Douglas R. Hofstadter
Douglas
R. Hofstadter is College Professor of Cognitive Science and
Computer Science, and Adjunct Professor of History and Philosophy
of Science, Philosophy, Comparative Literature, and Psychology
at Indiana University, where he directs the Center for Research
on Concepts and Cognition. His books include the Pulitzer Prize
winning Gödel
Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, Metamagical
Themas, The Mind's I (with Daniel Dennett), Fluid
Concepts and Creative Analogies, Le Ton Beau de Marot,
and a verse translation of Pushkin's Eugene Onegin.
In addition to his research and writings in cognitive science
and philosophy of mind, Hofstadter has contributed to physics
and mathematics (in particular the fractal structure generally
known as “Hofstadter's butterfly”), has composed
music and visual art, and has done poetry translation. He has
authored over 50 papers, including Analogy as the Core
of Cognition.

Related Links
• Douglas
Hofstadter's home
page
• Douglas
Hofstadter's Wikipedia page
• A
discussion of Douglas Hofstadter
• Lipogrammatic Autobiography,
by Douglas Hofstadter
• Selected
Annotated Bibliography of Douglas Hofstadter
• Presidential
Lectures interview with Douglas Hofstadter
• Analogy
as the Core of Cognition, by Douglas Hofstadter
• Hofstadter
on Einstein
 Douglas
Hofstadter Quotes
Which statement seems more true: (1) I have a
brain. (2) I am a brain.
Perhaps the most concise summary of enlightenment
would be: transcending dualism. … Dualism is the conceptual
division of the world into categories. … human perception
is by nature a dualistic phenomenon – which makes the quest
for enlightenment an uphill struggle, to say the least.
Relying on words to lead you to the truth
is like relying on an incomplete formal system to lead you to
the
truth. A formal system will give you some truths, but ... a formal
system, no matter how powerful – cannot lead to all truths.
Below every tangled hierarchy lies an inviolate
level.
No reference is truly direct – every reference
depends on SOME kind of coding scheme. It's just a question of
how implicit it is.
One of the basic tenets of Zen Buddhism is that
there is no way to characterize what Zen is. No matter what verbal
space you try to enclose Zen in, it resists, and spills over. It
might seem, then, that all efforts to explain Zen are complete
wastes of time. But that is not the attitude of Zen masters and
students. For instance, Zen koans are a central part of Zen study,
verbal though they are. Koans are supposed to be 'triggers' which,
though they do not contain enough information in themselves to
impart enlightenment, may possibly be sufficient to unlock the
mechanisms inside one's mind that lead to enlightenment. But in
general, the Zen attitude is that words and truth are incompatible,
or at least that no words can capture truth.
I think Ray Kurzweil is terrified by his own mortality and deeply
longs to avoid death. I understand this obsession of his and am
even somehow touched by its ferocious intensity, but I think it
badly distorts his vision. As I see it, Kurzweil's desperate hopes
seriously cloud his scientific objectivity.

|