The Sixth Sense, 3

Mirror selves, 2 | Anatta 3.2 | 無我 3.2

.

You cannot feel your own existence or non-existence. You can feel the existence or non-existence of (such as) your hair, your hands, etc.

But you cannot feel the existence or non-existence of _you_.

— Me@2018-03-17 5:12 PM

.

Only OTHER people or beings can feel your existence or non-existence.

— Me@2018-04-30 11:29:08 AM

.

.

2018.04.30 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

I am a Strange Loop, 4.3

記憶奇異圈 1.3 | Godel, Escher, Bach, 2.3

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 10 日的對話。

(安:他那兩本書,也和「哥德爾定理」有關?)

有關,但它只是例子,而不是主旨。Douglas 想帶出的是,「自我」意識,其實來自一些「Strange Loop」(奇異圈)。

「奇異圈」的意思是,一些有「自我指涉」的系統。例如,「這句話是假的」這句子就有「自我指涉」的成份。那樣,你就可以把它視為,有一個「奇異圈」。

「奇異」之處在於是,如果句子「這句話是假的」是真的,它就是假的。但是,如果「這句話是假的」是假的,它就是真的。

「自我指涉」的程度越高,「自我意識」就會越強烈。(留意,「自我指涉」中的「自我」,和「自我意識」中的「自我」,意思不同。)例如,(我估計,)狗的「自我意識」比老鼠強,是因為狗的「反思」能力比老鼠高。同理,人的「自我意識」比狗強,是因為人的「反思」能力比狗高。

Douglas 的成名作是《Godel, Escher, Bach》,就是透過眾多「奇異圈」的例子,企圖帶出「自我」和「意識」的來源。但是,由於書中的例子,橫跨了太多課題,例如,邏輯、數學、物理、繪畫、音樂、文字等,而又橫跨得十分精采,導致近乎沒有人,知道該書的主旨是什麼。

所以,作者於大概三十年後,寫了《I am a Strange Loop》(「我」是一個奇異圈)。為免再令讀者誤會,作者把該書的主旨,直接用作書名。

雖然,在我讀了那兩本書之後,仍然覺得,對於「『自我』和『意識』從何而來」這問題,作者最終也沒有給予,一個滿意的答案,但是,我不會怪作者,因為過程之中,我獲取了各門學問中,大量的靈感。

情況就有如,尋寶圖中所指的地點,最終發現沒有任何寶藏。但是,在尋寶的路途上,遇到的寶藏,比尋寶圖中的預定目標還要多。

— Me@2014.09.29

2014.09.29 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

記憶奇異圈

I am a Strange Loop, 4.2 | Godel, Escher, Bach, 2.2 | Copy Me 11

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 10 日的對話。

如果不是該書的精湛展示,我相信可能要,用多十年的思考和研究,才能領悟到那些道理。

(安:他那兩本書,也和「哥德爾定理」有關?)

有關,但它只是例子,而不是主旨。Douglas 想帶出的是,「自我」意識,其實來自一些「Strange Loop」(奇異圈)。

「奇異圈」的意思是,一些有「自我指涉」的系統。例如,「這句話是假的」這句子就有「自我指涉」的成份。那樣,你就可以把它視為,有一個「奇異圈」。

「奇異」之處在於是,如果句子「這句話是假的」是真的,它就是假的。但是,如果「這句話是假的」是假的,它就是真的。

「自我指涉」的程度越高,「自我意識」就會越強烈。(留意,「自我指涉」中的「自我」,和「自我意識」中的「自我」,意思不同。)例如,(我估計,)狗的「自我意識」比老鼠強,是因為狗的「反思」能力比老鼠高。同理,人的「自我意識」比狗強,是因為人的「反思」能力比狗高。

(安:其實你用「記憶」會不會較容易理解呢?

例如,你可以說:「人的『意識』比狗強,是因為人的『記憶』,比狗的『記憶』,較詳細和較多元化。」)

都可以,因為,雖然「自我指涉」和「記憶」意思不同,但十分相關。例如,如果有一隻昆蟲是,近乎完成沒有記憶力的,例如牠的任何記憶,都只能維持到三秒以內,那樣,在每一刻,牠也只能以當時的本能即時反應來行事。在這情況下,我們把那隻昆蟲視為,沒有「意識」的。

(安:你又怎麼知道,昆蟲是沒有記憶的呢?)

我是說「如果」。你不喜歡的話,用「機器」作例子,可能會好一點。

假設在十年後(2024 年),工程師製造了,一些有意識的機械人。那樣,市面上就會有兩種機械人 —— 「有意識」和「無意識」的。

有一天,有朋友帶了,他新買的機械人見你,要你估計一下,那機械人有沒有意識。

如果那隻機械人是沒有記憶的 —— 在每一刻,它也只能以當時的本能即時反應,來行事的話,你就可以肯定,它是沒有意識的。例如,它的功用就只是,每當偵測到主人,身邊的空氣過熱時,就立刻開風扇。

如果那隻機械人是有記憶的,那樣,它就有可能有意識。

「記憶」,是「意識」的先決條件,但不是充份條件。有「意識」的生物或機器,就一定有「記憶」;但是,有「記憶」的東西,亦未必有「意識」。

— Me@2014.09.27

2014.09.27 Saturday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

I am a Strange Loop, 4

Godel, Escher, Bach, 2

這段改編自 2010 年 4 月 10 日的對話。

如果你接受到,「自我」其實是「軟件」,你就會明白,莫講話「教學」,即是只是「對話」,也是(部分)「自我」(互相)「複製」的過程。所以,如果你大大受過一位神級導師的影響,在很大程度上,你就是他。他的思想已經複製到你的腦中。

我有很多這類想法,都是來自《I am a Strange Loop》(「我」是一個奇異圈)這本書。

(安:那本書的內容是關於什麼呢?)

「自我」。

《I am a Strange Loop》的作者是 Douglas R. Hofstadter。而 Douglas 的成名作是《Godel, Escher, Bach》。

我從《I am a Strange Loop》中,吸收很深厚的教學功力。我當時的感覺是相當震撼的。這書竟然可以將,那麼高深的概念,例如「哥德爾不完備定理」、「自我來源」、「多重自我」、「自我程式」等,逐步舖排,表達到連初學者的我,也能明白。而它的舖排,往往是橫跨幾個章。如果不是作者對那幾門知識,有極深刻的瞭解,他並不可能作到,那樣宏觀的佈局。

雖然當年的我,程度不低,但是,那時的我,並沒有那幾門學問的詳細背景知識。例如,在那之前,我只知道「數理邏輯」這個學問中,有幾條重要的定理,都叫做「哥德爾定理」。除了名字以外,我對「哥德爾定理」的理解近乎是零。但是,經過《I am a Strange Loop》的介紹,我就了解到「哥德爾定理」的核心思想是什麼。

如果不是該書的精湛展示,我相信可能要用多十年的思考和研究,才能領悟到那些道理。

(安:他那兩本書,也和「哥德爾定理」有關?)

— Me@2014.09.20

2014.09.23 Tuesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Universe | I

Onion self 9 | 洋蔥自我 9 | Inner and outer, 7

Universe is not something you can observe directly, but a logical implication.

Whatever you can observe, it is only part of the universe, not the universe itself. 

“I” is also a logical implication or logical limit.

Whatever you can observe, belongs to your “I”, but is not your “I”.

For example, you can see your right hand.

It is part of you.

It is yours, but it is not you.

— Me@2012.10.18

— Me@2014.02.09

2014.02.10 Monday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Consciousness 4

Event Realism 3.2 | 事件實在論 3.2 | Cumulative concept of time, 17.2

being conscious

~ having one’s own past information

~ having memory

~ having self-interaction

~ entanglement between past states and the present state

~ some of the past states keep existing through memories and records

~ past-self-and-present-self entanglement

— Me@2013-11-01 7:02 AM

2013.11.03 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Information 2

Event Realism 3 | 事件實在論 3 | Cumulative concept of time, 17 | Recursion 8.3 | I am a Strange Loop, 3.3

memory ~ information of the past

Part of the past still exists, in the sense that some states and events of the past are entangled with those of the present.

— Me@2013-10-09 6:50 PM

2013.10.23 Wednesday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Inner and outer, 6

Onion self 8

In a sense, the fewer qualifiers you give to yourself, the smaller “you” are.

As you have fewer unnecessary qualifiers, “you” are purer. For example, when you label yourself as “a person” rather than “a thin person”, “you” are purer. Furthermore, if you label yourself as “an animal” rather than “a person”, “you” are even purer.

In the most extreme case, you label yourself just as “a thing”. You are just a being. You are just you.

In another sense, the fewer adjectives you give to yourself, the bigger “you” are.

As you have fewer unnecessary adjectives, “you” are more complex. For example, when you define yourself as “a human” rather than “a thin human”, “you” are greater, because there are more objects satisfying the condition of “being a human” than “begin a thin human”. There are more “humans” than “thin humans”.

Furthermore, when you define yourself as “an animal” rather than “a human animal”, “you” are even greater.

In the most extreme case, you define yourself just as “a thing”. In other words, as everything is “a thing”, you are “everything”.

The smallest possible you is “nothing”. The biggest possible you is “everything”, aka “the universe”.

— Me@2013-09-17 10:15 PM

2013.09.20 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Conscious time

Cumulative concept of time, 15

In 1895, in his novel, The Time Machine, H.G. Wells wrote, “There is no difference between time and any of the three dimensions of space except that our consciousness moves along it.”

— Wikipedia on Spacetime

Consciousness “moves” from the past to the future because consciousness is a kind of reflection.

To be conscious, one has to access its own states. But only the past states are available. Accessing one’s own now-here state is logically impossible, because that creates a metadox (paradox).

— Me@2013-06-26 02:28:51 PM

We can remember the past but not the future because the past is part of the future; the whole contains its parts, but not vice versa.

— Me@2011.08.21

2013.06.29 Saturday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Consciousness 3

Copy Me, 4

Being conscious is being able to form memories.

forming memories

~ forming an identity

~ forming a causal chain of thoughts

To form memories, one needs to access and then store its own states.

But due to metadox (paradox), no one, or no single part of the brain, can access its own now-here state directly.

That is why different parts of the brain have to communicate and coordinate in order to be conscious.

— Me@2013-05-30 1:47 PM

2013.06.23 Sunday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Consciousness 2

So when we’re awake and conscious, a single shock initiates a series of responses. Because they are well-connected, the different parts of the cerebral cortex are able to communicate and the integration results in this being conscious.

But when we’re asleep and unconscious, the communication channels temporarily shut down. So the same shock produces only a short likewise response.

— The Secret You

— BBC Horizon Documentary

conscious

Etymology

From Latin conscius, itself from con– (a form of com– (“together”) + scire (“to know”).

— Wiktionary on conscious

Consciousness and self-awareness is due to the communications between different parts of the brain.

— Me@2013-06-06

2013.06.06 Thursday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK

Consciousness | 自我 | 意識

There is no direct self-interaction.

An observation or measurement is an interaction between the observer and the observed, involving two objects. So there is logically impossible to have direct self-observation.

— Me@2013-05-29 12:09:46 AM

You cannot see yourself directly from your own point of view. Instead, you can only see your mirror, photo, and video images. In other words, you can only indirectly see yourself.

— Me@2013-01-20 01:08:34 AM

— Me@2013-05-31 10:45:49 PM

2013.05.31 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK