BC LIFE
Saved by @Alex1Powell

I woke up realizing that there is something very wrong with thinking in categories and classifications. Many people accept the idea that this kind of thinking is at the core of abstract thought.

 Douglas Hofstadter argues otherwise in a very thick (not dumb in the Brit sense) book of his ('Surface and Essences') where he argues that analogy is at the core of thinking. You'll have to read his book, specifically the last chapter to understand what he means.
The problem with categories is that they create artificial boundaries that are too crisp. But we know that when we master any subject that there is a distinct fluidity between concepts. The master seems wrong from a by-the-book novice because he keeps on breaking definitions.
Analogy making employs the tacit knowledge gained through experience to adroitly navigate between similar and competing concepts. A master has an intuitive feel of the vocabulary he employs to create expressions that have previously never been heard.
Biological brains feel their way through their realities. Something feels like red because our interactions with that thing feels the same as if it was red. We do not see the color red, we feel the color red. There is no red in this picture:
Analogy making is the interplay between the iconic and the indexical (see Peirce). We land on each relevant sameness and make cognitive leaps between relevant distinctness.
A master sees the implicate wholeness of process rather than the fragmented collection of classifications. Analogy making is that just-in-time thought process that connects thoughts together.
Analogy is therefore that bridges thoughts or concepts together. Categorization or classification is just a subset of this concept. It is the assignment of a thought to a classification. A bridging of something that is observed to what was previously categorized.
In psychology, tests for general intelligence typically involves tests of analogy making (see: Raven progressive matrices). There has been some Deep Learning research to solve these, but most of them had unsatisfactory results.
I conjecture that the same process that an animal employs for navigation is the root of analogy making. https://t.co/lNqClJLE8W
Unlike animal navigation that connects what is perceived to internal concepts, analogy making internal concepts with each other. Indeed this capability is critical for any creature that needs to follow a complex conversation. You cannot converse if you can't analogize!
But analogizing bridges two concepts together, what's the process of bridging three concepts together?
100 years ago Charles Sanders Peirce (pronounced 'purse') introduced his method of triadic thinking to William James. Peirce believed it to be the core of all his insights. William James however never understood it!
Which finally brings me to the reason I woke up and wrote this tweet storm. Peirce triadic reasoning is the core of thinking about emergent phenomena.
Emergent phenomena is a difficult to grasp because it appears like magic. In simple terms, the interactive behavior of parts leads to an emergent behavior of the parts. Think of the phenomena of 'rubber-necking' as an emergent one.
Peirce's triadic thinking connects the parts with the whole in a systematic way. When one first here's about firstness, secondness, and thirdness, it sounds extremely weird.
But baked in the approach is an explicit expression of how concepts progressively constructed. The problem with symbols (or even categorization) as a starting point is that it never expresses how a mind actually arrived at a symbol.
C.S.Peirce's writings are all about a meta-level evolutionary process. The method always begins with firstness. That is something that is (well) first and by itself. Firstness is defined as the characteristics of being first!
It is here where I will lose most of my audience. It's perhaps also the point where William James also lost the plot! But let me assure you that if you ever want to seek out the 'big picture' of intelligence then you aren't going to find it without knowing Peirce.
@threadreaderapp unroll

More from Carlos E. Perez

Carlos E. Perez
Carlos E. Perez
@IntuitMachine
The Nature versus Nurture is a debate about scientific doctrine. It is a debate about the correct way of explanation for cognition.

The Representation versus Non-Representation shares the same debate. It is also about the correct way of explanation for cognition.

It is also the difference between thinking in nouns versus thinking in verbs. Nature and Representation have deep roots in Western thinking. It is a functionalist and reductionist way of thinking that meets its limits when analyzing complex adaptive systems.

It is perhaps due to this Western bias that concepts from the study of complex systems have had little traction in modern society. It is of course, more than a Western bias, but a human bias to seek out simple causal explanations of this world.

But the world is complex and messy. Spiral dynamics which is an evolutionary model of individuals and society explains how models of the world shape ourselves and our civilization.
SCIENCE
Carlos E. Perez
Carlos E. Perez
@IntuitMachine
In physics, energy is that which is causally invariant or symmetric with respect to time. Said differently, energy is never created or destroyed, it is conserved in the universe.

Now there is a question about information. Is information causally invariant? Does information remain the same with respect to time? To understand this, let's first understand what energy is, then attempt to understand what information is.

The strange thing about energy is that it is this universal currency that seems to be interchangeable between the different forces in nature (i.e. electromagnetic, strong, weak and gravity). It is that thing that makes change possible.

Now let's assume that the universe is computational in nature. That is, anything we see in nature is a consequence of computation. That is, there is computation underneath the physics that is driving the universe to change.

What does it mean then that information is conserved in this computational universe? Also, how is energy conservation related to information conservation?
SOCIETY , SCIENCE
Advertisement
Carlos E. Perez
Carlos E. Perez
@IntuitMachine
Does artificial anthropocentric intelligence lead to superintelligence?

When I use the term Artificial General Intelligence, my meaning of 'General' comes from the psychology definition of the G-factor that is tested in general intelligence tests.

It is an anthropocentric measure. The question that hasn't been explored in depth is whether a "human-complete" synthetic intelligence leads to a superintelligence. The prevailing assumption is that this expected.

I am going to argue that this assumption may not be true.

The assumption that goes into AGI automatically exploding into a superintelligence is driven by the bias that human intelligence is perceived at the pinnacle of all intelligence.
TECH
Carlos E. Perez
Carlos E. Perez
@IntuitMachine
It is astonishing that most of cognitive science ignores an obvious reality. That there are two kinds of humans.

Tomasello has a very credible hypothesis that what distinguishes humans from the great apes is the inclination towards shared intentional behavior. What is innate is the disposition and like personalities, it is what defines our cognition as we grow.

If cognitive preference is so critical in cognitive development then why is it that we seem to have completely ignored the difference in cognitive preferences between men and women?

Humans are that species of primates that wandered out into the savannah. The savannah is different enough from a dense jungle to exert the evolutionary pressures that encourage the development of planning and forecasting skills.

Furthermore, human infants required a disproportional amount of effort to rear. This meant the specialization of roles between women who were responsible for rearing offspring and men who were responsible for bringing home the bacon. Failure in either implied death.
SCIENCE
Carlos E. Perez
Carlos E. Perez
@IntuitMachine
The interview with CNBC of @chamath is a much watch because there is so much insight hidden underneath.

There are many things that caught my attention. The one thing was the abstraction that hedge fund strategies are all 'momentum' plays. What it seems to imply is that the marshaling of resources at an opportune time drives the future behavior of a stock.

From basic physics, we know that momentum is mass times velocity. So any 'momentum' tactic employs the variation of mass, velocity or both. Wrt stocks, mass is money and velocity is speed of trade.

We cannot argue that there are benefits of scale associated with having more money. Also, high-frequency trading has shown the value of high-speed trading. So in an abstract sense, market manipulation can involve a kind of momentum play.

The objective of stock trading is to buy a financial instrument at a low price and sell it at a higher price. The purpose of a momentum play is to front-run the decision process of other traders such that one acquires the assets before a decision is made.
BUSINESS

More from Life

LCTempleton
LCTempleton
@LCTempleton
My highlighted passages from The Psychology of Money by @morganhousel. Thread below

1. The 401k - the backbone savings vehicle of American retirement - did not exist until 1978. The Roth Ira was not born until 1998. If it were a person it would be barely old enough to drink

2. NYU professor Scott Galloway has a related idea that is so important to remember when judging success - both your own and others': "Nothing is as good or as bad as it seems."

3. Margin of safety - you can call it room for error or redundancy

4. "Every job looks easy when you're not the one doing it because the challenges faced by someone in the arena are often invisible to those in the crowd."

5. "The average equity fund investor underperformed the funds they invested in by half a percent per year, according to Morningstar - the result of buying and selling when they should have just bought and held."
LIFE
David Rothkopf
David Rothkopf
@djrothkopf
If there is one thing I have learned it is that people love bullshit. They buy bullshit stories from professional bullshit artists, accept bullshit philosophies, purchase bullshit how-to-books, vote for bullshitting politicians.

At first, I resisted believing this because it is illogical and dumb and frankly, doesn't reflect well on the human race of which I am a member (and thus have long been hopeful that it is more of a distinction than it actually turns out to be.)

But if you actually are interested in facts you begin to notice how little most people care for them. Sometimes it is because they are heard to learn and bullshit is so much more widely and easily available. Sometimes it is because facts make them uncomfortable about themselves.

Sometimes it is because just one tiny fact will upset a whole worldview that has grown as comfortable as an overstuffed chair. (Settling into such worldviews is a lot like settling into chairs like that because the longer you're there and the deeper you sink...

...the harder it is to hoist yourself up and out of your fat-assed intellectual laziness.) But I actually think the reason people have such an appetite for bullshit goes deeper, goes to an aspect of ourselves we just can't accept.
LIFE
Advertisement
Nick Huber
Nick Huber
@sweatystartup
How to get smarter very fast:

Interact with smart people here on Twitter who have different world-views than you do.

And let them change your mind on something.

Here are the 30 people you should follow (along with my favorite tweet from each)👇👇

Twitter can be terrible if you follow negative people.

It can also be more valuable than a college degree if you follow (and network with) the right people.

You get to look right into their brain and read a daily narrative of HOW they think.

Ok lets go:

#1: @ShaanVP

You know he's all about venture capital based entrepreneurship. I'm about small (non-sexy) business. We disagree on a lot of stuff.

But he's done it and he's won. Bonus follow: @theSamParr (@myfirstmilpod podcast


#2: @fortworthchris

He is where I want to be in 15 years. Has built a massive real estate private equity firm from the ground up. Super grounded with what the way he does business and his podcast @theFORTpodcast is top


#3: @Julian

I'm a scattered thinker and procrastinator.

Julian is a master of clear thinking and simple but effective writing. A world class example of content marketing and
ALL , LIFE
The Stoic Empire
The Stoic Empire
@TheStoicEmpire
//Thread of wisdom//

The modern mind is overstimulated and the modern body is under stimulated and overfed. Meditation, exercise, and fasting restore an ancient balance.

~ @naval

Retweet to add another.

I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him.

~ Galileo Galilei

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.

~ Richard Feynman

Your best work involves timing. If someone wrote the best hip hop song of all time in the Middle Ages, he had bad timing.

~ @ScottAdamsSays

When you are content to be simply yourself and don't compare or compete, everyone will respect you.

~ Lao Tzu
LIFE
Mona Eltahawy
Mona Eltahawy
@monaeltahawy
Three years ago today, I was icing my knuckles because I’d beaten the fuck out of a man who had groped me in a club a couple of nights before. I wrote about it in my new essay https://t.co/SqzluTtJKb 📷 @rerutled #IBeatMyAssaulter


After I explained to a club manager what had happened, he ooked at my Beloved and asked me “Why didn’t you let your husband take care of it?” I almost beat him up too.

“First of all, he’s not my husband. Also, this is my body, I take care of it.”

Patriarchy enables and protects men who sexually assault women, and it demands that only other men “protect” us.

As long as we obey and behave in ways it approves of, of course. Protection is conditional.Because if we disobey, ha! I don't want to be protected. I want to be free

I started #IBeatMyAssaulter and women from around the world shared stories.

Five days earlier, I had started #MosqueMeToo to talk about being sexually assaulted during pilgrimage and women from around the world shared stories 🎥 @rerutled


And between the two #, men were showing me how easily the goal posts can move.

Under #MosqueMeToo men asked me, “Why didn’t you make more of a fuss?” Under #IBeatMyAssaulter men said, “You made too much of a fuss. You were too violent. Don’t you think you overreacted?”
LIFE

You May Also Like

Hector Navarro
Hector Navarro
@Hectorisfunny
I'm going to attempt to chronologically list all of the Marvel characters Stan Lee had a hand in creating. Working with his genius collaborators, Stan and his team produced an insane amount of iconic characters in a roughy ten year period. (Thread)


With his younger brother, writer Larry Lieber, and Jack "the King" Kirby:

Groot

Tales to Astonish #13 (November, 1960)


With writer Lieber, and artist Kirby:

Fin Fang Foom

Strange Tales #89 (October, 1961)


With the King, Stan gives birth to the Marvel Universe:

The Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four #1 (November, 1961)


With Jack Kirby:

Mister Fantastic

Fantastic Four #1 (November, 1961)
CULTURE
Billy Bostickson \U0001f3f4\U0001f441&\U0001f441 \U0001f193
Billy Bostickson 🏴👁&👁 ...
@BillyBostickson
Tip from the Monkey
Pangolins, September 2019 and PLA are the key to this mystery
Stay Tuned!


1. Yang


2. A jacobin capuchin dangling a flagellin pangolin on a javelin while playing a mandolin and strangling a mannequin on a paladin's palanquin, said Saladin
More to come tomorrow!


3. Yigang Tong
https://t.co/CYtqYorhzH
Archived: https://t.co/ncz5ruwE2W


4. YT Interview
Some bats & pangolins carry viruses related with SARS-CoV-2, found in SE Asia and in Yunnan, & the pangolins carrying SARS-CoV-2 related viruses were smuggled from SE Asia, so there is a possibility that SARS-CoV-2 were coming from
ALL
Advertisement
Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
Remember: Just because an idea is old doesn't mean it's good.

Knowing whether old ideas are more likely to be good requires understanding whether conditions have changed in important ways.

Horse archery was an amazing method of warfare for over a thousand years...then people invented guns, and suddenly this great idea that had stood the test of time became obsolete.

Then again, when underlying conditions don't change much, tried-and-true approaches are probably better.

"Learning the lessons of history" usually just means assuming ergodicity and stationarity in an informal time-series model...

(end)
SOCIETY
Will Buxton
Will Buxton
@wbuxtonofficial
The Haas / Force India argument is fascinating, and the decision of the stewards may still have consequences. The first key finding is that the stewards ruled Racing Point Force India to be a valid constructor. That means that it builds its own cars.

Haas had argued that the cars had been designed by Force India, but as Haas knows only too well, "outsourcing" is legal. The stewards decided that "there is no regulatory support for the argument that Outsourcing of Listed Parts cannot come from a former or excluded team."

In determining this, the stewards also came to the following conclusion: "In relation to the submission by the Racing Point Force India F1 Team that it is not a new team, the Stewards decide that the Racing Point Force India F1 Team is indeed a new team."

This will have a big knock on effect for Haas in its continued arguments over the rights of RPFI as relates to its eligibility and rights under the complex payments structure. Haas has argued all along that RPFI should be treated as a new team and tread the same path that it did.

TLDR? Haas lost the fight but may have won the war. In having its argument that Racing Point hadn't designed their own car thrown out, they gained clarification that RPFI was a new team.
SPORT
Max Fagin
Max Fagin
@MaxFagin
November is here, and that means a massive shift is coming. And by "massive" I am of course referring to the redefinition of the kilogram unit of mass that the world has been building up to for more than 100 years. Let me explain:


1/ I've had an unhealthy fascination with metrology (the study of measurement) ever since my 2nd year as a physics major when I took a class devoted to duplicating historic physics experiments, so please indulge me for going into heavy detail (get it?) about the kilogram.

2/ So what actually *defines* a unit of measurement? If you're American, you probably know a mile is 5280 feet and a foot is 12 inches and an inch is 2.54 centimeters etc. But where does this chain of definitions end? Is it turtles all the way down?

3/ It's actually not! For all units (even the imperial units used in America) the answers all end with the Système International (SI) unit definitions established and maintained for over 100 years by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIMP) in France.

4/ At the base of this tower are the SI base units. Just 7 SI base units define every other unit in existence. They are:

Kilogram, kg (mass)
Meter, m (distance)
Second, s (time)
Kelvin, K (temp)
Ampere, A (electric current)
Candela, cd (luminous intensity)
Mole, mol (quantity)
SCIENCE