|
|
Re: new tutor here
Posted:
Jul 10, 2013 11:39 PM
|
|
|
|
On Jul 10, 2013, at 4:40 PM, Joe Niederberger <niederberger@comcast.net> wrote:
> Reading a mathematical picture for information is no different in some regards from other kinds of reading (say, reading a trail that the bad guys went down.)
>
> There's the information conveyed, and the reader's ability to discern it. The picture itself though, does indeed convey absolutely specific information if you are up to the task of seeing it.
Would reading a chess board then also be just like other kinds of reading?
I don't understand why you think these things are that mechanical. I have worked with a lot of people and almost all of them read very well, and I am sure the others read very well in their native language, until, it's not a question of reading. Then the difference in this "sense" really shows up.
Btw, on my way home today, all of this talk of rat-sense got me thinking...
Given that there have been billions of non human primates over millions and millions of years of evolution and given that cognitive ability in this large non human population would fall in a distribution, then it is reasonable to assume that there would be many extraordinary examples of non human primates. Now, if we assume that there is even just a glimmer of a connection between numerosity (rat-sense) and mathematical formulation then it would seem very likely that within this distribution of billions of apes with millions of years of evolution on their side that some of them at least would be quite extraordinary. How extraordinary? I think enough such that if rat-sense begets human-sense just a little bit, then I would expect some cases of humans somewhere saying "Take your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape!"
Regardless of what theory you believe I still think it is remarkable that this difference between us and them is so absolute and so resolute. It just goes to show you what a difference 3% in DNA makes. Although, you could compare a small airplane and an automobile and find that they too are only 3% different at a materials level. Yet, one flies through the air and the other can only roll around on the ground.
I see three layers of evolution here. That of the chimpanzee. That of the human. And that of the reasonable human. The chimpanzee layer is so done (evolved) that it will probably not change significantly at any point in the future, barring of course some alien intervention. Yes, unfortunately that means that we will never experience a human telling an ape to get their stinking paws off of them. The human layer (language, motor skills, emotions, etc) is mostly done, but not entirely blended. The reasonable human layer though seems to have a lot of blending left to do.
Bob Hansen
|
|
