Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by misiti3780 on Monday March 29, 2021 @01:28PM
(#26625256)
I tried reading GEB years ago and then gave up, but then I read "I Am A Strange Loop" and thought it was fascinating. I think the latter is just smaller version of the former, but more concise as he/they was able to think about it for a few more years.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by verdverm on Monday March 29, 2021 @01:56PM
(#26625658)
Strange Loop is much more approachable and in many ways is a more refined and concise treatment of his ideas
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by ppezaris on Monday March 29, 2021 @03:43PM
(#26627222)
The latter is a much smaller version of the former. GEB's central theme has to do with levels of meaning, which is delivered not only in substance but also in form. One has to look no further than Contracrostipunctus, or the final dialogue to see it on full display.
https://godel-escher-bach.fandom.com/wiki/Contracrostipunctu...
hidden in the dialogue as the first letter of each phrase is the acrostic "Hofstadter's contracrostipunctus acrostically backwards spells 'J.S. Bach'" which, when read acrostically backwards does indeed spell J.S. Bach.
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by leephillips on Monday March 29, 2021 @01:42PM
(#26625455)
he/they?
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by misiti3780 on Monday March 29, 2021 @03:31PM
(#26627067)
i actually wasnt sure if there was more than one person involved in all of this work...so i hedged.
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by jdonaldson on Monday March 29, 2021 @01:54PM
(#26625638)
Hofstadter is a polymath, and he's arguably changed the understanding of the philosophy of existence as much as the understanding of these philosophies have changed him. I actually like using "they" to describe this process.
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by leephillips on Monday March 29, 2021 @01:59PM
(#26625715)
Because he’s too smart to be just one person?
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by jdonaldson on Monday March 29, 2021 @02:47PM
(#26626454)
Maybe we recognize the contributions and influences of others in his work? Hofstadter is a big time guy, but he's not a self-centered egoist like Kurzweil. He'll regularly talk about the ideas he's bounced around with buddies like Daniel Dennett, etc. I see him as more of a poet than a philosopher or scientist. He is piecing together little bits of truth from many, many, different domains and showing how they reach the same conclusions. There's been nobody like him for over 50 years, so it's very difficult to draw comparisons to others, or even measure the impact of his contributions.
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by mprovost on Monday March 29, 2021 @04:13PM
(#26627571)
I talked myself into one of his classes as an undergrad and definitely came away with the belief that he was the smartest person I would ever meet. It's been 23 years and that's still true and I'd take a bet today that it will continue to be true for the rest of my life.
Re:Retrospective review of Gödel, Escher, Bach (1996) [pdf]
by jdonaldson on Monday April 05, 2021 @12:03PM
(#26700690)
Agreed. He's a humble guy, but it's also very humbling being around him and listening him to talk. As I've gotten older, I have to look back at my STEM career in academia and industry, I have to say that he's the last individual that I've really been in awe of.