5 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2023
    1. Flow triggers can be categorized into four distinct types: external, internal, group flow, and creative flow triggers.External Triggers: Factors or techniques that deliberately induce a state of flow during a specific task or activity, such as listening to music to help you focusInternal Triggers: Psychological and cognitive factors that spontaneously lead to a state of flow during activities, like completing a challenging task Creative Triggers: Factors that can help you immerse yourself fully in the creative processGroup Flow Triggers: Factors that promote a collective state of flow within a group or team setting

      flow can be induced internally, externally, creatively (ie things that get you into a creative process), and group flow triggers

      • see external, creative, and group flow triggers as perhaps something that has to do with extended cognition?
  2. Oct 2022
    1. useful in that it will catch readers up with the current state of the literature in extended cognition, looking at discussions of extended perception, belief and memory

      Downloaded the paper to Zotero

      I'm mostly interested in the current thinking about the role of the external environment in extended congition. Offloading K to our environment is extremely old, and digital PKM takes it on faith. At the same time personal experience suggests interplay with what I offload is also key. Sveiby saw external structure as the next component after PKM, for KM. The better I remember what I offloaded and how/why the more useful it is to work with the offloaded stuff.

  3. Jul 2022
    1. so that's me trying to do a synoptic integration of all of the four e-cognitive science and trying to get it 00:00:12 into a form that i think would help make make sense to people of the of cognition and also in a form that's helpful to get them to see what's what we're talking about when i'm talking about the meaning 00:00:25 that's at stake in the meaning crisis because it's not sort of just semantic meaning

      John explains how the 4 P's originated as a way to summarize and present in a palatable way of presenting the cognitive science “4E” approach to cognition - that cognition does not occur solely in the head, but is also embodied, embedded, enacted, or extended by way of extra-cranial processes and structures.

  4. bafybeicho2xrqouoq4cvqev3l2p44rapi6vtmngfdt42emek5lyygbp3sy.ipfs.dweb.link bafybeicho2xrqouoq4cvqev3l2p44rapi6vtmngfdt42emek5lyygbp3sy.ipfs.dweb.link
    1. We approach the problem of the extended mind from a radically non-dualistperspective. The separation between mind and matter is an artefact of the outdatedmechanistic worldview, which leaves no room for mental phenomena such as agency,intentionality, or feeling. We propose to replace it by an action ontology, which conceivesmind and matter as aspects of the same network of processes. By adopting the intentionalstance, we interpret the catalysts of elementary reactions as agents exhibiting desires,intentions, and sensations. Autopoietic networks of reactions constitute more complex super-agents, which moreover exhibit memory, deliberation and sense-making. In the specific caseof social networks, individual agents coordinate their actions via the propagation ofchallenges. The distributed cognition that emerges from this interaction cannot be situated inany individual brain. This non-dualist, holistic view extends and operationalizes processmetaphysics and Eastern philosophies. It is supported by both mindfulness experiences andmathematical models of action, self-organization, and cognition.

      The proposal is to interpret mind and matter as aspects of the same process network, and decouple both from the Cartesian/Newtonian mechanistic worldview. Catalysts of elementary reactions are agents exhibiting intention, which can exhibit increasingly complex behavior Distributed cognition that emerges from high level social interactions cannot be situated in any single individual brain.

  5. Jun 2021
    1. the original goal at least, was to have a machine that could be like a human, in that the machine could do many tasks and could learn something in one domain, like if I learned how to play checkers maybe that would help me learn better how to play chess or other similar games, or even that I could use things that I’d learned in chess in other areas of life, that we sort of have this ability to generalize the things that we know or the things that we’ve learned and apply it to many different kinds of situations. But this is something that’s eluded AI systems for its entire history.

      The truth is we do not need to have computers to excel in the things we do best, but to complement us. We shall bet on cognitive extension instead of trying to re-create human intelligence --which is a legitimate area of research, but computer scientists should leave this to cognitive science and neuroscience.