Quote:
Originally Posted by Rade
Yes, your comments make sense, but the question is, are they an accurate representation of the relationship of the Mind and Map to the Territory ? It would appear that Korzybski places the Mind within the Map, I take the opposite view. I hold the Map to be within the Mind. My reason is because Korzybski gives a very specific and limited function to the Map--e.g., to form a 'replica of the Territory'......
|
Okay, I have done a little research -- not much because I only have one book by Korzybski anymore. I will give you the point. Certainly it is correct to say that the Map is in the Mind. To an extent.
Here is where it gets tricky. The very concept of 'inside / outside' takes a beating here.
Let's start by defining "Mind". Korzybski did not consider ALL brain electrical activity to be part of the "Mind", as we generally do. His analogy was a pile of bricks. A pile of bricks is NOT a "house" unless the bricks are ordered in a certain way. Cows have brain activity and can even learn, but he insists they do not have Minds. Therefore, much of the activity in OUR brains is not actually part of the Mind. All the mechanical switching that your brain does to control muscles, the central hippocampus region that "experiences" emotions (fight or flight), the areas that recieve sensory information, and on and on---these are not parts of the Mind, according to K.
The Mind does what it does NOT with chemical signals, NOT with electrical signals. The actions of Mind (AOT) are mediated with something new, an
emergent thing, which I shall give a made-up name to: the Semanton. It is the "atomic unit" of semantic information. Yeah, it is obviously some combination of electrical and chemical activity of course, but it is a self-reinforcing entity, much like a "wave" is a self-reinforcing entity which travels across the surface of water -- an independent entity. The properties of the Semanton are not predictable from the properties of electrical and chemical activity in the brain.
Semantons are the Lego blocks. Here is where things get tricky. The Map is obviously constructed of Semantons--it is a semantic structure. We're all agreed.
The Mind is also constructed of Semantons--it is a semantic structure, too. It is a semantic structure that processes semantic structures, and generates Meanings (more semantic structures) for semantic structures.
Think of yourself--be self-aware for a moment. (This may be hard for some of you, but try.) Be aware of the "I" that defines who you are. You may even localize the "I" as being somewhere behind your eyes. Good. Your Mind is "sensing" (in a sense) yourself.
What sensing ability does the Mind have? Woops. The Mind can only have access to the Map--it only senses and interacts with the Map. So, what is that "I" right there in the middle of the Map. That's you! But the "I" is a part of the Map, it must be, because the Mind ONLY has access to the Map. But if your Mind is part of the Map, what's doing the thinking? Is that Mind inside the Map doing the thinking? Then, isn't it accessing an even smaller Map inside the Mind inside the Map???
Can you say, "infinite regression", boys and girls???
Korzybski breaks this conundrum like Hadrian untied the Knot. With a swift blow from his sword.
There is no inside / outside relationship between Map and Mind. Our arbitrary schemes of naming things -- (
material things) -- and referring to the attributes of things and the properties of things leads us to assuming
inapropriate properties for the Map and Mind. We naturally assume that one must be "inside" the other. Korzybski says, NO.
There is a single (one only) dynamic self-organizing, self-reinforcing, semantic structure within the brain. This semantic structure has many functions, some of which are localized within the brain tissue and some of which are hologrammatically distrubuted across vast regions of the brain. There is one function which builds and accumulates information from the Territory (though the senses) and incorporates this information into the Map. There is one function that localizes the Self within that Map. There is one function that is the Self, or arguably, constructs a dynamic model of an emergent entity that operates just like a "Self" within the semantic structure that is the Mind/Map.
The Mind is simultaneously one of the elements of the Map -- AND is the senior function that organizes and gives meaning TO the Map.
The Mind "
contains" the Map.
But equally true, the Map "
contains" the Mind.
Penrose and others make the fatal mistake of trying to compare the Mind/Map to other physical paradigms in the Universe. Like quantum mechanics, or digital computers, or a bunch of cells talking to each other.
The Mind/Map entity is unique in the Universe. There ARE NO OTHER paradigms that can be used to explain it.
