[tmbchr]™

Marvin Minsky’s Society of Mind



I’ve previously used the phrase “polytheistic mind” and various Jungian concepts cobbled together to describe this, but Minsky’s model is far more elegant:

A core tenet of Minsky’s philosophy is that “minds are what brains do”. The society of mind theory views the human mind and any other naturally evolved cognitive systems as a vast society of individually simple processes known as agents. These processes are the fundamental thinking entities from which minds are built, and together produce the many abilities we attribute to minds. The great power in viewing a mind as a society of agents, as opposed to as the consequence of some basic principle or some simple formal system, is that different agents can be based on different types of processes with different purposes, ways of representing knowledge, and methods for producing results.







9 Reader Responses

  1. Brooke Says:
    October 27th, 2007 at 11:51 pm

    Check out “Aspect Psychology” for a similar angle. It views the human psyche a whole civilization of personality ‘aspects’ which make up each individual. (Jane Roberts’ ‘Psychic Politics (An Aspect Psychology Book’):

    “Each personality contains an inner civilization of the self which he yearns to govern … The ego rises from the civilization of the psyche just as a leader rises from the masses of the people; appointed, chosen, or taking control according to an inner politics first existing within the greater inner mind.”

  2. Tim Boucher Says:
    October 28th, 2007 at 1:49 am

    HOLY SHIT

    That makes it all so clear

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminism
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry

    Those systems of government are advocated by people within whom those challenges have been met.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_actualization
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Federation_of_Planets

    It’s a universal repeatable process crossing all culture.

    I think we just solved the Da Vinci Code!

  3. Julia Says:
    October 28th, 2007 at 2:18 pm

    Sorry is this question goes Duh in the Homer Simpson sense but here goes. Is this a way to look at the 72 demons of Goetia? Some things I’ve read says they’re real demons with real chains of command etc. and others say they’re internal states/complexes and when you’ve mastered them you’ll know.

  4. Tim Boucher Says:
    October 28th, 2007 at 8:27 pm

    http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2003...mons-and-the-pharmaceutical-industry/
    http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005...the-wave-particle-duality-of-spirits/

    To become king, oaths of fealty or other pacts must be instantiated

    {See also: Ark of the Covenant}

  5. Marvin Minsky Says:
    October 29th, 2007 at 12:36 am

    I really like your summary in the box at the top of the page: “A core . . . results.” The paragraph better expresses that set of ideas than all the brief versions that I’ve tried to write!

    Umm, then I noticed a link to a URL at
    http://timboucher.tumblr.com/post/17482972
    which attributes Jane Roberts’ quote [“each personality…inner mind.”] to me. Some kind of referential mistake there, I think.

    Actually, I sort of like the romantic flow of that passage. It reminds me of Rousseau’s “social contract” philosophy; however, I can’t recall agreeing to any such contract.

  6. Tim Boucher Says:
    October 29th, 2007 at 2:46 am

    You have to learn to sub-contract out to sub-personalities?

  7. Tim Boucher Says:
    October 29th, 2007 at 2:55 am

    Hey Marvin, thanks for stopping by!

    I really like your summary in the box at the top of the page: “A core . . . results.”

    That’s from Wikipedia’s entry. The simplicity of it struck me as well.

    Some kind of referential mistake there, I think.

    Yeah, the tumblelog format leaves a lot to be desired, but I’m exploring alternatives.

    Actually, I sort of like the romantic flow of that passage..

    Me too, one of the things I like about the tumblelog/clickstream style of capturing annotated data.

    It reminds me of Rousseau’s “social contract” philosophy; however, I can’t recall agreeing to any such contract.

    Yeah, that’s the problem about that. I also was never consulted on just what the “consensus” was that consensus reality was founded on.

    But maybe that’s the opportunity which lies before us: to form those contracts in ourselves, with others and with the technology which surrounds us.

  8. alistair Says:
    October 29th, 2007 at 10:13 am

    my baptist friend says that what i do in hypnosis is the work of demons and that i`m at risk of possession.

    my answer to that is that i`m able to cope with my shit, thanks.

    i`m actually staggered at the depth of fear that religion instills in some.

    that`s my take julia, for what it`s worth.

    as a leader i`ve been called worse than an egotist.

    p.d. ouspensky, in his, the psychology of man`s possible evolution, says that most are never more than sleeping and function automatically.

    so when the machines wake up we are in an interesting spot…….marvin?

  9. speedbird Says:
    October 29th, 2007 at 11:35 am

    Very interesting…



SURROUND YOURSELF WITH STRENGTH.