from a newsgroup:
> I've cross posted this. In my experience a good artist can adopt several different styles of painting. If they use a certain style or explore a different technique will this mean that they are ' psychologically disturbed' ?
I think this question only make sense, if you give better concepts for "artist" and "the methods or style of the artists". Now, the question looks like you are assuming a Cartesian theater where "the artist" controls some part of his mind that then give a certain style to his work. The dualist view is misleading in questions related to the mind. Once you adopt a multiple-agent-viewpoint of the mind, you could argue that a good artist must be very sensitive to certain experiences, and
in turn, must be able to amplify these certain mental states (that are caused by the experiences directly in combinations with impressions from his long-term memories). Of course, we not always like to have certain mental states amplified, and in turn, our culture provides ways of thinking to avoid confrontation with them. On the other hand, good art often originates from the confrontation with average ways of
thinking. That is where your paradox comes from: On the one hand, it can be dangerous to leave safe cultural waters, on the other hand, it can be safe, no to stay in average cultural waters.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Thursday, August 10, 2006
About the use of memories
Minsky recently posted some thoughts from his book Society of Mind about our impression of continuous change in time. I also gave a reply :)
min...@media.mit.edu schrieb:
"The power of consciousness comes not from ceaseless change of state, but from having enough stability to discern significant changes in your surroundings. To "notice" change requires the ability to resist it, in order to sense what persists through time, but one can do this only by being able to examine and compare descriptions from the recent past. We notice change in spite of change, and not because of it. "
I agree that this is an interesting model to explain what our memories do: When our short-term memories can accurately predict a situation, we start to understand the world, form concepts and cause-effect relationships. It is also when our predictions are easy to make, that we start to get bored by a situation and that our higher-level reflective agents try to change their goals. Of course memories and learning are closely related. And what I find interesting, is, that when we are able to play we hardly notice that time passes ! For example, when I am programming, and am learning about a new abstraction of a problem, I hardly know what parts of the
design will work in the first place. Only much later I get an impression on which mistakes were necessary that solved my problem. My point is, before I try to resist change, I gratefully try to experience change. So, there are times when we read from our memories (resisting change), but equally there are times when we write to our memories (trying to make mistakes).
min...@media.mit.edu schrieb:
"The power of consciousness comes not from ceaseless change of state, but from having enough stability to discern significant changes in your surroundings. To "notice" change requires the ability to resist it, in order to sense what persists through time, but one can do this only by being able to examine and compare descriptions from the recent past. We notice change in spite of change, and not because of it. "
I agree that this is an interesting model to explain what our memories do: When our short-term memories can accurately predict a situation, we start to understand the world, form concepts and cause-effect relationships. It is also when our predictions are easy to make, that we start to get bored by a situation and that our higher-level reflective agents try to change their goals. Of course memories and learning are closely related. And what I find interesting, is, that when we are able to play we hardly notice that time passes ! For example, when I am programming, and am learning about a new abstraction of a problem, I hardly know what parts of the
design will work in the first place. Only much later I get an impression on which mistakes were necessary that solved my problem. My point is, before I try to resist change, I gratefully try to experience change. So, there are times when we read from our memories (resisting change), but equally there are times when we write to our memories (trying to make mistakes).
Thursday, August 03, 2006
structure and interpretation of computer programs
What is the meaning of a structure ? Why are certain structures more useful than others ? How do we build structures and abstractions ? From the book "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" :
"... It's in words that the magic is -- Abracadabra, Open Sesame, and the rest -- but the magic words in one story aren't magical in the next. The real magic is to understand which words work, and when, and for what; the trick is to learn the trick.
... And those words are made from the letters of our alphabet: a couple-dozen squiggles we can draw with the pen. This is the key! And the treasure, too, if we can only get our hands on it! It's as if -- as if the key to the treasure is the treasure!
John Barth, Chimera"
"... It's in words that the magic is -- Abracadabra, Open Sesame, and the rest -- but the magic words in one story aren't magical in the next. The real magic is to understand which words work, and when, and for what; the trick is to learn the trick.
... And those words are made from the letters of our alphabet: a couple-dozen squiggles we can draw with the pen. This is the key! And the treasure, too, if we can only get our hands on it! It's as if -- as if the key to the treasure is the treasure!
John Barth, Chimera"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)