Random Thoughts About "Other Minds" Book

Purchase here:

Peter Godfrey-Smith

Prof of philosophy @ City University of New York

Prof of the history and philosophy of science @ University of Sydney

Gifted the book for Christmas 2017

Started March 1 2018

Finished March 11 2018

Writing

After a brief intro to the reasoning behind writing the book, how the interest in octopi, cuttlefish, and squid arose – the author began with a decent scientific review of several peer reviewed studies relating to the nervous system of these organisms. The development of these nervous systems and how they likely evolved was discussed in enough detail for a mass-market book. Appreciated that all studies were cited and that the author commented on the rigor of the experimental design.

Quickly devolved into a wishy washy (better word for wishy washy??) philosophical mess that we largely based on theory. I was disinterested in this section (namely chapter 2-4), I put the book down for almost a week. I knew that it was probably important and likely my bias – I have several theoretical physicist friends who would have ate that up (ie Asheville types).

Being able to see the images of these pretty mysterious creatures was fantastic – it added to the possible anthropomorphism of these animals. They may actually be conscious? The issue that is not really addressed in the book is how can they measure consciousness – mentioned once in chapter 3.

He actually dedicated the book to all those who work to protect the oceans.. The end devolves into a commentary on climate change, the inability of humans to appreciate the sea (for example several comments on the fact that so many things are thrown into the sea and because it drifts off, or there are plenty of “other areas of the sea/other fish in the sea” humans don’t see the problem). Noted the somewhat funny rivalry between Darwin and Huxley – Huxley, who was quoted more than a few times in the article was then blamed for over fishing. (hypocritical unless they note that his theories on evolution were complementary in many cases to what Darwin had noted).

Ethics commentary was phenomenal.

Mentioned the “how do we test intelligence in another animal” theory as well. Interesting. What are these animals good at and how can we test these things in the ocean as opposed to in the lab? Is anyone attempting this?

Theory/Content

In the first chapter, Godfrey-Smith writes about the philosophy behind the evolutionary science of the human mind, it’s prose like and magical. I want to believe everything he is saying – I want him to include facts from studies that complement his theories (note: they do not need to prove the theories, just support). Later in the book, this magical prose is not what I was expecting. As books progress they typically become more detailed (is this true of philosophical literature… probably)

Get out philosophy books from college/notes from Wade Roberts course?

Initially the author describes the two very distinct origins of the “mind” beyond a sensory component. Mammals and cephalopods – originally splitting from the cnidarians (bilaterians with eyes?)

Spoke of the evolution of “sidedness” of organisms seen in the fossil records (three sided?!) Very cool but how does this become something that they find relevant to the study – became a dump of facts?

Anecdotes of octopus and squid learning – sneaky little dudes, escaping tanks, breaking lights, sneaking out of small ports, flooding rooms. Could have monopolized on this more in the book. Giving the animals more of a personality like dogs/cats/etc. They have a “mind” literally of their own. How do they recognize faces? Different outfits? Repeat days? SHOW ME THE DATA.

Sensing vs absorbing? Levels of input? Reread section. I honestly think this book could have been written in a more logical manner. References previous and future chapters throughout is making this hard to review.

The “or” experiments page 143. “And” experiments – using language as the medium but this does not justify consciousness or communication? But then used the cephalopods to talk about talking to no one and calls it “banter or chatter” How is this communication and why is this mentioned in this context.

Transitioned the social aspect of the octopus and although they are found alone most of the time these two sites are where they study them in depth – is this the most realistic? Would it not be interesting to look at the loner squid off California (name?). Does this animal also put on elaborate displays over time? What about the coloring of these squids. Picking and choosing things that fit the author narrative is annoying.

The names of the octopus were endearing… based on famous painters and mathematicians.

Genome sequenced – what else was there. Could they RNAseq the neurons specifically?

Per the jacket – does the author actually tell a story of how subjective experience creeps into existence?