Part 1,

The alleged ability directly to know the future without the use of inferences or guesswork. Precognition is a major category of extrasensory perception (ESP). The most common type of precognitive experience, comprising about three-quarters of survey and case reports, is the dream that seems to contain information about events that later occur.
(Leonard George: Alternative Realities, Facts on File, 1995, p. 228)


Some evidence for getting information outside of the locally stored information in our memory can be found in the scientific study of paranormal or psychic phenomena, such as telepathy and precognition. Both faculties of the mind get information from outside of the local realm of the individual mind and the brain.

What are people's views on this as an entity of occurrence as we evolve?

Bear in mind that Hyponoesis (Universal Mind) continuously creates and sustains reality. This reality however is only a potential reality. This potential reality consists of an infinite number of potentialities, out of which Exonoesis (Individual Mind) establishes an actual reality through the act of noetic operations like perception, thinking, comprehension, abstraction, judgment, etc.

Part 2,

The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of 'truth': 'conformity with facts, agreement with reality". This definition encapsulates the common-sense theory of truth, the correspondence theory, which claims that a statement is true if it corresponds to the facts. The absolute idealists put forward a coherence theory of truth, in which the only absolute truth is 'the whole' - anything less than that can only aspire to degrees of truth. William James argued for a pragmatic theory of truth (I’m a pragmatist), according to which the problem of truth is one of welfare economics, for a true assertion is one that proves the best for us in the long run. Tarski attempted to avoid the problems of self-reference by claiming that 'truth' can only be defined in a metalanguage.

Is it the case that we cant due to physical limitations absorb and reiterate all the world knows, if so why would we create something that can?

Just some dilemma’s I have been pondering during my surfing recently.

Cheers NiK :)

Ok, that's it ... I am going off my meds and let the precognizing begin, once again.

Anyone want to go in on a lottery ticket?

LOL! Deal me in...

Mum, I could be wrong but I believe the loop theory could explain your last point too. I like that theory though, combine that with our more or less predictable world, where a certain action usually cause a certain reaction and so on. Very little things can happen out of context...

Once upon a time I would have been more enthusiastic about the whole topic. I'm more inclined to believe Sam has a big point about those crackpots... Only... how wacky can you be if you are smart enough to make considerable profit on it? I don't believe "science" has the whole answer though. There will always be areas where science doesn't have the right tools as of yet and quite frankly it's more or less just a model of the world and not the answer to all our questions... (And never will be.)

I like the way you think about psychiatric patients Clayton. In any other given culture they could have been holy men or healers... I do think your other point is the most importent one though. There is infinite possible futures... There is no linear way between now and the future. It's the most possible complex chaotic movement and there is no way of telling exactly what is going to happen. Many probable things can be foreseen but only as vague ideas and not an exact description of what will happen. I do agree to some extent about the subjective nature of our perception of reality and thus how our future will look to us. The power of our mind is great, if you look for that tall man the fortune-teller told you about you are more likely to find yourself in that particular situation that you were expecting. We are fantastic at fulfilling out own prophecies, but that is not precognition.

Finally some answers to the reply I got for my last post. You can bring evolution into the discussion if you like. I believe I don't agree with you though... But I guess it's just the way you look on the situation. Evolution does not promote the *best* solution, it works according to the "best bang for the bucks" concept. We don't see, hear, smell, feel, all that is physically possible. A lot of nuances of the world remains hidden to us since our sensory apparatus are not made to perceive them. It's more cost effective to only process information you have to access in order to get by.

By any standard I don't think that a species that is currently on top of things could be considered "better". They are simply adapted to the current settings good enough to continue their race with the rest of the lot. My former section comes for me to the conclusion that we need to be a bit humble about ourselves. We could regard ourself as lucky to be in the position we are in but saying we are better because we step on the heads of others doesn't rhyme for me...

In evolution you only need to be more aggressive and a bit less refined (specialised) in order to make it fairly well. A culture that is more peaceful, morally evolved and adapted to its local environment is more vulnerable facing outside agressors. Who knows if the Neanderthal really was just a brute? Perhaps it was the other way around and we, Homo Sapiens, just simply killed them off as they infringed on our expansion and control over the recourses we were competing for.

Consider the illiterate culture where they have learnt to live with the nature around them in fairly good balance, using small scale technology, but get by just fine. Compare it to the average Joe in any western country (or any of the industrialized countries) that would not survive long if the supporting mechanisms that he needs to get by is taken away ((lets say as the result of a catastrophe caused by a hurricane or such...) and who's supporting mechanisms in themselves are just a slow variant of catastrophe, leading to pollution and on the whole being ecologically precarious).

Who's to say what is more evolved. The little man that is a generalist and can stand on his own two feet in order to support himself, or the "specialized" post-industrialist man who probably would starve or freeze to death in a couple of days if he was on his own... Or perhaps I'm a bit hard on the average Joe... I'm definitely sure he's not more evolved then any other man on earth though.

We're all on equal terms more or less. Our culture is just spray-painted over the core of being human. I believe any newborn child (up to the age of a couple of years, maybe even between 5 to 10) could be put in any culture (and if a time-machine would be at hand, in any time during human history (even the future... :P)) and do just fine. We have not changed that much the last couple of thousands of year... That I'm more or less sure of.

This is what I believe at least. You don't have to agree. ;) I'm more then fine with disagreeing in discussions. I'm not even saying you need to reconsider your own points of views. They are right in their context. The only difference would be accounted to the spray-paint that color the "goggles" we perceive the world through.

14% Of your brain only for 1 thought what if 100% were to be used? I think as we develop into more exponential beings i.e. in what we have available and what we are able to do things will become apparent. How about this take one journey and more than likely you will always remember your way home. What if you just knew?

There are plenty of hypnotists on the planet that without us knowing direct the populus to believe and act in whatever way they want. Where do they get this ability. Psychology. Power of the mind should preceed all. We have in out skull the most complex organic computer on this world. A massive improvement in memory for a computer netword as I said earlier is organic. Films like Lawnmower Man & the Matrix have only fuelled my childish imagination to contemplate uploading what we want into our database. All we have to do then is learn the best use of the information and make it our own incorporating style, charisma etc otherwise we would all become one. I feel I have diverted slightly from what is apparent in society when I say such things however I feel a deep attonement for development not however for the Power Mongers.

We have them already. Mobiles, MP3's etc palms things of this nature by 2010 nokia is going to have an implant ready phone and banking device for implantation under the skin in one of our hands. You hand flashes and you say hello and hey presto. Our brain can develop so much more I reckon that if you really wanted to you could do pretty much anything.

Question

Do we choose to feel pissed off because we want to?

No, why because of emotions, a simple choice can be made as to hang on I dont want to feel pissed off I can make a choice. As simple as it sounds I have started to enable this skill within me. I can make a choice. I sometimes presume that other skill are there they need unlocking. I have had dreams come true (pardon the cliche), I have have extremely vivid De-Ja-Vous i.e. feel and smell aswell and I cant answer it. What makes me worry about my family when Im 200 miles away. I think under added pressure we find these links somehow and we dont know how to utilise them.

Cold war time. Im unsure of the specific details so maybwe somebody could help, I will give it my best shot. I think they were called See something, basically telepaths who could see another country and give precise details for bombing raids however these psychics had never been to these places. Dont get me wrong they were not 100% correct but successfull they were on occasions where action had taken place.

We are more powerfull than we realise I think it is about time we all woke up a bit.

A small addition to the above discussion.

Ayn Rand in a very exclusive interview commented that "if you wanted to know the 'truth,' ask a child or a crazy person."

Sooo ... ask away ;) .

I ran into a person not too long ago that didn't think time existed, he was pretty sure at least, so he stopped eating to prove it. It wouldn't matter he said... That's what taking philosophical reasoning one step too far can do... But I agree the concept of time and that of the mind are really fascinating, that's for certain.

If you think you can "free" your mind and use more of your brain just go ahead and have a blast. I'm sure we have a lot of untapped potential but I'm also certain we could make due with what we have pretty nicely, if we only used it in a sound way. (Where do they get those figures BTW? it's not like anyone knows exactly what our potential is...)

IMHO our society does not promote using our brain in any way at all... Not in any positive way at least. BTW, did you know that some of the idiot sauvants and other autistic people do use a larger portion of their brain for thinking. If I remember it they have switched the working units in the brain that normally process socially important factors like understanding other peoples (emotional) expressions, both verbally and non-verbally undertones plus additional related abilities but as you know they can be exceptional at some isolated area.

Anyhow...

Where does it say we're exponential beings, or will be. I see no sign of people getting better by a logarithmic scale... Perhaps the opposite but I gather you don't mean it that way. There are indeed some attempts of making biological interfaces with silicon-chips but they are really crude atm. I'm thinking you have a fair chance in say 50 (perhaps even 20 to 30) years to make it work properly... My guess it that it will only be a small ‰ of the richest and most powerful that will use such technology to enhance themselves. Some will no doubt be used in the medical field but only in rich countries for a lucky few. (Edit: The military will no doubt tap this resource to it's full extent though.) That's how it usually goes...

I read William Gibsons books with great fascination in the early 90s. He sure put a lot of thoughts in the head of both scientists, other writers (/creators) and his readers. We're no where near anything of what he came up with though. Just as well. All those good sci-fi visions of the world are really just like dark nightmares come to think about it...

I may not come through like that but I appreciate hearing your thoughts on the subject. I believe we have a choice to be pissed off or not. I'm not sure this decision is within reach for everyone though. I'm not a determinist but I guess you could call me a pseudo-determenist. I'm sure we think like we do because we have lived our own particular lives that has brought us a special, unique frame of reference. This forms our way of thinking, reacting and acting. In certain settings we are in a position that allows us to make certain (bot not all possible, imaginable) choices. Others are not as lucky, and still, yet others again, may make choices that never were in our own reach. It's simple really. As I'm sure you think... It's been long since I used my brain to it's full potential...

I agree with you we are probably more powerful then we think and that we get it all out if in luck when it's really needed (like during stressful conditions). But I don't think we need to get smarter, we need only to grow wiser... The heart should always carry more weight then the brain in the way we live our lives. There is no logic in using only logic. Not that you would suggest anything like that. I'm just saying it...

Indeed we have the most complex organic computer (or what to call it) in the world in our sculls. It's not working strictly linearly though, so it's a precarious business to evaluate what it does and doesn't do and more so what it could do. I'm figuring it's more or less working as good as it can but I'm not saying it can't get any better... I usually think to myself that a healthy mind needs to forget stuff and not be to busy with the details (believe me I'm a master at some of this stuff :P). If you think about it it would be a nightmare not to be able to shut out all that isn't relevant to what is happening atm. There are people that can't bask in that luxury and I understand that's not really any fun. :P

Cheers,
Klas

Les, so what is your diagnosis? You got me curious there. ;)

(Now, just be sure to send me that money you will win for us... :P)

Eternal optimism :) .

And on that second to last note Klas, there seems to be (forgive me here) a 'thread' of the discussion of environmental factors coming into play. I am quite curious as to the why and how siblings can, at times exhibit similar behaviour and at others, quite extreme, diametrically opposed actions and thoughts.

At least that is the thought that came to mind as I read through your words.

Is the more 'benevolent' sibling higher evolved then? Of course, with the caveat in reference to the definition of the word benevolent. I have read and studied the formation of personality. Is this seperate from the evolution of intelligence for the being? How do these two factors play a role in what proportions of our cerebral capacity that we use. That question absolutely intrigues me.

And how appropriate that you mention the godfather of 'cyberspace.' I could be corrected here, but, I believe that it was in fact, Gibson that coined the term.

Annddd ... I must reread your thoughts again. 'Tis late and I am not certainly using my 10% at the moment, lol.

Nite for now ... and have a good good day ... till the next time we cross cyber paths ...

Purmusic you have suprised me. I like suprises.

Metasystem Transition Theory (MSTT) is the name we have given our particular cybernetic philosophy. Its most salient concept is, of course, the Metasystem Transition (MST), the evolutionary process by which higher levels of complexity and control are generated. But it also includes our views on philosophical problems, and makes predictions about the possible future of mankind and life. Our goal is to create, on the basis of cybernetic concepts, an integrated philosophical system, or "world view", proposing answers to the most fundamental questions about the world, ourselves, and our ultimate values.
Our methodology to build this complete philosophical system is based on a "bootstrapping" principle: the expression of the theory affects its content and meaning, and vice versa. In this way we aim to apply the principles of cybernetics to their own development. Our philosophy too is based on cybernetic principles. Our epistemology understands knowledge as a model, which is constructed by the subject or group, but undergoes selection by the environment. Our metaphysics asserts actions as ontological primitives. On the basis of this ontology, we define the most important concepts and organize them in a semantic network. At a higher level, we also lay out the fundamental principles of cybernetics in terms of these underlying concepts.

One of the central concepts is that of evolution in the most general sense, which is produced by the mechanism of variation and selection. Another is control, which we define in a special cybernetic sense, and assert as the basic mode of organization in complex systems. This brings us to the central concept for MSTT, that of the metasystem transition, or the process by which control emerges in evolutionary systems.

On this basis we then reconstruct the complete history of evolution, from the Big Bang to the present, as a sequence of MST's. An extrapolation of this sequence provides us with a first glimpse of what the future might bring. Finally, the possible dangers and opportunities of our evolutionary future direct our attention to the need for formulating an ethics, based on evolutionary and systemic principles, that could guide our actions.


Background of the theory of MST

The concept of the metasystem transition was introduced in Turchin's book The Phenomenon of Science, which was followed by Inertia of Fear and the Scientific Worldview. The basic tenets of MSTT were formulated by Turchin and Joslyn in "The Cybernetic Manifesto". As Heylighen joined the Editorial Board, the work on MSTT intensified, and the Principia Cybernetica Web was created. A major collection of papers on MSTT by the three editors and invited authors was published in a special issue of the journal World Futures entitled "The Quantum of Evolution". MSTT is also being applied to computer science and the foundations of mathematics by Turchin and his colleagues. The bibliography of PCP includes most publications on MSTT.

The classic example of an MST is the emergence of multicellular organisms. At the beginning of this process the control mechanism is quite rudimentary: just holding cells together. It takes place due to the laws of nature, without any spatially separated substructure. But in the course of further metasystem transitions, specialization of cells occurs, and we witness the creation of a multilevel hierarchy of structures and functions, where cells are integrated into tissues, tissues into organs, organs into an organism, and all this is controlled by the humoral and nervous systems (for further examples, see Metasystem transitions in biology).
Formation of the human society from individuals is also an MST. As in the case of multicellular organisms, the scope S of the transition is the whole system under consideration. This is not always so. A metasystem transition can take place over a scope which is a substructure of the considered system. Thus, formation of an army from conscripts is a typical MST resulting in a hierarchy of control, but the units which are integrated are individual conscripts, not whole societies. A more important example of this kind is the metasystem transition within the brain which resulted in the emergence of the human being.

The history of computer technology gives us more examples of MSTs. At its beginning we find von Neumann's idea: to keep and treat programs as data. In a mechanical calculator, no matter how it is designed, the top level in functional description is execution of four arithmetic operations. In von Neumann's computer this level is also present, but there is a higher level: the program, which controls the operations to be executed by hardware. We see two levels of control instead of one: a metasystem transition. (Of course, when we speak of instruments, such as computers, the control hierarchy always has the human user on the top, so we may not mention it).

The next MST in the use of computers was the introduction of formal machine-independent languages for programming; Fortran was the first. Now the computer program is no more the top of hierarchy. The top is a translator which reads the Fortran program written by the user, and compiles the necessary computer program: three levels of control.

Evolution

As in all evolutionary developments, the most important events are metasystem transitions.
In "The Phenomenon of Science" (Columbia University Press, 1977) it is shown that the major steps in evolution, both biological, and cultural, are nothing else but metasystem transitions of a large scale. The concept of metasystem transition allows us to introduce a kind of objective quantitative measure of evolution and distinguish between evolution in the positive direction, progress, and what we consider an evolution in the negative direction, regress For example, here is the sequence of metasystem transitions which led, starting from the appearance of organs of motion, to the appearance of human thought and human society:

control of position = movement
control of movement = irritability (simple reflex)
control of irritability = (complex) reflex
control of reflex = associating (conditional reflex)
control of associating = human thinking
control of human thinking = culture

Im going to fly like a butterfly and sting like a bee, technology is the way for me. Amen

P.S. Klas = Class for me.

Whoa ... I really need some time to digest this Nik.

I do recall that on your trip to the Drum and Bass gig, that you were also attending a conference of sorts. Have I got that correct? Was this the fodder offered for discourse?

Very forward thinking and it does deserve some time to one; absorb and then perhaps, I can speak from a more enlightened and informed position. Look forward to it.

You have a great day too.

LOL!!! Terminal, malignant, eternal optimism. I've heard of it... *Shudders* :P I'm glad I've never been infected... ;)

DnB is cool. I'm all for it. ^_^ Been a while since I trance danced to anything though, but DnB was the stuff for me when I did do it once upon a time.

I didn't get that "= Class for me" part, but I guess I don't have to.

I wonder... what the control of culture is in that next logical step of your MST. At the time being it looks more like money, power, corruption and worse (all the way up to politics ^_^). Then again you have to define culture more precisely, technology is just a part of culture as I see it for example, I'm sure others would disagree. It's not as readily definable as movement but I guess it's almost as complex as thinking.

I guess it's in a feedback control loop though. And that's why we are at a funky point in history. I agree that the technological development is exponential up until now and that this leads to a build up in the pace of the society. I don't believe our minds develop in accordance to this though. Perhaps it's even malevolent for the human mind...

Our social structures, mental and physical needs and basic sets of believes have probably touched many of the same basic points during a large portion of human history. Religion and culture have been around for ages, way back in the Paleolithic eras it was all in place. The only big thing that holds us apart is the accumulated experience and new levels of technology preserved from generation to generation by our culture. So up to this point I agree with you I guess, in your description of MST.

I believe there's a dissonance though between the built-in needs that human beings possess and what the culture in our world have driven our lives to look like. I'm not sure the "control" is working in this stage. Any biological system that is not in equilibrium will break down eventually. History will tell I guess.

A point I would like to raise on that chain of MST. I believe none of the points there can be seen as exclusively human. Other anthropoid ape (especially chimpanzees) have both some control of associating and culture as far as I've heard.

It's an interesting train of thought though.

As for the points you raised Les about twins. I know what you are talking about and I've considered this too. For me, the principal statements still holds, applied to this kind of example. I can start off with saying I don't believe any of the twins would be higher evolved. In fact I, in my own way of seeing it, opposed to the idea that some humans are more evolved then others. This could be a tough idea to defend though I guess...

Twins share the same genetic setup and the basic variables of the environment. It's usually the fact though, that they start off their life on different feet, quite literally, so to speak. Already during the time as a fetus, the environmental factors start to play a role for our development. It's very usual that one of the two get better blood-supply and the other as a result grows slower and weighs less at birth. Aside from such factors, as long as you are two individuals you will never face the same situations even if you face them together...

Does it sound confusing and not so well thought out? Perhaps it is. My thought is that you can't replicate the same settings in environmental factors and interaction with them in the exact same way between two people. Just the fact that there are two siblings present will make it impossible to know how they would have reacted if subjected to the same factors as lone individuals. The slight differences in experience and the slight difference in interaction with other environmental factors as nutritional aspects, disease and accidents will form two unique frames of reference. I'm not saying they would be very different, in fact rather much alike, but still distinctly different.

How about the diametrically different ways to react? For me that's simple but I guess I'm dodging a magical bullet here... For each stimulus or influence you get as an individual you will tend to act in accordance to it or "react" and make your stand and oppose it with a counter-attack. To some extent, chance is at play here, and to some extent I think it's the desire to feel like, and be treated by their surroundings as an individual in his or hers own right... (At least in our culture, where individualism is one of the sacred cornerstones of society.)

Perhaps I didn't understand your comment correctly. I'm not going to be upset if you tell me I'm barking up the wrong tree. It wouldn't be the first time. ^_^

What baffles me when I think about it is the contrasting, even conflicting ideas of technology and primordial powers of the mind as a thing transcending matter, time and other natural laws. The first leans heavily on logic, then second defies it. I don't believe you need to only look forward to a more advanced human, making the next transition in the meta system of life in order to find someone that is in control of the properties of the soul. I put faith in that this was done thousands of years ago by the shamans in our hunter and collector cultures.

What strikes me at times is that human culture is rather consistent in some respects. In a sense most of us can only handle an amount of interaction with other humans that is in level with the old tribal communities. And many urban cultures IMHO bear marks of almost being nomadic to the form...

Just some more thoughts on the subject. ;)

Klass for me = class i.e. compliment on my fair isle.

:) Ok

Uhm ... can I back the proverbial truck up a bit here?

I am still trying to formulate a sensible response to Nik's original submission of the MSTT cybernetic philosophy theory and then, Klas's reply to. However ... second things first ...

Yes, Klas, in answer to your somewhat rhetorical question, you understood me perfectly. Although as I had yet to introduce twins to the mix, I was headed that way. Ok, small giggle time ...

Klas, Klas, Klas ... I am a little amused that of all the mental fodder offered for thought, that Nik's compliment went over your head. Ahh, there ... an example of entrenchment in a mental paradigm, this one lingual. Phonetically, no connection, but and again, I am a little surprised as I thought most artists are 'visual' people, simply.

Perhaps, you need to come join us in the shallow end of the discussion pool? I jest, of course, a few more philosophical swimming lessons on my part, and I'll come join you ... hopefully, there is still a lifeguard on duty, lol.

Splash, Nik wakes up from his dream, question? What the hell is going on? lol.

lol! Ok, so I'm a bit slow on some things... I readily admit that. I usually blame it on not speaking english natively but this time, maybe I can't... :P I'll settle for just being a swedish blond at this point and move on...

I may be on deep water at times... But I'm sure I'm just treading water and is heavily relying on my life-jacket... ^_^

Oh no, I sincerely doubt that. Since Nik started this thread he has been in the driver's seat and you, my friend, have been riding shotgun rather comfortably.

Now ... will either of you let me out of the trunk?

Before or after we stop? :P

Lol.

*mumbles something really, really, really witty from the confines of the trunk*

;) lol!

I predict this post will go down hill any minute now , if has not already! .

Sure, but did you dream it?

No it has not and I have planned accordingly Vodka Martini's all round.

Sorry not cought up for a day or so I have been working my pale bulldog but off in a Pub.

I will come back with some more adept and competant speel in a day or so.

P.S. Assignment is ( what defines us as humans? ). The most latteral answer / reply will win the acknowledgement award.

The History of Evolution

The basic idea underlying the Principia Cybernetica Project is that evolution leads to the spontaneous emergence of systems of higher and higher complexity or "intelligence": from elementary particles, via atoms, molecules, living cells, multicellular organisms, plants, and animals to human beings, culture and society. This gives us a view of the history of evolution as a kind of progression towards higher complexity (albeit essentially unpredictable, with many side-tracks and dead-ends). Such an encompassing view may allow us to answer the basic questions: "Who are we? Where do we come from? Where are we going to?" (The last question requires an extrapolation of this development towards the future.)

Although the growth of complexity during evolution is not universal (many systems evolve towards higher simplicity), it appears as the most striking factor from a long-term perspective. Most of the time this complexity increase, and evolution in general, occurs rather slowly or continuously, but during certain periods evolution accelerates spectacularly. This results in changes which from a long term perspective may be viewed as momentous events, separating discrete types of organization. Each time a higher level of control or organization has developed we say that a Metasystem Transition (MST) has taken place.

(SIMPLICITY - supports my theory that we have created techology that can bridge all gaps due to our incapacity mentally to do what WWW can do).

The MST concept makes it possible to reconstruct the sequence of evolutionary events from the beginnning of time to the present as a partially ordered series of metasystem transitions. These transitions can be roughly classified in four categories or "tracks":

Prebiotic >

The developments taking place before the origin of the life, i.e. the emergence of physico-chemical complexity: the Big Bang, space and time, energy and particles, atoms and the different elements, molecules up to organic polymers, simple dissipative structures.

Biological >

The origin of life and the further development of the specifically biological aspects of it: DNA, reproduction, autopoiesis, prokaryotes vs. eukaryotes, multicellularity, sexual reproduction, the species.

Cognitive >

The origin of mind, i.e. the basic cybernetic, cognitive organization, going from simple reflexes to complex nervous systems, learning, and thought.

Social >

The development of social systems and culture: communication, cooperation, moral systems, memes

Although most of the transitions taken place sequentially within each main track, and these track emerge roughly in the order they are presented here, there is also essential interaction between the categories. For example, communication and cooperation between organisms (social track) takes place before rational thought (cognitive track) emerges, and is in a mutual positive feedback relation with that cognitive transition. Similarly, sexual reproduction (biological) appears in parallel with the emergence of reflexes (cognitive) and influences the appearance of social cooperation via its formation of family groupings.

So who is on track to with the A - Award?

Sorry for the delayed answer...

I'm not sure I'm up for that Acknowledgement Award... Who's to say something like that (without even being partially wrong...)? ;) I could make a try to explain my thoughts on the matter, but I would never pretend I got the ultimate answer... ;)

Now, first to your last post. I like how you put it in general. I agree to many of the formulations but have some minor issues. I'm not with you on your www ideas. Not because I don't understand what you are saying I believe, more because I can't bypass the sense I get that you give the www a characteristic of being almost an entity. It does not do anything on it's own in my opinion but I guess it's a matter of opinion, but I'm open to the possibility that I'm just ignorant to the obvious.

Now that is only a point on the side... My major, minor points (:P) are perhaps the emphasis one could give some elements of the description. The most important is that there can't be any logic to the whole "sequence" of transitions until they are postfactum. No meaningful extrapolation can be done with however much data you can gather from the events leading up to our currant state in the meta-system. In other words you might say that this is hard to view this clearly from within a system since it needs some perspective to be perceived more correctly.

The other is that there are more then just sidetracks and dead ends in evolution. There's no linearity or red thread in reality. There are regularly an almost total reset of the whole (meta-)system depending on random factors of basically chaotic but recurrent nature (in actuality rendering the inherent tendency of progression towards higher complexity incapable of functioning to it's full).

(You also bypass my whole idea of most bang for the bucks as a guide for evolution. There is no rule that will select the best solution. Evolution is only set for selecting working models for current settings. It's a big beta testing project basically. ^_^ And whenever you come near to the sharp version the whole scene has changed and forces you back to new testing.)

This means that even systems that are working just fine will never get the time to reach the more advanced levels of MST that we in fact have seen. There are reason to see many components of animal behaviour in terms of "culture", not only considering the case of our closest "relatives". Even (some) birds depend heavily on learning the correct way to sing in early social interactions and display distinct dialects in different regions. One could argue whether or not animals display moral systems... But there are some built in "modifiers" in animals interaction. Who's to say our "morals" are not just a fancy way to describe our inherent ways to react that we would display anyhow. ;)

I would have to point out (so you don't think I've missed the point totally) that human culture obviously have taken communication, social interaction, cooperation, moral systems and most certainly abstract thinking to new heights... I'm not in doubt here. ;) I'm just arguing that we in no way are totally unique in our features. The big question is if we use our big brain to anything useful or just keep fooling around at new levels of confusion. (Rather likely it seems to me...) Most of the stuff we come up with does not serve any purpose in the grand scheme, but is more or less just a way to fill the empty void we call our lives. (It's empty because we have far more capacity then we have use for and thus our engines are idling... (Sure we could use more of our capacity but most seem to prefer to live a lazy and ignorant life. I do in general at least. :P)

You say readily that the sequence of the MST doesn't have to be in any exact order and that they have some interactions between categories or "tracks". This is all well but I'm actually having trouble subscribing to the idea that there is a "general plan" to the whole sceme. I'm also having trouble in making the distinction between some of the major MST you describe. The big MST is from the prebiotic to the biological stage. The cognitive and social level are naturally easy to define but I find it harder to feel where a distinct line between them should be drawn...

Ok, I'll admit my brain is a bit mushy today. I probably didn't put myself that well, even if I've been formulating this over some time now (I'm constantly interrupted) . My son have been running a fever today and I've got a touch of the same he got. I have the distinct feeling you have thought this through more then I have and I'm not trying to convince you of changing your track of thoughts. I'm just stimulated some by your ideas and try to convey what they bring to my mind.

I'm glad you brought up the point of systems evolving towards higher simplicity, this I believe could account for some parts of human culture... The two do at some level interconnect I believe. More advanced technology leads to loss of some earlier valued abilities since they simply are not needed at this point. Such as remembering the entire known history and mythology word by word in your head. (Sure in illiterate cultures you could argue that there is not as much to hold in your head, but I believe they used their mind more proficiently then the people today.) Ok, so I'm probably idealizing a bit. Who isn't. ;)

So, finally that little description... What defines us as humans? Lateral answers you say? Ok, maybe I have got a shot at this... :P

First the most obvious version: "We" define us as humans... (Meaning: Our present values in our particular culture will determine what is the proper set of characteristics to display in order to be a good or bad (or whatever) human being.) Lateral enough? ^_^

The second most obvious version: Only in the interaction with others we can be defined (as anything). In other words... How we act and react, what we say, and thus display how we think will define us in relation to those we interact with. (In reality a version of the first one (since the interaction is culturally defined) but with a slight moderation.)

The third: It's not really what we do, say, think in general or anything of that sort that defines us. It's how we react in times when things don't go our way (times of grief and hardship) and it's how we deal with a situation when we are forced to make tough choices.

That should be my daily treading of water for this time. ;)

I would agree Klas, im going away to meditate and think over your last post in Tibet.

Hehe... No kidding? ^_^ What part did you agree on? Me treading water? :P

Alright, let's see ... yes, lifeguard still on duty, it's still safe for me to weigh in on the discussion ;) .

Ok, this has been on my mind as an alternative or addition as to how we define ourselves as humans ...

We, as humans, manage our resources. Yes, the rhetoric is there for the taking, but, the thought did occur to me ... are there examples out in nature of animals doing the same? And going beyond mere subsistence. A conscious effort to allocate and maximize and, perhaps, in some cases, delaying consumption.

Hehe... My snipers are in place so don't get too frisky. :P

I understand your thought. You mean in terms of what puts us aside as humans in relation to other animals? As you so readily mention there are some questions to be raised about whether or not we do manage our resources that well though... That is in larger scale at least...

One example of managing resources (I'm sure there are better though...): Take the "Jay", an European relative to the Blue Jay, and the Canada Jay. They use the autumn and early winter to gather large quantities of acorns to survive the winter with.

They are said to have fantastic memory (and has particularly developed areas in the brain enabling their good abilities to keep track of their food-stash) but they are widely recognized for leaving many acorns astray, in actuality rendering them a role as gardeners of the forest, planting new trees (that in a way ensures future stocks of acorn).

I'm quite sure it's not a conscious process though... I would not be not that silly. ^_^ It's just a characteristic one can display. Gathering things to be used in the future "on a rainy day". You naturally have the example of honeybees, in that case even including an advanced social interaction with many forms of communications as the base of whole "societies".

Thinking in these terms (what sets us apart from other animals) makes me think that it's our higher level of awareness on abstract planes that is undoubtedly human. Who's to say this definitely though. Who knows what exists on other places in the universe. (I'm not going to stretch it to a discussion about "aliens" though... :P)

In our specific case abstract thinking have been the lever that has given us leverage to compete with other specialised animals as the opportunist we are (that in actually emerged as a species rather late in evolution). It's not abstract thinking in itself or any of the other traits we can boast of... It's only in terms of how far we reach with some of these traits that we can be considered to be truly unique.

Well said Klas, well said.

I did make mention of managing resources, as it would indicate in of itself, a higher level of thinking, at least to moi. The concept of scarcity is something I usually equate with human thinking.

Adding to your illustrative example of the Jay, I seem to recall ants, I believe, who 'manage' herds of aphids. The aphids harvest plant substances that the ant cannot and in turn, the ant 'shepherds' literally milk the aphids.

And you raise an interesting thought as usual. Define abstract. Strange, or perhaps not so strange, how egocentric we are in our thoughts. There is a suggestion in your words that abstract thought may not be the only benchmark, and that in fact, there may already exist a definable something that is superior to what we have come to accept as the penultimate achievement of independent thinking.

Hmm, just went back and reread a few posts back. Interaction. What say you about those that take a vow of silence? Buddhist monks, as a pedestrian example. Yes, let's break down what it is that we mean by interaction. Your words, just to keep things easy here for reference:

"The second most obvious version: Only in the interaction with others we can be defined (as anything). In other words... How we act and react, what we say, and thus display how we think will define us in relation to those we interact with. (In reality a version of the first one (since the interaction is culturally defined) but with a slight moderation.)"

So, if I understand you correctly, interaction is another definable human trait. A given, it would appear. And possibly a precursor to what makes us human? Ok, now ... tie that in with religious beliefs, and in particular the example I made mention of.

Simply, the reason I made mention of the monks, is we seem to as a society generally hold these indivuduals in high regard as to have come through some gauntlet not yet encountered by the majority of us. Or, if you like, not sought after, nor looked for. That 'they' possess more human-like qualities that are supposedly more valued by society as a whole as well. Benevolence, acceptance and so forth.

Care to enlighten us once again, with your input?

Hehe... I would love to enlighten you... :P I doubt I have anything enlightening to come with... I'm stumbling in the dark as most of us are... My input is just a poor form of entertainment really. ;) (Whether it is for you or me remains to be seen. ^_^)

Hmm... Lets see. This is the point where me not speaking natively english might play a role. I'm not sure if I put myself that good, but lets take it from the beginning...

The concept of scarcity as conceived entity is probably indeed a thing "higher levels" of human thinking may have an exclusive right on per se. In itself it's just a question of survival instinct though. (Or if you will: egocentric thinking.)

Abstract thinking for me is the ability to process things that are not physical and immediate in it's nature (not necessarily including both) and that does not exclude or include egocentricity or any other emotional or otherwise individual coloring of it's content.

Simple abstract thinking allows us to be certain a tree will make a sound when it falls even if no one is there to hear it... (I.e. things you experience forms a map over how the world works and thus gives you the means to predict how things will turn out under certain settings.) I hear some think that is tricky to be sure of though. :P

More advanced abstraction involves putting yourself in the shoes of others, understanding their point of perspective. This is the same level, naturally, that gives you the means to follow through on introspection.

What the highest levels of abstraction would be is hard to say. I'm leaning on calling art in it's various forms some sort of ultimate abstraction. For me it represent human emotion and experience in some kind of tangible form. The kind of diversity humans present in art is not found anywhere among animals.

Sense of proportion, harmonious sounds (might be debated by some...) and enjoyable colors are in themselves not unique though. (A little silly example: There are small birds (I'm sorry but I can't remember the name of the species) where the males build little hut-like courts where they gather different kind of beautiful brightly colored stones and shells to impress the ladys with...I imagine they sing some and flap their wings too in order to catch their interest.) Like I said in the end of my last post. It's only in the particular way we combine our traits that we can be called unique.

Perhaps one should include religion in this higher end of abstract thinking. (I believe there would be some disagreement on that point though.) Indeed, philosophy at least. And for sure modern physics and the likes (including math of couse). At any rate, here again, I believe we have an exclusive human trait in religion (if you include our closest relatives in history, the neanderthals, perhaps even earlier) that is present no where else (on earth at least :P).

Now the question of interaction... Everything we do is interaction. Being silent is a powerful tool of interaction... By no means I would say that only verbal communication would count. On the contrary, non-verbal communication is in many ways more effective to convey how we place ourselves in a group of human beings. As you see, my descriptions in that post deals exclusively with how we define us, in terms of "good and bad" and similar and not in terms of what sets us apart from other animals and defines the core of the uniquely human. I thought I could dodge that magic bullet since the question was formed like it was... ^_^

The high esteem most in our society would put on Buddhist monks would not have anything to do with whether or not they are under a vow of silence... A psychiatric patient that is silent years on end would not invoke the same reverence, or what would you say?

I've pondered on the last point you raised of "holy men" being "more human" but I've personally concluded on the opposite (kind of). All the bad traits we show plus all the good ones are at the core of the humanity in us. You can't be more or less human in those terms really (IMHO!). Those that reach enlightenment leave these petty things behind them though and could be viewed upon as ceasing being human... (Sure, they would certainly be recognised as humans in the terms I described in that other post... Don't get me wrong here...) This other plane they reach though could be "truer" then what we experience I guess. All comparison would be kind of tough though since I gather they could not be directly parallelled.

Any true mystic experience (or state) will not readily be translated into words. (This is where art may take place of the highest form of abstraction though...)

Sounds a bit contradicting maybe. Wouldn't be the first time I put myself a bit woolly.

(Baa.)

Lololol ... your 'baa' had me confused after such an enlightening (yes) erudition on the questions posed ... and answered.

'K, now Klas you have me curious ... student? Student of?

And as far as your English is concerned, well, I think you speach good and write good two ;) .

I find your point about the holy men very interesting. That they may have left some of their humanity behind, shedding their very human qualities (on this, I do agree wholeheartedly) to pursue their own enlightenment.

Ok, some pop culture ... not as recent, but at the time it made a profound impact on me. TV show, 'St. Elsewhere.' After many successful seasons, they wrapped up the production leaving the viewer with the thought that the entire show was the product of an autisitc child of one of the doctors. I never underestimate any human, silent or loud.

But, to directly answer your question as to how I may view a psychiatric patient that has been silent for years ... I am not sure that you can compare the two, that being the monk and the fictitious patient. Ok, I am probably splitting semantic hairs here, but, in one case there is a conscious declaration of intent, the other perhaps, a manifestation of an underlying organic illness.

"I never underestimate any human, silent or loud." My words. And since we do not have as yet the privilege of fully understanding the human mind, it could very well be that the psychiatric patient has come to a fuller understanding of the world as we know it and has been shocked into silence by the enormity and impact of that knowledge.

What if you knew all that 'answers?' Ponder that, and tell me that a quick road trip to a ward would not be on the itinerary. Maybe going back to one of the original premises of the fact that we use only 10% of our brain power is for that exact reason. A safeguard against imploding mentally and psychically.

And as far as your postulate on abstract thought, I could not have put it better myself. No cop out, no dodging ... it is how I feel. Ahhh, here we go ... I was searching for this word ... 'empathy.' Putting oneself in another's shoes. I would agree that it is a human characteristic, although, as I am coming to realize, not necessarily only human.

To take our own internal maps, and compasses, if you will, and extrapolate that thought process onto another or onto a situation ... may be the highest level of abstract thinking.

And for now, those 'birds,' that I can't seem to recall their name either ... always make me giggle a bit as I think about the 'dances' that we do as humans, in our 'interactions' in search of a mate.

Hope you and yours weathered the virus that hit your household ... cause if this, your discourses to date on this thread were 'under the weather' (yeah, a little joke) then, I really look forward to when you are firing on all cylinders. Take care till then.

Nik? So, how does it feel to be back in school and having to doff the 'ol thinking cap? Personally, I love this stuff.

The MSTT theory stuff is still on my list of things to do. Hope you are being safe and well mate. Till the next time, keep your pale bulldog butt to the wall and don't work too too hard. Cheers people.

I need more than 6 months in "Tibet" forgive the pun! Im off tomorrow so will give your valued posts some considerable thought and mental athletics.

Remember to stretch first and do a little warm-up ... may I suggest the 'TPBM' thread? Kidding, of course.

Look forward to the next contribution(s).

*dips toe in the water* It's a lil chilly... I'm not sure if I'm well-read enough (or sometimes, I've done some of the reading, but don't remember where I've gotten the info), or have enough 12 dollar words to participate in this discussion, but here goes...

*wades in* Pop a squat guys, we're gonna be here awhile. (Although it looks like you guys are used to that.

1) AI - I do not think that the internet counts as artificial INTELLIGENCE. One of the basic tenets is that said Intelligence must be self-aware, which as far as I'm aware, the internet is not. It is a great tool, a resource that we have created & have @ our hands, but still falls under the "garbage in, garbage out" rules. One theory that I have seen contends that self-awareness, a "waking up" of a computer or similar construct will not occur until one is created that has a similar number of complex connections as the human brain has in a small space.

The concept of AI is a fascinating one, on many levels, the 1st being: How do you strive for such a thing, and yet attempt to put controls on it? If you go by Asimov's 3 laws, as shown in "I, Robot", then you have the demonstrated situation in which the most logical choice that can be made, in a situation defined to preserve our well-being, is not necessarily the correct choice. If you do not attempt to put controls on it, then you come to the scary situation in which we as a race have created something that might not have our interests @ heart, and may become our competitors. Self-awareness to me means being able to make a choice and recognizing the probable outcome of that choice, it's affects on both myself, and the world around me. In certain situations, I would choose to do something that did not benefit me as much, but was not as harmful to someone/something else. Who can say that the AI's logical choice would be the same? Who says the AI has to be logical?

The 2nd part of AI that is fascinating to me, is the concept of something that can think faster, and produce more possible outcomes than most of our brains currently can. Would such a thing not be truly more intelligent than we are? We desire such a thing, but only as long as we can use it as a tool in our hands. The idea of having it turn around and run our lives is scary because we as a race desire to be in control of our own lives and destinies. If you think about it however, how much are we really personally in control of these things? The argument can be made that we might be better off with an AI in charge than the system currently in place.

While we poke fun @ the fact that the current U.S. president can't pronounce the world nuclear, and basically stole the 1st election, really it's so scary it almost doesn't bear thinking about. So we don't think about it (much), and we poke fun @ it, and continue with the little details of our daily lives that we can do something about. We may get out there and protest, and try to change some of it, but many of us are too busy surviving within our societies to dedicate great resources of time and energy to the attempt.

(Don't get me wrong - me still human... me still want to be in control of me, no calling the computer Master tyvm, just tossing out things that make you go "hmmm").

2) The definition of truth - Truth is norms that we accept in our society as being factual, whether through belief or proof. All truths are NOT created equal. Please remember that in the last millennium scientists were burned to death for daring to put forth such a preposterous theory as the earth revolving around the sun. What we learn, and our knowledge of the world around us changes our accepted truths. It is sometimes quite frightening to realize how much we don't yet understand or may be wrong about, and it gives people panic attacks. We can all keep a more open mind though, and simply accept that our understanding is developing and growing. One of the biggest stumbling blocks towards evolution or progress, is being too sure that we have already found the truth and sitting secure in our comfy little corner of reality.

3 - Precognition and other forms of "esp". There are demonstrable occurences of such phenomena. Probably the reason that I am so open to this is the fact that when I was about 8 or so, and my older sister was about 10, we had the exact same dream @ the exact same moment. It was a weird, illogical dream, and the only reason we know it occurred, is that we shared a bunk bed @ the time, and I fell out of bed & woke up, and 2 secs later, she fell on top of me from the top bunk. Good thing the guest mattress was still on the floor from our friend sleeping over. *whew*

I think one of the most important things to remember about "esp" is that it stands for extra SENSORY perception. Our brains may indeed have more ways of sensing things that we are not currently aware of. A great explanation that I have seen for this is that things are out there in the form of energy, something on the level of a radiowave. If "tuned" to the correct frequency, we can receive it. To me, this goes a long way towards explaining "knowing" about a child or a parent in danger/trouble, or twin connections. Through familiarity, you are tuned in on the right frequency, and in times of trouble, the radiowave would be broadcasting quite loudly.

I also think that alot more people believe in such things than they will admit, because they are outside our accepted "truths", and most people are afraid of being labelled kooks. Have you seen the way the kooks get treated in our society? *goes back to hiding in the corner*. My father will tell you that he doesn't believe in any of it, yet he used to call me from his job to ask me where he had put something down there. It started off as a running joke "how would I know you idiot man, I'm not there, and look in the coffee can w/the paintbrushes". I was right about 90% of the time, and the joke always continued the same way... but he kept calling... but he doesn't believe in it...

On a daily basis, I'm as deaf & blind to such things as most people, but there have been too many weird occurences that cannot simply be explained away through accepted scientific theories.

4 - Evolution & our brains. I think we have much further to evolve to, but I think that we might want to consider the idea that the "unused" portions of our brains (and yeah... who did come up w/the numbers on all these things anyway?), might not necessarily be things that we haven't used yet. Some of them may be portions that we as a species used to use, and no longer do. Consider the "fight or flight" survival instinct. In survival mode our brains shut down, and we have only the 2 basic responses. We do not consider the complexities of either choice, we simply choose one and go for it. Lemme make your brain hurt for a moment though (as this thread has certainly done to mine), what if that instinct is shutting down rational, but not logical processing of thought/sensations? What if the brain is allowing the receptors that receive the radiowaves to open up to full band, and we are processing that information, and making rapid limited choices based on information that we cannot see, hear, touch, or smell?

5 - Couple of other quick thoughts to throw out there - as far as modesty, or humbleness as regards being the "dominant race" my parents are atheists, and I myself do not believe in a God per se, but I do believe that there is someone or something out there which may interfere/interact with our lives. Not on a daily basis, but at times, and I believe such a thing simply because I am not egotistical enough to believe that I am the highest form of life ever created/evolved.

I think that in some ways the world has become too large a place. It's harder to concentrate on the problems around you, or to reach out & make a connection with somebody who lives next door to you, when you're busy paying attention to what's going on 1/2way across the world. Which is not to say that such things shouldn't be paid attention to, simply that it changes how we interact with those physically close to us, and not always in a good way. I've made some wonderful internet friends, and am truly enriched by having people in my life that I would not know any other way, and yet, there are really times when I should shut the thing down, and go out there and hit a bar and mingle w/people physically. (I do do that too, but between work, helping take care of my grandparents, and other personal projects, it falls by the wayside sometimes. and when i'm in front of my computer working, it's easy to take 10 min to talk to a net friend).

I believe that the best parts of what make us human is our willingness to sacrifice some of our own comfort/enjoyment for the benefit of others. Our enjoyment of others and situations into which we put ourselves. Our ability to give someone the benefit of the doubt. Our explorations and willingness to continue to grow & develop and challenge ourselves to be more. Our appreciations of such abstract things as the way the sun casts a shadow at a particular angle.

I think the worst parts of what make us human are greed & blinders. Greed is not the same as selfishness... you can be selfish, but not greedy. Selfishness can be tempered with compassion, which restrains & limits a person. Greed has no such restraints, and is often harmful to somebody, something, somewhere. By blinders, I simply mean our inability/unwillingness to see the effects of our actions/choices. RAISE THE BLINDS! *snicker*.

Pardon me, I'm starting to get a lil bit loopy, so I think I'll stop this chapter here. Thanks for making my brain hurt, imma go give it nice relaxing bubble bath now. 8•P

Oh ... sorry ... could you repeat what you wrote after " *dips toe in the water* ?"

Can't see a thing on my monitor, as my blinds are up and the sun is reflecting terribly ;) .

Oooh k, one thing I have definitely learned is that what is funny to me, may not be, to the 'collective' you. And I am not inferring a lack of sense of humour on your part, as that is rather evident from your other postings. Uhm, that you have a sense of one, that is.

Alrighty, now that the tone has been set, shall we?

"The 2nd part of AI that is fascinating to me, is the concept of something that can think faster, and produce more possible outcomes than most of our brains currently can. Would such a thing not be truly more intelligent than we are?"

Your words, this time. What strikes me here is that you would give the edge to 'quantity' over quality. Is not one brilliant idea or concept better; simply, than a thousand? Although you raise an interesting question in of itself, which is better? More productive? And perhaps, more intelligent?

Truth, at least for me, and I do mean this quite personally, is an individual perception. My education has given and taught me to question ... delve deeper ... think for myself. Truths are not 'self-evident.' There, in a nutshell.

Ok, here is where it get freaky ... #3. Coz ... the same thing happened to me, a little bit younger though and scared the bejeezus out of me at the time. My brother and me shared a bed when we were wee little tots, hmm, thinking ages 4 - 5, for me and then 6 - 7, for him. Well, we both experienced the same nightmare at the same time and he ... he made it out of the room and into my parent's room and arms seeking consolation and comfort, while I got tied up in the bed covers and fell to the floor screaming my little lungs out.

Lol, my poor dad thought someone had broken into the house ... turns out, that my brother and me were being chased around the room by 'flying socks' in our respective and similar bad dreams. Deciphering the meaning of that one, is far beyond my own personal scope.

You may be familar with the concept of 'lucid dreaming.' Briefly, for the uninitiated, it involves a certain level of consciousness while in the dream state. Allowing for some conscious choice in what, who, where and so on for the content of our dreams. It's literally, what we tell our children when they have 'bad dreams.' That they can stop the monster from chasing them, or whatever is troubling them, can be dealt with by their own resources.

But, like most things it is a skill. Not used, it becomes more difficult to draw on. So, when you make mention of your theory of radiowaves and being tuned to a frequency, I do agree in part. I would refine it and simplify it to, that if not used, or developed, we as humans do not realize nor know our own potential in any psychic arena, or otherwise.

Well, a little mud to wade through on that last part. Put your boots on, in for a penny, in for a pound.

Annnd let's see ... Einstein, wore the same clothes everyday and was considered a slow learner ... Ghandi's 'peaceful' protest, and his practice of non-violent protest and civil disobedience ... can I be a 'kook' too?

Reiterating, I never underestimate any human, silent or loud. Just to be clear.

As far as the fight or flight response, I am not so sure that there still isn't some choice, conscious choice, made in those circumstances or situations where our bodies get hormonally charged. Yes, our bodies are at the 'ready,' but the response is not sympathetically autonomic. And there is something to be said for the self-preservation, that may be paramount to rational thought, so that we may re-visit the issue again in calmer waters. Ahhh, there ya go ... reflection, introspection ... more definable human traits?

Rounding out this part of the discussion, we come to #5. I agree, wholeheartedly, that I, too, won't let my ego tell me that I am 'it.' Does not compute, to me as well.

One thing that does frighten me is when it comes to survival of the 'fittest,' the definition that does seem to propagate itself, does not quite meet or match mine. (Yeah, yeah, I know I just said the 'ego' thing, lol.) Fittest? Wealthiest? Maybe. Smartest? Hmm, seems more like ruthless.

Uhm, yeah, time for me to stop as well. But, before that ... I would sincerely like to suggest that your line; "Raise the Blinds!!" ... would, indeed be a great slogan for the, hmm, let's call it the Caedes Movement for Art and Understanding.

Loopy? Yeah, I do loopy too, amongst many many other kooky things.

p.s. No Spell-Check was used in the making nor editing of the above.

There is a new player in town! ;) I'm glad to see you join us here Cat. I enjoyed reading your post. 12 dollar words? lol! Was that me??? ^_^ I'm sorry, but I'm heavily depending on my dictionary to get through, sometimes I just choose the alternative that sounds good for me and have no clue if it's a good combination...

(Hehe... Les. I'm going to have to hang my head in shame there regarding your last little note. Being slightly dyslexic (and a terrible typist... :P) I need that spell-checking badly and do some editing of my posts as a rule when I find my worst mistakes or the places I simply put myself too awkward ...)

I'm all for kooky, as if you didn't notice... Deal me in. :P

The tricky thing with such an eloquent and verbose discussion is that the long posts are hard to keep track on... I don't know what end to begin in now... At any rate I hope Nik will join in again a bit before 6 months has passed. ;)

Anyhow... Les, I've been hiding the nature of my studies for some time (basically passively though). I guess it's not a big deal. I just had a hullabaloo with my nemesis (well, he turned out to be... :P) here some time ago and I didn't like people to know since they might think I only said it to make a point in the discussion or just to show off or something. I'm not really comfortable with all the kind of expectations people might put on you when it is revealed. It IS no big deal (plus I've buried it deep down in a thread so maybe it will go unnoticed... :P) , so here we go: I'm studying in med school, and I have approximately one year left until I'm a resident. Ok. It wasn't that bad... ;)

I like what you said about never underestimating any human. Wise way to think. Sometimes it's hard not to judge too quickly though. I remember hearing some time that we on average take just maybe ten or so seconds before categorizing another human after we first meet them. I don't remember the exact time, shoot, my brain is rotting as we speak. Internet does that to me... :P

I'm thinking more or less the same about psychiatric patients actually. It's one of the things I usually come back to in these kind of discussions. In a way I agree on your semantic hairsplitting in another way not. I'm somewhat inclined to see their insanity as part of an fuller understanding that as you say have quite an impact on us... The baseline in my opinion in the matter is that the culture of the society we live in will declare who's sick and who is not. There are some boundaries in human behaviour and thinking that are less culturally defined I believe but the small print (i.e. interpretations) always are more depending on where you happen to be atm.

After spending some time at a psychiatric ward during my education (on the right end of the locked doors I'm happy to say) I'm more inclined to see the organic illness part of it all but there is a thin line in some cases... I can't avoid the thought though that some of the people we lock away could perhaps have been a shaman (or "similar") or at least be met by some esteem in another culture (and perhaps time) and that we only keep them away from us since they point in a direction we don't want to see, or even be reminded exists...

I'm fully aware on the fact that those kind of cultures also have their crazy persons that will never become "anything else" (in a manner of speaking). Those are the ones that can not learn to control their abilities, if that is what it is. The most important thing in these cultures though is that they have a more constructive way to deal with these kind of phenomenon and will not burn you at the stakes at once (more or less figuratively speaking)... It all fits into a greater scheme for them and if these "unstable" individuals can be trained by older, more experienced people that have travelled the same path before... You get my drift.

I'm a bit sceptical about the 10% figure per se but I agree we maybe wouldn't be doing any better off using more. (Then there's the quality vs quantity question...)

I'm glad I wasn't that far off in my ideas on abstract thinking. :) I may want to elaborate some on one point though. I have some trouble placing different types in order of preference (in a good way). For me what you describe as: "To take our own internal maps, and compasses, if you will, and extrapolate that thought process onto another or onto a situation ..." is the easiest one. I didn't put my example that good though...

On the highest end of the scale of abstract thinking I would put the likes of theoretical physics where you (believe me, not me though...) deduce profound laws and ideas of how the universe works on the basis of an elaborately laid out structure of balancing theories that have no other "real" or "physical" base then other theories and math. Yes, somewhere along the line the beginning of this abstractions come from our experience from the world and our internal maps about it. It's just the most extreme form of extrapolation I can think of (atm) personally. In actuality some of the laws and phenomena of the physics are indeed the opposite of what you might think based on "sound judgement" and experience.

As a small side note: No, I'm not firing on all my cylinders... lol! I'm a deadly tired parent of a two-year old that gets just enough sleep to keep as sane as I can be and stress my brain to pieces over upcoming exams (nothing immediate happily) and not getting the exercise I need or any of the rest I so desperately crave... I only got time to write such as this during very late hours...

Speaking of which... I need to go. Sorry Cat. I'll get back to you tomorrow. I hope the thread haven't expanded too much 'til then, then I'll never get to follow through on the various angles presented... ^_^

For now I would just like to comment on the last points that you brought up... Altruism is indeed one of the best traits of humanity. It's not that usual though. In larger scale at least. I've heard many say that it's indeed an egocentric vein in that seemingly overflowing well of goodness. In a way one could brush it off pretty easily though. It simply feels good to do good. That's egoistic too. But hardly that bad.

Your next point on exploration and such is, I believe one of those more exclusive traits of being human though. (Altruism is found throughout the animal kingdom in various shapes.) It seems to be a connection to the fact that we reach adulthood at a fairly old age compared to most other animals. Even as adults we remain curious on diverse things and never really stop to develop. That is one of the true great things about being human. It's built into our core to look beyond the next corner. Luckily for us the world keeps providing more unknown things beyond a seemingly ever expanding horizon.

The points about greed and blinders are great. These things (and similar) should always be considered. I'm more afraid of the blinders even if I know the greed hurt more in the short run. The question is if the greedy could keep doing it without the blinders? (And if we could keep letting others step on our shoulders?) No it's not a question really, only rhetorically. You already answered it at any rate.

I am of the opinion that one have an obligation to oneself and the surroundings to have a reasonable balance in the checkbook of traits... In order to do so we must at some point outsmart ourself and bypass or keep our bad traits in check by some means. No person will ever be able to do this completely (not talking enlightened Buddhist monks here...) but we could at least try our best...

I would need that bubble bath too now. And I'm only halfway finished with what I wanted to write...

(BTW, Les, survival of the "ruthlessnessed"... That's a much better way to put it. Suits my "most bang for the buck" theory for the inner workings of evolution. ^_^)

Now imagine how long this post would have been if I didn't have to get up in 5 hours. ;)

Cheers for now. :)

Good luck with your upcoming exams, as I am sure you will do well. And yeah, sleep?? What is that? Kidding ... a little, just a little. Anddd ...

... where were my manners? My welcome to the thread for Cat, falls short of the gracious one by Klas. Well, there you go, the yin and the yang thingy again, and to each their own.

Nothing of note to add at this moment, oh, right 'atm' ... hmm, those acronyms do come in handy ... I just wanted to say 'hi.' And yes, my own innate and at times, gregarious curiosity, had me coming back to the thread to see if there were any additions.

Alright, alright, Klas when you said and 'what is your diagnosis,' referring back some time to a shared joke, that ... that is when the proverbial lightbulb went off in my head and I thought, hmm, I wonder if?? And to keep with the vein, nay ... artery ;) , of honesty, most of the time ... most, I probably throw in a malapropism or four, lol. If it sounds good, as you say, it usually fits and won't be questioned.

My, my ... the overwhelming feeling I have at the moment, oops, atm ... is that scratch the surface ... just a tad ... and you can be amazed at what lies beneath. Yes, cheers for now ... have a good good night/day ... and in Nik's immortal words ... be safe and keep well :) .

ty gents for the welcome, my own curiosity had me coming back to find out what answers I might have received, but it's kinda late, and *yawn* pardon me, I'll wait til tomorrow to respond.

P.S. Feel free to pick on me anytime, but beware I pick back 8•P

^_^ Thank you Les, and you are welcome Cat... ;)

What a coincidence you all have three letter names (or nicknames). Oh, well I guess that is rather usual. You don't use long nicks as a rule. Keep it short and tidy. Just the opposite of my posts here by some odd chance... ^_^ Oh, well. Let's get down to business again. Now, where did I put my diketionairy???

Thoughts on your post Cat:

1) I agree 100 % on your view on the internet. "Garbage in, garbage out" is pretty descriptive really. And, boy, are there lot's of garbage or what? ^_^ At any rate I believe there is a long way to go before we can see "true" AI. I'm quite sure it would be dead silly not to include hardwired laws though. You don't have to be a superintelligent self-aware AI to think that terminating the way we run the planet would be a good thing to do. Now, I hope there is a good way for us to sail the ship in the long run but atm the odds are not high that we make another 100 years in the same direction...

Self-awareness for me is actually quite hard to nail down in a simple way. Where is the line we could draw. Is an animal like a dog self-aware. Most would probably say so. For me you don't need higher awareness or advanced thinking to be self-aware. It would seem to me to be a built in property of all living things in the animal kingdom. There is self and the others. We the hive, you the intruder. Me the hunter, you my pray. Me the grass eater, you the enemy... If they were not aware on some plane of the self, would they not have trouble filling their role in the greater sceme. With no sense of self there would be no survival instinct. The bees would not act as a society (yes, it's a bit weird to bring them into the discussion, but for me it's related) with a direction or purpose and the wolf would eat his own or even himself... (Why not if he had no self-awareness?) Once again, I'm at my favourite theory. We share parts of our traits with others in the animal kingdom. Not seen as a whole but bit's and pieces.

I agree on Les point about quality vs quantity regarding thinking and intelligence. I have one small addition though. Like you say, the machine could compute all possible outcomes to a given problem or settings if you will... The human mind though can quickly make a brief estimate of the factors involved and make a leap of faith so to speak and try to solve the problem at hand using a totally unexpected angle that can not be logically concluded on (or rather need not be logically concluded on, it does follow a certain logic though). This is what we call intuition or having a hunch. I believe firmly a machine could not do this "trick". A dog might in his own little ways though, definitely more intelligent animals. Perhaps we could create an AI with such capabilities. It would need to have emotions though (in my opinion). This "tool" is often the guide we use when doing our loose calculations of intuition. We often go for tings just because they feel right.

2) All truths are not created equal you say. I say they are not treated equal. I guess we are saying sort of the same thing though. :) For me there is a truth beyond the societies norms but they are in actuality what we relate to in the little beautiful thing we're best off calling our life... I really like what you say about keeping an open mind and being aware that our knowledge is "somewhat" limited as it is... It's indeed a big hole to fall in to think you know what is true... I usually think in terms of that science is just a matter of building models of small pieces of reality. If you put them all together they will fit nicely but there will always be pieces missing and it will never be completed.

3) I can't remember having shared a dream or such but I've been very much into "these kind of things" in my past. I have very keen senses though in some respects, I have unwittingly trained myself to be aware of some entoptic phenomena that is kind of neat at times but sometimes rather disturbing. (Who said kooky?) I have had some experience with Lucid Dreaming though, or close at least. It's from a special kind of "world" I visit some times. It's very familiar but distinctly different from all other places I dream about. I always remember the feeling of loss when I wake up from those kind of dreams. It's like loosing a limb. I'm a stronger and better being there. In those dreams I often fly like Arthur Dent did in one (or was it two) book(s) in the HHGTTG series. He falls and just before he hits the groung he's distracted and forgets to land on the ground. That's just how it feels in those dreams. And since I'm quite aware of what I do (even if not 100%) it's a fantastic feeling! lol! Loopy, anyone? Nah, most have those kind of dreams, I just enjoy them so much. :)

There is sooooo much more to write on stuff like ESP, I'm leaving it atm though... It's getting late here...

4) My brain hurts a bit too but that is mostly sleep deprivation I guess. 8P Anyway. I like your thoughts on the survival mode in the brain. There are many accounts on how this work from survivors of various disasters and catastrophes. I believe the description that we are shutting down rational though and keep the logic is fairly reasonable. At the same time we perceive limited amounts of "information", forming "tunnel vision" and similar, but must still process most sensory input in order to act as logical as they seem to do. It's the more deeper, central parts of the brain that takes control I believe, and they are the parts that are most connected to our emotional processing too. Indeed, as you say, we act on instinct, but who said instinct is blind and death. It's just not rational.

5) I believe in "something", not definable by humans limited ways to perceive and describing. It would be the ultimate abstraction. The totality of all existing. You may call it what you like.

That person interacting less with my neighbours then you people half way across the would be me too then... But trust me, you guys are more stimulating to be around. ;) In a way the world isn't becoming too large though. Sometimes I think it's more like shrinking and becoming too small. You can go anywhere and see everything in one lifetime, that was hardly possible a hundred years ago. Sure there were those that did, but the average Joe was a very small human in a very big world that he couldn't really grasp in our hand as we did today. Even more so, earlier in history. But, sure, the world is still too big for us to handle in a manageable way. That's why our neighbours fall short of our attention when we reach across the Atlantic to speak through this wonderful medium. I don't think this "big" world, of how you choose to call it, is that good for human beings in general. You don't really get enlightened by your computer... Or maybe we can? Who am I to say? ^_^

I'm a firm believer we have some certain "programs" that we need to run, just like a polar bear needs to walk for miles and miles in one direction to feel good. That's why they as a rule don't like it that well in the zoo and turn apathetic or gets other "disturbances" in their behaviour. We need to use our body for practical things and we need to be needed. We need to talk and laugh and touch and smell and be a part of the world around us.

We are opportunistic generalists and curious by nature but need some structure in our life still... It's quite an act of acrobatics to poise our needs in a way that makes our lives checkbook find a nice balance in the end...

lol! Nuff for today. My gray matter is running on hot air as of now, I'm sure. (Is that how you say it?)

Cheers,
Klas

ok, I lied, I'm not responding 2nite... cuz I've been overloaded w/work, and my brain is shutting down. And yes Les, loopy is a WONDERFUL state to live in, I rarely leave it 8•P

so um... anyways, I'll try again tomorrow.... I only have enough gray matter for the goof off posts. Did I mention I'm really familiar with the state of Procrastination too?

Ohh, I just had to add this little bit ... on your note Klas of how much (or little, we share with the 'lower' animals) ... and I quote, for reference purposes ...

"We share parts of our traits with others in the animal kingdom."

Talking with male friends, I am always surprised at their reactions, to their reactions to say, another male interacting with their wife, spouse or if you prefer, significant other. (Sometimes, most times? Although I am inclined to believe that even those higher evolved males share a similar reaction below the surface. Or ... perhaps are not 'alpha' material and are glad that they have someone atm and therefore do not exhibit this jealous response.)

Hmm, don't see any traces of behavioual characteristics like this in the animal kingdom, do we? Rutting of antelope, deer, and and ... a lion and his pride ... ok, that part is obvious. Seems silly to refer to an animal defending it's turf as jealous, lolol. Ok, that tickles me to no end.

We are animals. We share common traits, perhaps, a collective consciouness too. And continuing with the, well, analogy doesn't quite fit, but, will suffice ...

Dinner time. Who gets the biggest portions? Well, usually the male (IMHO) and you could say that it is because of physical necessity, being generally larger, they would consume and need therefore, more calories to replace and augment the supply of energy required by the individual. The 'lion's share,' to make the point that more obvious.

Alright, I am drifting in my thoughts here ... veering into oncoming traffic, and before the crash happens, I will try a quick summary of those thoughts.

We are hungry, we then seek food. We get cold, we seek shelter from the elements. We pursue the other half of our species ... oh, and this one is allllll about propagating ourselves, (thankfully, it does feel wonderful ... now there is a bit of innate programming that the creator, whoever she or he is, got absolutely right) ... for love, status (the arm trophy syndrome here), companionship? ... hmm, don't think so.

Oh my ... I just missed that headon with that truck ... ok, here is my thought for the thread for the day ...

We are so much more 'baser' than we 'think'. And as society evolves, what concerns me is that these fundamentally animal characteristics are still and more so, at increasing odds with the evolution of technology.

Now, I must find my bed ... hope my levels of (ok, Klas help me here?? ... lol) whatever it is that gets elevated when we get charged up, decline quickly, as I do need some slumber time. (It just can't simply be adrenalin? Can it? Well, leave it to me to try and complicate things, lol.)

Oh, oh ... happened again, as I got a little further into Klas's post.

Lucid dreaming.

Whoa ... kind of a scary feeling ran through me as I read your words on the associated feelings of loss with your experiences. Me ... too, although somewhat conversely. In fact, try as I did at one point, I never achieved nocturnal bliss or even close. It was usually a recurring scenario and although I did feel a sense of power while in the dream state, with the ability to lead the 'direction,' overwhelmingly I felt a sense of loss upon awakening.

The feeling, as I try to describe it, was there was a longing, a need to do something while in the dream and I was unsure of the exact what. Quite a contradiction of terms for you the reader I suppose. Uhhh ... you are reading this, aren't you? Kidding, kidding.

There, another talent developed back in the uni days. Speed reading for the facts, Jack. (Are you reading this Cat, that one was for you, lol.) Here is my thought as to why I never came close to experiencing that feeling of freedom and actually ended up hitting the ground, because I didn't get distracted ... enough, perhaps.

(Ok, beware I am shifting verb tenses here ...)

What if the brain is revolting and literally trying to shut down the thought processes, making for an uncomfortable experience? We do need sleep for other reasons, and more important ones than seeking gratification through our imaginations that we are in the living world prevented from doing so, either because of moral conventions or simply budgetary constraints. (Briefly; that was the intent of developing the skill of lucid dreaming as I saw it ... to go beyond your means, both mentally, physically and financially. No, no altruism here, lol. Purely selfish and indulgent, in my case anyways.)

I thought I knew the theory behind it, but I never, until this point had the benefit of someone else's experience in this arena. Did the usual egocentric thing, and assumed my own efforts and results would be mirrored by others. Apparently not. And that intrigues me now.

Now, relaxation therapy, meditation and such, is another story. With regards to those personal experiences ... they have and still are much more positive. After a session, I feel rejuvenated, exhilarated and quite simply like I am, indeed, floating. More Authur Dent-ish than with the lucid stuff.

So, I made the leap of thought that, well, of course, I am letting my mind shut down and am not attempting to control as many variables ... consciously, that is. Cause although simple, meditation for example, is not simplistic in it's effects on the body and mind as I understand it.

'Letting go,' then, equates for me at least, to something better. And I had to round up my thoughts and I will leave it at that. For better of worse, lololol.

Loopy? Ohhh no, well past that now, tyvm. G'nite from Canada ... for now ...
(p.s. Yes, I am a big, big fan of the 'ellispi,' really lol'ing on that one. However, for me those three little dots have come to take on an endearing charm for me ... cause, simply it means that I am never far away from my next interaction with you, dear reader ... :))) .
p.s.p.s. Wow. Bravo on those summary comments Klas, forget about saying, er, writing that I wish I could have said/written that ... I couldn't and I am a native English speaker.)

Thanks on that last note, that was mighty kind. :) I'll try to get some spare time tonight and see if I have more kooky things to share... BTW Cat. I'm in that club too... Procrastination is my middle name. :P

Well.... as I am stuck working from home, I can take advantage of waiting for e-mail replies to post here. Ahhh... gotta love it.

Lemme preface by saying the 12 dollar words are both for you Klas, and Nik. Les has 9 & 10 dollar words, and I'm stuck down here w/the 8 dollar words. This is probably because I'm using words already in my lexicon and not consulting the dictionary to use the one word that would describe what i'm saying instead of the 14 I use. Hmmm... I might wanna try... it would make the posts shorter... on the other hand... that's too much work... so... suck it up 8•)

1 - Quality vs Quantity - I think one great idea is better any day of the week than 1000 average ideas. However, since it's hard to be brilliant every time, it's generally a good idea to @ least try for more ideas in the hopes that one of those will spark the great one. (oh great one let me worship you - ok, i'm going loopy, have u ever noticed how bad most of daytime tv is? I wonder if it's on purpose). Is it not possible however that the AI would be able to come up with quality ideas, not just a quantity of them?

I think part of why we resist the idea of computers and automation is because sometimes the really great brilliant idea is completely ILLOGICAL... and yet... it's fantastic in it's complete lack of logic, but the results are the right ones. This I think is your intuitive leap Klas. Would a computer be capable of doing the same thing? I don't know, but I'm fairly sure we're going to get the chance to find out.

I think the best we can say is that we want something that can realistically produce ideas, foresee the result of those ideas, and calculate the odds, while letting us make the choices. I too think it would be a really bad idea to create an AI w/out some rules hardwired (if we can find a way to make them loophole free w/out further endangering ourselves). I agree, until a machine can truly feel emotion, it cannot really know/experience the consequences of certain actions.


2 - Self-awareness - I think 2 things define self-awareness. The 1st is being capable of independant thought. This is the true dream of people pursing AI. To produce something capable of thinking of something they have not thought of themselves. The 2nd thing is self-preservation. Any animal/structure including humans that moves to preserve itself is self-aware. There is a stain on my carpet that I am ABSOLUTELY sure is self-aware... it resists ALL attempts to eradicate it.

3 - Lucid Dreaming - I'm vaguely aware of this as an idea in some of the sci-fi/fantasy stuff I've read, I was not aware of practical attempts @ it. I tend to not remember my dreams, and when I do they are really weird surrealistic things. I wouldn't even attempt to analyze them. Your point about the brain purposely making them uncomfortable as an attempt to get rest & shut down is a really interesting one Les. I have problems turning my brain off so I can go to sleep. The only way to do it is to tire myself out enough, whether through reading or idiot tv. If I don't, I will stay there, staring @ the ceiling for 2 hours going "wth am I still awake?"

4 - Atruism - I've actually had really deep discussions w/a therapist about this. It can be somewhat egotistical, because you do get a good feeling from doing something good, and strive to keep experiencing that feeling. I have a tendency to give too much of myself to people sometimes in this way, and have to work really hard to make sure that I'm not going off the deep end and doing things that aren't right for me. I also get really embarrassed when people make (I feel) too much out of things that I do, thus I do them and then kvetch about doing them so it really doesn't look (as somebody recently told me) that I'm trying to be nominated for sainthood. My other problem in this area is that I have a tendency to overestimate people rather than underestimate them. However, I would much rather give a little bit too much of myself, than not give enough. I want that nice cozy warm feeling of having helped/resolved something/someone. So yes... in ways... it really is an ego booster... On the other hand... it also just makes me NUTS to see something going badly wrong, and not attempt to help make it better. That may be my individual personality quirk and have no reflection on being human however.

5 - Greediness - Greed rarely has blinders in my opinion. The very definition of greed to me is knowing and not caring about the consequences of an action as long as it benefits you. I don't think greedy people lack blinders, I believe they lack compassion.

6 - Kooks - It's hard to tell who's kooky because they're open to new/not generally accepted ideas, and who's just fallen off their rocker. The general lack of acceptance in our society for people who stray far outside the box instead of a little outside the box makes people afraid to acknowledge belief in kooky ideas, or be labelled as kooks. I think it goes back to people being comfortable in their cozy corners of reality. The kooks challenge the cozy corner, and if you're not willing to invite them in, give em a throw pillow and a blanket, curl up and explore it, you're going to reject them as hard as possible so that you can stay "safe". Yet another instinct for survival....

7 - ESP - I'm waiting for your brain to be well rested so you can attack this one Klas.

and dot's all for now... I am going to go back to taking advantage of being home in the middle of the day and getting my laundry done when nobody's around. 8•P

Eh... Um... I did say procrastinating was my middle name? Right?

Good news is I'm using this procrastination to stop procrastinating some other stuff that really needs to be done, so it's not all in vain. ;) The great checkbook of my life still balance out... I have some thoughts I'm pondering on the issues above. I'll be back in a week or so... :P (I hope...)

*deep breath* *exhale ... slowly*

Uh, ... what Klas said, ... me too ;) .

Although ... my procrastination has hit levels previously unknown to humankind.

Sooo, if you will excuse me ... I have to call my grandma and thank her for the ten dollars she gave to me on my 6th birthday. After that ... my school project for grade 7 ... it's cool ... it's all about volcanos and I use baking soda and ... ahh, got to keep that a secret for the display ... and I think I am well on my way to absolutely and completely ... and truly ... 'living in the moment.'

Feels good ... feels good. Hmm, what's that on TV? ... ahh, that was a funny episode of Seinfeld ... yeah, what the hey, I'll watch the show and I'll call grandma tomorrow, it's late anyway.

p.s. Back after I do some more homework, hope all is well with everyone :) .

*busy pretending this thread isn't here*

lemme go um… take down the xmas tree… yeah… that's it, I actually need to do that!

lol! "BRB"... :P

Lololol ... ahh, Klas you have inadvertently started a movement to end (?) procrastination in our respective Caedesian lives.

Now, where did I put grandma's number?

Alright, one thought for the day's thread and referencing Cat's comments ... in particular, #4, but, not limited to ... I am curious. Innately so. Watching the threads, the comments on images and so forth, I wondered what set of personality traits are more common to the membership, if any? Statistically speaking; what is significant.

Are we a kinder, gentler bunch? Certainly, I think I could make the statement, that creatively, there seems to be a definable difference vis a vis the general population.

Cat talks about not being able to watch 'something' go awry while sitting on the sidelines. And here, I am not sure if we are being politically correct in the public forum, but, without fail, our discourses on the 'kooks' has been more than kind and sympathetic and open.

Ok, ok, nothing quite of any substance ... yet ... the cogs are starting to move and grind ... either that, or we are waiting on Klas and Nik, and I don't discount the insightful Cat, to continue and offer some more fodder for discussion. But ... I digress ...

... Hey? Wanna see a 'volcano?'

Why does a cat always land on it's feet?

Many can say that The sun remains the same, always, but we speak of "weak sunshine today", or talk of the strong sun in the autumn season. When clouds obscure the sun, we see it as "weak sunshine", but the sun has not changed. Similarly, consciousness remains unchanged but, when obscured by what Orientals call "the dusts", it appears "low". Just as the life essence remains unchanged as there is constant transmutation, so consciousness is not affected by the obscuring elements. One Zen Master spoke of keeping the mirror clean, wiping away the dusts so that the basic nature of the mirror--which reflects unchangingly--will not be affected. Consciousness is like the mirror. It is necessary to remember that consciousness can only exist where there is duality. The polarity of subject-object relationship makes consciousness possible. When we enter deep meditation, where there is only subject and no subject-object relationship, the world disappears. With the reappearance of thought, consciousness and the subject-object relationship reappear, along with self, other, and God.

cuz we're flexible *wink*

les, I missed the above, I'll reply when i'm not @ work… and the site isn't shutdown for upgrades. lol

*After a week or so...*

I took out the last remains of our X-mas tree yesterday... I'm kidding you not. I'm really hoping I haven't affected any others procrastination in any negative way. :P That would be sad. Hehe... That talk about starting a movement towards ending it made me really nervous. I honestly believe that it's a good quality that you find among a certain kind of nice and relaxed people. ;) I've found a way to outsmart myself about it though, like I sid before. I'm using the procrastinating of further intelligible or otherwise posts on this thread to free energy to focus on writing my thesis.

The cat's that didn't land on the feet died long ago. ;) Perhaps that was the problem for the saber-tooth? Evolution tends to streamline certain qualities over time.

Nice reading about consciousness and meditation. I would agree on most of that. I must admit I'm rusty on my meditation. I guess the problem was I never really got started on a regular basis. ^_^ Now, what I find most relaxing is to surf the web, listen to radio in one ear, music in the other, watch some TV or a good movie. It's almost like some kind of meditation, naturally without any prospects of enlightenment. Just as well. I don't know where to put that in my schedule. :P

Just a thought that struck me when I read the above. I believe that the dust on the mirror of consciousness is what most would actually would refer to as the "self" and perhaps even what makes us human. That would be the reason why enlightenment make us something other then mere humans, the mirror would be wiped clean. I hear thought that the dust will settle again if you don't watch it. ;)

*Wanders off into another procrastination rampage.*

*does a double and triple take* ... Klas ... nice to 'see' you again. :)

I had wondered if this thread would see the light of a monitor screen once more. I'm glad you stopped by. Annnnd ...

I trust that this finds you well, both you and yours. Now ...

Ahem, no way I can contribute at this moment. The deepest thought that is emanating from my mind at the moment is, "Wonder if I can hit the wastebasket from here ... let's give it a go ...," you know what I mean? Lol. A little decompression time, and none of my mental fodder would taste good going down methinks.

Whoa ... pulled that last one out of the hat.

Good to see you. I shall be back.

My car had precognition once and wouldn't start.

Has anyone noticed how I can stop a thread?

no :P

That's because you are in Sweden...you are too far away.

lol! What ever... ^_^

I think you should be glad you have such a good car. Most will just take your money in gas and insurance and end up a pile of crap in the end. Having a car with precognition could make you famous and rich, if you just cash in on it and avoid being submitted to your local asylum... :P

Hmm, I think cabin fever would be a fair diagnosis for us all.

The cure? Well, *caedes of course. :P

And yes, the cure is sometimes worse than the disease. (Is that even possible?)

Hey Klas,

Had to refresh my memory on the discussion here, and then I recalled the kind of free association we have been employing, so ... and I quote, " ... listen to radio in one ear, music in the other ... ."

Interestingly enough (to some I guess and hope) and coincidentally to a smaller degree (JOKe), when I was taking psychology in university, a minor of sorts ... we were to participate in experiments and labs that were being conducted by some of the graduates and senior undergraduates. It was mandatory to participate to receive credit that would be applied to your course.

The one experiment that I signed up for was researching the capabilites of humans to differentiate and retain information from two sources at the same time. One visual, one auditory. Fast forwarding, the summary of findings, and I believe still the current thinking, is that we cannot imput information from two sources and subsequently recall salient facts and so forth.

So, when you make mention of doing these two activities at the same time, I suspect, that your brain does, indeed end up in a meditative state. Recognizing that it cannot process the information properly, you inadvertently have created a 'false' focus. And that is what I understand as one way of meditating.

The clearing of the mind accomplished by focusing on nothing.

Lol. Uhm ... I hope I made mention that I have not hooked up the I.V. of caffeine yet? So, with one eye open and the other shut ... I bid you a good good day, till the more coherent thoughts emerge. :)

lol! My coherent thoughts are not in the neighborhood atm... Good news is my time for the thesis is running up so I better be finished soon... I'm actually on schedule on that one. ^_^ Then I can waste more time here... (Yes the cure is worse. ^_^ Tougher to get rid of at any rate.) Interesting to hear of your study. I will readily sign on for that description as being true. What amazes me is that I actually can learn something from the stuff I read at the same time I do the other three things. Perhaps I actually can utilize this 'false' focus to like, focus. (Or my brain will end up like mashed potatoes when I'm 40... A, well, seven years to go isn't that bad. :P)

Klas you may think this is funny...when my car had precognition I had to replace the entire ignition system and that was not cheap. The mechanic told me to make sure I lube it and add water when needed...he said I don't want to see you here again for a long time. I forgot to ask if I should put anti-freeze in it.

Hehe... Sure do. ;) I actually thought it would be some trouble with the ignition. Rhymes so well. If it really happened though, I guess it would not have been that funny. (Maybe it's the cars in the states but it doesn't sound right to add water... ^_^)

Ha.....I schmoozed you good! I really got you! Everyone knows you don't put water in your ignition....you put it ON it. I still don't know about the anti-freeze.

If you say so. I beg to differ but I really don't care. In case you didn't get that part where I doubted you have a car with ignition problem in the first place... I can spell it out here. ;) It's impressive though to hijack an offtopic thread this far off topic. Now make a real point on the discussion here instead. That would be nice. ^_^ And the antifreeze goes in the happy hour drink if you some have anti-emetic left to mix it with. :P

What's the P under your eyes?

:P

I could be using it wrong but for me it signifies heavy irony. ;) Being too old to have grown up with internet and chat and such I guess I could miss some of the finer points about how you put things. Could this mean you are older then me? ;) Judging from the 'info' on your profile you beat me with some 32710 years... ^_^

Trust me ...I am far older than you, you can take that to the bank.

Ok. I doubt they will give me money for it though... ^_^ Sorry. My awkward humor there again... I do know the expression. ;)

So having lived longer then me... Have it made you more or less certain of wonky stuff like precognition or other psychic phenomenon?

Wonky? I have to get my dictionary...is that Swedish? Precognition? Probably. Psychic phenomenon? Absolutely but you don't want to know where it comes from.

No? Try me. ;) (I could guess though...)

If in doubt, google about... ^_^ Wonky is english slang, I guess I could use it a bit faulty or how you put it. I meant something in the line of "messed-up", but perhaps not as strong as that. In my way of using it you could just as well replace it with "funky", but that would still not be "proper" english I guess (i.e. slang).

Is that "English" slang or "American" slang? If it's American then even we don't understand it. I thought you would have been curious about where psychic phenomenon comes from...you must know.

Hehe... I was almost sure you wasn't going to say anything until you heard my best guess.

My english is an unholy mixture of the Queens language and American and to some degree Aussie perhaps, but I haven't talked enough to the people from Down Under I guess to have been that influenced.

What I'm curious of is what you think about the issue. I have my thoughts on the issue but I will not claim to be right and I will not give away that right to anyone else either really. What is of interest to me is to learn about different ways to see an issue like this. :)

When you put it like you did above ("you don't want to know where it comes from") I would think you have something in the line of "The Dark Side" in mind. (I.e. Devil, Dark Lord or how you like to put it.) ;) Especially after checking out the homepage link you provide on your profile page. (You could mean divine intervention and angels too coming from that perspective, but that doesn't really fit the bill on the above description.) You could have some parallell ideas to what I use as baseline though. I will perhaps come to that another time when I have some spare energy to gather my thoughts.

I will send you something in the morning by message, I don't know if they want to get into this on this forum. You know .... religion and politics are taboo to some...too bad...they are important topics in our lives.

Ok. :) That's fine by me. This is the offtopic forum though and I bet very few are reading this... So the chance (or risk rahter :P) of offending people are small and that would be on their own heads for all that matters. I would love to see your answer in the open here. It is after all a discussion that touches on the religious, in my mind at least. It's up to you though. I respect that you want to take it as a private discussion. I can't promise I'll answer more comprehendingly though... ^_^ (Or faster.)

OK, here goes...put your flak jacket on.

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Those that are fallen are the messengers of this deceit. They are bound to the earth and it's atmoshere and have been here for hundreds of years. They know true history far better than we do by most part. This is why some people know of past people, events etc. Some people say they hear voices, well they do and these are them. Communicate with the dead? No way...there is a gulf that man cannot transend. These fallen angels are more commonly known as "demons," and they are able to communicate with and influence human beings. Are they associated with UFO's? More than likely...keep in mind they fought a battle against the Archangel Michael.

So what are the up to? They are preparing for the final confrontation with God and we are in the midst of it. Look at the world now and imagine it's future. The U.S. is in decline and it won't be long and the "man of sin" will take over under the tuteledge of these fallen angels. Won't happen? It is written.

Are the angels in heaven part of this UFO brigade? Quite probably as they are the ones who mete out what is to come upon the earth, there are seven in particular:

Revelation 8:2 And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven trumpets.
3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.
4 And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel’s hand.
5 And the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the altar, and cast it into the earth: and there were voices, and thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake.
6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound.

You can read the rest. Don't believe it? That's ok we all have free will and can make our own choices but I would sure watch the signs...know that clouds usually mean rain. There is cover if you choose to seek it.

Thanks for sharing. I wasn't that far of the markers in my guess. ;) I've come across similar views on the spiritual domains. I won't debate if you are right or wrong. It's not a question of that I believe. I understand and respect what you believe. Perhaps I can offer more respect then understanding though. (I'm not that get acquainted with the "scriptures".)

I do have some kind of background in a Christian culture as part of the general heritage of the western world and such. I've never been inclined to take the bible by the letter though. I view it as an interesting documentation of previous generations ideas of life and what not. For me it's an important fact that the texts in the bible have been actively edited and some parts even left out. Gods words conveyed by man. That's how far I can go. That implies cultural influence on multiple levels.

That's a personal view and not offered as a point in a debate in order to compete with others viewpoints. It's important to me not to argue such issues in a way that would give anyone in particular the right before others.

Cheers,
Klas

:)

As one matures things change. Things that were once important no longer are, things that weren't important become important. As you draw closer to the end you will see what I mean. The light of this life steadily grows dim as the light eternal gets brighter. We are creatures of light always moving toward the one who created it. You are on that train. Cheers.

Cheers to that. :) Yes, we are all in the same boat. No doubt about it. ^_^

The answer to all is 42!

Is your name Arthur Dent? 8•P

(p.s. I'll return to serious convo just as soon as I get oh… a couple of uninterrupted hours)

I am the origionator when I have a spare month to read then I will make my observation. It's nice to see that you beautifull and colourfull characters have not disbanded yet.

By the way Klas, the train makes two stops. There are two doors, one with a red H and the other with a blue H. The blue one takes a key to open. The red one always remains unlocked. The blue door leads to the light and the red door leads to a deep dark gulf. You must find the key before the train stops. So we are all on the same train only some will ever find the key...the others never took the time to seek it out.

Hehe... Sure. I got the drift even before you explained it. :P What about the poor fellers that are color blind? (Nah, they could still see the blue I guess if they have the usual defect...) Each to his own I say. My modus operandi way to think of it is that no one religion in particular can claim to be right in any matter. What might be heaven to you might be a sidestep from Nirvana and as such just another distraction from ultimate enlightenment. ;) As in most matters my personal point of view is ultimately: I'll believe it when I see it. ^_^

Wasn't it 42 in the last universe. I seem to recall that when the ultimate answer and question came to be known the universe would be replaced by another even more absurd place.

(One of my personal favourite ideas is that the world really did end at the turn of the millenium. We were left behind, that's all. :P)

A couple of uninterrupted hours, talk about optimist. ^_^ The only way to go is more caffeine and less sleep... :P

Cheers NiK, I'll be waiting around for you. :) It has, as of yet proved to be quite worth it.

Oh, oh... I just had to nail the 100th post. Sorry for spamming. :P

One more Klas and I'll leave it alone. Realize first that Satan is a created being, a fallen Archangel...a Darth Vader type if you will. That means someone has power and authority over him and that someone would be his creator. This means his creator is "letting" him do his thing. What's his thing? Here again is the clue:

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

I can't highlight or underline so I will repeat the key...And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, WHICH DECEIVETH THE WHOLE WORLD:

Not just a part but the whole world. This is what Satan must do and has done it well, take a look around. When you see the clouds form you know a storm is approaching.

And God said: Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Can you find a God more powerful than this?

Sorry, but it takes more than words in a book to convince me. BTW have you read about that document they discovered recently (or maybe not so recently, but I've only just read about it) which basically says jesus asked judas to betray him so that he could fulfill his destiny? The church has dismissed it, of course, as they have always dismissed anything that goes against their existing rhetoric, eg the world is round, the earth revolves around the sun etc...

I'm not looking, but thanks anyway. ;) I'm neither in the buyers or sellers market. ^_^

I share your point of view that if there is an ultimate being, "god", or what you prefer to call it, you can't separate him from the bad or "evil" in the world. Right now the world (of mankind) deceiveth itself pretty much really. It's hard to tell who's doing what part in that respect nowadays. BTW, with one of your previous posts in mind, who to say that Dubbaya isn't the "man of sin" you spoke of earlier... ^_^ Last time I checked his history record isn't exactly what I would call spotless...

I tells you. The end is near. Have always been, will always be. It's just a question of what perspective you put it in. A couple of million years or what it now is supposed to be until the sun runs out of hydrogen and what not. (I should have paid closer attention in my physics class...) And I suspect mankind will not last even a couple of hundred years at this rate (or even just 100 years). But you never know. I love to be wrong in these kind of things. ^_^

Please don't feel offended by my points of views. I'm not bent on salvaging you over to "my side" and am not picking a fight. I just say it so you don't have to wonder about it. ;)

Cheers.

Sorry Sam, missed your post. Was it something newer then the Dead Sea Scrolls? There are so many parts of the bible that have been heavily edited. I mentioned this quickly somewhere above. I'm not keeping scores though. I'm not that interested. Apocryphal texts I think it's called. Tells a tale of politics in the church if you ask me. That is what I mean by that it "implies cultural influence on multiple levels". I.e. history will not remember those that didn't write it or how to put it...

Here's a link: http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/manuscripts/gospel_of_judas/

I can't seem to find the extract that I read in the paper, but it's bound to be around somewhere. Try an online newspaper perhaps, and search for "Gospel of Judas" or similar. Personally I don't put much value in the document, but then I put very little in the bible as a whole. But I do find it interesting the way that the church immidiatly rejects anything that suggests they might have to change their way of thinking; to me this has always been their weakness, their unwillingness to change... for example, the admission in 1992 that they had been wrong to persecute Galileo for his beleif that the earth revolved around the sun. Oh well, at least they got aroud to it eventually. But I seem to be going off topic here... don't want to start yet another yelling match with religious fundamentalists, so I'll say no more.

It all goes back to the verse I quoted:

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, WHICH DECEIVETH THE WHOLE WORLD: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Satan is known as the Prince of this World and for good reason...he is...at least temporarily. He controls governments, what you watch, what you read, even what you eat. If this is not true then man is purely evil and there is no hope...then where ya gunna go?

I love a good conspiracy theory. ;) (I know you put a different emphasis on it then that, but I'm not there *yet*) Hehe... You sound like a good trailer for Omen... :P I rather live in a world with misguided human beings then one run like a puppet theater. I seem to remember the notion of free will. As far as I remember free will is the answer to the question of evil in the world. The theory is, god put the devil here so we could choose the right path for our self, or else we would be mindless beings with total deterministic lives. I respect that you can have the ideas you have. I find them interesting at that. But I'm not easily convinced. I'm forever a sceptic. But I enjoy the luxury of doubting scepticism too. There is a spiritual aspect of life in my view on the world. I'm not letting it be limited by any one tradition though.

I don't stand by tradition, my website proves that. Truth is always the most palatable brew. Did you ever know that you know? I'm pretty up on politics because of the tie into scripture and let me tell you I could send you home crying if you had a couple hours to listen. The conspiracy theororists are the ones you think not. Something happened in 2001 that will change the world forever and put it onto the path that God said it would be on in the end. You belong to a very special generation for you may well see the culmination of all things. Be a watcher.

I doubt you could actually make me cry about these matters. :P I'm sure I would find it to be fascinating stuff though since I'm a great fan of modern lore. Just be aware of that premise. I'm not a potential believer. I'm not easily swayed into believing what people tell me. That will not keep me from lending an ear though. I find it quite entertaining to discuss things like this. I didn't get that part where you said. "Did you ever know that you know?" Either it's the deepest philosophical statement of the day or you (or I for all that matter) missed some part in the text to put it in context.

When it comes to the non religious (even though most everything has some religious ties) things concerning politics or better expressed governments there is the matter of evidence. The evidence is staggering..no..overwhelming. I have done some major research the last couple of years and the best way I can put it is that what is happening sounds so absurd that no one would believe it, but then even that is planned. Part of the dumbing down of the masses. So who is the master mind behind all of this? That deceiver.

Do you believe there is a God? If so then you could also believe that He created a being capable of all this. The fact is that God created His own adversary. The very name "Satan" means adversary. If you agree then all things are possible. And by the way everyone is a "potential" believer.

Reading back you asked about know that you know. It's just that, you just know that you know...maybe it's just a confirmation from God. I have felt that...like a confidence that transcends understanding.

History is full of people who beleived they know when the world is going to end etc. I know there have been a few religions that even set dates (which were later revised, surprise surprise). There is a huge diversity of religions in the world and millions of people who follow them that believe they, and only they, know the right answers. I'm sure they all have very convincing arguements too but that doesn't mean they are all correct. It's too easy to invent a philosophy and then find "evidence" to support it when you look hard enough for it.

Personally I prefer to believe that humans are in control of their own destinies. We are the ones who are responsible for our own futures and we are the only ones who can determine if it will be good or bad. We can't keep turning to god (or whomever we might believe in) for help, or blaming evil spirits when bad things happen. IMO we will never get anywhere that way... makes me think of the poor ignorant peoples of the past who thought that god was punishing them with the plague and that their devotion would save them from it... or the same ignoramuses who burned witches etc. etc. If we want to change the world we need to do it ourselves...

Agreed Sam. ;) For some strange reason the discussion about it amuses, even fascinates me. Maybe precisely because of the fact that so many people have had the inclination to think like this over the course of history. In my way of seeing it that tells something about people in general. Perhaps about the need to be part of a greater scheme and to "make it all fit".

I'm not debating that everyone is a potential believer (with or without "quote, unquote"). Au contraire! Mankind is hardwired to believe as I see it. But that has nothing to do with what you believe in. It could be believing in human rights, living a "green" lifestyle, politics and all different kind of religions. Even scepticism and atheism is a set of beliefs. There is little or no chance of me becoming a hardcore born again Christian that awaits the second coming though... I, like Sam above like to believe that we as human beings are responsible for what we do and should not hide behind any system of believes to justify the way the world is.

I agree on the description that there is a huge diversity in religion and so forth. I like to think that this seeming endless differentiation is actually a quality we all share. It doesn't separate as much as it keeps us together. (The ultimately most boring thing that could happen is if everyone were exactly the same... Right?) In my mind our common ground as human beings are always outweighs our differences.

*claps*

I set no dates, I just read the sky. I know a storm is coming (storm is underlined). And I know the signs of the times.

Jesus said: Matthew 16:3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?

I'm finished.