- 19 Mar 2018 04:42
#14897788
A problem with thought, no one wants to think about...
[1]Orthogonal, statistically independent inference abstracted from the interdependent whole.
Does human thought, as a fragmentary system of pattern recognition, favor binary logic because it doesn't need to conceptualize complex networks for its immediate/individual biological survival? Do humans need simulated intelligence (computers, aka technological extensions/manifestations of thought) to help build a sustainable ecosystem for humanity? Can human thought sustain its own nature or is human thought an evolutionary force being driven by the brain and the information it absorbs (can mankind think its way out of its thoughts) through the environment? Is the figure-ground dialectic a human myth, an abstraction of binary logic, can man be separate from nature if he is nature? If the information responsible for human thought does not originate in the brain and is a pattern configuration/tactile retrieval of the vibratory field that flows through existential experience (Reality, all forms of sensation), are we actually intelligent or are we pieces/resources of/for a primordial consciousness which is infinitely aware of everything because it's everything experiencing itself[2]?
[2]The permeation of consciousness projects permutations of itself, perpetually reproducing a multiplicity of vibratory fields which overlap & interweave as 'fabric' in the universe. Consciousness is inseparable from this 'fabric,' and can intrinsically explicate the harmony between vibratory fields, because consciousness happens to be modal-mulitplex pulsation entangled in a multidimensional oscillation. In other-words, consciousness can enter an information 'wave' from any point of vibration, because consciousness is the interplay of a polycentric sensation/perception that is expanding ad infinitum. Thought must be fragmentary because it's an expression of consciousness, thought is enfolded in the unfolding of the universe.
At this point, I'm not sure if mankind is advanced or primitive because what we call 'intelligence' may not not exist. How do I know if I'm intelligent if I'm unable to directly perceive my own thoughts? The thoughts I think I create come from everything else, and thus I'm unable to measure thought. Instead, I measure relative action/motion, let thought run its course, and wait for the biological vessel to return to its source. Can thought, as a fragmentation process, properly represent the whole of consciousness, or does it process a relative and temporary interpretation of reality?
Thus this question
Is not the right question to ask, because this present moment will project simultaneously our past and future.
What comes first, thought or action?
Who is intelligent?
How can intelligence be democratic?
When will thought understand consciousness?
Why is mankind collectively insane?
Where will consciousness go?
Ganeshas Rat wrote:The terms 'Advanced' and 'Primitive' have sense only in the context of comparing with something. Present moment is advanced to medieval age. Present moment is primitive to technological singularity.Yep, this is my point (learning is remembering). Furthermore, the technological singularity would be an extension of the LIVING singularity called LIFE-THE UNIVERSE-Etc. If and when we achieve a technological singularity, will consciousness call the technological singularity a 'Big Bang,' for lack of a better term and/or understanding of what LIFE is? Isn't it clear or self-evident that a technological singularity would be the result of consciousness colliding with itself in order to rearrange itself (synergistic regeneration)? If this is the case, does nurture exist? Or is nurture the potential trajectory of nature? Also, if nurture does not exist, and it's simply nature unlocking itself subjectively, wouldn't the lack of free-will reinforce a teleological model of ΩONEΩ ever-expanding consciousness/soul? Here you are in a body you didn't design, speaking a language you didn't create, having thoughts you didn't think (pieces of the whole can only experience fragments of the whole). See, ABC-XYZ moves within this happening called consciousness, but we're limited by existential disposition, and the whole of consciousness without is an infinite movement passing through us. However, we're so involved in IT (because we're IT), participating in the biochemical interplay which occurs within the mind/matter interface, that thought gives us the illusion that we're responsible for IT.
Present moment is advanced to medieval age.So it's true, binary thinking is a side-effect of a single movement happening right NOW, in the form of thought being aware of a past and potential future happening. However, there's only this present moment, and therefore there's only nature. Nurture, like past and future, is an illusion of this present singularity in motion. Identity operates the same way, it is an illusion abstracted from BEING present. Nurture (as a concept) is simply the rearrangement of nature. Are we not nature unlocking our nature? When you observe phenomena, you collapse the wave. 10101010=quantum coherence. Dialectical interaction is a side-effect of being present. Thought is fragmentary because it's a kind of interference (minus connotation, see physical denotation) pattern. Epistemological 'truth' is a side-effect of ontological/orthogonal[1] inference.
[1]Orthogonal, statistically independent inference abstracted from the interdependent whole.
Does human thought, as a fragmentary system of pattern recognition, favor binary logic because it doesn't need to conceptualize complex networks for its immediate/individual biological survival? Do humans need simulated intelligence (computers, aka technological extensions/manifestations of thought) to help build a sustainable ecosystem for humanity? Can human thought sustain its own nature or is human thought an evolutionary force being driven by the brain and the information it absorbs (can mankind think its way out of its thoughts) through the environment? Is the figure-ground dialectic a human myth, an abstraction of binary logic, can man be separate from nature if he is nature? If the information responsible for human thought does not originate in the brain and is a pattern configuration/tactile retrieval of the vibratory field that flows through existential experience (Reality, all forms of sensation), are we actually intelligent or are we pieces/resources of/for a primordial consciousness which is infinitely aware of everything because it's everything experiencing itself[2]?
[2]The permeation of consciousness projects permutations of itself, perpetually reproducing a multiplicity of vibratory fields which overlap & interweave as 'fabric' in the universe. Consciousness is inseparable from this 'fabric,' and can intrinsically explicate the harmony between vibratory fields, because consciousness happens to be modal-mulitplex pulsation entangled in a multidimensional oscillation. In other-words, consciousness can enter an information 'wave' from any point of vibration, because consciousness is the interplay of a polycentric sensation/perception that is expanding ad infinitum. Thought must be fragmentary because it's an expression of consciousness, thought is enfolded in the unfolding of the universe.
At this point, I'm not sure if mankind is advanced or primitive because what we call 'intelligence' may not not exist. How do I know if I'm intelligent if I'm unable to directly perceive my own thoughts? The thoughts I think I create come from everything else, and thus I'm unable to measure thought. Instead, I measure relative action/motion, let thought run its course, and wait for the biological vessel to return to its source. Can thought, as a fragmentation process, properly represent the whole of consciousness, or does it process a relative and temporary interpretation of reality?
Thus this question
Will Mankind's Future Be Advanced or Primitive?
Is not the right question to ask, because this present moment will project simultaneously our past and future.
What comes first, thought or action?
Who is intelligent?
How can intelligence be democratic?
When will thought understand consciousness?
Why is mankind collectively insane?
Where will consciousness go?
Last edited by RhetoricThug on 19 Mar 2018 23:07, edited 7 times in total.
Close encounters with ∞Infinity∞
"So much joy I cry, so much pain I laugh."
The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.
Remember, you need more than one note to make beautiful music.
Love is the missing link!
"So much joy I cry, so much pain I laugh."
The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.
Remember, you need more than one note to make beautiful music.
Love is the missing link!