CONSCIOUSNESS DOES NOT OBEY LAWS OF PENDULUMS: The problem with the
pendulum theory is that it assumes human consciousness and civilization
are "things" that operate entirely subject to "laws" of nature.
Proponents of the pendulum theory (a non-testable, non-falsifiable
"theory") fail to apprehend that an aspect of consciousness may lie
beyond laws of nature; may in fact be a coordinate sponsor with laws of
nature. (The philosophy for this is expanded below.) IOW, it may be
that no mere law of nature (or natural pendulum periods) can save a
corrupted culture. It may be that, instead of a swing back, we are in
for a long stay in a deep pit. To get out may require more in the way of inspiration to empathetic good faith than the diktat of elitist "moral scientists."
*****
CONSCIOUSNESS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: Beingness, as we experience it, can be conceptualized as comprised of Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI). CSI fluxes in ways to which we do not necessarily have access. Consciousness seems to abide all along a sequential chronology, Substance seems generally to dissipate towards disorganization (entropy), and Information accumulates.
PARTICIPATORY CONSCIOUS WILL: The qualitative aspect of Consciousness may be likened more to a label than an explanation. Somehow, our experiences, recordations, and memories unfold along a chronology wherein innumerable possibilities are presented all along the way, yet only one possibility is manifested to become the record in each case. The sum of such manifestations is represented in the informational record of our past. When reference is made only to the "laws" of nature, such may suggest a probability wave function for any particular event, but not a pre-determination. So, what can "explain" how any particular event actually comes to pass?
FAITH LABELS: For this, one may punt to a variety of unprovable faiths, such as Multiverse, Many Worlds, or Reconciling God. For example, one can assume that every possibility "in fact" does occur, in some parallel world or universe. This also is more a label for a result than a testable, falsifiable, or observable hypothesis. Or, one can assume that a "choosing function" of Participatory Conscious Will operates in our cosmos (being, per Ockam's Razor, the only cosmos), so that Consciousness, by the immeasurable quality of each observation and each apprehension from each point of view somehow participates in the choosing or reconciling of occurrences and renormalizations of events. For this, one may assume that Consciousness operates at disparate layers and levels of locality in space-time, and also at an encompassing level that reconciles current and preset events or laws. Under such an assumption, it would be implicated that consciousness at every level adjusts its choices and determinations based on changing and unfolding qualities of observation, appreciation, and reconciliation of feedback that are communicated among various levels in conscious intuitions that correlate with measurable significations of Substance and Information.
To assume that a multiverse exists, or that many worlds exist, is to assume (for no good or necessary reason) that Substance is superior as a determinant to Consciousness.
To assume that Consciousness reconciles choices is to assume that Consciousness is not inferior to, or wholly derivative of, Substance. To assume a Reconciling Consciousness is to invite people to come to reason together from disparate points of view in empathetic good will and good faith. Such an assumption is generally compatible with Judeo-Christian values for promoting decent respect for human freedom and dignity.
The assumptions that make Consciousness completely inferior to Substance are more compatible with crony elitists "justifying" rule under scientism, i.e., using deceit and positions of power to claim superior understanding of practical science and "moral science."
Thus, Marxists, Secular Humanists, Socialists, Progressives, and Libertarians who are without faith in a Reconciler tend to want elitist rule over the people at large -- including many people who as individuals are often more competent.
MORTALS DO NOT "CREATE" SUBSTANCE OR CONSCIOUSNESS: Substance is measurable in respect of how its sum is conserved. Mortals do not create CSI. Mortals bond with avatars that occupy loci that are amenable of normalizing measure. Mortals do not create Substance by adding to its sum. Mortals leverage Substance for machine purposes by organizing it. Mortals do not create Consciousness. Mortals can leverage avatars that can avail the expression of Consciousness in ways that are more capacitated to communicate intelligibly. In free and reasoned faith, mortals do not "create" Artificial Intelligence. Mortals tinker to leverage the Consciousness that already abides -- to avail it to bond with avatars that can be organized for highly complex functions.
INTELLIGENCE: Intelligence does not magically "emerge." Rather, intelligence is leveraged in respect of "stuff" that already abides. We do not create babies. We procreate. With empirical tinkering, we can tinker with genes. We can design genes and merge human beings with machines and computers. With enough tinkering, we will eventually learn ways to design avatars for giving leveraged and complex expression to conscious intelligence. But we will not "create" complex AI from scratch. Rather, we will leverage it from the CSI that is already extant. In reasoned and intuitive faith, Consciousness is not inferior to Substance, nor to elitist scientism. However, its avatars do reap the pit their perspectives are responsible for choosing to dig, however misled they may have been in making their choice.
*****
CONSCIOUSNESS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: Beingness, as we experience it, can be conceptualized as comprised of Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI). CSI fluxes in ways to which we do not necessarily have access. Consciousness seems to abide all along a sequential chronology, Substance seems generally to dissipate towards disorganization (entropy), and Information accumulates.
PARTICIPATORY CONSCIOUS WILL: The qualitative aspect of Consciousness may be likened more to a label than an explanation. Somehow, our experiences, recordations, and memories unfold along a chronology wherein innumerable possibilities are presented all along the way, yet only one possibility is manifested to become the record in each case. The sum of such manifestations is represented in the informational record of our past. When reference is made only to the "laws" of nature, such may suggest a probability wave function for any particular event, but not a pre-determination. So, what can "explain" how any particular event actually comes to pass?
FAITH LABELS: For this, one may punt to a variety of unprovable faiths, such as Multiverse, Many Worlds, or Reconciling God. For example, one can assume that every possibility "in fact" does occur, in some parallel world or universe. This also is more a label for a result than a testable, falsifiable, or observable hypothesis. Or, one can assume that a "choosing function" of Participatory Conscious Will operates in our cosmos (being, per Ockam's Razor, the only cosmos), so that Consciousness, by the immeasurable quality of each observation and each apprehension from each point of view somehow participates in the choosing or reconciling of occurrences and renormalizations of events. For this, one may assume that Consciousness operates at disparate layers and levels of locality in space-time, and also at an encompassing level that reconciles current and preset events or laws. Under such an assumption, it would be implicated that consciousness at every level adjusts its choices and determinations based on changing and unfolding qualities of observation, appreciation, and reconciliation of feedback that are communicated among various levels in conscious intuitions that correlate with measurable significations of Substance and Information.
To assume that a multiverse exists, or that many worlds exist, is to assume (for no good or necessary reason) that Substance is superior as a determinant to Consciousness.
To assume that Consciousness reconciles choices is to assume that Consciousness is not inferior to, or wholly derivative of, Substance. To assume a Reconciling Consciousness is to invite people to come to reason together from disparate points of view in empathetic good will and good faith. Such an assumption is generally compatible with Judeo-Christian values for promoting decent respect for human freedom and dignity.
The assumptions that make Consciousness completely inferior to Substance are more compatible with crony elitists "justifying" rule under scientism, i.e., using deceit and positions of power to claim superior understanding of practical science and "moral science."
Thus, Marxists, Secular Humanists, Socialists, Progressives, and Libertarians who are without faith in a Reconciler tend to want elitist rule over the people at large -- including many people who as individuals are often more competent.
MORTALS DO NOT "CREATE" SUBSTANCE OR CONSCIOUSNESS: Substance is measurable in respect of how its sum is conserved. Mortals do not create CSI. Mortals bond with avatars that occupy loci that are amenable of normalizing measure. Mortals do not create Substance by adding to its sum. Mortals leverage Substance for machine purposes by organizing it. Mortals do not create Consciousness. Mortals can leverage avatars that can avail the expression of Consciousness in ways that are more capacitated to communicate intelligibly. In free and reasoned faith, mortals do not "create" Artificial Intelligence. Mortals tinker to leverage the Consciousness that already abides -- to avail it to bond with avatars that can be organized for highly complex functions.
INTELLIGENCE: Intelligence does not magically "emerge." Rather, intelligence is leveraged in respect of "stuff" that already abides. We do not create babies. We procreate. With empirical tinkering, we can tinker with genes. We can design genes and merge human beings with machines and computers. With enough tinkering, we will eventually learn ways to design avatars for giving leveraged and complex expression to conscious intelligence. But we will not "create" complex AI from scratch. Rather, we will leverage it from the CSI that is already extant. In reasoned and intuitive faith, Consciousness is not inferior to Substance, nor to elitist scientism. However, its avatars do reap the pit their perspectives are responsible for choosing to dig, however misled they may have been in making their choice.
7 comments:
Basically, it appears that Gramsci advocated using subterfuge instead of violence in order to undermine the people at large, to replace their freedom and dignity with elitists who would be "looking out" for the general welfare. He recognized that alliances among the marginal elements of society could gradually take over every instutitution of significance and then use such institutions to undermine the established marketplace of goods and ideas.
Gramsci recognized the need to inspire hearts and minds, but he did not inspire assimilating faith in respect of a spiritual Reconciler that was higher than the utopian ideal of a State. In that respect, he reduced the dignity of the people at large, making them toys and puppets for the ruling class. IOW, Gramsci Progs want simply to replace the members of the ruling class, and thus they do nothing that reliably "progresses," respects, or dignifies humanity at large. The end result is simply plunder.
Scientism may be thought of as a practical art of connivery, for inspiring and manipulating the trust of targeted others. It is distinguishable from respectful communication in that it does not entail good will towards the target as a being entitled to equal human dignity. Generally, practitioners of scientism seek to bend the masses to their so-called expert rule, but not out of any greater knowledge of truth, per se.
Sam Harris thinks we can have a science of morality. I think that's a bridge too far. Calling such a thing "science" is, to my thinking, deceitful scientism. Material-based science can test for replicability of cause-effect relationships. However, when it comes to predicting how people with a cultural history will react to a novel stimulus, I think an aspect of inspired consciousness comes into play, that is beyond explanation in the cause-effect terms of science -- except in hindsight rationalizations to contrived purposes. I don't think such contrivances should be taught as science.
Global Warming seems to be another form of elitist scientism that is contrived to economic interests. The so-called advantages of multi-culturalism seem also to be contrivances masquerading as scientific theories and studies. Manipulation of the minds of the masses via media and academia seems to be a common investment for herd managing and crony political businesses. This manipulation is scientific in the way that placebos are scientific. It succeeds by tricking the trust of others. These con-man confidence games are what I would call scientism. They can be useful, but the usual use is to undermine the dignity of targeted others.
Scientism may be thought of as a practical art of connivery, for inspiring and manipulating the trust of targeted others. It is distinguishable from respectful communication in that it does not entail good will towards the target as a being entitled to equal human dignity. Generally, practitioners of scientism seek to bend the masses to their so-called expert rule, but not out of any greater knowledge of truth, per se.
I agree that the pendulum metaphor can be interesting as a rationalizing description. I think that was the purpose for which you meant it. I do not disagree with the analogy for that limited purpose. Certainly, I hope there will be some moderating swing back.
Even so, a swing back is hampered because, as you recognize, technology will play its role, and the precise pace and direction of technology is not so foreseeable. A swing back to less centralized control and snooping is also hampered because the middle class that values its members' individual freedom and competence is not well represented under established economics and institutions. A swing back is also hampered because the general accumulation of weaponized knowledge renders individuals who are not monitored and regulated more and more dangerous to the collective.
Now, add into this mix the pretentious trend of practitioners of "moral scientism" and their attraction to the nonsense of historical determinism. Notice how they lord and rule over practitioners of traditional faiths and family values, to put religious-based inspiration in retreat (except among jihadi monsters of religion).
Considering all of that, I know not how a pendulum can swing back in any efficient or objective sense, as opposethe d to a merely metaphorical sense. If we do a dance of two steps towards central collectivism and one step back towards lip service to individualism, such a dance could be described as like a pendulum. But it would relentlessly pull human beings ever deeper into a kind of collective hive mindedness. And so, Republican and Democrat Parties more and more abandon the representation of ordinary, competent, free thinking Americans. So I'm not seeing the shadow of a pendulum. I'm seeing the shadow of something I would be more inclined to call full bore, free fall, pagan abandonment of children and innocence, masked under scientism and historicism.
I think there was a time in America when people of talent, initiative, discipline, fair mindedness, and non-coddling disposition were admired and emulated. Now, those kind of people are denigrated as "privileged whites" who refuse to own up to, and pay the dhimmi tax for, their privilege. What will America produce, when everyone who produces is denigrated? As Hillary says, businesses don't produce jobs. Lol.
CONSCIOUSNESS DOES NOT OBEY LAWS OF PENDULUMS: The problem with the pendulum theory is that it assumes human consciousness and civilization are "things" that operate entirely subject to "laws" of nature. Proponents of the pendulum theory (a non-testable, non-falsifiable "theory") fail to apprehend that an aspect of consciousness may lie beyond laws of nature; may in fact be a coordinate sponsor with laws of nature. (The philosophy for this is expanded below.) IOW, it may be that no mere law of nature (or natural pendulum periods) can save a corrupted culture. It may be that, instead of a swing back, we are in for a long stay in a deep pit. To get out may require more in the way of inspiration to empathetic good faith than the diktat of elitist "moral scientists."
*****
CONSCIOUSNESS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: Beingness, as we experience it, can be conceptualized as comprised of Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI). CSI fluxes in ways to which we do not necessarily have access. Consciousness seems to abide all along a sequential chronology, Substance seems generally to dissipate towards disorganization (entropy), and Information accumulates.
PARTICIPATORY CONSCIOUS WILL: The qualitative aspect of Consciousness may be likened more to a label than an explanation. Somehow, our experiences, recordations, and memories unfold along a chronology wherein innumerable possibilities are presented all along the way, yet only one possibility is manifested to become the record in each case. The sum of such manifestations is represented in the informational record of our past. When reference is made only to the "laws" of nature, such may suggest a probability wave function for any particular event, but not a pre-determination. So, what can "explain" how any particular event actually comes to pass?
FAITH LABELS: For this, one may punt to a variety of unprovable faiths, such as Multiverse, Many Worlds, or Reconciling God. For example, one can assume that every possibility "in fact" does occur, in some parallel world or universe. This also is more a label for a result than a testable, falsifiable, or observable hypothesis. Or, one can assume that a "choosing function" of Participatory Conscious Will operates in our cosmos (being, per Ockam's Razor, the only cosmos), so that Consciousness, by the immeasurable quality of each observation and each apprehension from each point of view somehow participates in the choosing or reconciling of occurrences and renormalizations of events. For this, one may assume that Consciousness operates at disparate layers and levels of locality in space-time, and also at an encompassing level that reconciles current and preset events or laws. Under such an assumption, it would be implicated that consciousness at every level adjusts its choices and determinations based on changing and unfolding qualities of observation, appreciation, and reconciliation of feedback that are communicated among various levels in conscious intuitions that correlate with measurable significations of Substance and Information.
To assume that a multiverse exists, or that many worlds exist, is to assume (for no good or necessary reason) that Substance is superior as a determinant to Consciousness.
To assume that Consciousness reconciles choices is to assume that Consciousness is not inferior to, or wholly derivative of, Substance. To assume a Reconciling Consciousness is to invite people to come to reason together from disparate points of view in empathetic good will and good faith. Such an assumption is generally compatible with Judeo-Christian values for promoting decent respect for human freedom and dignity.
The assumptions that make Consciousness completely inferior to Substance are more compatible with crony elitists "justifying" rule under scientism, i.e., using deceit and positions of power to claim superior understanding of practical science and "moral science."
Thus, Marxists, Secular Humanists, Socialists, Progressives, and Libertarians who are without faith in a Reconciler tend to want elitist rule over the people at large -- including many people who as individuals are often more competent.
MORTALS DO NOT "CREATE" SUBSTANCE OR CONSCIOUSNESS: Substance is measurable in respect of how its sum is conserved. Mortals do not create CSI. Mortals bond with avatars that occupy loci that are amenable of normalizing measure. Mortals do not create Substance by adding to its sum. Mortals leverage Substance for machine purposes by organizing it. Mortals do not create Consciousness. Mortals can leverage avatars that can avail the expression of Consciousness in ways that are more capacitated to communicate intelligibly. In free and reasoned faith, mortals do not "create" Artificial Intelligence. Mortals tinker to leverage the Consciousness that already abides -- to avail it to bond with avatars that can be organized for highly complex functions.
INTELLIGENCE: Intelligence does not magically "emerge." Rather, intelligence is leveraged in respect of "stuff" that already abides. We do not create babies. We procreate. With empirical tinkering, we can tinker with genes. We can design genes and merge human beings with machines and computers. With enough tinkering, we will eventually learn ways to design avatars for giving leveraged and complex expression to conscious intelligence. But we will not "create" complex AI from scratch. Rather, we will leverage it from the CSI that is already extant. In reasoned and intuitive faith, Consciousness is not inferior to Substance, nor to elitist scientism. However, its avatars do reap the pit their perspectives are responsible for choosing to dig, however misled they may have been in making their choice.
Post a Comment