From: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky (sentience@pobox.com)
Date: Tue Oct 05 1999 - 08:21:47 MDT
Damien Broderick wrote:
>
> At 10:16 PM 4/10/99 -0500, Eliezer wrote:
>
> >> You're using the word "anthropomorphic" in a manner quite different from
> >> how I normally see it used. Could you flesh that out a little more?
> >
> >Anthropomorphic: Shaped by man. Any pattern caused by features which
> >are unique to humanity
>
> This is a contrary usage, Eli, almost the opposite of the standard.
Your definition is better, anyway, but let me try to explain mine:
There are some cases where anthropomorphic explanations - explanations
caused by features which are unique to humanity - are correct; for
example, an anthropomorphic explanation of human culture. In other
cases, where the forces are presumably preexisting to and external from
humanity, such as the laws of physics, "anthropomorphism" is a
legitimate criticism. You're probably right in that something needs to
be added about anthropomorphism referring to perceptions or mental
constructs rather than realities.
> Anthropomorphic: `Shaped like man'. Any pattern deformed by a human
> percipient into a construct that resembles something human. E.g., imposing
> the face of Jesus on a bean or a biscuit and declaring this a miracle. E.g.
> (maybe, maybe not) Sagan and Druyan telling the story of an ape troop in
> terms appropriate to a bunch of feeble-minded gangsters (in SHADOWS OF
> FORGOTTEN ANCESTORS).
>
> Anthropocentric? Still not quite right...
>
> Damien Broderick
--
sentience@pobox.com Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
http://pobox.com/~sentience/tmol-faq/meaningoflife.html
Running on BeOS Typing in Dvorak Programming with Patterns
Voting for Libertarians Heading for Singularity There Is A Better Way
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:25 MST