A great idea poorly executed. This book is basically just a list of concepts and formulas to know with no derivations or explanations and accompaniedA great idea poorly executed. This book is basically just a list of concepts and formulas to know with no derivations or explanations and accompanied by unnecessarily complicated examples. It would benefit greatly from a short explanation of why the formulas make sense (doesn't need a full proof) and either a more granular working out of the examples or some explanations of what mathematical wizardry was used to get from one step to the next. I found myself using this book mostly as a list of things I needed to know which I then went to the Khan academy online for ridiculously well crafted explanations, derivations and examples.
I do think this could be a very nice review book with some additional work. As it stands now it's like a snapshot of a student's notes without explanations - they might make sense to the student, but not to anyone else. ...more
Want to feel really dumb? Enroll in a science PhD program at an elite school after having been out of academia for many years and after having spent yWant to feel really dumb? Enroll in a science PhD program at an elite school after having been out of academia for many years and after having spent your middle and high school years in a state of stultified catatonic boredom and disinterest. Sign up for a few advanced math classes during your PhD program and become painfully aware of the gaps in your knowledge that your earlier disinterest engendered.
Want to feel really smart? Go back and try to fill in those holes with a book like this. At some point along the way I realized that, despite my horrid initial exposure to algebra and more advanced mathematics, it's an absolutely beautiful discipline and is useful for much more than calculating when two trains leaving from different stations will meet if one is traveling at 30 mph and blah, blah, blah. It's so much more than that!! With proper training, one can begin to probe the deepest secrets of the universe, and uncover fascinating hidden relationships between all sorts of real-world phenomena. I've become so enamored with the subject that I decided to go back to square one and work my way back up to advanced math, filling in all the gaps in my understanding along the way and learning at my own depth and pace rather than being force-fed in the examination-focused pressure-cooker style favored by most academic settings.
This is a wonderful book for this purpose. The explanations are clear and problems elegant (if you factor consistently, all the numbers in the problems divide into one another nicely without ugly fractions). I finished wondering how I could have ever found any aspect of algebra confusing. Oh, yeah, it was passing all those notes in high-school and not giving a damn. It's never too late! Read this book! ...more
This text represents a bloated hodgepodge of factoids and neo-phrenology. The problem is that molecular detail is rich, and higher level explanationsThis text represents a bloated hodgepodge of factoids and neo-phrenology. The problem is that molecular detail is rich, and higher level explanations are vapid. There is little substantive middle ground tying the two together. Concepts and tools to bridge that gap do exist. They include network theory (just how do neurons compute logic, and how does network structure constrain flows to lead to appropriate "information processing"?), complexity concepts such as emergence and agent based modeling (which demonstrate how large scale patterns can emerge from the interactions of agents following simple local rules), philosophical theories of part/whole relations, simulations, mathematical concepts such as fractals and chaos (as they relate to iterative patterns of development and sensitivity to both small parameter changes and developmental history) and most importantly, dynamics. It's as if Walter Freeman never existed. I read this whole thing and understand little more about how the mind works than when I started. ...more
It was difficult to get past Wolfram's outsized ego, but I was finally able to do so by alternately considering it sympatheticFlawed but magnificent.
It was difficult to get past Wolfram's outsized ego, but I was finally able to do so by alternately considering it sympathetically (thinking of him as desperately seeking validation) and comically (his statements of priority and the importance of his work are so over the top it's really kind of entertaining). I also had some strong issues with Wolfram's discussion on natural selection, as well as his discussion of intelligence and life (he would have benefited from a reading of Maturana and Varela). And his principle of computational equivalence doesn't seem to recognize that something like a brain in effect channels computations toward unlikely computations that simpler but "computationally equivalent" systems do not. Despite these reservations, the book is a wonder, and seeing him deftly redefine such fundamental concepts as randomness and to effectively provide a proof of Godel's theorem in the span of a few short pages using substitution systems was to see a small miracle of human thought. His discussion regarding the limitations of current mathematics (that this field has in fact only explored a small portion of "math space") was fascinating as was his exercise in translating axiomatic systems into automata-like conceptions. Beyond specific insights and deep analysis, the sheer amount of methodological work involved in Wolfram's explorations is humbling. In short, while this book and Wolfram's vision would have benefited greatly from a restraint on his egotistical ramblings, I do think this is a very important contribution that that will likely spur creative research far into the future. ...more
On the positive side, this book represents such a broad take on the history, architecture, and functionality of the Internet that it's bound to fill iOn the positive side, this book represents such a broad take on the history, architecture, and functionality of the Internet that it's bound to fill in a hole or two in one's knowledge. On the negative side, the information it provides is at such a basic level that it's hard to imagine it being very useful to anyone who has had even minimal exposure to the online world. ...more
Thompson's essay on "Life and Mind" is worth 10 stars. In it, he clearly articulates a number of fascinating connections between cognition and the proThompson's essay on "Life and Mind" is worth 10 stars. In it, he clearly articulates a number of fascinating connections between cognition and the process of living (ala Maturana and Varela). I got more out of this essay than Thompson's 500 page book on the same topic. I didn't find the rest of Emergence and Embodiment particularly engaging or edifying....more
I can't possibly write a review to do this book justice. It's a wonder of nature. Reading it was like attending a first-rate circus, where the main shI can't possibly write a review to do this book justice. It's a wonder of nature. Reading it was like attending a first-rate circus, where the main show is entertaining enough but then one is constantly marveling at the fact that human beings are even *capable* of such feats. The breadth and depth of the author's knowledge is a wonder, and the way he manages to tie such diverse themes together - mathematics, logic, mind, art, music, literature - is, well, humbling. I feel both much smarter having read this book, and like a monkey in comparison.
GEB is so rich in content it could well serve as the basis for an entire interdisciplinary undergraduate education (the "golden braid" that would tie disparate realms together). I would have loved to have learned this way, using the book as a basecamp for daring explorations into the various fields required to fully grok the work. I could imagine GEB acting as the glue that would provide a cohesive framework for a degree in cognitive science, computer science or complex systems.
In truth, GEB requires and justifies multiple readings. I only skimmed over the puzzles and exercises, but do believe it will be worth my while to go back, reread the book in detail and work through all of the problems. There is so much here, on so many levels; it's a beautiful tangled braid of the same type that Hofstadter believes underlies the emergence of mind. ...more
The Baldwin Effect is kind of a fascinating idea - that mind can direct evolution. This notion was supposedly laid to rest with the disgrace of LamarcThe Baldwin Effect is kind of a fascinating idea - that mind can direct evolution. This notion was supposedly laid to rest with the disgrace of Lamarck, but Baldwin (and others) may have found a loophole. We all know the apocryphal interpretation of giraffe neck evolution as presented by Lamarck - by striving to reach leaves on higher branches, early giraffes supposedly stretched their necks and these changes were then passed on to their offspring. The germ/soma distinction, as well as some conclusive experiments involving cutting the tails off many a poor rat (and finding that their offspring had no shorter tails) laid that mechanism to rest.
However, consider this: at some point in the past there were antelope-like precursors to giraffes. If none of those antelope creatures had ever decided to reach for the higher leaves, natural selection would have had nothing to operate on to select for longer necks. Much like Waddington's notion of "genetic assimilation" (another very cool idea, now accepted but beyond the scope of this review), it was the behavior (read: minds) of these giraffe precursors striving for the higher leaves that exposed the genetic variation already existing to the action of natural selection, thus opening up a new channel for evolutionary development.
That's a crude example of the process and this book contains many more sophisticated and interesting treatments, but I think it illustrates the main point - behavior can "lead the way" for genetic modification to follow. We can certainly think of definitive cases where this has been the case. Domestication of plants and animals comes to mind, as well as our own "domestication" since the invention of agriculture. That's not to mention the explicitly mind-directed evolution that is resulting from our conscious use of genetic engineering.
This book provides a good introduction to the Baldwin effect, though it's quite technical and some essays are more convincing than others. As usual, Terry Deacon's star shines and his two contributions are the best in the collection. Read anything by him for a methamphetamine jolt of cerebral wonder. ...more
This is DeLanda deciphering Deleuze and the result is almost intelligible, certainly more so than Deleuze's primary texts. The essay on materialist meThis is DeLanda deciphering Deleuze and the result is almost intelligible, certainly more so than Deleuze's primary texts. The essay on materialist metaphysics and the one on intensive and extensive cartography were especially brain twisting. According to Delanda/Deleuze, reified generalities and Platonic essences are not real - reality is immanent in materiality. But then are possibilities real things? They are if they are latently possible in material things but just not currently "actuated" (This is quite different than Many Worlds type interpretations where any damn thing we can think as a possibility must be real somewhere). On a related note, are only solutions real (as per axioms and all their deductive theorems) or do the problems themselves that we try to axiomatize count as real things as well?