Is this actually worth reading or just psuedointellectual trash?
Looks like it might be cool
>>7634427
This one's actually pretty good tee bee honest
The answer is actually both. Hofstadter introduces a lot of compelling topics in an interesting and insightful way, but his overall theories on everything fall flat. Like, it's a good book to learn about Godel's theorems, topics in computer science, and biology, but his ultimate explanation for how this ties into consciousness or the fabric of the universe or somesuch has little substance. Nonetheless, it's fun.
>>7634427
It's worth reading. So is this book from him, which deals with the task of translation.
>>7634427
It's worth the work.
>>7634507
I can't take him seriously with hair like that.
>>7634427
i throughly enjoyed it. That said, you have to take it with a grain of salt. Its not trying to be a guide to the universe, more of an innocent "hey look, these things exist and they are cool" sort of experience with lovely dialogues inbetween.
Be sure to read up on the chinese-room though experiment after the part about the turing test, though.
>>7634427
>senior university professor writing about his field
>pseudo intellectual
Even if it's bad, it's hardly posturing. And it's not bad.
Should take IJ's place on the litcore list
Is it a well written book, or just interesting subject matter?
>in library between classes
>check to see if they have this
>"due 11/9/15"
fucking thieving asshole
>>7634427
"I am a Strange Loop" by him has all of the subtance of this book without the reddit bullshit
>>7634536
It's more of a philosophical text and he got the idea when he was in undergrad
>>7634427
It's a pretty awesome book. It teaches you about formal systems in an easy to grasp manner. It doesn't have anything interesting to say about art, music, consciousness, philosophy, etc. despite the pretensions of its author, but it is very good at communicating ideas about logic, and the various asides are at least thought-provoking.
>>7634536
He wrote it when we was around 28
It isn't by far psuedointellectual. But nearly all examples from the scientific world are somewhat outdated nowdays.
I'd say even the philosophical considerations about science don't hold up anymore (read: back then he didn't know about computers, the internet and so on)
What still holds true is this strange dichotomy between free will and determinism. I think this book has the best explanation for free well (read: even simple recursion/feedback loops systems can't be predicted [just calculated or estimated])
But if you are only interested in this part, read "I am a strange loop" by the same guy. Supposed not to be as convoluted and bloated as GEB. IRRC Hofstadter wrote it, becaus this last point was his most central one, and many people missed out on it in GEB because of all this bloat which again ist somewhat outdated to day...
however: just my 2 pence
>>7634427
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:2a5326d7a3b2140d8beb85cf702f73fd6fc05d72&dn=G%C3%B6del%2C%20Escher%2C%20Bach%20-%20An%20Eternal%20Golden%20Braid%20by%20Douglas%20R.%20Hofstadter
mobi magnet
>>7634712
>without the reddit bullshit
Haven't read either, what do you mean by that? Is GEB condescending or full of forced humor?
>>7637579
It has "whimsical Carrollian dialogues", which doesn't sound terribly promising.
