Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Work smarter, not harder: A Hasidic Parable by MC Complete

A long time ago, in a village far, far away, there were two brothers, Reuven and Shimon.  Reuven and Shimon were very different in many ways.  Reuven was always tired and sleep deprived; Shimon always got plenty of rest.  Reuven was always busy, worried and stressed out; Shimon always took it easy.  But there was one thing the brothers had in common: they both learned a lot of Torah.

After 120 years, the brothers went to shamayim.  When they got to Gan Eden, Reuven was rewarded with a beautiful plot of land with flowers, fruit trees, a Shas, a Rambam, a Shulchan Aruch, and the Ran on Nedarim.  However, Shimon was rewarded with a huge plot of land, with trees, flowers, birds, a waterfall, and a library full of Rishonim, Achronim, and Poskim, and wireless.

When Shimon saw this, he was very upset.  He want to Hashem and said, “Hashem, I don’t understand.  My borther worked so hard all his life.  He was sleep deprived, stressed out, and worried, and yet he always found time to learn Torah.  And how he learned Torah!  He would not turn the page until he understood every word of the Gemara.  I know that sometimes he would struggle with passages in the Gemara, so much so that sometimes he would not be able to sleep.”

“Hashem, You know that I did not learn Torah like that.  I never had the kochos hanefesh that my brother had.  If I didn’t understand something, I would read some mefarshim, think about it for a few minutes, maybe discuss it with my brother, and then, if I wasn’t getting anywhere, I would move on and forget about it.”

“There must be some mistake!  I got the portion of Gan Eden that was clearly intended for my brother.”

“Do not worry about your brother, “ said Hashem.  “He got the a beautiful portion in Gan Eden.  But you got the portion that was intended for you.”

“When I learn Torah,” Hashem said, “do you think I’m tired, stressed out, and worried?  Of course not.  For Me, learning Torah is easy.  Your brother learned Torah the way a man learns Torah, but you learned the way that I learn.  You fulfilled the words of My Torah: in the image of God was Man created.”

“Effort and willpower is an aspect of the body, but wisdom is an aspect of the soul.”

This life is a constant struggle between the Yetzer Tov and the Yetzer Hara.  The Yetzer Tov is like a tiny nation state surrounded on all sides by large enemy nations.  The Yetzer Tov has no hope of overpowering the Yetzer Hara.  The only hope of the Yetzer Tov is to have better weapons and better battle plans.

And lots and lots of siyata dishmaya.

The king and the general: A Hasidic Parable by MC Complete

A long time ago, in a kingdom far, far away, lived a king and a general.  One day, an enemy kingdom invaded with a large army.  The king asked his general to lead the king’s army and repel the invasion.  With great ingenuity and bravery, the general repelled the invasion.

The king was very happy.  The next day, a messenger arrived at the general’s house with a beautiful white horse.

“The king has decided to honor you for your bravery,” said the messenger.  “He sent you this horse as a token of appreciation.”

“I’m sorry,” said the general.  “But I cannot accept this horse.  Please return it to the king.”

The messenger was shocked.  “Why not?” he asked.

“Because I am confident that if I wait for a few years, the king will send me a horse *and* a chariot,” replied the general.

What could he do?  The messenger returned to the king and reported to him the bizarre words of the general.

The king was furious.  “How dare the general refuse my gift?” he asked.

A few years passed.  Again, the foreign army invaded.  Again, the general repelled the invasion.  But this time, the king did not send a gift to the general.  “If my gifts are not good enough for the general, why should I bother sending them?” the king asked.

The king, of course, is Hashem.  The general is us.  Sometimes Hashem sends us physical pleasures as a reward for our mitzvos.  Sometimes we accept them with love; but sometimes we refuse them, thinking that eschewing the pleasures of this world will make us frummer.  Sometimes we even think that enjoying the pleasures of this world will dilute our reward in The Next World, as if zechuyos are stock options that may be exercised at a time of our choosing.

Is the mind a computer?

Is the mind a machine?  Daniel Dennet seems to think so.

The brain is an organ.  Organs are organic machines, components in a composite machine (the composite machine is the animal itself).  Probably, one can also analyze the brain, and see how the brain is also a composite machine, composed of smaller machines.  Maybe the mind is simply one of the smaller machines that compose the brain.

Is the mind a computer?  Dennet calls the mind a “virtual machine”.  The term “virtual machine” can mean different things in technical contexts.  The JVM (Java Virtual Machine) and a VMWare (VM here stands for “virtual machine”) image are two very different things.  Mostly what Dennet is trying to say by using this term is that the mind is software as opposed to hardware.  This distinction is very important to Dennet, and he uses it to make some interesting points, but I find it problematic and sometimes distracting.  So for the moment I want to ignore the hardware/software distinction.

Computers, unlike many other machines, deal with data.  A computer stores data in memory (and on disk, and in registers, but let’s ignore these distinctions for the moment).   The contents of memory change over time.  This gives rise to a distinction that I do not want to ignore: the distinction between data and behavior.  A computer does things, but computer memory doesn’t do anything.  The computer’s CPU does things.  The memory is there for the CPU to play with.

The CPU can do things, but without the memory, it doesn’t know what to do!  It looks to the memory for instructions on what to do next.  This adds complexity, so some computers or computer programs segment the memory into the part that contains instructions and the part that contains non-instructions, or data.

If we model the mind as a computer, consciousness should be modeled as the data memory of the computer.  A mind can be conscious of different kinds of things.  The simplest contents of consciousness may be sensory perception, but certainly includes other things, like emotions, thoughts, etc.

I sometimes like to use JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) as a semi-formal, or pseudocode, way of visualizing the contents of data memory.  Here is a pseudocode model of a conscious state:

{
 visualField: ‘Some bitmap with a computer screen’,
 desires: [
‘Solve the mind-body problem’,
‘Publish a philosophical paper’,
 ],
 volition: ‘typing’,
 beliefs: [
‘The mind is a computer’,
‘God exists’
 ]
}

At any other point in time, the memory of this mind probably has contents that are different to some extent or another, for instance:

{
 visualField: ‘Israeli salad’,
 desires: [
‘Solve the mind-body problem’,
‘Publish a philosophical paper’,
 ],
 volition: ‘eating’,
 beliefs: [
‘The mind is a computer’,
‘God exists’
 ]
}

This “JSON object” represents the contents of consciousness, which is the data memory of the mind.  Presumably, there is something relevant to the CPU and the instruction memory, which controls or influences the transitions between conscious states, but those mechanisms are not contents of consciousness.

Many have emphasized the “higher-order” nature of consciouness, which means that the mind can think about itself.  Some, like Hofstaedter (and my father), seem to suggest that it is this “higher-order” nature that makes consciousness what it is.  Dennet is a bit more cautious about this point, but he too finds great importance in this higher-order-ness.  Higher-order-ness can also be modeled in JSON, and I think modeling it in this way can help clarify what higher-order-ness means:

{
 visualField: ‘Bitmap with a computer screen’,
 thoughts: [
‘I see a computer in front of me’,
‘There is a computer in front of me’,
‘I think therefore I am’
 ]
}

When the mind thinks about itself, it has a very high degree of accuracy.  There is nothing logically necessary about this.  It’s just how the mind works.