Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×


Upcoming SlideShare
Creative Energy workbook
Creative Energy workbook
Loading in …3

Check these out next

1 of 96 Ad

More Related Content

Similar to Eros+.pptx (20)

Recently uploaded (20)



  1. 1. Making Sense of Sense How do our ideas hit the mark? Shinning a light on sensibility . 1 E.R.O.S. The Quadranym Word-Sensibility Model
  2. 2. What’s in a word? 2 Making Sense of Sense The task is to collect commonsense knowledge. How much informaAon about the world is contained in a single word? Commonsense Knowing Acquisition & Ontology
  3. 3. “I know nothing in the world that has as much power as a word. SomeAmes I write one, and I look at it, unAl it begins to shine.” –– Emily Dickinson 3 Making Sense of Sense
  4. 4. 4 Q: Why can’t computers use language like people do? A: People experience the world, computers don’t. Making Sense of Sense
  5. 5. InteracAng with the world produces instances of coherent sense, some of which are apparent in the words we use. The Premise 5 Making Sense of Sense
  6. 6. There is a disAncAon to be made between a coherent sense of a word and the potenAal condi:ons it may aim at in the world. Coherent Sense CondiAonal Sense 6 Making Sense of Sense
  7. 7. Coherent Sense CondiAonal Sense •  A desire to eat points to hungry as being a coherent sense of eat. •  What food you’ll have to eat becomes a condi:onal factor of eat. Corpus: eat I prepared a nice bird! What are we having to eat? Corpus: eat 7 Non-declaraAve: hungry DeclaraAve: food Word: eat Making Sense of Sense
  8. 8. Condi:onal Sense Denote EAT Denote BIRD The verb Eat and the noun Bird together form a complete unit of thought, “Eat bird.” That much is clear, what isn’t clear is how they are categorized as objects of experience. Let’s say Robin funcAons like a prototype to provide one with an actual sense of the word, Bird. Hungry is able to do a similar task for the word, Eat. Each sense-word acts as a coherent core for their perspecAve denotaAons. The sense of "bird" (“robin”) converges with the sense of "eat" ("hungry") to produce birds that experience indicates as likely menu opAons. robin hungry PotenAal Foods PotenAal Birds Find Meaning Find Meaning potenAal potenAal actual actual Coherent Sense 8 Making Sense of Sense
  9. 9. MoAvaAon: “Eat bird.” Object: food Condi:on-Poten:al Judgment: “Eat bird.” Standpoint: hungry Coherent-Actual 9 Coherent-Condi:onal Units Occur and Reoccur Making Sense of Sense
  10. 10. Every word in every language is defined relaAve to a frame. ― Charles Fillmore 10 Making Sense of Sense
  11. 11. Actual (self-sense) PotenAal (world-sense) Word (that-sense) EAT mode=sate state=hungry state=food mode=starve Q-Unit: Quadranym 11 Dynamic Framework for Specified Terms An opAmal generalizaAon model of the process of concept specificaAon. States: actual = hungry ⊇ potenAal = food Modes: poten6al = sate ⊇ actual = starve Level pertaining to rules of grammar Level pertaining to potenAal interacAons with the world Level pertaining to actual contexts of experience Conceptualizing States: FROM actual-being TO potenAal-becoming Conceptualizing Modes: FROM potenAal-acAon TO actual-measure Making Sense of Sense
  12. 12. “When one encounters a new situaAon (or makes a substanAal change in one's view of the present problem) one selects from memory a structure called a Frame. This is a remembered framework to be adapted to fit reality by changing details as necessary.” ― Marvin Minsky 12 Making Sense of Sense
  13. 13. 13 The ObjecAve Field (DeliberaAve Framework) Constraint hungry Include: Selector Deliberate food Exclude: CriAc •  Input •  Rerun •  Value •  Output •  Return •  Expense actual potenAal potenAal actual robin bird Q-Unit & Network Circuits Closing The Loop (Q-Unit: HeurisAc-Framework) Making Sense of Sense
  14. 14. “Framing is the most ordinary thing we do. A frame is a coherent structure of related concepts so to help make sense of things. ” ― George Lakoff 14 Making Sense of Sense
  15. 15. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- System 1: a.  Heuris:c[2] b.  Contextual Trace[4] c.  Q-Unit: Quadranym[4] d.  Meta-Dimensional Roles[4] Guider System 2: a.  Delibera:ve[2] b.  Objec:ve Field[4] c.  Seman:c Networks[3] d.  Nodes & Directed Edges[3] EAT Framing Systems[1] Two Systems of Thinking[2] Eat Eat oven satisfy hunger roast cook kitchen savory Eat survive Eat follow recipe Eat swallow M A v t e d B y G o a l D e s i r e s HasProperty U s e d F o r A lt Lo ca A o n CapableOf H a s P r e r e q u i s i t e U s e d F o r IsA LocaAonOf 15 2. See, Two system of thinking - Thinking Fast and Slow (Kahnerman12) UsedFor person food domesticate CeatedBy poultry 3. SemanAc network common sense representaAon - hrp:// See Also, Open Mind Common Sense (Singh, P. [42])) Liminal Point: HeurisAc Dynamic Prototype: robin 1. See, Mental Framing - Metaphors We Live By (Lakoff, Johnson[28]) 4. Q-units are like capacitors, See menu, Q Theory IntroducAon HeurisAc Store CausesDesire UsedFor Bird Books, PublicaAons & General References Driver SubjecAve-Actual State-hungry Mode-starve ObjecAve-PotenAal State-food Mode-sate Making Sense of Sense
  16. 16. “By their very nature, heurisAc shortcuts will produce biases, and that is true for both humans and arAficial intelligence, but the heurisAcs of AI are not necessarily the human ones.” ― Daniel Kahneman 16 Making Sense of Sense
  17. 17. ObjecAve State: condiAon-potenAal Food AcAon & Measure Modes SubjecAve State: coherent-actual Constraint Hungry E=sate Poultry is Food R=starve Robin not Poultry Q-Unit: Coherent Bias Working Memory, Heuris:c Bias, Predictability & Predic:ve Errors Eat: •  The probable conclusion is drawn from the statement, “Eat bird”. •  Robin is not bird in eat frame of system 1. •  Eat frame is now in discord with bird frame of system 1. Poultry is Bird Robin not Bird Selector: potenAal CriAc: actual DeliberaAve Analysis Categorical ResoluAon System2 17 Making Sense of Sense
  18. 18. “Your frame of reference is what you see.” ― Jacque Fresco 18 Making Sense of Sense
  19. 19. nutri6on SubjecAve hungry EAT Food ObjecAve ingest Bird Poultry S = funcAon O = structure O = exclusive S = inclusive survive Coherent à Condi:onal Coherent à Condi:onal ⊇ potenAal actual actual actual potenAal potenAal actual potenAal actual potenAal actual potenAal 19 Input......................... by _actual:[S _eat à O _bird] Output:.......... by _potenAal:[S _food à O _poultry] Self Is Here Actual S = hungry Inclusive E = bird PotenAal O = food Exclusive R = poultry actual Q-Unit: Generalized System of Nested States potenAal Q-Systems: A Hierarchy of Nested States Arrows = Dynamic Sense Making Sense of Sense
  20. 20. 20 The Q Categorical Axiom: State: actual ⊇ potenAal Mode: potenAal⊇ actual Ontological Descrip:on: A State is an actual being. An actual being has a becoming; it is always a potenAal becoming. A Mode is potenAal acAon. A potenAal acAon has a difference; it is always an actual difference. Like fractals, Q dimensions emerge as self replicaAng parerns across different scales of contextuality. Realms, hierarchies and domains represent classes of context. The Q-unit represents the fundamental unit of context in the system and, as we have been demonstraAng, is based on the Q categorical axiom. actual potenAal potenAal actual State Mode AcAve Passive These dimensions exist in Ame and are only defined or acAve when they are encountered. Ame The encounter pertains to unarended sense (habits or sAmulus) and arended sense (focus or viewpoints). When unarended sense becomes arended sense this is an affect we call, The Orienta:on Of Interac:vity. (At this point, this parAcular idea is sAll a speculaAve aspect of the model. For more details go to Theory: Post 4) A General Descrip:on of the Q-unit. Making Sense of Sense
  21. 21. 21 The Drawbridge The states of a drawbridge determines one's crossing ability. To come upon a drawbridge one encounters its actual state as either a crossing state or a non-crossing state. In the case of a drawbridge, any actual state has a predicAve potenAal in Ame. The modes of a drawbridge refers to its acAons. To refer to a drawbridge is to refer to its potenAal modes indicaAng the up or the down acAon. In the case of a drawbridge, any acAve potenAal mode has an actual difference aptly idenAfied. A simple way to help think about some basic goal related dynamics as pertaining to the Q categorical axiom is to consider… The World Is Full Of Easy Goal Oriented Predic:ons actual potenAal potenAal actual State AcAve Passive Time & Goal Mode Making Sense of Sense
  22. 22. 22 Analogy ConAnued... The Q Categorical Axiom: State: actual ⊇ potenAal Mode: potenAal ⊇ actual The actual state is always the superset where cross-ability and non-cross-ability both exist. The potenAal state is the subset where only one of those states exists. The potenAal mode is always the superset where the up-ness and down-ness are both acAve measures. The actual mode is the subset where the passive difference is idenAfied. According to the Q axiom, a mode is always a potenAal acAon or measure, such that, any acAon or measure is a potenAal response that automaAcally idenAfies its related actual difference. For instance, if the mode is up, it has an actual difference down. The acAve- potenAal mode is idenAfied only awer the passive-actual mode is determined. This suggests a frame of reference (e.g., is the train your on moving or the one next to you?). These are two points of measure that need not be complimentary terms. A state does not funcAon in this way, a state’s becoming can be any number of possible condiAons, for instance, up can become sky, good mood or awake. Occurrent interacAons with the world will drive remembered responses toward predicAng likely potenAal condiAons. Making Sense of Sense
  23. 23. potenAal actual acAon measure actual potenAal being becoming Being à becoming Cycles States AcAve Passive Modes AcAve Passive Bias actual ⊇ potenAal potenAal ⊇ actual Contextual Temporal Cycle Contextual Spa:al Cycle Q-Unit dynamics are cyclical. A reciprocal dynamic between ability and opportunity to find resoluAon. 23 1.  To encounter an acAve state refers to an experience of actual context and its potenAal in Ame, thus, pertaining to an actual temporal sense. 2.  To encounter an acAve mode refers to a potenAal acAon and its discerning actual measure, thus, pertaining to a potenAal of spaAal sense. The Q Categorical Axiom: State: actual ⊇ potenAal Mode: potenAal ⊇ actual Recursion & ResoluAon Difference Drawbridge:[PotenAal_up(actual_self)⊇Actual_down(potenAal_cross)] The drawbridge is being in Ame The drawbridge has acAons in space State is about Cross-ability Mode is about Up or Down Making Sense of Sense AcAon à Measure Cycles 1. State: Temporal Sense 2. Mode: SpaAal Sense
  24. 24. “The only source of knowledge is experience.” ― Albert Einstein 24 Making Sense of Sense
  25. 25. 25 The key idea of The Quadranym Word-Sensibility Model is that the environment drives the actual-subjecAve-sense, while remembering guides the potenAal-objecAve-sense. To be clear, in this system, there is no real difference between subjecAve reality and objecAve reality except for how it pertains to context, otherwise there is theoreAcally only a single empirical reality made experienAally discrete by contextual and categorical processes. The objecAve sense of a Q-unit pertains to the ability to make useful predicAons about the world as it applies in context with the subjecAve sense. “Eat bird.” – Remembering ExperienAal Cycles: FROM flux:[Poultry(food)]à [Bird(hungry)] TO unit:[Bird(hungry)⊇Poultry(food)] [MaLer(energy)] à [Nutrient(hungry)] Passive-PotenAal ObjecAve Guided AcAve-Actual SubjecAve Driven Unit:[Poten6al(actual)⊇Actual(poten6al)] Q-Unit: Environmental Cause of Concepts Flux:[Actual(PotenAal)] à [PotenAal(actual)] Causal Flux ExperienAal Cycles Form Remembering Units Environmental Driver Situa:onal Context “Eat Bird” SubjecAve Sense ObjecAve Sense Making Sense of Sense
  26. 26. Prior to any associaAon a word holds at least two subjects (states) and two predicates (modes). Q Ontology: Words are not atomic, words are topics. MoAon Marer Passive AcAve 0 ENERGY 26 modes Energy:(∀x) Energy(x) ⟹ [AcAve(moAon)⊇ Passive(marer)](x) states Q-Unit: A State of Experience Engages a Mode of Difference 1. Ontologically, basic words are specified suitable to grammar rules. 2. Word Representa:on: a word is a predicate with a subject variable. 3. Quadranyms are apt-subjects of predicates iniAaAng a word sense. Eat(x) Energy(x) Mul:-Organiza:onal Dynamics Q-units are about Word-Topics and Theme-Topics. Making Sense of Sense
  27. 27. Expansive sate, ac6ve Objec:ve food, maLer Subjec:ve hungry, mo6on Reduc:ve starve, passive Topic eat à energy Quadranym Square (Prime Dimensions) 0 27 Units will organize and nest together for any given topic. The prime Q is an exemplary quadranym derived from the Q axiom. Making Sense of Sense
  28. 28. 28 Unit(One Clock): [Nutrient(hungry) ⊇ Marer(Energy)] Flux: a sense driven by the environment. Unit: remembering how that sense has been driven before. Flux:[Actual(potenAal)] → [PotenAal(actual)] Unit:[PotenAal(actual) → Actual(potenAal)] Flux is a double bracket: [b] → [a] Unit is a single bracket: [a → b] Each bracket represents a clock, and like circadian clocks, a self oscillaAng system responds to its environment. Flux (Two Clocks):[Marer(energy)] à [Nutrient(hungry)] Remember-ing Environmental-ing Scripts can be formed by linking Q-Units together. Each unit is like a frame of a film. ExisAng units can be inserted or new units can form. The Causal flux is the reason for scripAng units. SubjecAveab ObjecAve b SubjecAve a ObjecAve b For instance… See Q Scripts in menu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Q Scripts See Q layers, Q-Unit goals form discrete hierarchies, realms and domains Making Sense of Sense
  29. 29. “We are storytelling creatures, and as children we acquire language to tell those stories that we have inside us.” ― Jerome Bruner 29 Making Sense of Sense
  30. 30. I want chocolate mousse! I understand… but you’re telling me this, why? In our model, once moAvated, the listener’s intenAon is to find cues in the content so to sync with oscillaAng coherent and condi:onal factors. InAmaAng Mental States Pierre Marie 30 Making Sense of Sense
  31. 31. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Pierre, the oscillaAon between coherent and condi:onal factors are categorically in sync, so he can then reply, “I understand”. [Resolve(belief)] à [Urge(desire)] 31 CondiAonal Sense Coherent Sense Causal Flux Remember-ing Loop Forms Units Marie: agent (cf., semanAc role) [S _self à O _desire] [S _desire à O _proposiAon] [S _proposiAon à O _denote] [S _denote à O _urer] [S _urer à O _proposiAon] [S _proposiAon à O _other] (transcending from intra-subjec:ve to inter-subjec:ve) Pierre: pa6ent (cf., semanAc role) [S _other à O _hear] [S _hear à O _ProposiAon] [S _proposiAon à O _cause] [S _cause à O _intenAon] [S _intenAon à O _proposiAon] [S _proposiAon àO _denote] [S _denote à O _instanAate] [S _instanAate à O _That ProposiAon] Units & Scripts Flux: [O] à [S] Unit:[S à O] To form scripts, the flux changes a condiAonal-sense (reference role) to a coherent-sense (sense role), for instance, the reference role O _ desire fluxes to the sense role S _desire. S _desire can now reference its own object O _x to either intend a denotaAon or create a new sense. . !, See, In6ma6ng process of uLered signs. (Husserl, E., [23]) Note, Represen6ng causal flux FROM reference TO sense in a Q script InAmaAng Mental States[1] driver Making Sense of Sense
  32. 32. “Thinking is an acAve verb, think-ing. It means you are doing something. One thing you are doing is criAcizing your thoughts, seeing whether they cohere. And if they don’t, you begin to change them and experiment with others. You get new intuiAons, new insights.” ― David Bohm 32 Making Sense of Sense
  33. 33. See, Q Theory Introduc:on in site menu. Also See, The Principle of the Orienta:on of Interac:vity in posts: post 6 ConAnuous Singularity E: acAve-potenAal Discrete MulAplicity R: passive-actual Thinking is the ac:ve side of thoughts. 33 acAve-actual passive-potenAal Coherent Sense CondiAonal Sense Selector: perceiving CriAc: percepts A Unit of Remember-ing How about Cupcakes? sigh * * or When one is moAvated, categorical potenAals become acAve potenAals. An occurrent unit of moAvaAon is driven toward resoluAon. Virtually, a unit of internal percepAons arempts to unify with external percepAons toward equilibrium between interdependent states to maintain a system process. That would be great Sameness Difference ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Making Sense of Sense
  34. 34. “To imagine a language is to imagine a form of life.” ― Ludwig Wirgenstein 34 Making Sense of Sense
  35. 35. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Environmental CAUSE of Concepts 35 The Birth of a No:on A coherent noAon is actual, urged and likely to be culAvated. A condiAonal noAon is a random opportunity and targeted by the coherent noAon. If successfully engaged a complete act is determined and able to be used repeatedly in some meaningful way. 1, See, : Pre-cogni6ve Condi6ons, Immanent with the Sensible before Transcendental Categories - Phenomenology of Percep6on (Merleau-Ponty[*]) Making Sense of Sense
  36. 36. -------------------------------------------------------------- Consider how music feels when you think of these kinds of cycles. Musical composers incorporate noAons of anAcipaAon and resoluAon to keep listeners engaged. [urge _hunger à resolve _food]<find> [urge _food à resolve _fish] <find> [urge _fish à resolve _water] <find> [urge _water à resolve _dive] <find> [urge _dive à resolve _swim]<find> [urge _swim à resolve _catch] <find> [urge _catch à resolve _eat] <find> [urge _eat à resolve _sate] <stop> Meta-Dimensional Roles: MoAvaAon Cycles OscillaAng Between MoAvated Units of Context FISHING SCRIPT See, Cogni6on as Agent/Environment Dynamics (Chemero [5]) 36 Making Sense of Sense Urge & Resolve Cycles. Mo:va:onal cycles: NoAons are more reacAve for the Kingfisher and more reflecAve for humans.
  37. 37. 37 Making Sense of Sense “The meaning or value of a thing consists of what it affords.” ― James J. Gibson
  38. 38. TABLE Bench scaffold chair roof … e = raise r = flat o = top s = surface ? Affordance Flux pre-reflecAve reflecAve 38 Flux:[ObjecAve(surface)]<find>[SubjecAve(surface)] Making Sense of Sense An Environmental-ing Flux of Opportunity •  The coherent (pre-reflecAve) state affords actual quesAons. •  The condiAonal (reflecAve) state affords potenAal answers.
  39. 39. table subjecAve offPut object objecAve onSet surface A Remember-ing Unit of Opportunity subjecAve objecAve objecAve subjecAve potenAal actual actual PotenAal actual PotenAal 39 Making Sense of Sense actual potenAal Urge(desire) Resolve(belief) Unit:[OffPut(rest) à OnSet(surface)] rest beer Affordance Unit In the Q model, predicAng is projecAng experienAal unit cycles out in the world to capture sense making resoluAon.
  40. 40. “To understand is to experience harmony between what we aim at and what is given, between the intenAon and the performance - and the body is our anchorage in the world. ” ― Maurice Merleau-Ponty 40 Making Sense of Sense
  41. 41. 41 Making Sense of Sense Procedural Scripts: Hungry:[urge = eat à resolve = s:ck]<find> The causal flux will drive ways to modify the interacAons with the world. Humans reflect on their scripts to modify them. If something works once maybe it will work again or maybe it can be modified and made more efficient, or used differently in other scenarios.
  42. 42. 42 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2, See, Present-At-Hand, Ready-To-Hand (Heidegger[*]) 1, See, Phenomenology of Percep6on: Pre-cogni6ve Condi6ons, Immanent with the Sensible before Transcendental Categories (Merleau-Ponty[*]) Task Oriented PercepAon[2] Seeing what one expects to see. Script[1]:[subjec:ve-actual _eat à objec:ve-poten:al _coconut ]<find> A Polynym is a set of predicates of any number (usually a small number), with subject variables, and owen appear together, and can be used to frame situaAonal contexts or topics. Polynym Dimensions[3] Eat(x) Flesh(x) Coconut(x) Open(x) Smash(x) Each predicate represents a dimension of a polynym topic. A subject variable of a polynym dimension can select quadranyms. Quadranyms link together to form Q scripts. Scripts form on each Polynym dimension to form layers. The Polynym 3, See, image schema - The Body in the Mind (Johnson M., 1990[*]) Books, PublicaAons & General References Making Sense of Sense
  43. 43. [Subjec:ve _coconut à objec:ve _rock]<find>[Subjec:ve _rock à objec:ve _smash]<find> [Subjec:ve _smash à objec:ve _coconut]<find>[Subjec:ve _coconut à objec:ve _open]<find> Predicate: tool Predicate: hard Causal Flux[1] FROM Actual(potenAal) TO PotenAal(actual) 43 Forming Scripts OscillaAng States ConAnuous Reciprocal CausaAon [S _open à O _flesh]<find>[S _flesh à O _chew]<find>[S _chew à O _swallow]<stop> Predicate: food Predicate: sow FROM Actual(potenAal) TO PotenAal(actual) Causal Flux Making Sense of Sense ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1, Causal flux in this instance can also be referred to as a Modal Flux. Note, Q scripts join almost like a cenApede where each locomoAon system sends signal to the next system. The objecAve goal is a condiAon-potenAal, and when found that is no more experience necessary. The coherent sense doesn’t then resolve, rather, it becomes something different. Each new sense is derived from the reference of the previous state frame. Once the new sense finds its reference then another state frame is pulled, uniquely predicated and a new reference is aptly queried.
  44. 44. 44 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2, See, image schema - The Body in the Mind (Johnson M., 1990[*]) 1, See, : Pre-cogni6ve Condi6ons, Immanent with the Sensible before Transcendental Categories - Phenomenology of Percep6on (Merleau-Ponty[*]) Meta-Dimensional Roles Content Dimensional Roles Bias Eat(x) Goal Flesh(x) MoAvate Coconut(x) Task Open(x) Modify Smash(x) e.g., Predicate: Eat(x) (∀x) eat(x) ⟹ [Sate(hungry) ⊇ Starve(food)(x)] (∀x) eat(x) ⟹ [Intact(chew) ⊇ Fragment(substance)(x)] (∀x) eat(x) ⟹ [Available(consume) ⊇ Deplete(resource)(x)] (∀x) eat(x) ⟹ [Stable(corrode) ⊇ Disintegrate(substance)(x)] Quadranyms represent certain topical orientaAons that may or may not apply to a situaAonal context depending on the polynym predicates. Polynyms are important factors to help trigger the quadranym sense-topic best suited for context. Q system analysis makes a disAncAon between content and Meta-Dimensional Roles (M-roles). M-roles apply to both polynyms and quadranyms. Polynyms may have any number of dimensions. Meta-Dimensional Roles are ontological categories of quadranyms and polynyms used to organize the content of a system. Polynym M-Role Types[2] Q-units are the subjects of Polynyms Books, PublicaAons & General References Q scripts run linearly or can be strategically divided into layers. Making Sense of Sense
  45. 45. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Context Cycle Rate Subjec:ve Objec:ve Bias –––––– cycle = r NegaAve a PosiAve b MoAvate ––– cycle = r Urge a Resolve b Task –––––– cycle = r Mo6vate a Goal b Modify –––– cycle = r Func6on a Structure b Manipulate – cycle = r Control a Conform b 45 See, Ready-To-Hand includes a larger purpose (Heidegger, 1927) Time Rates of Context From overarching to occurrent rates of contextual cycles. Making Sense of Sense Meta-Dimensional: Quadranym Roles Meta-Dimensional: Polynym Roles Each predicate of a polynym will iniAate on different Ameline layers to execute the script of a situaAonal context. For instance. Eat will cycle more generally while specific procedures of eat are taking place. M-role InformaAon can influence between layers and levels.
  46. 46. -------------------------------------------------------------- ①  [S = NegaAve à O = PosiAve]: bias (self conscious – emoAons)* ②  [S = Urge à O = Resolve]: moBvate (self reflecAve - emoAonal thinking)* ③  [S = MoAvate à O = Goal]: plan (reflecAon on world - thinking)* ④  [S = FuncAon à O = Structure]: modify (deliberaAve reacAon - thinking)* ⑤  [S = Control à O = Conform]: manipulate (learned - reacAon)* ⑥  [S = Be à O = Become]: transform (insAncAve - reacAon)* •  Each bracket is a feedback loop to move content through scripts. •  Each layer is a Ameline moving content at its own rate of context. *See, Six level Model (Minsky35) 46 Making Sense of Sense •  Polynym (Hierarchies): any number of ‘ver6cal dimensions’ = ap:tude •  Quadranym (scripts): Q-units in any number of ‘horizontal cycles’ = agtude Polynym: A Hierarchy of Nested System Layers Scripts can run linearly or be strategically divided into any number of polynym layers. There is no one polynym structure – hierarchical structures will compete and change.
  47. 47. Meta-Dimensional Roles: Quadranym Examples Subjec:ve ⊇ Objec:ve States The Bias Roles Expansive ⊇ Reduc:ve Modes The Difference Roles Actual ⊇ PotenBal State Set S ⊇ O Coherent ⊇ CondiAonal State Set S ⊇ O FuncAon ⊇ Structure State Set S ⊇ O Control ⊇ Conform State Set S ⊇ O urge ⊇ resolve State Set S ⊇ O NegaAve ⊇ PosiAve State Set S ⊇ O Posi6ve ⊕ Nega6ve Mode Set E(+) ⊕ R(-) ∨ E(-) ⊕ R(+) PotenBal ⊇ Actual Mode set E ⊇ R General ⊇ ParAcular Mode set E ⊇ R AcAve ⊇ Passive Hemispheres E(s) ⊇ R(o) Infinite ⊇ Finite Hemispheres E(s) ⊇ R(o) Inclusive ⊇ Exclusive Hemispheres E(s) ⊇ R(o) Singular ⊇ MulAple Hemispheres E(s) ⊇ R(o) 47 Neg and Pos modes: Always Switchable Roles Switch Polarity Making Sense of Sense
  48. 48. 48 Making Sense of Sense “'Facts, facts, facts,' cries the scienAst if he wants to emphasize the necessity of a firm foundaAon for science. What is a fact? A fact is a thought that is true. But the scienAst will surely not recognize something which depends on men's varying states of mind to be the firm foundaAon of science.” – Gorlob Frege
  49. 49. PotenAal A STATE Of A STAR It is Phosphorus NOT Hesperus for all to see No more experience is necessary So now let’s go have our morning tea The same for you is the same for me Making Sense of Sense That Star:(∀x) star(x) ⟹ [Above(earth)⊇ Below(light)](x) Actual The Sense & Reference of a Denota:on[1]: 1.  Sense and reference are idenAcal to themselves a=a. 2.  Different senses can reference same denotaAon a=b. Sense of Reference That Star Same: The Sense Phosphorus = That Star Phosphorus[1] InteracAve Level of Sense & Reference ExperienAal Level of Sense & Reference Sense of Reference A simple sense-making reference frame for the topic, That Star.[2] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.See, Sense and Reference (Frege G, [13]) 2. Sense and reference play parAcular ontological roles and provide relaAonal descripAons between Q-Unit dimensions. 49
  50. 50. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That Star:[Phosphorus à morning] That Star:[Hesperus à evening] •  IdenAcal reference to one object (a=a): no more experience necessary (Sense & Reference = passive difference). •  NonidenAcal reference to one object (a=b): more experience necessary (Sense & Reference = ac:ve sameness). General Topic: Posi:on:[Coherent-actual = Appearanceà Condi:on-poten:al = 6me and space] That Planet:[Venus ⊇ Phosphorus and Hesperus] passive passive acAve 50 1. See, Sense and Reference(Frege G, [13]) 2. See, Twin Earth "'meanings' just ain't in the head.”(Putnam H,[*]) Making Sense of Sense No No, that’s not true The same for me is a difference for you Phosphorus and Hesperus are both Venus all the way She disappears and reappears at different Ames of day But remember… water is the same for all to see Except on twin earth where it’s XYZ ”’meanings' just ain't in the head.”[2] It’s all around us in the world insteadJ Difference: The Sense Phosphorus and The Sense Hesperus = That Planet Venus[1] Books, PublicaAons & General References
  51. 51. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SubjecAve Ontology (AcAve Hemisphere) E=solar system S=astronomer[3] ObjecAve Ontology (Passive Hemisphere) O=planet R=second Mode Mode Quadranym Inten:onality logic Reference Sense Expansive-SubjecAve a†tude premise context Mode of context representaAon[1] ReducAve-ObjecAve proposiAon conclusion object Mode of object representaAon[1] Use of Concept[2] Truth CondiAon[2] Theme-Topic: Venus 2, See, Use of Concept, Language Game, Truth Condi6ons,’ (Wirgenstein[24,25]) context object Implicates AcAve Sameness: more experience necessary Implicates Passive Difference: no more experience necessary 51 1, See, Modes of Representa6on (Frege [13]) Making Sense of Sense 3, S=astronomy can also fit theme-topic S _role PotenAal Actual potenAal interacAons with the world actual contexts of experience
  52. 52. “We think in generaliAes, but we live in detail.” ― Alfred North Whitehead 52 Making Sense of Sense
  53. 53. 53 Making Sense of Sense
  54. 54. Quan:fying Spa:ality: Door is configured such that, Barrier B is the condi:onal category of the coherent category Passage P IFF Door D is a condiAonal category of the coherent category Space S. •  Coherent P is all S •  Condi6on B is some S The phrase, by this I mean x, is a subjecAve qualifying term, wriren as, by _x. •  by _Space: [Coherent = void ⊇ CondiAon = between{door, passage, barrier...}] •  ∀x: Sx → DPBx = coherent: Open(door) •  ∃x: Sx → DPBx = condiAonal: Close(door) 54 The Q Self and a spa:al code toward openness and movement. Making Sense of Sense
  55. 55. 55 Making Sense of Sense
  56. 56. “To exist as an individual means not simply to be numerically disAnct from other things but to be a self-pole in a dynamic relaAonship with alterity, with what is other, with the world.” ― Evan Thompson 56 Making Sense of Sense
  57. 57. By _space: [Subjec:ve = void ⊇ Objec:ve = door] Subjective Space Open Subjec:ve State: passage y x subjec:ve state: barrier Reduc:ve mode Expansive mode 0 Close 0 SubjecAve State: Void Finite Infinite 57 Making Sense of Sense The zero-point of any Q-concept is a self iden:fica:on opportunity. pass y X impasse Reduc:ve mode Expansive mode 0 SubjecAve State: [_solid]<find>[_condiAon] 0 y x
  58. 58. A real-world locked door means the subjecAvity of the concept is denied leaving one faced with only the objecAvity of the concept. SAll, as cued, it’s a door, because control of Door is categorically there even if not actually there. S = dooràControl/Actual O = dooràConform/Poten:al Coherent space CondiAonal space Door[passage à barrier] Open Subjec:ve State: passage Objec:ve state: barrier Reduc:ve mode (-) Expansive mode (+) 0 Close By _door: [Subjec:ve = passage ⊇ Objec:ve = barrier] Objec:ve Space 58 Making Sense of Sense
  59. 59. Empty is coherently having space. Between is the condi:on transi:oning space. ObjecAve Network CondiAonal Roles Space Modes SubjecAve State Coherent Role void infinite exit out finite enter in potenAal potenAal actual actual Note: potenAal/actual arrows below are in relaAon to modes (not states). States: actual à potenAal Modes: potenAal à actual potenAal actual actual actual actual potenAal Space: 59 Making Sense of Sense
  60. 60. •  SubjecAve: The enAty void is ubiquitous to the topic of space by virtue of void’s singular principle in every condiAon of space. •  ObjecAve: The enAty between is a mulAplicity of principles, such as, enAAes and changing properAes. One Small detail. 60 Making Sense of Sense
  61. 61. “I asked myself about the present: how wide it was, how deep it was, how much was mine to keep.” ― Kurt Vonnegut 61 Making Sense of Sense
  62. 62. 62 Making Sense of Sense
  63. 63. The Doors of Time… like we transition space, we transition time… and rarely the other way around. Everyone does it, we go to the edge of the pool and dip our toe in the water; if the temperature feels warm we enter quickly if cool we hesitate. The reason we hesitate to get into a nice pool on a nice hot day is owen the change and not necessarily the temperature. Once calibrated to air temps our bodies will resist change because of how sensibility works. The noAce of change is what concerns us. From: If not now when? To: If now then? hrps:// 63 Making Sense of Sense ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Test(swim)] à [Temp(change)] CondiAonal Sense Coherent Sense Causal Flux Remember-ing Loop Forms Units [Temp(change) à Test(swim)] driver Opportunity drives ability. Ability assesses opportunity.
  64. 64. ObjecAve State Networks CondiAonal Roles Time Modes SubjecAve State Coherent Role present future swim water past test temp Present is coherently having :me. Event is the condi:on transi:oning :me. potenAal potenAal actual potenAal actual actual potenAal actual Note: potenAal/actual arrows below are in relaAon to modes (not states). States: actual à potenAal Modes: potenAal à actual Time: 64 Making Sense of Sense
  65. 65. The everyday sense of :me comes when Now becomes objec:fied. 65 Making Sense of Sense
  66. 66. What Now are we talking about? 66 Making Sense of Sense •  SubjecAve: The enAty present is ubiquitous to the topic of 6me by virtue of present's singular principle in every condiAon of 6me. •  ObjecAve: The enAty Event is a mulAplicity of principles, such as, enAAes and changing properAes.
  67. 67. •  Coherent and Condi:onal subject variables: ENTITIES: let Saa’ be actual ac6ve’ Subject (coherent) and let Spp’ be poten6al passive’ Subject (condiAonal). Saa’ ⊇ Spp’ •  General and Par:cular predicate variables: PROPERTIES: let Ppa’ be poten6al ac6ve’ Predicate (general) and let Pap’ be actual passive’ Predicate (parAcular). Ppa’ ⊇ Pap Q-Units: Quadranym Topics of Space & Time Let D be denota6on. (x) ⦂ D(x) ⟹ Ppa’(Saa’)⊇ Pap’(Spp’)(x) 67 Quadranym RepresentaAon: Subjects (States) and Predicates (Modes) in Brackets Making Sense of Sense It’s easy to loose sight of what a mode is and what a state is when engaged in any complex engineering project. The Q axiom keeps modes and states straight thus improving the tractability of categorical judgments in a system. A quadranym is a general proposiAon that is true for all the members and their posiAons of the delineated Q-unit class. ① (∀x) : Space(x) ⟹ [Infinite(void)⊇ Finite(between)](x) ② (∀x) : Time(x) ⟹ [Future(present)⊇ Past(event)](x) ③ (∀x) : Distance(x) ⟹ [Far(posi6on)⊇ Near(rela6on)](x) ④ (∀x) : Direc6on(x) ⟹ [From(posi6on)⊇ To(rela6on)](x) ⑤ (∀x) : Door(x) ⟹ [Open(passage)⊇ Close(barrier)](x) ⑥ (∀x) : Container(x) ⟹ [Out(empty)⊇ In(full)](x) ⑦ (∀x) : Energy(x) ⟹ [Ac6ve(mo6on)⊇ Passive(maLer)](x)
  68. 68. “Each part of the brain knows a lirle bit about what’s happening in some other [parts], but there’s no single place that knows everything. ... It’s like a big corporaAon. .” ― Marvin Minsky 68 Making Sense of Sense
  69. 69. Different ways of Thinking 69 Making Sense of Sense
  70. 70. Topic Expansive Reduc:ve Objec:ve Subjec:ve Time future past event present Door open close barrier passage percepAon sAmuli select organize interpret logic proposiAon conclusion evidence argument scienAfic hypothesis fact law theory science predicAon test analysis hypothesis Q u a d r a n y m Matrix 70 Making Sense of Sense
  71. 71. Expansive: novel, general. Reduc:ve: familiar, specific. Objec:ve: condiAonal noAon. Subjec:ve: coherent noAon. General Domains Topic Expansive Reduc:ve Objec:ve Subjec:ve Ame future past event present door open close barrier passage percepAon sAmuli select organize interpret logic proposiAon conclusion evidence argument scienAfic hypothesis fact law theory science predicAon test analysis hypothesis 71 Making Sense of Sense
  72. 72. Topic Expansive Reduc:ve Objec:ve Subjec:ve Ame future past event present door open close barrier passage percepAon sAmuli select organize interpret logic proposiAon conclusion evidence argument scienAfic hypothesis fact law theory science predicAon test analysis hypothesis Expansive: novel, general. Reduc:ve: familiar, specific. Objec:ve: condiAonal noAon. Subjec:ve: coherent noAon. 72 Making Sense of Sense General Domains
  73. 73. Topic Expansive Reduc:ve Objec:ve Subjec:ve Ame future past event present door open close barrier passage percepAon sAmuli select organize interpret logic proposiAon conclusion evidence argument scienAfic hypothesis fact law theory science predicAon test analysis hypothesis Expansive: novel, general. Objec:ve: condiAonal organizaAon. Subjec:ve: coherent noAon. Reduc:ve: familiar, specific. 73 Making Sense of Sense General Domains
  74. 74. Topic Expansive Reduc:ve Objec:ve Subjec:ve Ame future past event present door open close barrier passage percepAon sAmuli select organize interpret logic proposiAon conclusion evidence argument scienAfic hypothesis fact law theory science predicAon tested analysis hypothesis Reduc:ve: familiar, specific. Objec:ve: condiAonal noAon. Subjec:ve: coherent interpretaAon. Expansive: novel, general. 74 Making Sense of Sense General Domains
  75. 75. spaAal expansive open large reducAve close small Roles content Dimensions Domain potenAal potenAal actual actual 75 Making Sense of Sense Modes Complimentary Roles SpaAal RelaAons of LocaAons
  76. 76. categorical expansive general inclusive reducAve specific exclusive Dimensions Domain potenAal potenAal actual actual Roles content 76 Making Sense of Sense Modes Complimentary Roles SpaAal RelaAons of LocaAons
  77. 77. mental expansive novel unknown reducAve familiar known Dimensions Domain potenAal potenAal actual actual Roles content 77 Making Sense of Sense Modes Complimentary Roles SpaAal RelaAons of LocaAons
  78. 78. E=premise O=evidence S=claim R=conclusion argument Argument •  Subjec:ve: The enAty claim is ubiquitous to the topic argument by virtue of claim’s singular principle of every condiAon of argument. •  Objec:ve: The enAty evidence is a mulAplicity of principles, such as, enAAes and changing properAes. •  AlternaAve Mode Set: E=Agree - R=Disagree In conclusion, what we are proposing is a Quadranym Argument. 78 Making Sense of Sense
  79. 79. Prime Dimensions Quadranym & Polynym AcquisiAon 79 Quadranyms and polynyms can be collected into a kind of thesaurus containing sets of word dimensions that are generally regarded as strategic ways of thinking. Our hope is that once quadranyms and polynyms are berer understood their pracAcal and diverse applicability will be apparent. Making Sense of Sense
  80. 80. Making Sense of Sense Q Code Tags: qt, qe, qr, qo, qs (qe) expansive (qo) objec:ve (qs) subjec:ve (qr) reduc:ve (qt) = topic THE QUADRANT GRAPH HELPS TO ILLUSTRATE DIMENSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS, DIAGONAL, TOP & BOTTOM, LEFT & RIGHT 80 Framing a Topic Using The Quadranym Square SupplemenAng lexical ontologies with Q-units improves tractability and helps to establish a natural contextual flow of events. SemanAc network representaAon rely on nodes directed edges, Q representaAon relies on Q-units & meta-dimensional roles.
  81. 81. 81 Role: Expansive Role: ReducAve Role: SubjecAve Role: ObjecAve PosiAve NegaAve Pull Push We present an common sense knowledge acquisiAon effort to collect quadranym Polyordinate theoreAcal constructs, such as, in the examples given below. We use the term quadranym (literally, ‘four-words’) to mean four dimensional subordinate elements that defines a superordinate axiom. Making Sense of Sense
  82. 82. Making Sense of Sense All Qs are tested and cerAfied by humans. To assist in this process a simple sorAng program is used to read back quadranym constructs through an array of natural language scripts called expression-frames. Expression-frames are tailored to fit a specific realm or domain. For example, the Valence Realm. (qt) = topic, (qe) = expansive, (qr) = reducBve, (qo) = objecBve (qs)= subjecBve. It is correct to be (qe) instead of (qr) when the situa6on is (qo) but could have been (qs) when regarding (qt). Expression Frame Prime Quadranym 82
  83. 83. Making Sense of Sense qt = mood, qe = bePer, qr = worse, qo = happy, qs = sad It is correct to be (bePer) instead of (worse) when the situa6on is (happy) but could have been (sad) when regarding (mood). It is correct to be (worse) instead of (bePer) when the situa6on is (sad) but could have been (happy) when regarding (mood). People can quickly see if their Quadranym makes sense to them. qt = sensiBvity, qe = soothed, qr = irritated, qo = comfort, qs = discomfort It is correct to be (soothed) instead of (irritated) when the situa6on is (comfort) but could have been (discomfort) when regarding (sensiBvity). 83
  84. 84. 84 Expression frame interface example. Making Sense of Sense
  85. 85. 85 Making Sense of Sense The Polynym Thesaurus A collecAon of topical dimensions of any number. •  Quadranyms represent autogenously uniAzed contextual dimensions. •  Polynyms represent strategically divided contextual dimensions For normal communicaAons subjects are broken down into any number of dimensions. The Q system works on two levels, on the inter-personal level where all dimensions are configured as predicates, these are polynyms. On the intra-personal or responsive level only quadrant dimensions are used. Like quadranyms, polynyms can also be collected. Many polynyms already exist in the world since they represent any number of dimensions for strategic thinking. For example, Freud’s polynym (p3) , Psyche: Id, Ego, Superego. It is used as a strategy to understand the human mind.
  86. 86. Acquisi:on Interface example: basic (cf., html, Java, python) 86 Making Sense of Sense We present an interdisciplinary knowledge acquisiAon effort to collect superordinate theoreAcal constructs, such as, in the current examples. We use the term polynym (literally, ‘many-word’) to mean an array of subordinate elements that defines a superordinate axiom.
  87. 87. 87 polynym: a theore:cal construct that is best described using an array of subordinate terms id ego superego Psyche (Freud) P=3 A=psychology topic (source) P=denominator A=area/discipline subordinates } } Making Sense of Sense Introducing
  88. 88. 88 id ego superego Psyche (Freud) P=3 A=psychology topic (source) P=denominator A=area/discipline subordinates } } Superordinate The theoretical construct = {Freud, Psyche} Subordinates The theory’s divisions = {id, ego, superego} Making Sense of Sense
  89. 89. 89 id ego superego Psyche (Freud) P=3 A=psychology topic (source) P=denominator A=area/discipline subordinates } } Numerator The theory topic = {psyche} Denominator The number of subordinates = {3} Making Sense of Sense
  90. 90. 90 Goal • collect synsets of theory subordinates • build a network of interdisciplinary theories • enable development by web community Uses • machine learning • mapping between disciplines • story understanding • knowledge base inferencing • interdisciplinary research • language translation id ego superego earth metal wood fire water Psyche, Personality (Freud) P=3 A=psychology chi (Wu Xing) P=5 A=philosophy reasoning P=2 A=cog-sci inducAve deducAve innate insAnct impulse reflex want desire me self raAonal reason resolve decide ideal moral conscience self-reflecAon restraint disapproval synsets topic (source) P=denominator A=area/discipline subordinates } } } { { Making Sense of Sense
  91. 91. 91 Synonym sets (synsets) are essenAal for story understanding and language translaAon. However, meaning can change in context of a specific theory… ≠ ego personality (Freud) P=3 A=psychology self raAonal reason resolve decide ego English (WordNet) conceit narcissism pride vanity self-esteem Like a thesaurus, synonym sets in a lexical database like WordNet[#] are highly aligned in meaning. In the context of a superordinate construct, synonym sets may be more abstract. CreaAng super/subordinate synonym sets is a unique way to define and compare axioms. Making Sense of Sense
  92. 92. 92 A network of interdisciplinary theories and accompanying synsets can be built communally. Specialists in different fields collect and compare ideas in one locaAon. Expert 1 Expert 2 personality (Freud) P=3 A=psychology energy (chakra) P=7 A=philosophy mood (Ekman) P=6 A=psychology intelligence (Gardner) P=7 A=psychology chi (Wu Xing) P=5 A=philosophy truth (Buddha) P=4 A=philosophy Making Sense of Sense
  93. 93. 93 Related theories can be retrieved together, even if originaAng from different domains. theology metaphysics man (Shultze) P=3 A=theology man (Hsing) P=5 A=metaphysics Search: humani:es natural spritual carnal common worthy superior called sage Making Sense of Sense
  94. 94. The Quadranym Sensibility Model (Q): The Q proposal is a method to research and represent word level concepts, commonsense knowledge and the intersects that dispense a human-like sensibility. 94 Making Sense of Sense The prime Q is an exemplary quadranym derived from the Q axiom. It is idenAfied by the acronym EROS: Expansive, ReducAve, ObjecAve, SubjecAve. (p. 21 - 28) The Q Categorical Axiom: State: actual ⊇ poten6al Mode: poten6al ⊇ actual
  95. 95. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.  Bruner, J. (1984) Actual minds possible world, MIT Press. 2.  Jon Barwise and John Perry, Situa6ons and Attudes, 1983. MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-02189-7 3.  Chalmers, D. J. (2010) The Character of Consciousness, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. 4.  Chalmers, D. J. (1996) The Conscious Mind, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 5.  Chemero, A., (2009) Radical Embodied CogniAve Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 6.  Clark, A., Chalmers, D. J. (1998), reprint, (2010) The Extended Mind. MIT Press. 7.  Clark A. (2015) Surfing Uncertainty, Oxford University Press. 8.  Dahlgren, K. (1988) Naïve SemanAcs For Natural Language Understanding, Springer US, copy right holder: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 9.  Dreyfus, H.L. (ed.) (1982) Husserl, IntenAonality and CogniAve Science, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 10.  Fillmore, C. (1968) "Frame semanAcs”, (1982) In LinguisAcs in the Morning Calm. Seoul, Hanshin Publishing Co., 11.  Fodor, J. A. (1978) “ProposiAonal A†tudes” in RePresentaAons: (1984) Philosophical Essays on the FoundaAons of CogniAve Science, J.A. Fodor, Cambridge, Massachusers: MIT Press, 1981. 12.  Frege, G. (1891) FuncAon and Concept, in Jenaische Gesellschaw für Medizin und Naturwissenschaw, 13.  Frege, G. (1892) On Sense and Reference, Zeitschriw für Philosophie und philosophische KriAk 14.  Frege, G. (1892) Concept and Object, in Vierteljahresschriw für wissenschawliche Philosophie XVI 15.  Fries, P. (2005). "A mechanism for cogniAve dynamics: neuronal communicaAon through neuronal coherence". 16.  Gallagher S. (2005 )How the body shapes the mind. Oxford University Press. 17.  Gibson, J.J. (1950). The PercepAon of the Visual World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 18.  Gibson, J. J. (1966). The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems, Boston: Hughton Mifflin. 19.  Gibson, J.J. (1972). A Theory of Direct Visual PercepAon. In J. Royce, W. Rozenboom (Eds.). The Psychology of Knowing. New York: Gordon & Breach. 20.  Gibson, J.J. (1977). The Theory of Affordances In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (eds.). 21.  Heidegger M. (1927) Being and Time, translated by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962. 22.  Hoff B. (1982) The Tao of Pooh. Duron 23.  Husserl, E. (1900/1970) Logical InvesAgaAons, (Engl. Transl. by Findlay, J.N.), London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 24.  Husserl, E. (1913) Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. 25.  Kahneman D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan. 26.  Kahneman D. Tversky A.(2000). Choices, Values, and Frames, Cambridge University Press. 27.  Kripke S. (1972) SemanAcs of natural language, Reidel Publishing Company. 28.  Lakeoff G., Johnson M, (1980) Metaphores we live by, University of Chicago Press. 29.  Lenat, D. (2001) Hal's Legacy, 2001's Computer as Dream and Reality. Common Sense and the Mind of HAL". Cycorp, Inc. 30.  Lenat, D. and Guha R. V. (1990). Building Large Knowledge-Based Systems: RepresentaAon and Inference in the Cyc Project. Addison-Wesley. 31.  Matuszek C. (2005) "Searching for Common Sense: PopulaAng Cyc from the Web". TwenAeth NaAonal Conference on ArAficial Intelligence. Pirsburgh, Pennsylvania. 32.  Merleau-Ponty M. (1945) Phenomenology of PercepAon, first published, EdiAons Gallimard, Paris. 33.  Miller G. A., Beckwith R, Fellbaum C. D., Gross D., Miller K. (1990). WordNet: An online lexical database. Int. J. Lexicograph 34.  Minsky, M. (1986) The Society of Mind. Simon and Schuster. 35.  Minsky, M. (2006). The EmoAon Machine. Simon & Schuster. 36.  Myin E. (2013) Radicalizing EnacAvism: Basic Minds without Content MIT Press. 37.  Plous, S. (1993). The psychology of judgment and decision making. McGraw-Hill. 38.  Prinz, J. (2012) The Conscience Brain, Oxford University Press. 39.  Rosch, E. (1975) “CogniAve RepresentaAons of SemanAc Categories", Journal of Experimental Psychology. 40.  Searle, J. (1983) IntenAonality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 41.  Stamenov, N.I., and Gallese, V. (2002) Mirror Neurons and the EvoluAon of Brain and Language. John Benjamins Publishing Co. 42.  Singh, P. (2002) The Open Mind Common Sense Project, MIT Medi a Lab January 1, 2002: 43.  Velleman, J. D. 1989. PracAcal ReflecAon . Princeton: Princeton University Press. "The Guise of the Good” In Velleman 2000. 44.  Whitehead, A. N. (1929), Process and Reality, New York: Macmillan. 45.  Whitehead, A. N. (1933) Adventures of Ideas, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; New York: Macmillan. 46.  Williams, R.R. (1992). RecogniAon: Fichte and Hegel on the Other. SUNY Press. 47.  Wirgenstein, L. (1953) Philosophical InvesAgaAons , G.E.M. Anscombe and R. Rhees (eds.), G.E.M. Anscombe (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell. 48.  Wirgenstein, L. (1921) Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (TLP), 1922, C. K. Ogden (trans.), London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 49.  Mind in Life: Biology, Phenomenology, and the Sciences of Mind 95 Making Sense of Concepts Important CS acquisiAon projects (The Cyc project: ‘Common Sense knowledge Base’ (Lenat, Guha, 1990)) (Open Mind Common Sense (Singh, P. 2002)) Reference Page Not Complete
  96. 96. Dane Scalise – Researcher Scory Vercoe – MIT Media Lab Making Sense of Sense The Quadranym Sensibility Model (EROS) A Look at the Ordinariness of the Mythic Sense Identify the box that you seek to think out of;-) 96 Dedicated to coders and thinkers