[QUOTE=Memnoth;40000463]Since truth is bound to an interpreting mind,[/QUOTE]
That's only evident if you don't believe in an objective reality. (but I do)
well like the thing is what if the figured out some kind of system that encompassed all of our math into one thing?
anything's possible. seriously.
Could you explain what you mean a bit more?
A. i'm not from the 4th dimension
B. it probably wouldn't make sense if i even knew of such a thing.
My reasoning that a teleported person (copy and recreate method of teleportation) is not the same as the original is because every particle is its own entity, each one is different even though they all appear the same. Obviously this means we technically die every five years since that's when every atom in our body is finally replaced by new ones. But what if you (completely theoretical here) had an electron, a neutron, and a proton that were capable of moving in every direction at infinite km/s, capable of forming bonds and separating at those infinite speeds, obviously this is impossible but if it was accomplished couldn't we tell these particles to go back and forth in such an incredibly complex way so that they are forming two complete humans identically, if this this was the case wouldn't they be the same since they are made from the same particles? Also, say I had the particles do the same thing as above, only instead of two humans, it was an entire universe? Would this work, would we all be 3 simple particles (ignoring dark matter and muons)?? Say we had a computer telling the particles what to do from its emulations, could the computer tell the particles to create a computer that's identical to itself, and then remove itself from existence? Then the universe would be run by 3 particles (Albeit with infinite energy), what would make we [I] truly[/I] different from you, since the particles that are in me are in you and are also in the machine telling the world what to do?
A bit long, but I wanted to let the philosophical side of me out. Anyway, could anyone explain this?
Just had a kinda bad trip on a synthetic called Rasta. (definitely not doing it again). I felt like our lives weren't real, and I was chained watching everything and nothing cancelling themselves out over and over by playing every possible scenario that could exist. Our current consciousness wasn't actually a real thing, nothing we did was our own decision, it was just inevitable considering the infiniteness of everything. It felt so real the scariest thing is that even now it could actually be the truth. This feels super hard to explain in words but it just felt hopeless, and I was stuck there watching it happening, feeling a sudden realization about what was happening, and then it reset over and over.
I've been thinking recently of the conceptual side of an end. Isn't it true that it is human beings that created the idea of anything ending? What tangible phenomena can be said to "end" definitely and not simply change into something else?
Death instantly comes to mind as an end of life, end of consciousness. Nothing disappears, however, when a living entity dies - it simply transforms into something else.
All things that have an actual end have been engineered by humanity. For example, the month March can end. What is a "March", though? Can we touch it, see it? Does the natural environment show the end of March in any visible way? No! Human beings have divided time into parts, gave them beginnings and ends. This applies to many different areas but I think we couldn't find one that ends just like that.
It makes me think that everything we observe is continuous, although alternates in form. Nothing has begun and nothing has ended because those concepts have been made by us, mistakenly.
The problem with philosophizing on whether or not conceptual words are truly valid when looking from a purely objective viewpoint is that when you break it down all words are just human concepts stemming from our need to categorize and label subjectively perceived patterns. If you want to be 100% objectively accurate in regards to the grand scheme of things then language can't be used at all. You couldn't even say that everything is "continuous" because that's a concept based on our subjective perspective of a flow of time :v:
End is a necessary and completely valid concept because it is relevant to us on a local, subjective level.
[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;40033026]The problem with philosophizing on whether or not conceptual words are truly valid when looking from a purely objective viewpoint is that when you break it down all words are just human concepts stemming from our need to categorize and label subjectively perceived patterns. If you want to be 100% objectively accurate in regards to the grand scheme of things then language can't be used at all. You couldn't even say that everything is "continuous" because that's a concept based on our subjective perspective of a flow of time :v:
End is a necessary and completely valid concept because it is relevant to us on a local, subjective level.[/QUOTE]
I agree and it terrifies me that a lot of things for which we have names are simply collective agreements - they have very little to do with the real nature of the cosmos. Even though they are not accurate and, as you said, only serve us on a local level, we believe in them like in truths (some of which are, to us, universal).
It's horrid that the more we advance in science and the more things we identify, name, and examine, the narrower are our horizons - we think we're done while in fact we just adjusted an observation to human limitations.
shit sucks
[QUOTE=Adbor;40032857]I've been thinking recently of the conceptual side of an end. Isn't it true that it is human beings that created the idea of anything ending? What tangible phenomena can be said to "end" definitely and not simply change into something else?
Death instantly comes to mind as an end of life, end of consciousness. Nothing disappears, however, when a living entity dies - it simply transforms into something else.
All things that have an actual end have been engineered by humanity. For example, the month March can end. What is a "March", though? Can we touch it, see it? Does the natural environment show the end of March in any visible way? No! Human beings have divided time into parts, gave them beginnings and ends. This applies to many different areas but I think we couldn't find one that ends just like that.
It makes me think that everything we observe is continuous, although alternates in form. Nothing has begun and nothing has ended because those concepts have been made by us, mistakenly.[/QUOTE]
"the anxiety-laden problem of what will happen to me when I die is, after all, like asking what happens to my fist when I open my hand, or where my lap goes when I stand up."
[QUOTE=supersoldier58;40030908]My reasoning that a teleported person (copy and recreate method of teleportation) is not the same as the original is because every particle is its own entity, each one is different even though they all appear the same. Obviously this means we technically die every five years since that's when every atom in our body is finally replaced by new ones. But what if you (completely theoretical here) had an electron, a neutron, and a proton that were capable of moving in every direction at infinite km/s, capable of forming bonds and separating at those infinite speeds, obviously this is impossible but if it was accomplished couldn't we tell these particles to go back and forth in such an incredibly complex way so that they are forming two complete humans identically, if this this was the case wouldn't they be the same since they are made from the same particles? Also, say I had the particles do the same thing as above, only instead of two humans, it was an entire universe? Would this work, would we all be 3 simple particles (ignoring dark matter and muons)?? Say we had a computer telling the particles what to do from its emulations, could the computer tell the particles to create a computer that's identical to itself, and then remove itself from existence? Then the universe would be run by 3 particles (Albeit with infinite energy), what would make we [I] truly[/I] different from you, since the particles that are in me are in you and are also in the machine telling the world what to do?
A bit long, but I wanted to let the philosophical side of me out. Anyway, could anyone explain this?[/QUOTE]
That's kind of a cool idea. It would need to go a step further to work though, and the fundamental particles would need to be capable of filling in for multiple electrons, protons and neutrons in the same atom in order to be anything other than Hydrogen.
Taken to it's conclusion, the fact is that every hydrogen atom in the universe is identical in form and function, and the same can be said for the fundamental particles. So every carbon atom in your body is functionally the same as every carbon atom in mine, even though they aren't factually the same. I suppose the difference would lie, as it does now, in how those atoms are positioned relative to each other.
Pretty rad.
[QUOTE=CrashLemon;40020221]I took mushrooms the other day and I was in a completely familiar environment yet it felt completely different because I had lost any anchor with my sober perspectives. This made me realize that we often do not even associate real things with what they are, even if they're in front of us, but 'compile' everything with associated memories, creating a world of our own that perfectly replicates the real, physical one.
If it makes sense.[/QUOTE]
Every psych user have realized that
heavy users in general just look at shit that way...
What if bananas were salty?
I like the way this guy explains it, [video=youtube;QCr0AVe_dzo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCr0AVe_dzo[/video]
Fractals used as maps
[url=http://www.onezoom.org/tetrapods.htm]Tetrapods(shit that lives) -OneZoom-[/url]
Imagine if everything ever known was accessible like this (oh wait it is *smokes dmt*)
The other day, me and my friends were just walking through the woods smoking bowls and such, when somebody said that if you leave a human to just wander, they will always end up walking in a circle.
20 minutes later of mindless wandering, we end up back to where we started. So I started thinking that maybe every action that our body does, every movement, thought, twitch, etc. is just super complex math equations shooting off at ridiculous speeds.
[QUOTE=pancaker94;40240943]The other day, me and my friends were just walking through the woods smoking bowls and such, when somebody said that if you leave a human to just wander, they will always end up walking in a circle.
20 minutes later of mindless wandering, we end up back to where we started. So I started thinking that maybe every action that our body does, every movement, thought, twitch, etc. is just super complex math equations shooting off at ridiculous speeds.[/QUOTE]
Nope, Chinese room.
[url]http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/[/url]
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;40029590]That's only evident if you don't believe in an objective reality. (but I do)[/QUOTE]
I was more thinking in the general line that numbers can go beyond our understanding of what it actually represents, therefore they become subject to what we think it is rather than a truth based on empirical observation.
I do believe in an objective reality, the brain is hardwired to react to its surrounding environment. The center of language and logic (including mathematics) are in the same brain hemisphere, and as such, language can be viewed as a form of mathetamics that is not subject to manipulation (almost like roman numbers before Leonardo Fibonacci) where every word, as numbers, have a subjective representation where the true meaning can be distorted but not necessarily be false.
[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;40033026]The problem with philosophizing on whether or not conceptual words are truly valid when looking from a purely objective viewpoint is that when you break it down all words are just human concepts stemming from our need to categorize and label subjectively perceived patterns. If you want to be 100% objectively accurate in regards to the grand scheme of things then language can't be used at all. You couldn't even say that everything is "continuous" because that's a concept based on our subjective perspective of a flow of time :v:
End is a necessary and completely valid concept because it is relevant to us on a local, subjective level.[/QUOTE]
The thing about subjective perception is that it is bound to have a correlation on the objective level. If our brains where completely inaccurate at making sense of the objective reality, we would not have the ability to survive from an evolutionary viewpoint. Even communication must pass an objective barrier before being subject to sensory organs and made sense of by the receiving end.
On another note, I have been thinking about the following: What is more likely, considering the nature of the universe, that both the start of Big Bang and death is a one time event completely outside the tangible box of scientism where empirical observation is based on reoccurring measurable patterns or that the rest of the universe is simply not yet discovered? I think there is another word for things outside the scientific method, and it's usually called religious belief.
If there is only one measurable point that's called "the beginning of Big Bang", is it really scientific to label it as the point of creation? I think the same applies to the subjective experience of death.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;40241396]Nope, Chinese room.
[url]http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/[/url][/QUOTE]
I think the Chinese room argument is very weak. It supposes that conversation and understanding are somehow distinct from programming and responding to syntax. I think they're expressions of different complexity of the same thing.
[editline]11th April 2013[/editline]
Really all it takes to "understand" Chinese from the point Searle reaches by learning to "program" the computer with Chinese characters is to map those characters and strings to concepts, like tree, love, lanaguage, etc. I don't think that is anything supernatural.
[editline]11th April 2013[/editline]
All it really does imply is that the Turing test does not guarantee "understanding" as we like to think of it, and then perhaps not consciousness.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9FRSghXhDM[/media]
fast food lasagna
your argument is invalid.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;40251948]I think the Chinese room argument is very weak. It supposes that conversation and understanding are somehow distinct from programming and responding to syntax. I think they're expressions of different complexity of the same thing.
[editline]11th April 2013[/editline]
Really all it takes to "understand" Chinese from the point Searle reaches by learning to "program" the computer with Chinese characters is to map those characters and strings to concepts, like tree, love, lanaguage, etc. I don't think that is anything supernatural.
[editline]11th April 2013[/editline]
All it really does imply is that the Turing test does not guarantee "understanding" as we like to think of it, and then perhaps not consciousness.[/QUOTE]
It is still a fundamental statement about "understanding" We understand things and we weigh them subjectively, and two rational people can disagree completely rationally. Thus It takes a great bound of faith for me to jump from an objective mechanism to a subjective perspective.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;40253333]It is still a fundamental statement about "understanding" We understand things and we weigh them subjectively, and two rational people can disagree completely rationally. Thus It takes a great bound of faith for me to jump from an objective mechanism to a subjective perspective.[/QUOTE]
Maybe a context-grasping AI for real-world interaction is beyond our capabilities, but what about a virtual AI, one in which the context is created and commented on by itself? The game becomes more like the dream of the computer met by the player, or the developer.
Rather than writing a hundred AIs for different characters, why not write one massive controller AI inside of which all context is contained and other apparently sentient entities are extensions of its consciousness, filtered through a few variables and a few event assignments(memories).
Would it not be a short step from the virtual consciousness to real-world awakening? Just a few cameras, maybe a scanner for more clear 3D perception, some microphones and audio comparison algorithms
but that'd be slow as shit unless piped through a good gpu
I wonder if OpenCL can do all that
I'm rambling, but my point is, how deep does the mimicry have to go before the machine is considered conscious? We're sacks of chemicals attached to a point-of-consciousness, what makes us so special? Could a point-of-consciousness be in everything, but but so encumbered by lack of brain that it never awakens? Would but the power to understand give sentience to anything? Could your pet rock eventually roll onto your lap for attention? Will the tree hug you back, given the ability?
Granted there's no evidence to support this conjecture, which is why there's so many question marks. Just brain vomit, no wholesome food for thought.
A few weeks ago, I started hanging out with a new group of like 5 people. We've always gotten along really well in school and stuff but only recently have we all started hanging out together on a regular basis. I could go into all kinds of details, but the gist of it is that I am very happy. It's kind of like I found the group of friends I should've had all throughout high school, but only a few weeks before I graduate.
Everyone at our school gets along well; there's a lack of cliques, no bullies, and everyone's on good terms with each other. I always ran into these people over the weekend, talked, had a few beers, had some good conversations, and that's kinda what my weekend consisted of. I have an at least somewhat personal relationship with most of the people in our grade, but never got super involved with them. I now feel that this group I'm with is kind of like family.
I don't know why I'm posting this really, but I guess I would just advise that if you guys don't have a really good group of core friends you get to know on an emotionally intimate level, you should go looking for them, because they're out there.
My last period is British Literature, which I usually despise due to the nature of the class, but what we discussed today had me in some deep thought. We looked at William Wordsworth's [I]Lines Composed A Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey[/I].
The poem is about becoming subject to an overwhelming amount of positivity and only being able to fully appreciate it after you have time to meditate on it and see how it's actually changed your life. Wordsworth worded the sudden revelation he had as "disturbing." We talked about how it's possible that he found it disturbing because he had gone his entire life ignorant to the things he learned. He went on to discuss that revelations like this are kinda what life is all about. He talks about how we're so caught up in normal everyday bullshit that we rob ourselves of the real beauty life has to offer. Check out this stanza:
The dreary intercourse of daily life,
Shall e'er prevail against us, or disturb
Our cheerful faith, that all which we behold
Is full of blessings. Therefore let the moon
Shine on thee in thy solitary walk;
And let the misty mountain-winds be free
To blow against thee: and, in after years,
When these wild ecstasies shall be matured
Into a sober pleasure; when thy mind
Shall be a mansion for all lovely forms,
I was weirded out by how much this poem applied to me. Over these past few weeks I've been out and about with this crew, but only recently have I sat down and thought about how much happier I am than I was just a couple of months ago. I was so caught up in my regular, rather dull lifestyle that it took this personal "revelation" of mine to see that I've been missing out. I feel as if I'm not going to get caught up like that anymore. That there's gonna be a lot more interesting things happening in my life because I've recognized that sticking to an average joe schedule for too long of a time is not a very good thing.
This might just be the Vyvanse talking, but I would go so far as to say that these past few weeks have been some of the most enjoyable and introspective times of my life. Every time I wake up I think about how I'm looking forward to the day, which has never been the case.
So my ex-gf decided to share this nice story with me.
[quote]Back in 2004 scientists ha a theory that if you take a human and remove the 5 senses that you will be able to talk to god
So an old man who had nothing to live for was ther test subject
They strapped his to a table and cut out his sight smell taste touch and hearing ... At first the man was quiet
Then after a few days he started saying he was talkin to his wife
She was dead so the scientist didnt believe them
Then he started complaining about hear to many voice and the scientist still didnt believe him. Then the old man starte naming off dead family members of the scientist and personal things only those people would have known
After that some of the scientist decided to leave...
After like 6 weeks into the study the man was going crazy from the voices and screamed in pain all the time begging to be killed
But then she suddenly stopped ... And didnt move for two days...
When he did he made full eye contact with one of the scientist (even tho he was blind) and said this word. " I have talked to god.. He said he's abandoned us.. This no heaven and no forgiveness...
Then the man just magical died...
Right then and there for no reason what so ever....
You have a lot to learn about life
The only way to be happy is to accept
The world is destroyed .... Totally done for... Have you heard about the underground wars?
I just recently found out and then honestly it's taught me a lot... I've decided I will accept the world for everything and everyone it is and just wait till my death because that's all that can be done... And I'm gonna live it right[/quote]
:|
I remember reading that story on creepypasta forums.
that story is so dumb
He magical died
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.