The self is not physical, but symbolic

  • Thread starter Thread starter coberst
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physical Self
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of symbols and their significance in relation to the self, exploring the idea that the self is symbolic rather than physical. Participants examine the role of mathematical symbols in understanding concepts and how personal experiences shape the meaning of these symbols. The conversation touches on cognitive development, the grounding of symbols in human experience, and the implications of these ideas in various contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that symbols gain meaning through personal experience and cognitive development, referencing the work of Becker and L&N.
  • Another participant introduces the "symbol grounding problem," attributing it to Stevan Harnad, and expresses concern that it may not receive adequate attention in discussions about symbols.
  • There is a mention of the complexity of concepts and symbols, comparing them to a growing chemical molecule influenced by both experience and imagination.
  • A participant questions whether the interest in symbols is part of an engineering project or represents a pursuit of disinterested knowledge.
  • One participant indicates they are working on a paper related to the symbol grounding problem, suggesting a connection to their ongoing research.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express interest in the topic and share related concepts, but there is no clear consensus on the implications of the symbol grounding problem or the nature of symbols. Multiple viewpoints and areas of inquiry remain open for discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various theories and concepts without fully resolving the complexities involved, such as the relationship between symbols and cognitive development, and the implications of the symbol grounding problem.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring cognitive science, philosophy of language, mathematics, and the intersection of engineering and symbolic reasoning.

coberst
Messages
305
Reaction score
0
The self is not physical, but symbolic

What are symbols and why are symbols meaningful to me? One answer might be “the self is not physical, it is symbolic”—Becker.

Mathematics is, I think, a useful means to start an effort for comprehending the nature of symbols.

Mathematical concepts are referred to by symbols, both written and audible. Eighty-five or quatre-vingt-cinq references the same concept as does 85. Common mathematical symbols such as 0, 1, i, pi and e are meaningful because we have become familiar with the concepts that they symbolize when we have studied mathematics in school. Our schools and colleges are interested primarily in helping us use these symbols as an algorithmic means for solving mathematical problems.

I am a retired engineer and I worked constantly for four years in college learning how to do math. Doing math is very important to engineers, understanding math is of little consequence to an engineer’s job performance. I suspect most engineers would be somewhat dumbfounded if they were to be asked ‘do your understand mathematics’.

The degree of meaning that these symbols hold for each of us is dependent upon the relationship we have with the concept. Almost all of us will find that the symbols 1, 2, 3, and 4 are meaningful even before we go to school. Those who have studied math in grade school and high school will find that the other symbols mentioned have a meaning of some dimension.

L&N, Lakoff and Nunez, co-authors of “Where Mathematics Comes From”, tell us that “to comprehend a mathematical symbol is to associate it with a concept—something meaningful in human cognition that is ultimately grounded in experience and created via neural mechanisms.”

At birth an infant has a minimal innate arithmetic ability. This ability to add and subtract small numbers is called subitizing. (I am speaking of a cardinal number—a number that specifies how many objects there are in a collection, don’t confuse this with numeral—a symbol). Many animals display this subitizing ability.

In addition to subitizing the child, while playing with objects, develops other cognitive capacities such as grouping, ordering, pairing, memory, exhaustion-detection, cardinal-number assignment, and independent order.

When a child goes to school the teacher depends upon all of these past experiences as prerequisites for a child to readily comprehend arithmetic.

It is our experience in the world that eventually gives symbols significance. As we get older we travel far from these original experiences that give our world of symbols their meaning. We are constantly adding new worldly experiences to augment this meaning we attach to symbols. I suspect that if we could examine closely one of our concepts of a particular symbol we would find that concept to be as complex and convoluted as is our DNA. If we could trace the historical sequences of the structuring of a particular concept it might be as instructive as is a similar examination of our DNA.

Concepts, i.e. symbols, i.e. abstract ideas, are like a gigantic chemical molecule that continues to grow in size and in complexity as we pass through life. The symbol gains grounding from our experiences but the concept also has a great deal that result from our imagination. I think we might say that a symbol is an abstract idea created by experience and imagination, which becomes a significant meaning in our life.

If such is the case can you comprehend why some people might ‘go bananas’ when the flag is burned?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi coberst,
I am a retired engineer …
Congrats on the retirement. Hope you’re enjoying life. Good to see other engineers on here. I’ve been engineer for 20 years now, so perhaps we share some background.

The self is not physical, but symbolic

What are symbols and why are symbols meaningful to me? One answer might be “the self is not physical, it is symbolic”—Becker.
You may be interested in the “symbol grounding problem”. Wiki has a decent synopsis here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_grounding

I believe Stevan Harnad is the originator of the symbol grounding problem. I’ve discussed this with him and have to agree he’s put his finger on a serious issue. My impression is that the concept doesn’t get the attention it deserves due to the line of thinking that you’ve provided above.

Once you read through the Wiki article, I’d suggest reading over Harnad’s most recent paper on this here: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Temp/symgro.htm

Harnad’s other publications can be found online here: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/genpub.html
 
Q

I have only glanced at your references, so far, but I think they are great. I shall study them. Thanks.

You evidently have an interest in such things. Is this part of your engineering project or is this what I call disinterested knowledge?
 
Hi coberst,
I'm working on a paper that I'm hoping to publish. The symbol grounding problem is related to it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K