RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona...
-
Upload
gilbert-hodgkiss -
Category
Documents
-
view
227 -
download
7
Transcript of RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona...
![Page 1: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW
Dr. Leonid PerlovskyHarvard University and AFRL
Arizona State University
14 Oct., 2008
![Page 2: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
OUTLINE
• Science and religion today
• Artificial intelligence difficulties since the 1950s and logic
• Dynamic logic, the mind, and the knowledge instinct
• Higher cognitive functions
• Beautiful (scientific explanation)
• Sublime (scientific explanation)
• GOD (scientific explanation)
![Page 3: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
SCIENCE AND RELIGION
Can scientific and religious views be reconciled?
Many scientists wrote that scientific discoveries in physics, molecular biology, evolution, and cosmology do not contradict the main tenets of the world’s religions
Einstein:– “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced
that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe.”
Jung:– Schism between science and religion points to a psychosis of contemporary
collective psyche, – survival of culture demands repairing this schism
![Page 4: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
CURRENT UNDERSTANDING
There is no scientific theory, explaining religion
From a review (in my words):– I hoped that your book will help me to enter my classroom
without leaving my religious beliefs at the doorstep. I hoped that I’ll be able to enter my church without leaving at the doorstep my intellectual integrity. I hoped for too much.
I attempt to outline directions to unifying science and religion
– Not any specific religion
– Scientific foundations for emotions of religiously sublime
![Page 5: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
DIFFICULTIES OF AI SINCE the1950s
Cognition involves evaluating large numbers of combinations– Pixels -> objects -> scenes
Combinations of 100 elements are 100100
– This number is larger than the size of the Universe • > all the events in the Universe during its entire life
Combinatorial Complexity (CC) – A general problem (since the 1950s)
•AI, recognition, language…•Statistical, neural networks, rule systems…
![Page 6: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
CC vs. LOGIC
CC is related to formal logic– Gödel proved that logic is “illogical,” “inconsistent” (1930s)
– CC is Gödel's “incompleteness” in a finite system
Logic pervades all algorithms– rule systems, fuzzy systems (degree of fuzziness), pattern recognition, neural networks (training uses logic)
![Page 7: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
DYNAMIC LOGIC
Dynamic Logic: “from vague to crisp”– initial vague concepts (thoughts, decisions,
plans) dynamically evolve into crisp concepts (formal-logic)
Overcomes CC
Experimentally proved recently in brain neuro-imaging - The brain works “from vague to crisp”- Vague are also less conscious
![Page 8: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
OUTLINE
• Science and religion today
• Artificial intelligence difficulties since the 1950s and logic
• Dynamic logic, the mind, and the knowledge instinct
• Higher cognitive functions
• Beautiful (scientific explanation)
• Sublime (scientific explanation)
• GOD (scientific explanation)
![Page 9: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
STRUCTURE OF THE MIND
Concepts – Models of objects, their relations, and situations– Evolved to satisfy instincts
Instincts– Internal sensors (e.g. sugar level in blood)
Emotions– Neural signals connecting instincts and concepts
• e.g. a hungry person sees food all around
Behavior– Models of goals (desires) and muscle-movement…
Hierarchy– Concept-models and behavior-models are organized in a “loose”
hierarchy
![Page 10: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
THE KNOWLEDGE INSTINCT
Model-concepts always have to be adapted– lighting, surrounding, new objects and situations
– even when there is no concrete “bodily” needs
Instinct for knowledge and understanding– Increase similarity between models and the world
Emotions related to the knowledge instinct– Satisfaction or dissatisfaction
• change in similarity between models and world
– Related not to bodily instincts• harmony or disharmony (knowledge-world): aesthetic emotion
![Page 11: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
CAUSALITY VS. TELEOLOGY
The knowledge instinct is a teleological principle– The mind and human evolution has a purpose: increase of
knowledge– Evolution is moved by a “final cause”
The knowledge instinct is mathematically equivalent to dynamic logic– Teleology = causal dynamics
Scientific causality = Intelligent design
Basic physical laws at the elementary level are the same
– Hamiltonian dynamics = minimization of Lagrangian (energy minimization)– But for complex systems KI is a revolutionary change
- Law of Entropy: evolution toward chaos (thermal death)- Law of the KI: evolution toward knowledge
![Page 12: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
OUTLINE
• Science and religion today
• Artificial intelligence difficulties since the 1950s and logic
• Dynamic logic, the mind, and the knowledge instinct- Engineering applications
• Higher cognitive functions
• Beautiful (scientific explanation)
• Sublime (scientific explanation)
• GOD (scientific explanation)
![Page 13: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
APPLICATIONS
Many applications
Signals processing and object recognition
Financial market predictions– Market crash on 9/11 predicted a week ahead
Internet search engines– Based on text understanding
Semantic Web
![Page 14: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Three objects in noise object 1 object 2 object 3 SCR - 0.70 dB -1.98 dB -0.73 dB
PERCEPTION:PATTERNS BELOW NOISE
y y
x x
3 Object Image + Clutter3 Object Image
![Page 15: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
IMAGE PATTERNS BELOW NOISE
x
yDL starts with uncertain knowledge, and similar to human mind converges rapidly on
exact solution
![Page 16: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
a b c d
fe hg
IMAGE PATTERNS BELOW NOISE
3 objects, 10,000 data points, signal-to-noise, S/N ~ 0.5Complexity: Logical~MN ~105000; DL ~ 106, Improvement in S/N about 100 times
![Page 17: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
OUTLINE
• Science and religion today
• Artificial intelligence difficulties since the 1950s and logic
• Dynamic logic, the mind, and the knowledge instinct
• Higher cognitive functions
• Beautiful (scientific explanation)
• Sublime (scientific explanation)
• GOD (scientific explanation)
![Page 18: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
HIGHER COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS
Abstract concept-models are at higher levels of the hierarchy– Higher level concepts are general, vague, less conscious
– Higher levels unify lower-level knowledge
– Purpose of higher-level concepts: make meanings of lower-level knowledge
Similarity measures
Models
Action/Adaptation
Models
Action/AdaptationSimilarity measures
objects
situations
meanings
![Page 19: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
BEAUTY
The highest aesthetic emotion, beautiful – improvement of the highest models (at the top of the
hierarchy)– feel emotion of beautiful
Beautiful “reminds” us of our purposiveness– the “top” model unifies all our knowledge – vague, rarely consciously perceived– we perceive it as our life’s purpose (Kant: “aimless
purposiveness”)– what makes us different from a piece of rock?
Beauty is separate from sex – sex uses all our abilities, including beauty
![Page 20: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
RELIGIOUSLY SUBLIME
Beautiful – Emotion related to improvement of the highest concept-
model of understanding of our meaning and purpose
Sublime– Emotion related to improvement of the highest concept-
model of behavior toward making our lives meaningful and purposeful
– Can we do this? When we feel we can, we feel emotion of sublime.
Ten commandments?– Maimonides (12th century): God demands from us thinking
on our own, but we are incapable, therefore, he gave us ten commandments
![Page 21: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
GOD FROM PURELY SCIENTIFIC VIEW
The highest concept(s) in our mind– Vague, not differentiated, not separated from emotions, not
conscious– They do not belong to our conscious psyche (“I”)– We do not “owe” them
They direct our lives– They “owe” us– We perceive them as active source of will outside of our
selves– Agents with will and purpose
This is what traditionally is called GOD– C. Jung warned against “psychologizing” unconscious– Science tread on incomputable, infinite, unconscious,
mysterious
![Page 22: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
FUTURE DIRECTIONSresearch, predictions and testing of NMF/DL
• Brain neuroimaging– Cognitive and emotional hierarchy – Higher concepts and emotions – Conscious vs. unconscious
• History of cultures, historical linguistics, and psycholinguistics– Correlate evolution of religions, languages, consciousness, and cultures– Measure emotionality of various languages in labs and correlated with religious and cultural evolution
• Mathematical development– Joint evolution of language and cognition– DL in the hierarchy, evolution of the higher models– Emotionality in computer models of evolution of languages and cultures
• Music– Direct effect on emotions– Concurrent evolution of music, consciousness, religions, and cultures
• Improve human condition around the globe– Develop predictive cultural models, integrate spiritual and material causes– Identify language and music effects that can advance consciousness, reduce religious intolerance, and
tensions – Diagnose cultural states (up, down, stagnation), measure Differentiation, Synthesis, Hierarchy
22
![Page 23: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
BACKUP
Combinatorial Complexity since the 1950s
Aristotle vs. Gödel
Language, cognition, and cultures
Role of music in evolution of cognition and cultures
Predictions and testing
16-Sep-05 23
![Page 24: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
CC was encountered for over 50 years
Statistical pattern recognition and neural networks: CC of learning requirements
Rule systems and AI, in the presence of variability : CC of rules
– Minsky 1960s: Artificial Intelligence– Chomsky 1957: language mechanisms are rule systems
Model-based systems, with adaptive models: CC of computations
– Chomsky 1981: language mechanisms are model-based (rules and parameters)
Current ontologies, “semantic web” are rule-systems– Evolvable ontologies : present challenge
COMBINATORIAL COMPLEXITY SINCE the 1950s
![Page 25: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
ARISTOTLE VS. GÖDEL logic, forms, and language
Aristotle– Logic: a supreme way of argument– Forms: representations in the mind
Form-as-potentiality evolves into form-as-actuality Potentialities are illogical, actualities are logical (Dynamic
Logic)– Language and thinking are closely linked
From Boole to Russell: formalization of logic– Logicians eliminated from logic uncertainty of language– Hilbert: formalize rules of mathematical proofs forever
Gödel (the 1930s) – Logic is not consistent
Aristotle and Alexander the Great
![Page 26: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
LANGUAGE vs. COGNITION
• “Nativists”, - since the 1950s- Language is a separate mind mechanism (Chomsky)- Pinker: language instinct
• “Cognitivists”, - since the 1970s- Language jointly with cognition- Talmy, Elman, Tomasello…
• “Evolutionists”, - since the 1980s- Language transmission between generations- Hurford, Kirby, Cangelosi…
• NMF / DL was extended to language ~ 2000
• Co-evolution of language and cognition
![Page 27: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
INTEGRATEDLANGUAGE AND COGNITION
Where language and cognition come together?– A fuzzy concept m has linguistic and cognitive-sensory models
• Mm = { Mmcognitive,Mm
language };
– Language and cognition are fused at fuzzy pre-conceptual level• before concepts are learned
Language and cognition – Initial models are vague fuzzy blobs
– Language models have empty “slots” for cognitive model (objects and situations)
– Language participates in cognition and v.v.
L & C help learning and understanding each other – Help associating signals, words, models, and behavior
![Page 28: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
SYMBOLIC ABILITY
Integrated hierarchies of Cognition and Language– High level cognition is only possible due to language
Similarity Action
ActionSimilarity
Similarity Action
ActionSimilarity
cognition language
M
M M
M
grounded in real-world objects
grounded in language
grounded in language
![Page 29: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
EVOLUTION OF CULTURES
• The knowledge instinct–Two mechanisms: differentiation and synthesis
• Differentiation –At every level of the hierarchy: more detailed concepts–Separate concepts from emotions
• Synthesis –Connect knowledge to life–Connect concepts and emotions
Connect language and cognitionConnect high and low: concepts acquire meaning at the next level
16-Sep-05 29
![Page 30: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
EMOTIONS IN LANGUAGE
• Animal vocal tract–controlled by old (limbic) emotional system–involuntary
• Human vocal tract–controlled by two emotional centers: limbic and cortex–Involuntary and voluntary
• Human voice determines emotional content of cultures–Emotionality of language is in its sound: melody of speech
16-Sep-05 30
![Page 31: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
LANGUAGEEMOTIONS AND CUTURES
• Conceptual content of culture: words, phrases–Easily borrowed among cultures
• Emotional content of culture–In voice sound (melody of speech)–Determined by grammar–Cannot be borrowed among cultures
• English language (Diff. > Synthesis)–Weak connection between conceptual and emotional (since 15 c)–Pragmatic, high culture, but may lead to identity crisis
• Arabic language (Synthesis > Diff.)–Strong connection between conceptual and emotional–Cultural immobility, but strong feel of identity (synthesis)
16-Sep-05 31
![Page 32: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
MODELS OF CULTURAL EVOLUTION
Differentiation, D, synthesis, S, hierarchy, H
dD/dt = a D G(S); G(S) = (S - S0) exp(-(S-S0) / S1)
dS/dt = -bD + dH
H = H0 + e*t
![Page 33: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
DYNAMIC CULTURE
Average synthesis, high differentiation; oscillating solutionKnowledge accumulates; no stability
![Page 34: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
TRADITIONAL CULTURE
High synthesis, low differentiation; stable solutionStagnation, stability increases
![Page 35: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
INTERACTING CULTURES
Two cultures– dynamic and traditional
– slow exchange by D and S
dDk/dt = ak Dk G(Sk) + xkDk
dSk/dt = -bkDk + dkHk + ykSk
Hk = H0k + ek*t
![Page 36: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
INTERACTING CULTURES
Knowledge accumulation + stability
1) Early: Dynamic culture affects traditional culture, no reciprocity2) Later: 2 dynamic cultures stabilize each other
![Page 37: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
PUBLICATIONS
300 publications3 books
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS(2001; 3rd printing)
2007:
Neurodynamics of High Cognitive Functionswith Prof. Kozma, Springer
Sapient Systemswith Prof. Mayorga, Springer
2008:The Knowledge InstinctBasic Books
![Page 38: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
ROLE OF MUSIC IN EVOLUTION OF THE MIND
Melody of human voice contains vital information– About people’s world views and mutual compatibility – Exploits mechanical properties of human inner ear
• Consonances and dissonances
Tonal system evolved (14th to 19th c.) for – Differentiation of emotions– Synthesis of conceptual and emotional– Bach integrates personal concerns with “the highest”
Pop-song is a mechanism of synthesis– Integrates conceptual (lyric) and emotional (melody)– Also, differentiates emotions– Bach concerns are too complex for many everyday needs– Human consciousness requires synthesis immediately
Rap is a simplified, but powerful mechanism of synthesis– Exactly like ancient Greek dithyrambs of Dionysian cult
![Page 39: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
SCIENCE VS. RELIGION
• Science causal mechanisms
• Religion teleology (purpose)
• Wrong! –In basic physics causality and teleology are equivalent–The principle of minimal energy is teleological–More general, min. Lagrangian
• The knowledge instinct –Teleological principle in evolution of the mind and culture –Dynamic logic is a causal law equivalent to the KI–Causality and teleology are equivalent
16-Sep-05 39
![Page 40: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
PREDICTIONS AND TESTING of NMF/DL theory of the mind
Experimental testing– Neural, psychological, and psycholinguistic labs– Simulation of multi-agent evolving systems
Instinctual learning mechanisms
Ongoing and future research: – similarity measure as a foundation of knowledge and language instincts– mechanisms of model parameterization and parameter adaptation– dynamics of fuzziness during perception/cognition/learning– mechanisms of language and cognition integration– emotionality of languages and cultures– mechanisms of differentiation and synthesis– mechanisms of cultural evolution– role of music in synthesis and in cultural evolution
![Page 41: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
NEURAL MODELING FIELDSbasic two-layer mechanism: from signals to
concepts
Bottom-up signals– Pixels or samples (from sensor or retina)
x(n), n = 1,…,N
Top-down concept-models Mm(Sm,n), parameters Sm, m = 1, …;
– Models predict expected signals from objects
![Page 42: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
THE KNOWLEDGE INSTINCT MATH.
The knowledge instinct = maximization of similarity between signals and models
Similarity between signals and models, L– L = l ({x}) = l (x(n))
– l (x(n)) = r(m) l (x(n) | Mm(Sm,n))
– l (x(n) | Mm(Sm,n)) is a conditional similarity for x(n) given m
• {n} are not independent, M(n) may depend on n’
CC: L contains MN items: all associations of pixels and models (LOGIC)
n
m
![Page 43: RELIGION FROM SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW Dr. Leonid Perlovsky Harvard University and AFRL Arizona State University 14 Oct., 2008.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062312/55181bf455034691678b46cb/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
DYNAMIC LOGIC (DL) non-combinatorial solution
Start with a set of signals and unknown object-models– any parameter values Sm
– associate object-model with its contents (signal composition)
– (1) f(m|n) = r(m) l (n|m) / r(m') l (n|m')
Improve parameter estimation– (2) Sm = Sm + f(m|n) [ln l (n|m)/Mm]*[Mm/Sm]
• ( determines speed of convergence)
– learn signal-contents of objects
Continue iterations (1)-(2). Theorem: MF is a converging system
- similarity increases on each iteration- aesthetic emotion is positive during learning
'm
n