“For most of my life I have not been able to answer these questions, because I have not known what computation is.” Brian Cantwell Smith 1
What is computation that it can be not known?
It begins with the advent of arithmetic bearing ubiquitous utility with the realization that arithmetic is a complete system of objects and rules of their manipulation that can be rote taught to a person who can then perform arithmetic without understanding what she is doing and be construed as effectively computing a function. Arithmetic can even be taught to a machine by building it to honor the objects in an indexical state and their manipulation rules construed as a digital state machine. By defining a small set of basic state manipulating rules arithmetic computation can be realized as a sequence of manipulation steps construed as an algorithm machine made with physical symbols. The contents of a state can be viewed as symbolic referents manipulated by a sequence of rule steps construed as formal symbol manipulation or as information processing.
The common theme among the construals is the manipulation of a state of objects. The intrigue is that such a simple framework can be usefully realized in so many different ways. The difficulty is that for each realization to conform to the framework the state objects and the manipulation steps are designed together; mutually defining; neither grounding; forming self contained ontological castles in the clouds. The framework is not grounded and none of its realizations are grounded.
The only commonality underlying the framework and all of its construals is the human in the works. A human intentionally invented the framework. Humans intentionally realize instances of the framework. Humans intentionally assign meanings to a state and its objects. Humans intentionally program sequences of manipulation steps for the realizations. Framework computation supervenes on the arbitrarily capable expressivity of humans who make computation whatever they want it to be.
“They (computers) are computational, of course; that much is tautological. But only when we let go of the conceit that that fact is theoretically important will we finally be able to see, without distraction—and thereby, perhaps at least partially to understand—how a structured lump of clay can sit up and think.” Brian Cantwell Smith 2
Brian clearly thinks that the universe is computing, that life is a computation. Any understanding of computation must precede the humans in the works, include an understanding of from whence they come and bear no resemblance to the conventional views of computation
“The whole story has to be turned upside down.” Brian Cantwell Smith 3
Brian did not realize how upside down the story has to be turned. You are invited on a journey of knowing computation embarking from karlfant.net. The terrain is steep with treacherous passes and fierce winds but there is no easier passage through the territory.
Karl Fant
1 Smith, Brian . Foundations of Computing. In Scheutz, Matthias (ed.), Computationalism: New Directions, Cambridge. MA: MIT Press, 2002, p. 24
2 Smith, Brian Cantwell, On the Origin of Objects. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996. p 75-76
3 Smith, Brian Cantwell, On the Origin of Objects. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996. p x