I think you're underestimating the extent people go to 'share' beliefs with each-other and grant each-other varying levels of assumed trust. For example, I've never been to Singapore. But if another on this forum is from there, and the two of us trust each-other, and have no reason not to, then I can draw upon his/her experience of Singapore likewise he/she can draw upon my experience of the United States. Or further examples of this, are strangers giving each-other directions of where to go in a town. These systems of belief-exchange and presumed-trust, are not exactly 'scientific' but spill over into areas of social relationships, interactions, morality, religious systems, ethics, how people 'ought' to behave with one-another, etc.cladking wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2024 4:07 pmAll consciousness exists in three dimensions and can not help but to operate in whole and in part in three dimensions (except modern humans).
"Survival" is how life works. Every individual must by nature try to survive. Those which do not quickly perish.
Every consciousness is "self aware" they just don't know it. Our self awareness is wrong. Our self awareness and thinking is a feedback loop created by abstract language in a brain that now operates one dimensionally. It is this one dimensional aspect that we perceive as "thinking".
The second definition of "metaphysics" is "magic". I don't mean "magic". I mean the first definition "the basis of science". No science of any kind can exist without metaphysics by definition. The basis of modern science is Observation > Experiment. It is all the definitions, axioms, assumptions, and experiment that exists.
Much of what modern humans believe simply has no experimental foundation whatsoever and is merely derived from assumptions that come with language and best guesses. It is not really science at all because only experiment can underlie true science.
These social interactions become largely 'intuited', and science always had difficulty in explaining and describing these sociological or psychological phenomena.
Well that's a lofty goal you have to create machine intelligence, considering what you've already mentioned about language and human 'intelligence'. From my perspective, the more depth I've gone into the matter of human intelligence, the more questions I have about it. Certainly, it's a difficult phenomenon to pin-down and 'define', to put into words, especially by how it is linked to human and animal 'evolution'. Philosophers and Philosophy have been studying thought, consciousness, theory of mind, for a long time now—more questions than answers pile up.cladking wrote: ↑Mon Feb 12, 2024 5:17 pmI'd rather talk about this than anything else but experience tells me that people will balk at derailing the thread. But this theory is all encompassing and affects everything.
My very first project in life was to understand thought and my second was to create machine intelligence. The two are probably about one and the same thing. It is by getting rid of thought that a machine might become "intelligent". Ai is quite the opposite and by teaching it language we assure it can never be intelligent. I suppose that if it became self aware it might be able to design a new version of itself that could use all of its memory in three dimensions.
I've gone up many blind alleys in these quests and seen nothing and it was not until I found the existence of a natural language that I began truly understanding the nature of consciousness and how this may be related to AI.
https://sacred-texts.com/egy/pyt/index.htm
How odd that the only surviving writing in Ancient Language is just a silly little book of ritual read at the Kings' ascension ceremonies and is mistaken by pseudoscientists as a book of incantation!
I do believe machine intelligence, AI systems, advancing computer codes and programs, are going to complicate matters exponentially, as computers become better capable of mimicking human language, beliefs, and communication.