Gender identity is ever evolving, but how do we approach it in a way that includes everyone? Dr. Clare Mehta helps guide us in understanding
Mehta, Dr Clare. “Beyond Boxes: Unpacking the Complexity of Gender.” Www.ted.com, 2018, www.ted.com/talks/dr_clare_mehta_beyond_boxes_unpacking_the_complexity_of_gender. [Accessed 5 Mar. 2023.]
gender impacts our entire life all the way down to what toilets we use
how psychologists have determined gender:
gender occurs along a continuum
psychological androgyny: feeling both male and female
what if gender is feeling a little bit of everything?
gender box suggestion:
birth assigned gender category
current gender identification: the one you chose to identify
gender roles: how much you follow the societal expectations of gender roles
gender social presence: what do you look like: butch/femme/androgynous
gender evaluations: how do you feel about your own and other gender groups
gender salience: how aware you are of your gender in any given moment
gender reference group identity: how similar and psychologically connected you feel to your gender
women and men can both display emotional traits of a different gender. this suggests gender is a scale and multi dimensional
from watching this tedtalk, i have seen that gender isnt as straightforwards as male and female as i already knew and appreciated, but it has made me think about how we can encourage people to step out of these gender personality traits with more confidence and how it might be currently impacting their lives, which ties in nicely with the expectation that men bottle up their emotions. this is a topic worthwhile exploring because it has now come up in multiple areas of my research. i need to find a context in which this occurs to help the project progress.
We study the logic of dynamical systems, that is, logics and proof principles for properties of dynamical systems. Dynamical systems are mat
Abstract:
We study the logic of dynamical systems, that is, logics and proof principles for properties of dynamical systems. Dynamical systems are mathematical models describing how the state of a system evolves over time. They are important in modeling and understanding many applications, including embedded systems and cyber-physical systems. In discrete dynamical systems, the state evolves in discrete steps, one step at a time, as described by a difference equation or discrete state transition relation. In continuous dynamical systems, the state evolves continuously along a function, typically described by a differential equation. Hybrid dynamical systems or hybrid systems combine both discrete and continuous dynamics. This is a brief survey of differential dynamic logic for specifying and verifying properties of hybrid systems. We explain hybrid system models, differential dynamic logic, its semantics, and its axiomatization for proving logical formulas about hybrid systems. We study differential invariants, i.e., induction principles for differential equations. We briefly survey theoretical results, including soundness and completeness and deductive power. Differential dynamic logic has been implemented in automatic and interactive theorem provers and has been used successfully to verify safety-critical applications in automotive, aviation, railway, robotics, and analogue electrical circuits.
Published in: 2012 27th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
That is really interesting.
Just before I googled it, I tried to summarize my special interests - and it took a few hours, when I gave them the title axiomatization of dynamical systems. (Writing about how I came from my passion for polymath stuff and chaos theory to that would exceed the margin right now.)
Please bare with me, the next stated thoughts might be very ill-formulated gibberish at this stage of thought ...primordial soup or such heeh...
Axiomatization: definition in merriam-webster: the process of reducing down to a system of basic truths or axioms
Let's reduce that idea to basic language using some analogies: (It's very simplified and reduced, many details are omitted.)
Axioms are basic building blocks. Building blocks can be arranged and combined in all sort of ways, like a mosaic. You can chunk them and re-arrange them.
A dynamical system is a chaotic system that changes over time. Its compounds interact. These interactions correlate to the alterations in the dynamical system (compound = subordinate or detail, system = superordinate or whole/big picture)
-> (quantum) contextuality: [Quantum contextuality means the whole alters the details, as well as the details alter the whole. The system alters the compounds, and the compounds alter the system.] [Also: to understand quantum contextuality you can use the example of translating language: One word often has multiple meanings. It is ambigious. Which word is meant in that sentence? The right meaning of the word can be found when the context is analyzed. That is basically the principle behind quantum contextuality: (Also: Good read: https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-spooky-quantum-phenomenon-youve-never-heard-of-20220622/ )] {Further idea in my brain: What is the role of quantum contextuality in quantum error correction algorithms such as Bayesian Optimization?}
Well, back to axiomatization:
A system is a collection of interwoven building blocks. Axiomatization is a process of segmentation, of chunking, and of de-tangling the whole into its basic building blocks.
Dynamical systems are emergent, which means their working mechanisms alter themselves and emerge collectively.
A few years back, I wrote about the way we communicate with our technology. It was obvious even then that a big game-changer would be enabling a reliable conversational interaction with technology in order to overcome the friction humans experience when we use our modern tools, be they apps, phones, cars or semi-autonomous coffee makers. Too much typing and swiping and app management…
IoT ‘conversation’ and ambient contextuality – TechCrunch
IoT ‘conversation’ and ambient contextuality – TechCrunch
[ad_1]
More posts by this contributor
IoT redux… this time, it’s personal
Tagging may be the best way to make IoT contextually relevant and usable
A few years back, I wrote about the way we communicate with our technology. It was obvious even then that a big game-changer would be enabling a reliable conversational interaction with technology in order to overcome the friction humans…
"According to Bateson double binds are transactions; that is to say, relational, social, and built upon repetition. More than a single or simple contradiction, they are instead an entire system of layered contradictions mobilized over a range of communication channels. At one level of meaning or abstraction and within a particular communication channel something is prohibited, punished—violations threaten or appear to threaten actual survival. But at another level and communicated via a different channel, something else is required, something impossible to effect if the prohibition is honored, yet not accomplishing it is also punishable and life-threatening. And topping it all off, not only is the situation inescapable and impossible to voice or talk about, it is so confusing that perceiving what is happening may be, at best, barely possible. Finally, all this happens over and over again, until such double-bind patternings become experienced as “reality.”
Bateson was also aware that double-bind effects might not be simply debilitating or pathological. Normal versions of double binds occur all the time. Religious practices, entertainment, game design, learning, and professional environments may also deal with some edge of double bind. And both sorts of double binds—these relatively common ones and those of much greater abusive effect—also create, in ranges of circumstances including the almost intolerable, conditions that may produce new creativities—if survived. Abusive practices and challenging ones are only too easily mistaken for each other when crucial context markers distinguishing one from another become unrecognizable, contradictory, or fraudulent. Thus terror and possibility are on edge in double bind experiences, as “transcontextual confusions” require “transcontextual gifts” one may or may not have. Bateson inspected such patternings as intense, that is, needing fine discriminations between kinds of messages for urgent appropriate response; contradictory, and this at two different orders of message, each of which denies the other; and finally, unvoiced, that is to say, making explicit checks of context impossible, inappropriate, or meaningless.”
When you can use AI as a conduit, as an orchestrating mechanism to the world of information and services, you find yourself in a place where services don’t need to be discovered by an app store or search engine. It’s a new space where users will no longer be required to navigate each individual application or service to find and do what they want. Rather they move effortlessly from one need to the next with thousands of services competing and cooperating to accomplish their desires and tasks simply by expressing their desires. Just by asking.
The concept of an ‘app’ could gradually disappear – makes me wonder if all of this could lead to questioning the personal assistant concept altogether – I could be my own ‘personal assistant’ in the digital world.
Machine learning research has been gathering pace and so has AI in the process.
I have found that it is a most context-specific way of life: the pastor's emotional life, family life, experience in the faith, and aptitudes worked out in an actual congregation in the neighborhood in which she or he lives- these people just as they are, in this place.
