Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

sdfo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 215 posts

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#151

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

johnny_reilly wrote: post #55

This book changed me. I was an idle eight year old, and my school didn't give us homework to do. So my father decided to set me homework of his own devising, which on one occasion was reading Flowers for Algernon. I was moved by the story of a man who had little natural ability, straining to make the best of what he had. Then becoming smarter than everyone around him, and then what follows. There's many things to tak…

> I took away that we should make the best of what we have.

As someone on the spectrum, no.

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#152

Post by upwardbound »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #151
johnny_reilly wrote: post #55

This book changed me. I was an idle eight year old, and my school didn't give us homework to do. So my father decided to set me homework of his own devising, which on one occasion was reading Flowers for Algernon. I was moved by the story of a man who had little natural ability, straining to make the best of what he had. Then becoming smarter than everyone around him, and then what follows. There's many things to tak…

> I took away that we should make the best of what we have. As someone on the spectrum, no.

I have a miscellaneous question in case you happen to have a perspective. Do you think it might be potentially ambiguous to use the general term "the spectrum" to refer only to the asperger's/autism spectrum? Human minds are wonderfully diverse, and I feel like it might downplay that diversity if we make it sound like there is only one spectrum of genetically-linked mental phenotypes. As some examples:

- eidetic memory

- depression

- perfect pitch

And much more. I've always wanted to ask this and was wondering if you had thoughts on this?

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#153

Post by zzzzzzzza »

geysersam wrote: post #149
_qfi9 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we can know certain things about things that are smarter than us. perhaps even smarter than a post singularity intelligence, for instance, we are "computationally" equivalent to a turing machine: a tape with symbols on it and a head that reads and writes symbols to the tape according to rules. the natural generalization of a turing machine to infinity would be a hyper turing machine: an infinitely wide tape and infin…

> we are "computationally" equivalent to a turing machine: Why do you think that? We know of modes of computation different from Turing machines, quantum computers. There's nothing saying there might not be yet other kinds of computers currently undiscovered.

actually i think we are more limited than a turing machine since even the default turing machine has a (single) infinite tape/running time. But there is a quantum turing machine/quantum lambda calculus as well. just has (probably?) a faster running time on a subset of algorithms.

but essentially turing machine/quantum turing machine have the same kinds of inpus/outputs or domain/range, whereas a hyper turing machine has a bigger domain/range.

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#154

Post by marktangotango »

sslapec wrote: post #99

My elder brother is mentally challenged due to lack of oxygen when he was born. I had this idea a few years ago of how would he experience the world if he'd suddenly become healthy. How would he deal with his previous life, etc. I once mentioned my thoughts to my boss during a lunch and he told me there's already a novel about it. That's how I've discovered Flowers for Algernon.

> My elder brother is mentally challenged due to lack of oxygen when he was born.

My wife had a great uncle who was similarly afflicted; at home child birth, this sort of brain damage was not uncommon in the early part of the last century. He was non verbal, he communicated in grunts and gestures. When I knew him his family had all passed away. My mother in law, his niece was his guardian.

He lived in an assisted living facility for the 30+ years before he died a few years ago. My wife made a point of our family visiting him for the holidays. We were often the only visitors he'd have for the entire year. Then his health took a turn and my wife became more involved. We visited him one final time when he was in hospice and near death. Seeing that poor shell of a man in obvious pain was the saddest, most pitiful thing I have ever seen. It broke my heart to see what had become of his life, and how his parents would have Grieved to see what became of him.

Dear internet stranger, I hope you're able to cherish the time you have with your brother.

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#155

Post by techdragon »

myself248 wrote: post #117
gwern wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the problem with any superintelligence story; they are by definition hard to write without being superintelligent. As Vinge was famously told, "you can't write this story. No one can." If a chimpanzee could write a story about a human expert of any sort, the other chimpanzees wouldn't understand it: it would either be gibberish, or dumbed down to superficial analogies that give an illusion of understanding. ("…

> That's the problem with any superintelligence story; they are by definition hard to write without being superintelligent. Ditto this, but for any domain specialization. A lot of fiction gives me a bad case of something which I don't have a term for but it seems like it might be the inverse of the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect: Basically, I was fine with the story until it got technical in a way that I know well, and the…

I’m glad I’m not the only one that has this problem!

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#156

Post by ElvisTrout »

upwardbound wrote: post #152
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I took away that we should make the best of what we have. As someone on the spectrum, no.

I have a miscellaneous question in case you happen to have a perspective. Do you think it might be potentially ambiguous to use the general term "the spectrum" to refer only to the asperger's/autism spectrum? Human minds are wonderfully diverse, and I feel like it might downplay that diversity if we make it sound like there is only one spectrum of genetically-linked mental phenotypes. As some examples: - eidetic memo…

The word spectrum is a word in its own right. You can apply it to whatever you want.

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#157

Post by mlhpdx »

johnny_reilly wrote: post #55

This book changed me. I was an idle eight year old, and my school didn't give us homework to do. So my father decided to set me homework of his own devising, which on one occasion was reading Flowers for Algernon. I was moved by the story of a man who had little natural ability, straining to make the best of what he had. Then becoming smarter than everyone around him, and then what follows. There's many things to tak…

Likewise, I read this story at an early age and have never forgotten it. It was moving and terrifying to feel that progression and regression against the backdrop of education and grades and fitting in.

Regarding the comments using the words “less-intelligent” to motivate their “kindness”: Kindness without respect is just being nice.

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#158

Post by svat »

fairity wrote: post #19

I think too many of us believe that intelligence is valuable, in and of itself. Instead, I think we should value personal excellence. That is, making the most of the intelligence you’re given. The arc of intelligence in Flowers of Algernon is the same arc that we’ll all experience over our lifetime. With old age, we, too, will lose our intelligence. If we value intelligence, in and of itself, we’ll eventually face a…

> If we value intelligence, in and of itself, we’ll eventually face a crisis of sorts.

Related, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Water —

> […] pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It’s the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one level, we all know this stuff already. It’s been codified as myths, proverbs, clichés, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up front in daily consciousness.

> Worship power, you will end up feeling weak and afraid, and you will need ever more power over others to numb you to your own fear. Worship your intellect, being seen as smart, you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out.

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#159

Post by ec109685 »

johnny_reilly wrote: post #55

This book changed me. I was an idle eight year old, and my school didn't give us homework to do. So my father decided to set me homework of his own devising, which on one occasion was reading Flowers for Algernon. I was moved by the story of a man who had little natural ability, straining to make the best of what he had. Then becoming smarter than everyone around him, and then what follows. There's many things to tak…

Read this in seventh grade, and it really did move me as well. There are many events that happen in life (and stories) that remind me of this book.

Agree with the premise of make the best of what you have.

Re: Flowers for Algernon (1965) [pdf]

#160

Post by 1123581321 »

cwillu wrote: post #96
darkerside wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You probably just didn't get it. Just kidding

“You're not good at ‹game›, you just do random things for an hour and then you randomly win.” --words I've heard

Was this Twilight Imperium? :)
Post reply on HN