Simple computer program for the Human mind

[bobhikes]

I have been looking for a solution to finish my mind project.

I believe the main program for the mind to be

1)Build a norm from your experiences
2)Resolve all deiviations from the norm.

3)Of course the mind does take care of the body. These are simple sub routines any computer can do this.

No one would attempt to build a computer that established its own norms based on its experiences and resolve deviations from that norm. It would be a pretty silly computer but then we can be pretty silly.

Any thoughts on this for or against any questions.

 

[idav]

I like this kinda stuff. Having software that has the capacity to learn and change its self based on the new data is key. What would the computer experience?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Are we talking abut behavioural norms? Or are we talking about preferable system states? I like the idea of developing a system with individualised, self developed norms of system state and behaviour as this would make for an idiosyncratic system.

I would however suggest that specific states could be perceived as norms not just about its desirability but based on the varying degree of 'comfort' that the state represents based on how closely it matches previously established and frequently achieved system states (how well it matches the system's usual routine). However, perhaps one of the most problematic components of such models is not resolving deviations from some desired state of operations, but rather developing some approach to system initiated (as opposed to responsive) action.

 

[bobhikes]

Are we talking abut behavioural norms? Or are we talking about preferable system states? I like the idea of developing a system with individualised, self developed norms of system state and behaviour as this would make for an idiosyncratic system.

I would however suggest that specific states could be perceived as norms not just about its desirability but based on the varying degree of 'comfort' that the state represents based on how closely it matches previously established and frequently achieved system states (how well it matches the system's usual routine). However, perhaps one of the most problematic components of such models is not resolving deviations from some desired state of operations, but rather developing some approach to system initiated (as opposed to responsive) action.

Its a work in progress and I am not completely there yet. I believe a combination of both is at work here. Preferable system states controlled by the emotional systems and Self developed norms developed by the logical systems. This would be typical of all life. The scaling comes from the difference for norm. Something that is much greater or lesser than the average norm gets greater attention. Repetative actions readjust the norm.

In humans as opposed to other animals we have the ability to have both systems interact.

We can resolve deviations to the emotions and bodies subroutines but we can also use emotions to support our logical diviations. Other animals do not have this ability. It would be a simple loop back to the program that could easily have developed in evolution.

 

[Mcshane22]

I think skyNet as in terminator has the patent
I would look at statistics for a sum of norms. Such as the little Debbie girl is not a representation of just one person but it was a cumulative of multiple persons. If it can be done for looks it can be done for norms


Ex. If statistics show that 1/25 people have the Potential to be a serial killer ,the deviation of the norm would be to kill people

 

[bobhikes]

I think skyNet as in terminator has the patent
I would look at statistics for a sum of norms. Such as the little Debbie girl is not a representation of just one person but it was a cumulative of multiple persons. If it can be done for looks it can be done for norms


Ex. If statistics show that 1/25 people have the Potential to be a serial killer ,the deviation of the norm would be to kill people

I am not familar with skynet and not trying to design a computer. I am trying to understand how the human mind works through evolution.

A little more detail for what I'm saying, all intelligent life builds norms automatically and then look for deviations to its norms, then it trys to resolve these deviations. Resolution can be as simple as realizing its not important to as complex as building a society.

In the mind Psychology has stated that there are 2 systems at work. They are simply known as system 1 and system 2. My opinion is to call them emotional system(system 1) and logical system(system 2). In my program for the mind Each builds its own norms and trys to maintain the norms by looking for deviations and resolving them. In humans we have a loop back in the program so that system 1 and system 2 can interact.

 

[idav]

I am not familar with skynet and not trying to design a computer. I am trying to understand how the human mind works through evolution.

A little more detail for what I'm saying, all intelligent life builds norms automatically and then look for deviations to its norms, then it trys to resolve these deviations. Resolution can be as simple as realizing its not important to as complex as building a society.

In the mind Psychology has stated that there are 2 systems at work. They are simply known as system 1 and system 2. My opinion is to call them emotional system(system 1) and logical system(system 2). In my program for the mind Each builds its own norms and trys to maintain the norms by looking for deviations and resolving them. In humans we have a loop back in the program so that system 1 and system 2 can interact.

Ah I see I wasn't sure if your were talking of computers or not.

The system state that your saying is the emotional one also allows us to predict outcomes via the imagination and without the interaction with the logic side we would be easily duped. Possible future outcomes is what gives us motive to choose only one of five possibilities. It is easier to predict possible future outcomes with the more knowledge and experience we have.

 

[Mcshane22]

I am not familar with skynet and not trying to design a computer. I am trying to understand how the human mind works through evolution.

The reference to skynet was just a corny joke in reference to the antagonist in the terminator movies no seriousness applied, just for a laugh. You are correct though I did misunderstood your motive.

Your are on to something great ,and I look forward to your conclusions

I enjoy the analyzation of how things evolve

 

[Mcshane22]

Question I am new in studying phycology I touched on subject in college only to better understand the social sciences but not enough in details to comprehend phycology.
In reference to system 1 and 2 ,is his the same as the ego and the id or soothing different

 

[bobhikes]

Question I am new in studying phycology I touched on subject in college only to better understand the social sciences but not enough in details to comprehend phycology.
In reference to system 1 and 2 ,is his the same as the ego and the id or soothing different

System 1 and 2 are the new terms, they are similar to ego and id but different same as they are similar to emotion and logic but different.

Explantion from a book I am reading, its goes into pages of details in fact is the main theme of the book.
"System 1 operates automatically and quickly, with little effort and no sense of voluntary control

System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it, including complex computations. The operations of system 2 are often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice and concentration."

Quoted from Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, copyright 2011, My opinion, A very good book if you want to learn about how the human mind works. Not at all clinical, written for the average student.

 

[Mcshane22]

System 1 and 2 are the new terms, they are similar to ego and id but different same as they are similar to emotion and logic but different.

Explantion from a book I am reading, its goes into pages of details in fact is the main theme of the book.
"System 1 operates automatically and quickly, with little effort and no sense of voluntary control

System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it, including complex computations. The operations of system 2 are often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice and concentration."

Quoted from Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, copyright 2011, My opinion, A very good book if you want to learn about how the human mind works. Not at all clinical written for the average student.

Thanks for the book reference I'm am going to check it out! There was a fictional story I can't remember if I read it or if some one was telling me about it but it a while back about a phycologist who was hired by a military weapons technology firm to develop drone technology tanks. He is the narrator and he chroncals the evolution of the drones self awareness as they start to apply their own experices and develop a pseudo conscious , there was multiple flaws in it but still it was entertaining. Your book reference sounds like what i was looking for as I would love to read something that is actually scientific and applicable to real life.

 

[bobhikes]

Ah I see I wasn't sure if your were talking of computers or not.

The system state that your saying is the emotional one also allows us to predict outcomes via the imagination and without the interaction with the logic side we would be easily duped. Possible future outcomes is what gives us motive to choose only one of five possibilities. It is easier to predict possible future outcomes with the more knowledge and experience we have.

Prediction is the quick way the emotional one reacts, the logical side is slower but also can predict.

The last thing I would change is that
It is easier to believe you can predict possible future outcomes with more knowledge and experience.

A main idea that I have latched on to is that evolution has made us to see patterns that don't exist. Knowledge is a result of these patterns that don't exist.

 

[Mcshane22]

Prediction is the quick way the emotional one reacts, the logical side is slower but also can predict.

The last thing I would change is that
It is easier to believe you can predict possible future outcomes with more knowledge and experience.

A main idea that I have latched on to is that evolution has made us to see patterns that don't exist. Knowledge is a result of these patterns that don't exist.

Interesting, When I was reading Spinoza's "Ethics" he speaks of the highest level of knowledge one can achieve is of the Third Kind which he states is intuition. Intuition is the ability to see patterns that dont exist based on ones that do that exist and apply reason ( 2nd kind of knowledge) to choose the best outcome.