Cover Page 

Uploaded June 27, 2011 

 

Issues in the Study of 

Abstractions  

Author: Jeffrey G. Long (jefflong@aol.com) 

Date: May 1, 2000 

Forum: Talk presented at the Eighth Interdisciplinary Conference on Evolutionary Systems, sponsored by the Washington Evolutionary Systems Society.  

Contents 

Pages 1‐15: Slides (but no text) for presentation 

 

License 

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial 

3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by‐nc/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative 

Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA. 

Issues in the Study of AbstractionsAbstractions

Jeffrey G. LongWESS ConferenceWESS Conference

May 2000

OverviewOverview

Ch i O Mi d• Changing Our Minds• The Reality of Abstractions• Types of Learning• Making Notational Engineering a RealMaking Notational Engineering a Real

Discipline

Changing Our Minds: Four People

• Adam-1: Born 200,000 years agoAd 2 B 100 000• Adam-2: Born 100,000 years ago

• Adam-3: Born today• Adam-4: Born 100,000 years hence

AssumptionsAssumptions

Th l ll d H i• The people are all modern Homo sapiens sapiens

• The people are genetically identical• The people grow up to be competent at p p g p p

living a normal life for their times

If Brought Together, Could They Communicate?

B i biliti l li bl• Basic capabilities always reliable:– Smile, cry, show other emotions– Basic cognition: differentiate 3 > 2

• Basic ontological assumptions/beliefs are very different

• Effectively, each exists in a different world y,

The World of Adam 1The World of Adam-1

N l• No language• No numbers• No time• No shapeNo shape• No relations

N l• No value

The World of Adam 2The World of Adam-2

L• Language• No numbers• No time• No shapeNo shape• No relations

N l• No value

The World of Adam 3The World of Adam-3

L• Language• Numbers• Time• ShapeShape• Relations

V l• Value

The World of Adam 4The World of Adam-4

All f th i l b t ti• All of the previous, plus new abstractions that we cannot even imagine– New concepts of language, numbers, time,

shape, relations, valueWh ll b i– Wholly new abstractions

– Wholly new media– Wholly new values and behaviors

Changing Our MindsChanging Our Minds

Th i d f H i h t l• The mind of Hss is what evolves• It evolves via new abstractions and the

application thereof• This creates a new ontologygy• There is a major chasm between people

having vastly different ontologieshaving vastly different ontologies

Are They Real or Inventions?Are They Real or Inventions?

Wh t it i ld t d t i• What criteria could we use to determine this?

• What are the consequences of one or the other?

What criteria could we use?

H d k thi i “ l”?• How do we know anything is “real”?– Intersubjective agreement– Functional utility– Cultural convention

• Are there parallels to the way we learn to see objects?– Piaget’s developmental stages

What are the consequences?What are the consequences?

If b t ti “ l” th• If abstractions are “real” then:– There is some biological/ontogenetic

ti th t ll t thperception process that allows us to see them– There may be some way to see new

abstractions more q ickl or s stematicallabstractions more quickly or systematically– It changes the nature of reality: what we think

is real is only “surface structure”is real is only surface structure

Types of LearningTypes of Learning

N Ab t ti S thi t t ll• New Abstraction: See something totally new in the environment

• New Paradigm: Change our unconscious beliefs about a system or situation

• New Knowledge: Extend our conscious beliefs about a system or situationy

Making Notational Engineering a Real Discipline

U i it R h L b/P• University Research Lab/Program• Private Foundation• For-Profit Corporation• Federal Research LabFederal Research Lab

• Primary requirement: results