This is such a great way of seeing how we can be in our lives differently, in ways that help us connect beyond ourselves and how where we're situated offers so much more than we allow it to. I've been writing this week about how we've become so self-guided that we've forgotten to be collectively anything, and the idea of "I locate; therefore, I am" is such a great counterpoint to going ever inwards.
Completely agree. I read a great book called Empire of Normal by Robert Chapman that explores the wider point that neurodiversity and different ways of knowing are as critical for the viability of human life as biodiversity is for nature. Not that we are not nature, but you get what I mean. The more room we make for different ways of knowing that exist within the human mind, the more sane we will become collectively.
Just looked this up and now on the (ever growing) list to read. Currently seeking anything that allows space for different ways of knowing, and then in turn being, so we can function better together.
This fascinating Dan. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I was also in a 'brain-frying in a good way' conversation yesterday around what it means to think as a human (rather than 'think' as a bot or AI). A very clear element of that was the fact that we're embodied and experienced. We 'know' things as a result of the places we've been, the people we've met there, the experiences we've had and so on - in essence, our relationship with the world. So, 'I locate; therefore I am' would ring true with that.
That is such a good point. AI has to be trained with these ways of knowing if we're to get the best out of it. The interview with Tyson is so great. There's a bit where he talks about how once humans began using the written word, visual recognition 'moved' from the optimal side of the brain for visual reference to the other. This makes literate people less reliable when it comes to recognising faces. Because we have used training data from literate people, AI is less capable of visual recognition as a result. His conclusion is that if we want to train AI to be better at visual recognition, we need more illiterate people involved in the data set it is trained by! This just makes my head spin but shows how arrogant our perception of 'intelligence' is.
Fascinating. A question I had from my discussion yesterday was about how we might train AI with knowledge that isn't written down anywhere. Things like tacit knowledge, as well as knowledge from cultures where things aren't written, perhaps by intention, accident or design. I suspect an enormous but hugely exciting rabbit-hole is opening up for me to explore here! Tyson's book is on order...
This is such a great way of seeing how we can be in our lives differently, in ways that help us connect beyond ourselves and how where we're situated offers so much more than we allow it to. I've been writing this week about how we've become so self-guided that we've forgotten to be collectively anything, and the idea of "I locate; therefore, I am" is such a great counterpoint to going ever inwards.
Completely agree. I read a great book called Empire of Normal by Robert Chapman that explores the wider point that neurodiversity and different ways of knowing are as critical for the viability of human life as biodiversity is for nature. Not that we are not nature, but you get what I mean. The more room we make for different ways of knowing that exist within the human mind, the more sane we will become collectively.
Just looked this up and now on the (ever growing) list to read. Currently seeking anything that allows space for different ways of knowing, and then in turn being, so we can function better together.
Sounds like we’re on a similar quest!
This fascinating Dan. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I was also in a 'brain-frying in a good way' conversation yesterday around what it means to think as a human (rather than 'think' as a bot or AI). A very clear element of that was the fact that we're embodied and experienced. We 'know' things as a result of the places we've been, the people we've met there, the experiences we've had and so on - in essence, our relationship with the world. So, 'I locate; therefore I am' would ring true with that.
That is such a good point. AI has to be trained with these ways of knowing if we're to get the best out of it. The interview with Tyson is so great. There's a bit where he talks about how once humans began using the written word, visual recognition 'moved' from the optimal side of the brain for visual reference to the other. This makes literate people less reliable when it comes to recognising faces. Because we have used training data from literate people, AI is less capable of visual recognition as a result. His conclusion is that if we want to train AI to be better at visual recognition, we need more illiterate people involved in the data set it is trained by! This just makes my head spin but shows how arrogant our perception of 'intelligence' is.
Fascinating. A question I had from my discussion yesterday was about how we might train AI with knowledge that isn't written down anywhere. Things like tacit knowledge, as well as knowledge from cultures where things aren't written, perhaps by intention, accident or design. I suspect an enormous but hugely exciting rabbit-hole is opening up for me to explore here! Tyson's book is on order...