1 / 30

The Nature of The Artificial

IV International Conference: The Culture of The Artificial. Urbino, Italy, 25-27 May 2001. The Nature of The Artificial. Augmenting Negrottian Artificiality with Heideggerian-Whiteheadian Naturality. Syed Mustafa Ali, Ph.D. The Meaning(s) of Nature. nature 1

henryh
Télécharger la présentation

The Nature of The Artificial

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IV International Conference: The Culture of The Artificial. Urbino, Italy, 25-27 May 2001. The Nature of The Artificial Augmenting Negrottian Artificiality with Heideggerian-Whiteheadian Naturality Syed Mustafa Ali, Ph.D

  2. The Meaning(s) of Nature • nature1 • “the collective term for all that exists apart from the artificial” • NATURE AS “OTHER” TO THE ARTIFICIAL • nature2 • “all that exists in the evolving universe of space and time” • NATURE AS EXISTENTIAL TOTALITY • nature3 • that which is expressed “all other things being equal, when it develops according to its kind without outside interference.” • NATURE AS ESSENCE EXISTENTIAL CONTINUUM Ferré, F. (1988) Philosophy of Technology. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall.

  3. THE ARTIFICIAL NATURE TECHNOLOGY Mimetic Nature3 of The Artificial

  4. The Theory of The Artificial (I) • Definition: The Artificial • An object or machine that reproduces by means of different materials and procedures the essential performance of a natural object taken as an exemplar based on a more or less shared representation at a particular observation level. Negrotti, M. (1999) The Theory of The Artificial. Exeter, Intellect. Negrotti, M. (1999) From The Artificial to the Art: A Short Introduction to a Theory and Its Applications. Leonardo 32 (3), 183-189.

  5. The Theory of The Artificial (II) observation level representation exemplar essential performance nature1 nature3 conventional technology nature2 ? artificial

  6. Evaluation of The Theory • Merits • Self-evident simplicity of conceptual foundations • Possible overall correctness • Drawbacks • Problematic metaphysical assumptions about the nature3 (as essence) of nature1 (as “other” to the artificial)

  7. Dreyfus vs. Christiansen on Heidegger and Representationalism NB: Performative, Behavioural, Observational, Phenomenological The Philosophy of The Artificial • Realism • A human-independent reality exists • Representationalism • Human interactions with phenomena are mediated by mental representations • Essentialism • The essence (or what-ness) of a phenomenon is definable in terms of a finite set of necessary and sufficient features that it must possess

  8. Negrottian Realism (I) • Accessible and Inaccessible Reality • “The objects that we perceive from the observation levels that we assume in each unit of time and space are not ‘pieces’ or partial spheres of reality: rather, they are the verifiable reality that we can grasp from those selected levels.” (p.13) • Finite Access to Reality • “There is no reason to think that, having to deal with a finite, limited and filtering sensory power, reality should disappear from our horizon.” (p.13) OBJECTIVE RELATIVISM (OR)

  9. Negrottian Realism (II) • Accessible Reality as Infinite • “The observational levels of concrete reality - both of the natural and of the artificial reality - and their interplays have to be considered as infinite.” (pp.36-37) • Inaccessible Reality as Infinite • “Reality includes, that is to say, it has in itself, all the features observable by all the species, along with infinite others which cannot be observed by any species and which are sometimes revealed through investigations using scientific instruments.” (p.14) HIERARCHICAL INFINITISM

  10. TRANSCENDENTAL REALISM(TR) Reality In-Itself is independent of any possible knowledge of it (Kant) EMPIRICAL REALISM(ER) Reality In-Itself is independent of any actual encounter with it (Heidegger) OR: TR or ER ?

  11. Accessible Reality Appearance TR OR Inaccessible Reality Reality Negrottian Realism (III) • Reality In-Itself as Inaccessible • “… it does not matter what the world is in itself, since the only ways we have at our disposal to describe the world are our representations of it.” (p.15) TRANSCENDENTAL REALISM (TR)

  12. The Problem of Consciousness “Where appearance is concerned we cannot make the appearance-reality distinction because the appearance is the reality.” (p.122) Searle, J.R. (1992) The Rediscovery of The Mind. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Consciousness provides at least one example of reality accessible as it is In-Itself.

  13. Pylkkö’s Critique of Dreyfus From TR to ER • Heideggerian Empirical Realism • Hermeneutic (access-oriented) • Pluralistic (multiply-moded) Dreyfus, H.L (1991) Being-In-The-World. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press. • Robust (supports scientific-naturalism) • Evolutionary account of consciousness • Materialistic conception of nature1 • nature1 as “absurd”, “meaningless” • nature1 as In-Itself yet not For-Itself • nature1 as non-experiential or “vacuous”

  14. ER and The “Hard” Problem The “Hard” Problem of Consciousness Explaining how ontological subjectivity (or first-person experience) can arise in (or from) an ontologically-objective (or non-experiential) substrate. Chalmers, D.J. (1996) The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. OUP Heideggerian ER cannot solve it.

  15. Post-Heideggerian ER • What we know • Some form of ER is correct • Proof: In-Itself reality of consciousness • Heideggerian ER is incorrect • Proof: Failure to solve The “Hard” Problem • Cause: Non-experiential ontology of nature1 • What we must do Reconsider the nature3 of nature1

  16. Rethinking Nature1: A Sketch WHITEHEADIAN PANEXPERIENTIALISM A process-atomism in which the fundamental units of nature1 are dipolar physical-mental events (actual occasions), relationally-constituted via a process of actualisation (concrescence) involving mental selection of physical feelings (prehensions) of actualised events (objects) by actualising events (subject-superjects).

  17. TIME Concrescence: Subject Phase OTHER- CAUSATION PHYSICAL PREHENSIONS SUBJECT1 SUBJECT2

  18. TIME Concrescence: Superject Phase SELF- CAUSATION MENTAL SELECTIONS SUPERJECT1 SUPERJECT2

  19. Types of Prehension (Feeling) • Physical • objects of prehension are concreteactualities (prior actual occasions) • pure • actualities prehended in terms of their physical pole • hybrid • actualities prehended in terms of their mental pole • Conceptual • objects of prehension are abstractpotentialities (eternal objects)

  20. ARTIFICIALS NATURALS Aggregates and Individuals • Collections (or complexes) of actual occasions form societies or nexus • Societies can be distinguished into two kinds on the basis of internal structure • Aggregates • non-experiential, non-creative • Compound Individuals • experiential, creative (regnant monad)

  21. Post-Mimetic Artificiality ? • Conventional panexperientialism does not provide any criteria other than the mimetic (behavioural) by which to distinguish aggregates from individuals • Problem Case 1 • Pseudo-non-experience (Guillain-Barré syndrome) • (Searle 1992) • Problem Case 2 • Pseudo-experience (Chinese Room, Zombies) • (Searle 1980) (Chalmers 1996)

  22. ARTIFACTUALS NATURALS The Poietic Difference (Ali 1999) The being or existence) of an actual entity is its becoming or process (Whitehead) Being and becoming are the same in the sense that they belong together in essential, unitary relation (Heidegger) A difference in becoming entails a difference in being ?

  23. Artificing as “rupture” of (and “irruption” into) the causation of the natural (Ladrière) PRODUCT Fi SUBSTANCE PRODUCTANT M M, E, Fo, Fi SUBSTANCE E, Fo SUBSTRATUM SUBSTANCE Techne (Allopoiesis) [Other-Production] Physis (Autopoiesis) [Self-Production] Phenomenology of Artificing NATURALS Aristotelian Framework ARTIFACTUALS

  24. Panexperientialist Conception • Contraction of the field of incoming prehensions to a concrescing occasion occurs in two ways: (Ferre 1996a) • forcing discordant elements on subjectivity • negating elements of potential richness (pure physical feeling) • En-forcing – or En-Framing (Heidegger 1977) – is an intrinsically temporal process involving effective purposesustained over time by constant renewal and refreshment (Ferre 1996b) • En-Framing involves canalization and intensification of originality through hybrid prehension (Sherburne 1966) Artificing as Canalization (En-Framing)

  25. Artificing as “rupture” of (and “irruption” into) the causation of the natural (Ladrière) PROCESS PRODUCT P M P M Fi M, E M Fi Fo PRODUCTANT SUBSTRATUM PROCESS TIME P M P M P M P M PROCESS Fo E PRODUCTANT PROCESS P M P M Process Model of Artificing Whiteheadian Framework NATURALS ARTIFACTUALS

  26. Negrotti on Replication (I) • According to Negrotti, • “We can define A as a replication (in empirical terms and not logical) of B if A is the result of a reproduction of B at all its observation levels by using the same materials and, more importantly, by drawing upon all its performances, without making any selection of essential performances.” (p.75)

  27. Technological Systems Closed Completely Formal Finitely-describable at single observation level Therefore, replicable Natural Systems Open Partially Non-Formal Infinitely-describable at infinite levels So, non-replicable Negrotti on Replication (II) • Assumption of Hierarchical Infinitism • However, is the number of levels infinite?

  28. Whitehead on Replication • Although nature1 is hierarchically infinite, all naturals (except God) are finite • Non-replicability of naturals follows from their openness which follows from ... • … self-creativity (final causation) • Self-creativity more pronounced in higher compound individuals

  29. Necessity and Sufficiency (I) • Replication is only possible in 3 cases: • “When we know all the steps and all the components needed to reproduce something, for example, in the case of mass production; • When we are able to act as combiners of natural elements which, when they are combined, are necessary and sufficient for producing a complete system, as, for example, in the case of artificial insemination; • When the reality to be reproduced is composed or is describable from only one possible level of observation: this is clearly possible only for a reality man has himself created in purely formal or informational terms, as, for example, in the case of replicating a computer program.” (p.78)

  30. SUFFICIENCY Necessity and Sufficiency (II) • On a panexperientialist conception of nature1, need to distinguish between • preparatory (or subjective) necessity • efficient causation (physical and conceptual feelings) from prior actual occasions • can be established by the artificer • consummatory (or superjective) necessity • final causation (self-creation) of actual occasion • cannot be established by the artificer Even in phenomena such as artificial insemination, artifactual combination must work in conjunction with natural combination

More Related