Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Wed, 7 Jan 1998 20:46:56 +0100
Hi Lars
Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
>
> I've been reading a lot about AI lately (maybe I'll write something
> for the web site eventually), and some ideas are starting to bubble
> somewhere deep down in my brain. They haven't come together just yet,
> but Magnus' excellent article got the bubbling started. Basically,
> I'm a little unhappy with his dismissal of AI (and his use of Dynamic
> Quality in that dismissal) and I'm also a little unhappy with the
> Squads rejection of the Subject/Object viewpoint.
It wasn't intended as a dismissal really, but I guess it could be
interpeted that way depending on your view of AI.
> Do any of you know of any good definitions of the terms subjective and
> objective? Can you think of any thing/idea/concept/whatever that would
> be purely subjective or objective? (I'm now trying to think entirely
> within a SOM framework, disregarding MOQ for the time being.)
Asking TLS about definitions of subjective and objective is like
asking Saddam Hussein if he's a republican or a democrat ;-)
Anyway, a SOM objective thing would be the speed of light in
vacuum. The MoQ counterpart would be Quality I guess. Calling
Quality objective might sound outrageous but that's the way
Pirsig describes it in ZMM. He says that what people have
different opinions about, what is subjective, is what things
have Quality, not Quality itself.
There's also an excellent chapter in "The Mind's I" by D.
Hofstadter about this. It's called "What is it like to be a bat"
and I think it's been mentioned here before. It discusses the
possibility to express subjective "be-ing" objectively, and in
that case, what's left of the subject? The free-will?
Good luck with the bubbling and keep us posted.
Magnus
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:37 CEST