by Douglas R. Hofstadter
|
| List Price: | $26.95 |
| Amazon Price: | $7.99 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. |
| You Save: | $18.96 (70%) |
| Average Rating: |  |
| Lowest New Price: | $7.99 |
| Availablitiy: | Usually ships in 24 hours |
|
 |
|
Product Description
What do we mean when we say "I"? Can thought arise out of matter? Can a self, a soul, a consciousness, an "I" arise out of mere matter? If it cannot, then how can you or I be here? I Am a Strange Loop argues that the key to understanding selves and consciousness is the "strange loop"--a special kind of abstract feedback loop inhabiting our brains. Deep down, a human brain is a chaotic seething soup of particles, on a higher level it is a jungle of neurons, and on a yet higher level it is a network of abstractions that we call "symbols." The most central and complex symbol in your brain or mine is the one we both call "I." The "I" is the nexus in our brain where the levels feed back into each other and flip causality upside down, with symbols seeming to have free will and to have gained the paradoxical ability to push particles around, rather than the reverse. For each human being, this "I" seems to be the realest thing in the world. But how can such a mysterious abstraction be real--or is our "I" merely a convenient fiction? Does an "I" exert genuine power over the particles in our brain, or is it helplessly pushed around by the all-powerful laws of physics? These are the mysteries tackled in I Am a Strange Loop, Douglas R. Hofstadter's first book-length journey into philosophy since Godel, Escher, Bach. Compulsively readable and endlessly thought-provoking, this is the book Hofstadter's many readers have long been waiting for.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Average Customer Review:
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:
 Mumble Jumble Ramble, 2008-11-20
A scientist doesn't talk of "soul", an unscientific term of undefined meaning. You can't dismiss the "lower Level" called brain, because without a brain we cannot feel nor think. I think the problem of consciousness won't be resolved by loopy conundrums and puzzling analogies. I, for one, don't think a child of two has "less soul" than an adult: a child has a mind (mind, not soul) less educated, informed and developed. Nor do I think that, because a deceased loved one survives in my memory and dreams, he/she shares consciousness with me. This is a consolatory fancy; if the Author is comforted by believing it, by all means, let him be, but there's nothing "scientific" in such a notion.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
 I Am A Strange Loop, 2008-11-17
How real is X to you...the moment you start taking X for granted, then it would seem you would consider X's reality highly dubious.
This, a book of analogies and metaphors, presents a plethora of academic notions in a down to earth way, spinning science subjects such as physics, mathematics at the logical level, chemistry, psychology, humanities, and a touch of theology, to describe the human experience, which Hofstadter calls a Strange loop. He brings in a lot of his humble personality and subtle sense of humor to help the reader feel like his best friend is telling you about a crazy dream he had the night before. In keeping with the spirit of the book I recognize that every reaction or review would carry the bias of the reviewer's life experience, whether that be one of science, business, art, sports, spiritual, or just a plain ordinary person...most of us. I am going with the human experience henceforth. With regard to the human experience Hofstadter suggests that in order to perceive our universe, you must have a soul, described in the book as that with the capability to interpret the symbols of the universe.
From small to large, while there is a DNA make up that begins things, Hofstadter puts forward the notion, backed with enough thought to be the foundation of a thesis, but not enough to make a boring academic read, that DNA must be capable eventually through development in chemical communication of powering enough energy to a.) Interpret symbols, b.) Share these symbols with other beings, and c.) Care about the other being. Please understand not I did not state the possibility of a soul to be strictly the domain human beings. Hofstadter, in no way suggests the human being as the center of thought but in many ways implies that souls are not dependent on the human form. This is clearly in sync with Emerson, and Jesus to name a couple souls, but is scientifically based in the 21st century.
To see the complete review do a keyword search on cigarroomofbooks
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:
 chatty and personal, rather disappointing, 2008-11-09
Once again, Hofstadter brings his unusual and very personal style to a serious subject. As with the title, "I" is a major player here, with stories, ruminations and specifics on what he thinks as a conscious human and a researcher. In many cases, I felt like we were almost in a dialog together.
The book is too long and repetitious, with its essence only a few key points. There is a complex thread on KG, incompleteness, Russell and how all that applies to looks and being inside and outside the system. It's a tough subject and the author makes a solid shot.
The other main topic is the degree of consciousness from humans to insects, with the lowly mosquito making many appearances. Hofstadter believes that consciousness gradually appears as you go up the chain, with no concrete dividing line. Fair enough.
Given that premise, he doesn't get into how that applies to different abilities and perceptions within humans, either as fully grown adults or as developing humans in the womb. A serious assessment of when humans become conscious and how consciousness evolves as we age (to be fair, he does use Ronald Reagan as a proxy for late-state decline) would have been welcome. Perhaps his highly-visible liberal views would have made that too dangerous, with a simple example being his brief mention of "The Bell Curve" that could have been more seriously assessed.
The riff on consciousness at a distance and replication was one of the highlights. A segue into science fiction concepts could have been a treat in his hands, such as Star Trek's "Borg" and so many other ideas of collective intelligence. How much technology could I insert into the brain and still be a conscious human, especially one who is still "me"?
Finally, computer science and artificial intelligence, one of Hofstadter's own fields, has quite the history of debate on what is intelligence. He is quite clear that many systems are far from conscious, such as chess players and feedback systems, without pushing the envelope for future possibilities. Do some pushing.
The book has its moments, and what a fertile mind he has. On this subject, I prefer Steven Pinker and more traditional writers.
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:
 Gödel, Escher Bach Lite, 2008-10-20
Title says all!
Too much wit, too little novelty since his seminal 1979 book...
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:
should have cashed out while he was ahead, 2008-10-18
If this were written by any other author it would be dismissed as more inane crank-speak. Unfortunately, it was written by the author of a prior, stunning work (GEB) - which somehow earns it immunity against ridicule.
Let me summarize:
1. Take the cutesy, at times tedious, analogies and dialogues from GEB.
2. Construct new analogies by combining last night's dream with a childrens' cartoon, and crank the folksy up to 11.
3. Replace all of the informative / insightful components from GEB (who needs them anyway?) with the results of 2.
4. Publish.
Everyone has pet theories about consciousness. Most of us have the decency not to publish books about it.
Price is accurate as of the date/time indicated. Prices and product availability are subject to change. Any price displayed on the Amazon website at the time of purchase will govern the sale of this product.
|
Store Categories
|