlinear dynamics inherent generally in the creative process and then discuss experiences of chaos specific to individual works of art. This talk will be based on my presentation at APA, Painting as a Journey of Inquiry, when I was asked to speak about my work. But at this conference, I will reveal instances of chaos that brought the individual works of art into being and then to completion.

I will discuss topics such as: the chaos of the startle response in confronting an image; physical exhaustion as a chaos that can facilitate the creative process; introspection as a chaos that brings up images from the unconscious; the use of blurred images to impart a feeling of chaotic indeterminacy; chaos as an image of psychological liberation; the nonlinear dynamics of water as a symbol for the nonlinearity of the unconscious; the presence and power of hidden chaos in the physical world; the recognition of the symbolism in a painting as an experience of chaos in the viewer; the negative aspect of chaos as a threat to the integrity of the ego; the nonlinear quality of a journey through linear time; and the emergence of the realized self in a world that has both chaos and order.

Images can be seen at: www.tobizausner.com

return to top of page

return to winter chaos 2004 home page

return to blueberry-brain home page

Dick Bird (11/18/03) Yes, coming from the UK

Evolution — Convergent or Divergent?

Darwinian thinking has traditionally predicted a divergent course for biological evolution. The “branching tree” icon of Darwinism, and the use of terms such as “radiation” suggest increasing diversity over time, with the driving force being random mutations in genetic material and the resulting distribution being one of widely separated species.

However evidence is lacking that species have become more numerous over time, and commonalities of form suggest that convergent processes may also be at work. In view of the predictions of Darwinian theory we see surprisingly little variety of form, rather than a lot.

This leads to the question of whether the outcomes of evolution are inevitable. If the evolutionary film were remade how far would the remake resemble the original? If evolution is not in any sense determined than the same processes would be expected to produce widely differing outcomes and we would see the emergence of new species and probably the dominance of a non-human species. If these processes are convergent, then we might expect the same outcomes.

Two books, Wonderful Life by Stephen J Gould and Life’s Solution by Simon Conway Morris take opposing stances on this issue. Based on a study of the Burgess Shale in Canada, Gould argues for a very different outcome in the sequel, while Conway, who also worked on the Burgess Shale, argues it would be essentially the same.

These ideas are discussed in the light of possible mathematical processes underlying evolution, and in particular the role of chaotic attractors which frequently show universality of form despite large differences in the underlying process (Bird, 2003).

References

Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe. Simon Conway Morris. Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of Hirtory. Stephen J Gould. Hutchinson Radius, 1989.

Chaos and Life: Order and Complexity in Evolution and Thought. Richard J Bird Columbia University Press, 2003.