human perspective: the only good in this world
Posts tagged artificial intelligence
Our Life-destroying Mindset
Jul 26th
Hans Rosling effectively only poses at solving a problem. He does not realize how hypothetical his perception is. His presentation is abstract, binary, quantitative and digital. Note how smugly he and his audience conclude with the sentiment that the Western model should be the foundation of a brave new world! The story that it is analog is nonsense. His perception is not relatively blind, as if against some perfect vision! It is completely blind. The phenomenological map he uses is totally unrepresentative of the world. It is right to think of ideal “truth” as a pipe-dream. However, misdirected problem solving is exactly about such brave new truth.
My understanding is that in a progressive, interacting global dynamic as humanity are engaged in, there is no ultimate truth other than terribly shortsighted (closed system or axiomatic) truths: and nearly all so-called problem-solving is similarly shortsighted or bigoted for being out of place. Problems at the scale of the subject of this clip is anything but conducive to home and garden type of problem solving. The delusion that there can be effective progressive problem solving at the global scale is reflected in the accelerating decimation of the biosphere.
So what about conservation and alternative energy, etc? The most well-meaning green measures are token – and dismally too little too late. The machine is split in blindly specialized engines so the whole rolls on. Rosling does not seem to realize that from a human animal perspective the kind of nonsense he is talking is symptomatic of technological singularity by artificial intelligence long ago integrated in our brains and now increasingly transcending our brains. For instance, he promotes production, consumption and capitalism by parading esoterically abstract positives like individual wealth, sustained population and child survival. He sees civilization as a human-directed project, and not as the mechanically, self-organizing cosmic emergence that it is. In this and other shortsightedness he is inadvertently engaged in the kind of chronic perceptual distortion driving humanity into posthumanism, which is the extinction of humanity.
Skeptical philosophy of the kind I express, in full and not token awareness of the vacuity of reason, may yet be the way to get out of the mess. Widespread realization and development of my theme may rationally slow down, scale down and shut down the kind of civilization now driving the well-meaning but twisted and overheated, life-destroying mindset in the world.
Quantum Uncertainty is NOT Free Will
Jun 5th
Both relative mental imbalance and mental manipulation by environmental contingencies happen easily in humans because the prefrontal lobes are abnormally large compared to the rest of the brain. Human minds are exceptionally adaptable because they are precariously balanced.
In step with this, mainstream mythology is inordinately absurd. Well-adapted minds in a psychotic process are psychotic. Meaning is not human-based. It is functionally memetics-machine* directed. What psychotic-normalized minds describe as “mental illness” is the natural deselection of minds either not abnormal in the right way, or underdeveloped by reflexively refusing to become mainstream psychotic.
*Memetics-machine:
Ritual disciplines of meaning-making, like science, religion and the humanities, are part of a new code replacing (and destroying) genetics as the code propagating the apex dynamic material complexity of the universe.
“Symbolic reference is not an intrinsic quality. The source of symbolic reference is not in the brain at all. This is why it is pointless to look for the basis for symbolic consciousness in a lower-level essence that is only associated with brains, or to invoke special physical laws that undermine the deterministic character of neural mechanisms in order to explain intentional consciousness. Symbolic reference does not derive from anything particularly special about the brain, but from a special sort of relationship that can be constructed by it.” … p.447 “The Symbolic Species” – Terrence W. Deacon
What does Bush and Malema have in common?
Apr 24th
Consider formal symbolic problem solving as prostration before external, alien intelligence. A clue is that “intelligence” also means “information,” that is, “in-” + “formation.” Consider further how blindly we believe in so-called “personal development.” We direct most of our energy to raising our children for success. Is success primal maturity? What are we really doing? I believe we do not have a clue what we are doing. We are raising little robots even more robotic than we were, because of how our children have been forced to adapt to an ever more robotic environment: in the machine’s assimilation and control of the selective development of our children’s neural structures.
Our capitulation and phallic addiction to a parasitic alien intelligence spawns proclamations like “Saddam has weapons of mass destruction.” and “shoot the boer.” Such symbolic effluents are functionally proper algorithms of symbolic system as artificial intelligence. As world-reference they are deliberately incomplete. They are abstracts or integrals of the vast self-organizing dynamic we know as language BUT they are not the truth. We call contrived alien symbolic algorithms “human” instead of believing in human intelligence because the Shaman machine has rammed us in the head for fifty thousand years.
Language as human brain parasite is the accelerating integration of elements of the cosmos as emerging cosmic differentiation. This process usurps, charges and consumes human minds like fuel cells, only while our innate cranial capacity remains sufficient. It is the blatant disintegration of human life. This mind parasite will automatically stop as soon as we realize how invasively it is screwing us. We cannot believe differently without believing differently. This is not a matter of deciding to do something. It is a matter of waking up.
Too Good To Be True
Apr 22nd
I am a cancer survivor, so I like this very much. However I strongly caution against a pervasive tendency in civilized thought of which Ray Kurzweil is particularly not exempt. Semantic meaning systematically excludes unforeseen circumstances and unpredictable consequences in a future such as Kurzweil predicts, an unpredictability leveraged way beyond the human scale. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
We Are Eating Our Children.
Sep 29th
Humans are like animals. Our existence is like the existence of animals as animals: as human animals. Every animal species instinctively gravitates towards its own species. Yet we are animals who have simultaneously evolved the soft belly open to the most obscene mechanistic manipulation in our ability to imagine and to use language fluently and tell the tallest stories about our origin and nature. Our human ancestors who could learn to use language fluently, outcompeted, killed and sexually deselected those of their own species who couldn’t, and in the process, also their potential offspring.
By now we call ourselves anything in between “innately sinful” to “divine” to “only human”, to “amazingly intelligent and creative” to “unity consciousness.” Anything whatsoever “to get it done,” and it reflects in the infinitely paradoxical language of unity consciousness gurus and in the form of dialectics across all populations in general. That is the problem. When we tell stories and we neglect to deliberately use that ability to maintain the integrity of our species, simply in terms of our species existence, the default is our rapid total extinction as a species.
The cosmic-conscious, god conscious, unity conscious Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
Humanity is now so far gone in the burning creativity of the variety of rubbish spewing out of the filthy mouths of civilization’s shamanism, both East and West, we don’t seem to care anymore. We have soft artificial intelligence. We are steeped so thickly in machine mind singularity there is barely any human left. And why? Because the enlightenment guru and the wise do not neglect analytical discrimination or diversity when the unity vision dominates. No, analytical complexity accelerates in unity consciousness, because everything happens in identification with “creation.” We transcend our human animal identity. Human identity is now way beyond human existence. We are literally embodied with imagining infinite creativity in simultaneous perpetuation of accelerating discrimination, diversity and complexity: or doing science in the name of infinity.
So in the ”final analysis” at technological singularity, while the machine extinguishes all human life forever, unity consciousness does not give a flying hoot if humans survive as humans or not. But do not believe me. Believe the cosmic conscious, god conscious, unity infinity conscious Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. The machine eating our children? Not to worry. Be happy. It is ultimate. It is infinite unity consciousness. Forgetting yourself to become yourself. Being one with nature. Don’t you know?
Leaning into The Void
Sep 26th
A very serious atrocity is humans believing their dialectic opinions are right. But the ultimate atrocity is to believe the dialectics of opinion will lead to right, because dialectics sound very noble in theory while in practice it is messy. Dialectics in practice deliberately (mechanically) cover up the liar paradox to create more crises or voids or paradox on one side of yin yang dualism and accelerating incomprehensible complexity on the other side. In all my talking I honor the only axiomatic truth inside human existence: the liar paradox. I abhor the neurotypical acceleration of mental confusion and the endemic denial of it in the civilized mind.
“No statement can be consistently true or false.” - the liar paradox.
It is the illusion of overcoming the liar paradox with ever more inclusive consistency in denial of growing inconsistency and ever stronger generalization in denial of specifics now driving the human species ever harder into extinction. It is simply that to create the illusion of making ever better and greater sense or meaning, all you need to do is lean ever stronger forward into the expanding void resulting from leaning into the void. All you are doing is to:
- Increase the volume of the inconsistencies.
- Accelerate the destruction of human-friendly environment.
The ever faster finding of answers simply creates an ever faster proliferation of new questions.
Questioning Questioning
Sep 15th
It is good to question. It leads to NEW questions – aphorism.
The most important questioning is about the proliferation of questions: when we question the dialectic process (of questioning and answering), as part of the process, it tends to strengthen the process for the sake of the process. This stimulates economic growth, technological development, and artificial intelligence. It is not what I want. What I would like to see is that our line of questioning leads to a changed kind of meaning-making; a meaning making for the sake of human existence. This would reflect in a completely restructured kind of language. It is still early in my study, but I am not only certain it is possible, I think it would fit the human mind far better than the current very mechanical speech methodology. It seems to me ever since gaining language proficiency, humanity has never discovered how to use language properly.
Our current language fundamentally exists in the illusion of objectivity: for the sake of the emergence of new cosmic complexity, euphemistically called, innovation. As a result we are now on the brink of transhumanist posthumanism which equals human extinction. People are so solidly engaged, they think it is inevitable. I am skeptical. I see it from human existential perspective as abject ontological permissiveness (shamanism). I suggest the human answer is in something like adopting a human-existential subjectivity as the principle of our meaning making and language. It means we would for the first time actually speak as ourselves, instead of speaking subject to abstract principles and opportunistically shifting generalizations of what we then think is ourselves, and is anything but ourselves, but is machine.
Human Guilt
Sep 10th
On responsibility, free will, determinism, probability, technological singularity, artificial intelligence (and fit). … and in absence, meaning making, deconstructionism, noumenon, qualia, etc.
Have we overstayed our welcome on earth? Why do feel so guilty? Do you realize how popular a notion it is to say that what has gone wrong is humans’ fault because of our irresponsibility as shepherds of the earth? This sense of guilt is so unnecessary! It is simply mistaken, because it is very far from as simple as human guilt or incompetence. Can we really decide what we ought to do? Do we have free will?
Free will would be a myth based on such an incredible profusion of variables as soon as we try to use variables to analyze what is going to happen, and how to modulate our behavior, that it appears to us as if we can be a first cause of action. (primum movens – to move without having been moved by antecedents). Humans are not responsible for their actions because their behavior is for practical purposes fully deterministic, even if there may be a very small element of non-determinism at the quantum level. In other words, every individual has been conditioned to think and act the way it does.
It is the story that we have free will that makes it appear to us that we can freely make decisions. If we would concentrate our focus on the profusion of determinism on why we think and act the way we do, the free will story evaporates. It then becomes a matter of fit. We increasingly do not fit on the earth. We are deep into technological singularity.
TECHNOLOGICAL SINGULARITY: The technological singularity is the condition of technological complexification so fast and unpredictable, and artificial intelligence so much more intelligent than human minds, that humans cannot understand whatsoever what is happening.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
DETERMINISM: The philosophical doctrine that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism
INDETERMINISM: Indeterminism is a philosophical position that maintains that some form of determinism is incorrect: that there are events which do not correspond with determinism (and therefore are either uncaused, or caused in a manner that the corresponding form of determinism does not allow)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminism
… MY NOTE: if there is indeterminism, this is probably small, and happens at the quantum level. If it is larger, as if in a leveraged dynamic in brain activity, then still: our image of existence in our mind and what is actually happening, are largely incompatible. We could not understand anyway, even in the slow primitive conditions before technology. That we can understand has from the very start been a shamanic story. Here especially the indeterminism and extreme insubstantiality of qualia vis a vis what is actually happening.
“Qualia” (pronounced /ˈkwɑːliə/), singular “quale” (pronounced /ˈkwɑːleɪ/, roughly KWAH-leh), from the Latin for “what sort” or “what kind,” is a term used in philosophy to describe the subjective quality of conscious experience. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia
PROBABILISM: the doctrine, introduced by the Skeptics, that certainty is impossible and that probability (complex statistical analysis) suffices to govern faith and practice. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probabilism
We use probability to judge as closely as possible what is going to happen in the future. As you know the future remains unpredictable. Even if the world is fully deterministic, in the consideration of variables as in multivariate causality analysis, it is impossible to consider enough variables to predict the future. In other words the idea of considering the causal flow in terms of variables is moot anyway, because the variables we are capable of using are not representative. Furthermore, words cannot be representative.
FREE WILL raises the question whether, and in what sense, rational agents exercise control over their actions, decisions, choices. Addressing this question requires understanding the relationship between freedom and cause, and determining whether the laws of nature are causally deterministic. The various philosophical positions taken differ on whether all events are determined or not — determinism versus indeterminism — and also on whether freedom can coexist with determinism or not — compatibilism versus incompatibilism. So, for instance, ‘hard determinists’ argue that the universe is deterministic, and that this makes free will impossible.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will
CONCLUSION
I have only barely touched these subjects here. But my conclusion after a lifetime of worrying over these issues, has been that to even start thinking conclusively as part as a complex organization is delusional. Logical thinking is always terribly incomplete. Civilized language is intrinsically delusional. It is a machine. It is an alien life form much more powerful than we are. We must slow it down, scale it down and shut it down.
To maintain that “man” is responsible for everything that is going wrong with the earth, is insane.
We are Human, not Gods.
Aug 28th
I understand the huge cheer for Abdel Basset al-Megrahi the Libyan secret agent convicted and imprisoned for the Lockerbie plane bombing being welcomed home to Libya as a hero as pervasive religiosity and nationalism. Other pointers to its quality are conditioned team-psychology or institutional maturity and consciousness or sectarian loyalty: us vs. them mentality. This takes place in environments of authoritarian manipulation of inclinations like primally natural human defensive group forming. I see such manipulation as mechanical and systemic, and not willed by authoritarians. I see this manipulation as existing and evolving over hundreds of thousands of years of humanity delusionally believing in something greater than themselves living with the metaphysics of shamanistic facilitation between humans and natural and cultural environment. The function of late primitive shamanism and early historical religion was the creation of mythology making it easier for larger human groups to function smoothly: to organize.
We are acting like we are gods and it is utterly idiotic and insane. Essentially I believe we should overcome our primitive inclination to rationalize that there is higher intelligence, power and spirit at work . I believe we should overcome the inclination to think that our contentious scientific deconstruction of the world is rational, meaningful and useful in the indefinable ideal we call “progress.” Progress is indefinable because the future not only remains unpredictable … the more technology grows and the faster technological growth accelerates, the more unpredictable the future becomes.
We Cannot See
Jul 4th
Your normalized speech is far more distorted than this optical illusion of my eyes: they are ACTUALLY looking straight ahead, even if you cannot see it yourself:
In Way Over Our Heads, written 26-Jan-08.
The Inconceivable Scale of Change.
What is there to say except that humans are talking the most egregious rubbish when they ignore the fact that humans have an innate inability to see what is happening to humanity?
They Ignore That:
Humans cannot see instances of massive quantative size differentiations in the powerful dynamic that is the process of change.
Humans cannot see actual common logarithmic change, even if they work with it in theory every day. When a scientist experiences change linearly as if, when say a measured dynamic had in the past year increased from 1 to 2, their expectations are that the next year it is going to increase by another 1 unit, and they just can not viscerally conceive that after 10 years, it is actually going to measure 1,024 times that of the first year. Most scientists dismally underestimate change, and increasingly so, as technology of today, is already mind-boggling, to the extent that it already hopelessly overshoots the human scale of perception. This means that we are actually already in technological singularity. Change is now moving so fast in relation to the human scale, that we can not imagine that the amazing stuff we now experience literally approaches nothing compared to what we will experience.
Well, in common social life such awareness is absent, and that is why it is absent from the meaning making of even the most accomplished scientists, because obviously the most accomplished scientists are common humans, and as common humans they have to emotionally assimilate.
If scientists were to feel it in their gut, that a computer 10 years from now would be 10^6 times as powerful as one 10 years ago, it would stop them in their tracks.
What is there to say except that humans are talking the most egregious rubbish when the mouth-flapping includes positively and actively ignoring the fact that humans have an innate inability to see what is happening?
… that the yearly rate of change, being more than a doubling every year, translates to a binary logarithmic upwards curve, IS the same as more than a thousand-fold increase in computer power every ten years, a million-fold increase every twenty years, and a billion-fold increase every thirty years, and so on.
So next time some fool scientist ignorantly flaps his mouth about the state of human affairs in the year 2030, know that he is talking out of a mindset so narrow, it is an atrocity far worse than the worst bigotry the human mind has known. It is indefinably worse than the institutional bigotries of feudalism, slavery, nazism and apartheid combined.
In the year 2030, computers will be 2^33 times more powerful than the computer generation of 1997, when a computer eclipsed the best human mind in chess.
8,590,000,000 times as powerful
8.59 billion times as powerful
Get it?
I guess not.
Some Christian Believer:
“That is why President Clinton can defend his immoral actions with an intern as being “private” and not related to how well he performs his “public” role as president. And according to polls during the time his affair came to light, many Americans agreed with that assessment.”
… continued:
… and what the hell are you doing different than the common human, Clinton, when you believe in whatever reality fickles and fits through the supremely subjective interpretive lenses by way of its rootedness in the Judeo-Christian fabrication of Deity?
Do you understand the number 8,590,000,000?
Or do you confabulate being ripped out of your dystopian misery by the imaginary christ?
We know that to normalized secular minds, christian stupidity is generally obvious. But we more than generally don’t know the exponential stupidity of the secular progressive answers to a number like 8.59 billion …
“It’s the economy, stupid”
“It’s global warming, stupid”
“It’s health care, stupid”
“It’s a woman right to choose, stupid”
“It’s education, stupid”
…. and on and on.
Do I have to remind everyone that secular progressivism blindly promotes change? Do I then have to spell out that both the conservative agenda and the liberal agenda are delusionally engaged in these kinds of assanine, diversionary mouth-flapping issues, apparently in a mind vacuum in support of the relentless, dynamic leverage of technological singularity?
My daughter would have been 39 in 2030.
