Skip to main content

Thoughts XV

Here are my latest ruminations on this and that, what is and what is not.

When creating a model that mimics a phenomenon perfectly, one is tempted to interpret the model as a full explanation of it.  This is errant causality.  It is the profound weakness of modeling.

It is a never good idea to invite administrative jobs in the parlor door. They promise more than they deliver. They ask more than they give. It should be no other way.  The converse, to give more than they ask, renders as undesirable the newly appointed administrator.

In the pursuit of truth, someone is always threatened.

We are more likely to accept what we want to believe, or what fits within our precepts, or supports our goals - all regardless of the facts of the matter. Rejection of what we wish to be so is difficult.

We live in a big data world but we still have small data brains. This is not to imply the brain has a small capacity, but it thinks in small data settings. It uses tools such as instinct, intuition to filter or distill large amounts of information to that manageable. The human brain can analyze a maximum of 5-6 variables. But it can’t analyze the value of 50 or more variables or dimensions.  Moreover, it can't analyze them in combination, in correlation.  But this is today's situation. What we can see are but a few slices or projections of these many dimensions, and this is what it relies on to make decisions and predictions. 

Indeed, a great deal of what is call data compression is a recognition a few key data dimensions from which the original data can be reasonably reconstructed.  So, data compression is truly a human inspired effort, though applied from of the necessity of limited data capacity and bandwidth.

Subjective vs Objective.  What's the difference. statistically speaking?
Statistics is an excellent tool, honest and reliable.  One the one hand, it illustrates its weakness by its use of observed data, and on the other hand it illustrates its strength on the basis of the underlying assumptions of the data type and consequent probabilities. Thus, one can sometimes argue either side of the point. 

So, what is subjective and what is objective in all this?  For the later, it is the probabilistic (i.e. statistical) assumptions about the data and the volume of data.  For the former, it seems to be the null hypothesis, as this implies a confirmation or denial of some proposition. Regardless, there is a strictly objective decision.

Despair is a condition brought on by what appears to be impossible, whether an event, goal, or object.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view