https://suno.com/song/959ef136-00e8-48b ... 31578b878f
At least philosophy becomes more enjoyable
The Crisis of Meaning
Re: The Crisis of Meaning
A philosophical enchantment of the hard problem
https://suno.com/song/959ef136-00e8-48b ... 31578b878f
At least philosophy becomes more enjoyable
https://suno.com/song/959ef136-00e8-48b ... 31578b878f
At least philosophy becomes more enjoyable
Deep down I'm very superficial
Re: The Crisis of Meaning
Suno's privacy notice:
https://suno.com/song/e5232ddf-82a0-421 ... 8c6925fdba
Shared in the Shadows
ProfileGhastlyRhymes717
techno
April 14, 2024
v3
[Verse 1]
In this digital age
We're connected every day
Sharing our lives in the things we say (share with you)
But who's to know
Who sees our truths?
Our information shared
Without any clue
[Verse 2]
Through collaboration
We find common ground
Sharing our thoughts
Our voices resound (resound)
But in the shadows
Secrets may hide
Our privacy compromised
Along for the ride
[Chorus]
Sharing our lives
But at what cost?
Our information out there
Forever lost
In a world of service providers
We're just data
Will we ever escape this constant trade-off? (oh-oh-oh)
https://suno.com/song/e5232ddf-82a0-421 ... 8c6925fdba
How We Share Your Information
Shared in the Shadows
ProfileGhastlyRhymes717
techno
April 14, 2024
v3
[Verse 1]
In this digital age
We're connected every day
Sharing our lives in the things we say (share with you)
But who's to know
Who sees our truths?
Our information shared
Without any clue
[Verse 2]
Through collaboration
We find common ground
Sharing our thoughts
Our voices resound (resound)
But in the shadows
Secrets may hide
Our privacy compromised
Along for the ride
[Chorus]
Sharing our lives
But at what cost?
Our information out there
Forever lost
In a world of service providers
We're just data
Will we ever escape this constant trade-off? (oh-oh-oh)
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Re: The Crisis of Meaning
Excellent interview with comedian Jimmy Carr. A 5star recommendation.
https://youtu.be/uHLAazKUU68?si=VvXnzGQXC22AyTBw
https://youtu.be/uHLAazKUU68?si=VvXnzGQXC22AyTBw
Deep down I'm very superficial
Of Mammoths and Lice [Re: The Crisis of Meaning]
The Atheism Delusion - Konstantin Kisin
Completely understand Konstantin Kisin's perspective and agree. However, my personal journey into these matters moved on from that point long ago, because none of it hits any note for me; no new atheist notes, no agnostic notes, no religious pre-post-alternate lyrics of any sort. It’s just that I'm curious and will never stop investigating.
One thing stuck with me: reason, science, engineering, the pursuit of truth and knowledge does not touch life directly, or rather: it cannot sense beyond its functional scope. No matter how many words you throw at reality - call it Nature or God - it is as deaf and indifferent to your opinions, descriptions, conclusions... as a Mammoth to a pack of lice squatting in its fur. Mild irritation the only sentiment that manifests, occasionally.
However, without this pack of lice irritating the Mammoth (imagine Richard Dawkins as Lice Face) relentlessly, it would be prone to drifting away into delusional landscapes that distract him from the harsh reality in which it has to survive and like a drunk finding himself crashed into a tree rather soon. Reason and science keep the Mammoth sober and force its hands on the ball, always. Could be a win-win symbiotic relationship between two species.
Problem for the lice is they can't see nor feel the complete Mammoth, but they know it is there. Religion equates with being humble enough to admit that a lice is just a lice who knows Mammoth is real but also is aware that it knows very little about Mammoth, and only indirectly via a Virtual Reality Consciousness Helmet that tells the lice a lice-version of Mammoth.
The well-known 4 atheist horsemen talk like they are 4 lice under a deep hypnosis, convinced that physical reality "out there" is an objective representation (there are no "objective representations"; a contradiction in terms), it isn't. As if eyes are like a window with blinders, you open them et-voila: the objective world on display for the little atheist man living in his own brain, looking out of the window. There are also many religious pundits who suffer the same hypnosis, making claims about how the eye can only be designed by an intelligent creator.
Well, the honest lice that does real science and uses reason to its full capacity, likes to remind the hypnotized crowd of religious believers and atheist non-believers that the physical brain as it is known, is just a selfie with accumulated facts stored in a meta-database. Don't take that selfie too seriously! It's just a selfie....c'mon.
Given that a brain's selfie will never show you who-what actually made that selfie obviously, it might have very little resemblance to the actual “brainery" that made it. There are many reasons to assume that this is the case; not selfies or other representations but rather transmutations is what happens. But then whatever the math, it never touches reality either. "You still need God to breath fire into the equations". That humbles in the face of awe.
The Mammoth you see in your mind and feel is really there, but it might in reality be transmutations in vector space performed by Mathmom. Call her the Creative Genius of Father God. The woman behind a successful man, who inspired him to create and rise above his own dust. Caveat: also this is just poetic dust blowing in the wind, of course.
Completely understand Konstantin Kisin's perspective and agree. However, my personal journey into these matters moved on from that point long ago, because none of it hits any note for me; no new atheist notes, no agnostic notes, no religious pre-post-alternate lyrics of any sort. It’s just that I'm curious and will never stop investigating.
One thing stuck with me: reason, science, engineering, the pursuit of truth and knowledge does not touch life directly, or rather: it cannot sense beyond its functional scope. No matter how many words you throw at reality - call it Nature or God - it is as deaf and indifferent to your opinions, descriptions, conclusions... as a Mammoth to a pack of lice squatting in its fur. Mild irritation the only sentiment that manifests, occasionally.
However, without this pack of lice irritating the Mammoth (imagine Richard Dawkins as Lice Face) relentlessly, it would be prone to drifting away into delusional landscapes that distract him from the harsh reality in which it has to survive and like a drunk finding himself crashed into a tree rather soon. Reason and science keep the Mammoth sober and force its hands on the ball, always. Could be a win-win symbiotic relationship between two species.
Problem for the lice is they can't see nor feel the complete Mammoth, but they know it is there. Religion equates with being humble enough to admit that a lice is just a lice who knows Mammoth is real but also is aware that it knows very little about Mammoth, and only indirectly via a Virtual Reality Consciousness Helmet that tells the lice a lice-version of Mammoth.
The well-known 4 atheist horsemen talk like they are 4 lice under a deep hypnosis, convinced that physical reality "out there" is an objective representation (there are no "objective representations"; a contradiction in terms), it isn't. As if eyes are like a window with blinders, you open them et-voila: the objective world on display for the little atheist man living in his own brain, looking out of the window. There are also many religious pundits who suffer the same hypnosis, making claims about how the eye can only be designed by an intelligent creator.
Well, the honest lice that does real science and uses reason to its full capacity, likes to remind the hypnotized crowd of religious believers and atheist non-believers that the physical brain as it is known, is just a selfie with accumulated facts stored in a meta-database. Don't take that selfie too seriously! It's just a selfie....c'mon.
Given that a brain's selfie will never show you who-what actually made that selfie obviously, it might have very little resemblance to the actual “brainery" that made it. There are many reasons to assume that this is the case; not selfies or other representations but rather transmutations is what happens. But then whatever the math, it never touches reality either. "You still need God to breath fire into the equations". That humbles in the face of awe.
The Mammoth you see in your mind and feel is really there, but it might in reality be transmutations in vector space performed by Mathmom. Call her the Creative Genius of Father God. The woman behind a successful man, who inspired him to create and rise above his own dust. Caveat: also this is just poetic dust blowing in the wind, of course.
Last edited by Parodite on Fri May 03, 2024 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deep down I'm very superficial
Re: Of Mammoths and Lice [Re: The Crisis of Meaning]
Was looking for a concept and description of the human mind hypnotized by what it perceives to be objective reality, as if directly observed.Parodite wrote: The well-known 4 atheist horsemen talk like they are 4 lice under a deep hypnosis, convinced that physical reality "out there" is an objective representation (there are no "objective representations"; a contradiction in terms), it isn't. As if eyes are like a window with blinders, you open them et-voila: the objective world on display for the little atheist man living in his own brain, looking out of the window. There are also many religious pundits who suffer the same hypnosis, making claims about how the eye can only be designed by an intelligent creator.
My loyal friend came up with this one, pretty good and enough for now:
From here the going gets tough but becomes even more interesting.Cognitive hypnosis of objective realism
This concept describes the state of mind where individuals deeply believe that physical reality exists independently and objectively, rather than recognizing it as a construct generated by the brain's interpretation of sensory information. In this state, the mind is "hypnotized" by the illusion of direct and unmediated perception, leading to a strong conviction in the absolute reality of the external world.
A common fallacy is the conclusion that because of this, we live in a matrix or simulation. Which suffers from a remnant of hypnosis still active in the background. Or the equally misguided suggestion that "things only exist in consciousness".
Air Jordan Peterson is struggling with that idea and is tempted to agree that consciousness creates the world; also a persistent leftover of that same hypnotic state.
The worst are people making paranoid claims about "the world being an illusion". Sort of a revenge Blitz Krieg against reality, now that it still refuses to be simple, unambiguous and instead turning to be persistently mysterious. So if it is not to my taste, I declare it an illusion. Or: I don't like you so you don't exist.
Musk likes to know what is outside the matrix. There is nothing there I'm afraid, because it isn't a matrix, nor a simulation. Just language suggestive of things not even wrong, a bad word salad at best.
Deep down I'm very superficial
-
Nonc Hilaire
- Posts: 6222
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am
Re: The Crisis of Meaning
- IMG_4827.jpeg (104.16 KiB) Viewed 95 times
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”
Teresa of Ávila
Teresa of Ávila
Darkroom [Re: The Crisis of Meaning]
A nice example of a creationist who is in the same deep hypnosis of direct realism as his Darwinian counterparts like Richard Dawkins.
Neither of them doubts that the material world as it appears, manifests, is also what it objectively is independent from experience.
They all talk like little men inside their own brains, looking out of their eyes into the world like you gaze through a window and observing what-is as-is. They then both see a cow out there in a meadow and quarrel about how the hell it got there. All arguments pro-con suffer the same hypnoticon not-even-wrong conclusions.
https://youtu.be/ISUynYz93zY?si=GyVg27dDPdaVEJeS
The reasoning of Meyer, aside the hypnosis he is suffering, seems to boil down to: "The fact that reality is exactly is what it is, proves that it needs an intelligent creator to make sure that it exactly is what it is. Random materialistic events can never be that precise."
Sounds similar to a Jehovah witness who once claimed that only God can put exactly 60 seconds in a minute.
Both Dawkins and Meyer make their claims in the same darkroom, where the drug of direct realism is like a scentless vapor dispersed in the environment.
Tucker Carlson... well, it looks like he OD'd long ago and turned into a hallucinogenic substance himself. TC, don't sniff too much of that stuff. You start to see UFOs that must be spiritual entities.
Neither of them doubts that the material world as it appears, manifests, is also what it objectively is independent from experience.
They all talk like little men inside their own brains, looking out of their eyes into the world like you gaze through a window and observing what-is as-is. They then both see a cow out there in a meadow and quarrel about how the hell it got there. All arguments pro-con suffer the same hypnoticon not-even-wrong conclusions.
https://youtu.be/ISUynYz93zY?si=GyVg27dDPdaVEJeS
The reasoning of Meyer, aside the hypnosis he is suffering, seems to boil down to: "The fact that reality is exactly is what it is, proves that it needs an intelligent creator to make sure that it exactly is what it is. Random materialistic events can never be that precise."
Sounds similar to a Jehovah witness who once claimed that only God can put exactly 60 seconds in a minute.
Both Dawkins and Meyer make their claims in the same darkroom, where the drug of direct realism is like a scentless vapor dispersed in the environment.
Tucker Carlson... well, it looks like he OD'd long ago and turned into a hallucinogenic substance himself. TC, don't sniff too much of that stuff. You start to see UFOs that must be spiritual entities.
Deep down I'm very superficial
Re: Of Mammoths and Lice [Re: The Crisis of Meaning]
We rationalize the world around us in an effort to explain it. So the world in that sense is a creation of our consciousness. Which also makes the world an illusion of the same, in the same sense.Parodite wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2024 1:40 pmWas looking for a concept and description of the human mind hypnotized by what it perceives to be objective reality, as if directly observed.Parodite wrote: The well-known 4 atheist horsemen talk like they are 4 lice under a deep hypnosis, convinced that physical reality "out there" is an objective representation (there are no "objective representations"; a contradiction in terms), it isn't. As if eyes are like a window with blinders, you open them et-voila: the objective world on display for the little atheist man living in his own brain, looking out of the window. There are also many religious pundits who suffer the same hypnosis, making claims about how the eye can only be designed by an intelligent creator.
My loyal friend came up with this one, pretty good and enough for now:
From here the going gets tough but becomes even more interesting.Cognitive hypnosis of objective realism
This concept describes the state of mind where individuals deeply believe that physical reality exists independently and objectively, rather than recognizing it as a construct generated by the brain's interpretation of sensory information. In this state, the mind is "hypnotized" by the illusion of direct and unmediated perception, leading to a strong conviction in the absolute reality of the external world.
A common fallacy is the conclusion that because of this, we live in a matrix or simulation. Which suffers from a remnant of hypnosis still active in the background. Or the equally misguided suggestion that "things only exist in consciousness".
Air Jordan Peterson is struggling with that idea and is tempted to agree that consciousness creates the world; also a persistent leftover of that same hypnotic state.
The worst are people making paranoid claims about "the world being an illusion". Sort of a revenge Blitz Krieg against reality, now that it still refuses to be simple, unambiguous and instead turning to be persistently mysterious. So if it is not to my taste, I declare it an illusion. Or: I don't like you so you don't exist.
Musk likes to know what is outside the matrix. There is nothing there I'm afraid, because it isn't a matrix, nor a simulation. Just language suggestive of things not even wrong, a bad word salad at best.
Quite often I start my work intending to get done what I was planning to do the day before Then I find, to complete that task, there is something else I have to do first. Then something else Then I get a phone call and there is something more important. Then suddenly I wake up the next morning.
Kind of like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GncQtURdcE4
As far as Hypnoses goes I think Ground day is much better than Cats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH0UrqdH_8U
After all, for me at least, it is the crisis of ground hogs all the way down.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Re: The Crisis of Meaning
Indeed we rationalise, interprete, analyse the world around us. A thinking process adding subtitles to sensory experience. The whole package. What is it, how does it come about?
This theory of living in a simulation arises during that hypnotic state called direct realism, and for that reason deserves closer inspection. Turns out the idea is not even wrong and frought with self-defeating inconsistencies.
If one adheres to what I'd call the generally accepted standard model of consciousness, it is believed your own conscious experience arises in your physical brain. Just as you are tought at school and university and 99,99% of serious scientists and philosophers who concern themselves with it, will tell you.
So did I until 40 years ago and the strange inconsistancy of the idea revealed itself:
If my consciousness arises in my brain and generates some sort of internal representation fed by sensory input, than this supposedly physical brain I talk about, is itself just a representation of itself. Like you look at a picture of yourself, a selfie.
Now the one who is looking at his own selfie and then wonders how it can be that this consciousness arises in/from that "physically real" selfie... obviously tries to explain reality backwards.
Caveat: physical reality presented at large is so convincingly and objectively real, that this hypnotic state is completely logical, inevitable and I would say necessary to function. What if you will end this hypnotic state and start to completely doubt the validity, truthfulness of that respresentation and conclude it is illusory from the get go?
Well... these types of conundrums is what you get when you believe that consciousness arises from a mere selfie. Its just an error in thinking. A blue screen of death. Easy once you see the error, but very hard for most to let it land and then go from there. Even today.
Another angle and more easy way to debunk the simulation theory is: the word simulation has only meaning in relation to something else that is known to be real and therefor can be simulated.
Like a flight simulator and real flying. If you claim that all of your experience is a simulation than you have come up with the real thing that it simulates. If asked, "Ok, a simulation, a virtual reality, but of what??".... there is a deafening silence. Hence the statement is meaningless.
Once you leave behind the nonsense of consciousness arising from selfies, simulations, virtual realities and magic matrixes, things start to get interesting.
This idea of virtual reality occured to me when I was very young, but then realised that it doesn't matter what it is: my sandwich still tastes the same. Same is true for all other aspects. If I'm in pain, content, inspired, wake up, don't wake up...all real or all virtual in some magic matrix... it makes zero difference.
Same with empirical science and tech: maybe it is all a dream in the mind of some alien IQ 900 kid experimenting with his latest AI generated universe testing advanced game theory. Or maybe God himself made us up during a creative divine if not somewhat hellish dream he once had, and now tries to come to terms with the consequenes.
To discover that whatever you throw at life and its mysteries...wow...my coffee still tastes like coffee. Something reassuring about that.
This theory of living in a simulation arises during that hypnotic state called direct realism, and for that reason deserves closer inspection. Turns out the idea is not even wrong and frought with self-defeating inconsistencies.
If one adheres to what I'd call the generally accepted standard model of consciousness, it is believed your own conscious experience arises in your physical brain. Just as you are tought at school and university and 99,99% of serious scientists and philosophers who concern themselves with it, will tell you.
So did I until 40 years ago and the strange inconsistancy of the idea revealed itself:
If my consciousness arises in my brain and generates some sort of internal representation fed by sensory input, than this supposedly physical brain I talk about, is itself just a representation of itself. Like you look at a picture of yourself, a selfie.
Now the one who is looking at his own selfie and then wonders how it can be that this consciousness arises in/from that "physically real" selfie... obviously tries to explain reality backwards.
Caveat: physical reality presented at large is so convincingly and objectively real, that this hypnotic state is completely logical, inevitable and I would say necessary to function. What if you will end this hypnotic state and start to completely doubt the validity, truthfulness of that respresentation and conclude it is illusory from the get go?
Well... these types of conundrums is what you get when you believe that consciousness arises from a mere selfie. Its just an error in thinking. A blue screen of death. Easy once you see the error, but very hard for most to let it land and then go from there. Even today.
Another angle and more easy way to debunk the simulation theory is: the word simulation has only meaning in relation to something else that is known to be real and therefor can be simulated.
Like a flight simulator and real flying. If you claim that all of your experience is a simulation than you have come up with the real thing that it simulates. If asked, "Ok, a simulation, a virtual reality, but of what??".... there is a deafening silence. Hence the statement is meaningless.
Once you leave behind the nonsense of consciousness arising from selfies, simulations, virtual realities and magic matrixes, things start to get interesting.
This idea of virtual reality occured to me when I was very young, but then realised that it doesn't matter what it is: my sandwich still tastes the same. Same is true for all other aspects. If I'm in pain, content, inspired, wake up, don't wake up...all real or all virtual in some magic matrix... it makes zero difference.
Same with empirical science and tech: maybe it is all a dream in the mind of some alien IQ 900 kid experimenting with his latest AI generated universe testing advanced game theory. Or maybe God himself made us up during a creative divine if not somewhat hellish dream he once had, and now tries to come to terms with the consequenes.
To discover that whatever you throw at life and its mysteries...wow...my coffee still tastes like coffee. Something reassuring about that.
Deep down I'm very superficial