Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.003889711 = product of:
  0.015558844 = sum of:
    0.015558844 = weight(_text_:information in 480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015558844 = score(doc=480,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.25362873 = fieldWeight in 480, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=480)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

What is the uniquely human factor in finding and using information to produce new knowledge? Is there an underlying aspect of our thinking that cannot be imitated by the AI-equipped machines that will increasingly dominate our lives? This book answers these questions, and tells us about our consciousness - its drive or intention in seeking information in the world around us, and how we are able to construct new knowledge from this information. The book is divided into three parts, each with an introduction and a conclusion that relate the theories and models presented to the real-world experience of someone using a search engine. First, Part I defines the exceptionality of human consciousness and its need for new information and how, uniquely among all other species, we frame our interactions with the world. Part II then investigates the problem of finding our real information need during information searches, and how our exceptional ability to frame our interactions with the world blocks us from finding the information we really need. Lastly, Part III details the solution to this framing problem and its operational implications for search engine design for everyone whose objective is the production of new knowledge. In this book, Charles Cole deliberately writes in a conversational style for a broader readership, keeping references to research material to the bare minimum. Replicating the structure of a detective novel, he builds his arguments towards a climax at the end of the book. For our video-game, video-on-demand times, he has visualized the ideas that form the book's thesis in over 90 original diagrams. And above all, he establishes a link between information need and knowledge production in evolutionary psychology, and thus bases his arguments in our origins as a species: how we humans naturally think, and how we naturally search for new information because our consciousness drives us to need it.

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 71(2020) no.1, S.118-120 (Heidi Julien). - Vgl. auch den Beitrag: Cole, C.: A rebuttal of the book review of the book titled "The Consciousness' Drive: Information Need and the Search for Meaning": mapping cognitive and document spaces. In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.2, S.242.
Weitere Rez. unter: https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/17830/19659: "Author Charles Cole's understanding of human consciousness is built foundationally upon the work of evolutionary psychologist Merlin Donald, who visualized the development of human cognition in four phases, with three transitions. According to Donald's Theory of Mind, preceding types of cognition do not cease to exist after human cognition transitions to a new phase, but exist as four layers within the modern consciousness. Cole's narrative in the first part of the book recounts Donald's model of human cognition, categorizing episodic, mimetic, mythic, and theoretic phases of cognition. The second half of the book sets up a particular situation of consciousness using the frame theory of Marvin Minsky, uses Meno's paradox (how can we come to know that which we don't already know?) in a critique of framing as Minsky conceived it, and presents group and national level framing and shows their inherent danger in allowing information avoidance and sanctioning immoral actions. Cole concludes with a solution of information need being sparked or triggered that takes the human consciousness out of a closed information loop, driving the consciousness to seek new information.

LCSH

Information Storage and Retrieval

Subject

Information Storage and Retrieval

Theme

Information

0.0014872681 = product of:
  0.0059490725 = sum of:
    0.0059490725 = weight(_text_:information in 712) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0059490725 = score(doc=712,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 712, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=712)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Theme

Information

0.0011898145 = product of:
  0.004759258 = sum of:
    0.004759258 = weight(_text_:information in 4400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004759258 = score(doc=4400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 4400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4400)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Theme

Information

8.923609E-4 = product of:
  0.0035694437 = sum of:
    0.0035694437 = weight(_text_:information in 4380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0035694437 = score(doc=4380,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.058186423 = fieldWeight in 4380, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4380)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Theme

Information

8.4132596E-4 = product of:
  0.0033653039 = sum of:
    0.0033653039 = weight(_text_:information in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0033653039 = score(doc=666,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.054858685 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Die Murmel liefert das Hauptthema des Buchs. Die Seele, das Ich, ist eine Illusion. Es ist eine »seltsame Schleife« (a strange loop), die ihrerseits von einer Unzahl von Schleifen auf einem niedrigeren Niveau erzeugt wird. So kommt es, dass der Klumpen Materie innerhalb unseres Schädels nicht nur sich selbst beobachtet, sondern sich dessen auch bewusst ist. Seltsame, genauer: selbstbezügliche Schleifen faszinieren Hofstadter seit jeher. Er sieht sie überall. Sie sind das Herzstück von Gödels berühmtem Unbeweisbarkeitssatz. Sie lauern in den »Principia Mathematica« von Russell und Whitehead, stets bereit, die Fundamente der Mathematik zu untergraben. Ihre kürzeste Form sind logische Paradoxa wie »Dieser Satz ist falsch« oder die Karte, auf deren einer Seite steht »Der Satz auf der Rückseite ist wahr« und auf der anderen »Der Satz auf der Rückseite ist falsch«. In Kapitel 21 führt er ein verstörendes Gedankenexperiment ein, das auch Thema zahlreicher Sciencefiction-Geschichten ist: Ein Mann wird, wie in »Raumschiff Enterprise«, auf einen fremden Planeten und zurück gebeamt, indem eine Maschine ihn Molekül für Molekül abscannt und die Information an den Zielort übermittelt, wo sie zur Herstellung einer exakten Kopie dieses Menschen dient. Wenn dabei das Original zerstört wird, entsteht kein philosophisches Problem. Wenn es aber erhalten bleibt - oder mit derselben Information zwei Kopien hergestellt werden -, entsteht ein Paar identischer Zwillinge mit identischen Erinnerungen. Ist der so gebeamte Mensch derselbe wie das Original oder ein anderer?

8.4132596E-4 = product of:
  0.0033653039 = sum of:
    0.0033653039 = weight(_text_:information in 4561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0033653039 = score(doc=4561,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.054858685 = fieldWeight in 4561, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4561)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

In which I introduce the ancient mind-body problem, explain why I am on a quest to use reason and empirical inquiry to solve it, acquaint you with Francis Crick, explain how he relates to this quest, make a confession, and end on a sad note -- In which I write about the wellsprings of my inner conflict between religion and reason, why I grew up wanting to be a scientist, why I wear a lapel pin of Professor Calculus, and how I acquired a second mentor late in life -- In which I explain why consciousness challenges the scientific view of the world, how consciousness can be investigated empirically with both feet firmly planted on the ground, why animals share consciousness with humans, and why self-consciousness is not as important as many people think it is -- In which you hear tales of scientist-magicians that make you look but not see, how they track the footprints of consciousness by peering into your skull, why you don't see with your eyes, and why attention and consciousness are not the same -- In which you learn from neurologists and neurosurgeons that some neurons care a great deal about celebrities, that cutting the cerebral cortex in two does not reduce consciousness by half, that color is leached from the world by the loss of a small cortical region, and that the destruction of a sugar cube-sized chunk of brain stem or thalamic tissue leaves you undead -- In which I defend two propositions that my younger self found nonsense--you are unaware of most of the things that go on in your head, and zombie agents control much of your life, even though you confidently believe that you are in charge -- In which I throw caution to the wind, bring up free will, Der ring des Nibelungen, and what physics says about determinism, explain the impoverished ability of your mind to choose, show that your will lags behind your brain's decision, and that freedom is just another word for feeling -- In which I argue that consciousness is a fundamental property of complex things, rhapsodize about integrated information theory, how it explains many puzzling facts about consciousness and provides a blueprint for building sentient machines -- In which I outline an electromagnetic gadget to measure consciousness, describe efforts to harness the power of genetic engineering to track consciousness in mice, and find myself building cortical observatories -- In which I muse about final matters considered off-limits to polite scientific discourse: to wit, the relationship between science and religion, the existence of God, whether this God can intervene in the universe, the death of my mentor, and my recent tribulations.

Footnote

Now it might seem that is a fairly well-defined scientific task: just figure out how the brain does it. In the end I think that is the right attitude to have. But our peculiar history makes it difficult to have exactly that attitude-to take consciousness as a biological phenomenon like digestion or photosynthesis, and figure out how exactly it works as a biological phenomenon. Two philosophical obstacles cast a shadow over the whole subject. The first is the tradition of God, the soul, and immortality. Consciousness is not a part of the ordinary biological world of digestion and photosynthesis: it is part of a spiritual world. It is sometimes thought to be a property of the soul and the soul is definitely not a part of the physical world. The other tradition, almost as misleading, is a certain conception of Science with a capital "S." Science is said to be "reductionist" and "materialist," and so construed there is no room for consciousness in Science. If it really exists, consciousness must really be something else. It must be reducible to something else, such as neuron firings, computer programs running in the brain, or dispositions to behavior. There are also a number of purely technical difficulties to neurobiological research. The brain is an extremely complicated mechanism with about a hundred billion neurons in ... (Rest nicht frei). " [https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2013/01/10/can-information-theory-explain-consciousness/].

7.4363407E-4 = product of:
  0.0029745363 = sum of:
    0.0029745363 = weight(_text_:information in 4559) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0029745363 = score(doc=4559,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.048488684 = fieldWeight in 4559, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4559)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Spektrum der Wissenschaft 2006, H.6, S.101-102 (M. Springer): "Wir erforschen den Kosmos, um zu erfahren, woher wir kommen, und die Welt der Elementarteilchen, weil wir erkennen wollen, woraus wir letztlich bestehen. Nun wenden wir uns mit dem in Jahrhunderten gewonnenen Wissen dem nächstliegenden Forschungsobjekt zu: dem eigenen Gehirn. Das ist ein Schwindel erregendes Unternehmen, denn dabei beugt sich gewissermaßen das Gehirn wissbegierig über sich selbst. Geht das? Kann eine ursprünglich zur Analyse der unbelebten, bewusstlosen Natur entwickelte Methode jemals erklären, wie unser Gehirn Bewusstsein produziert? Muss nicht zwischen physikalisch-chemischen Hirnvorgängen und unserem sinnlichen Erleben von Farben, Schmerzen und Emotionen die notorische »Erklärungslücke« der Bewusstseinsforschung klaffen? Es kommt auf den Versuch an. Wer wissen will, was die Naturwissenschaft - konkret die Neurobiologie - bisher über die materielle Basis unseres bewussten Erlebens herausgebracht hat, sollte dieses Buch lesen. Christof Koch sucht empirisch nach den »neuronalen Korrelaten des Bewusstseins« (neuronal correlates of consciousness, NCCs) - dem kleinsten Satz neuronaler Ereignisse, der für eine bestimmte bewusste Wahrnehmung hinreichend ist. Gewiss vermag unser Gehirn noch viel mehr, als bloß Sinneserlebnisse zu vermitteln: Wir können sprechen, Erlebnisse reflektieren, zählen, logisch denken und so weiter. Das vergleichsweise bescheidene Projekt, NCCs für bewusste visuelle Wahrnehmung zu suchen, hat Koch gemeinsam mit Francis Crick, dem Mitentdecker des genetischen Codes, bis zu dessen Tod 2004 verfolgt, weil die beiden darin den einfachsten Zugang zum Rätsel des Bewusstseins sahen. Damit wiederholte Crick eine Vorgehensweise, mit der er schon 1953 erfolgreich war: zur Erforschung des bislang Unvorstellbaren zunächst ein möglichst einfaches Beispiel zu studieren. Bevor Crick zusammen mit James Watson die Struktur der DNA aufdeckte, konnten die Biologen sich nicht vorstellen, wie ein einzelnes Molekül die Information über den Aufbau eines lebenden Organismus enthalten sollte. Analog hofften später Crick und Koch, aus der Struktur der Neuronen und ihren Wechselwirkungen auf die physische Grundlage des Bewusstseins schließen zu können.