Lego Serious Play at CERN, Challenge Based innovation CBi is the latest iteration of an evolving experiment at CERN in Geneva. The CBi acronym stands for “Challenge Based innovation”, and the experiment pulls in students from several countries and multiple disciplines. The Scimpulse Foundation collaborates with CERN since 2013 and in this occasion we facilitate a concept design workshop. It’s a sunny September morning in Mayrin, the outskirts of Geneva, right on the side of the ATLAS experiment building there is a new shell enclosure where a bunch of students practice and learn about innovation. Dr. Marco Manca is the coach of the team and he wants to make sure that they come out of the experience with a new mindset. The challenge is to design something that may enable blind people to perceive the surrounding environment; maybe some type of augmented sensory device. They call themselves the “Heisenberg” team. They fly through the training! what is Vision? To know how we did it, keep on reading … Let me see! Let me see!
Consciousness 1. History of the issue Questions about the nature of conscious awareness have likely been asked for as long as there have been humans. Neolithic burial practices appear to express spiritual beliefs and provide early evidence for at least minimally reflective thought about the nature of human consciousness (Pearson 1999, Clark and Riel-Salvatore 2001). Nonetheless, some have argued that consciousness as we know it today is a relatively recent historical development that arose sometime after the Homeric era (Jaynes 1974). Although the words “conscious” and “conscience” are used quite differently today, it is likely that the Reformation emphasis on the latter as an inner source of truth played some role in the inward turn so characteristic of the modern reflective view of self. By the beginning of the early modern era in the seventeenth century, consciousness had come full center in thinking about the mind. Locke's contemporary G.W. 2. 2.1 Creature Consciousness Sentience. Wakefulness. 3.
Qualia In philosophy, qualia (/ˈkwɑːliə/ or /ˈkweɪliə/; singular form: quale) are what some consider to be individual instances of subjective, conscious experience. The term "qualia" derives from the Latin neuter plural form (qualia) of the Latin adjective quālis (Latin pronunciation: [ˈkʷaːlɪs]) meaning "of what sort" or "of what kind"). Examples of qualia include the pain of a headache, the taste of wine, or the perceived redness of an evening sky. As qualitative characters of sensation, qualia stand in contrast to "propositional attitudes".[1] Daniel Dennett (b. 1942), American philosopher and cognitive scientist, regards qualia as "an unfamiliar term for something that could not be more familiar to each of us: the ways things seem to us".[2] Erwin Schrödinger (1887–1961), the famous physicist, had this counter-materialist take: The sensation of color cannot be accounted for by the physicist's objective picture of light-waves. Definitions[edit] Arguments for the existence of qualia[edit] E. J.
Data, Information, Knowledge and Wisdom From SystemsWiki by Gene Bellinger, Durval Castro, Anthony Mills There is probably no segment of activity in the world attracting as much attention at present as that of knowledge management. Yet as I entered this arena of activity I quickly found there didn't seem to be a wealth of sources that seemed to make sense in terms of defining what knowledge actually was, and how was it differentiated from data, information, and wisdom. What follows is the current level of understanding I have been able to piece together regarding data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. According to Russell Ackoff [1989], a systems theorist and professor of organizational change, the content of the human mind can be classified into five categories: Ackoff indicates that the first four categories relate to the past; they deal with what has been or what is known. A further elaboration of Ackoff's definitions follows: Data... data is raw. Ex: It is raining. Ex: It rains because it rains. Now consider the following:
C.G.JUNG Los escritos de Freud constituyeron una experiencia fundamental en los estudios de Jung. La Interpretación de los sueños lo impresionó notablemente. En 1906 Jung le envió a Freud una copia de su libro Psicología de la demencia precoz y éste le respondió con agradecimiento y críticas. En 1907 Jung fue a Viena invitado por Freud, y estuvieron reunidos durante trece horas consecutivas. “Freud”, dice Jung, “fue el primer hombre realmente importante con el que me había topado, ningún otro podía comparársele. En 1909, renunció a su puesto en Burghölzli para dedicarse a su consulta privada en Küsnacht, donde se había construido una casa a orillas del lago. “Emprendimos el viaje en Bremen en 1909. “Freud tuvo un sueño, cuyo contenido no estoy autorizado a revelar. “Freud no pudo, como digo anteriormente, interpretar mis sueños de entonces más que parcialmente o, en algunos casos, en absoluto. El sueño fue el siguiente: me encontraba en una casa desconocida que tenía dos plantas.
Orchestrated objective reduction Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR) is a controversial 20-year-old theory of consciousness conceptualized by the theoretical physicist Sir Roger Penrose and anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff, which claims that consciousness derives from deeper level, finer scale quantum activities inside the cells, most prevalent in the brain neurons. It combines approaches from the radically different angles of molecular biology, neuroscience, quantum physics, pharmacology, philosophy, quantum information theory, and aspects of quantum gravity.[1] The Penrose–Lucas argument[edit] The Penrose–Lucas argument states that, because humans are capable of knowing the truth of Gödel-unprovable statements, human thought is necessarily non-computable.[23] In 1931, mathematician and logician Kurt Gödel proved that any effectively generated theory capable of proving basic arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete. Criticism of the Penrose–Lucas argument[edit] Objective reduction[edit] Motivation[edit]
DIKW Pyramid The DIKW Pyramid, also known variously as the "DIKW Hierarchy", "Wisdom Hierarchy", the "Knowledge Hierarchy", the "Information Hierarchy", and the "Knowledge Pyramid",[1] refers loosely to a class of models[2] for representing purported structural and/or functional relationships between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. "Typically information is defined in terms of data, knowledge in terms of information, and wisdom in terms of knowledge".[1] History[edit] "The presentation of the relationships among data, information, knowledge, and sometimes wisdom in a hierarchical arrangement has been part of the language of information science for many years. Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom[edit] In the same year as Ackoff presented his address, information scientist Anthony Debons and colleagues introduced an extended hierarchy, with "events", "symbols", and "rules and formulations" tiers ahead of data.[7][16] Data, Information, Knowledge[edit] Description[edit] Data[edit] Structural vs.
Intuition pump In the case of the Chinese Room argument, Dennett argues that the intuitive notion that a person manipulating symbols seems inadequate to constitute any form of consciousness ignores the requirements of memory, recall, emotion, world knowledge and rationality that the system would actually need to pass such a test. "Searle does not deny that programs can have all this structure, of course," Dennett says.[2] "He simply discourages us from attending to it. But if we are to do a good job imagining the case, we are not only entitled but obliged to imagine that the program Searle is hand-simulating has all this structure — and more, if only we can imagine it. But then it is no longer obvious, I trust, that there is no genuine understanding of the joke going on." A popular strategy in philosophy is to construct a certain sort of thought experiment I call an intuition pump [...]. See also[edit] References[edit] Jump up ^ Baggini, Julian; Peter Fosl (2003). "2". External links[edit]
The Emperor's New Mind The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds and The Laws of Physics is a 1989 book by mathematical physicist Sir Roger Penrose. Penrose argues that human consciousness is non-algorithmic, and thus is not capable of being modeled by a conventional Turing machine-type of digital computer. Penrose hypothesizes that quantum mechanics plays an essential role in the understanding of human consciousness. The collapse of the quantum wavefunction is seen as playing an important role in brain function. The majority of the book is spent reviewing, for the scientifically minded layreader, a plethora of interrelated subjects such as Newtonian physics, special and general relativity, the philosophy and limitations of mathematics, quantum physics, cosmology, and the nature of time. Penrose states that his ideas on the nature of consciousness are speculative, and his thesis is considered erroneous by experts in the fields of philosophy, computer science, and robotics.[1][2][3] See also[edit]
The Problem with the Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom Hierarchy - David Weinberger by David Weinberger | 9:00 AM February 2, 2010 The data-information-knowledge-wisdom hierarchy seemed like a really great idea when it was first proposed. But its rapid acceptance was in fact a sign of how worried we were about the real value of the information systems we had built at such great expense. What looks like a logical progression is actually a desperate cry for help. The DIKW hierarchy (as it came to be known) was brought to prominence by Russell Ackoff in his address accepting the presidency of the International Society for General Systems Research in 1989. Where is the Life we have lost in living? Those lines come from the poem “The Rock” by T.S. The DIKW sequence made immediate sense because it extends what every Computer Science 101 class learns: information is a refinement of mere data. But, the info-to-knowledge move is far more problematic than the data-to-info one. So, what is “knowledge” in the DIKW pyramid? And humbug.
Digitale Lehre: Harvard für alle | Studium Kostenlos studieren bei den berühmtesten Professoren des Landes: Die Online-Kurse der US-Elite-Unis machen das möglich. Nur wer soll die Angebote am Ende finanzieren? Speichern Drucken Twitter Facebook Google + "Gestern habe ich die Uni gewechselt", schreibt Dan Fellin aus Portland, Oregon, auf seinem Blog. Moment, halblang, wovon ist überhaupt die Rede? Anzeige Sieht so der Anfang einer gigantischen Bildungsrevolution aus? Studenten aus aller Welt helfen sich gegenseitig Statt abgefilmter Vorlesungen bekommen die Teilnehmer kurze erklärende Einheiten vom Dozenten vorgetragen, dann folgt ein Verständnistest, erst dann geht das Video weiter. Nachdem Udacity den Anfang gemacht hatte, zogen andere nach. Udacity, edX und Coursera haben innerhalb der Universitätslandschaft hohe Wellen geschlagen, die auch in Deutschland angekommen sind. Das Zertifikat, das das HPI ausstellt, hat dabei eher symbolischen Wert.
Quantum cognition Quantum cognition is an emerging field which applies the mathematical formalism of quantum theory to model cognitive phenomena such as information processing by the human brain, decision making, human memory, concepts and conceptual reasoning, human judgment, and perception.[1][2] [3][4] The field clearly distinguishes itself from the quantum mind as it is not reliant on the hypothesis that there is something micro-physical quantum mechanical about the brain. Quantum cognition is based on the quantum-like paradigm[5][6] or generalized quantum paradigm [7] or quantum structure paradigm [8] that information processing by complex systems such as the brain, taking into account contextual dependence of information and probabilistic reasoning, can be mathematically described in the framework of quantum information and quantum probability theory. Main subjects of research[edit] Quantum-like models of information processing ("quantum-like brain")[edit] Decision making[edit] Human memory[edit]