Identity

Awakening eras, crisis eras, crisis wars, generational financial crashes, as applied to historical and current events
uncertainty
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: Identity

Post by uncertainty »

uncertainty wrote: So far as I can tell there are only two "realms" or "realities" that we as humans inhibit: the internal and the external. The internal is the "realm of the mind" and the external is the "physical universe".
So obviously this isn't new per se (but somehow relevant). Since all logical systems of thought require assumptions the best you can hope for is to know all of your assumptions and hope it is logically consistent. Also the "level" for which you make your assumptions is arbitrary from this perspective. Mathematicians always try to boil it down to the bear bones but for other systems this isn't necessary. Obviously the "higher the level" of assumptions the more likely you are going to miss assumptions and that it won't be logically consistent. In this sense this is kind of how the "hard" sciences transition into the softer ones. There are plenty of things that don't get fully addressed when you move from chemistry to biology but they just get paved over with assumptions and are attempted to be made logically consistent.

Some how I feel oddly refreshed by the "two realms" abstractions. Its not like it is an entirely new train of thought in its own right. What appeals to me is the fact that its not really a science/philosophy thing and its not an art thing. I know the arts side is more comfortable making trains of thought with no correspondence with being real but from a "STEM" background (even in higher math) it is less of a "thing". It is somehow weird to create an abstraction that is very likely not true but regardless helps in some capacity as a "perspective" for moving the conversation forward. Just abandoning the pretense that a mental model has to be right vs helping to gain any insight. If all models are inherently broken part of it becomes an art of constructing false models that help our understanding. Models after all are just another logical system.

Models represent ways for us as humans to compression information from our experience (from either the "physical" or "mental"). The fewer and more general the assumptions the model contains while remaining logically consistent the more information the model "contains". From this perspective it would seem that math is the most information dense field of study and why it requires so much mental effort....

uncertainty
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: Identity

Post by uncertainty »

Anybody else feel like information theory is still pretty vastly understood? You would think for something as cataclysmic-ally important it is, honestly for the future of our society, we would have a better grasp at this point but even distinguished professionals give indications that they are missing some "conceptual pieces". Anyone else had this sensation?
-----

Identity

encapsulated - there is some sort of barrier distinguishing between the entity and the "rest of the world"
common interest - all of the parts "in" the identity act under some common pursuit

I have also pondered if the universe could be said to have an identity. It has some definite beginning and boundaries(?). In this sense I could start to see some of Einstein's pantheism. I think the distinction I would make from pantheism is that all of reality is a subset of the all encompassing god/ohm/whatever you want to call it (EDIT nvm think that is straight textbook pantheism). Not sure about this point though for instance there would have to be some common interest/end for the universe which either is like unity with the divine entity and thus making some sort of cyclical notion from Hinduism make sense or ..... I'm not sure if there really is something that makes sense other than this. Either the universe doesn't have an identity and thus no end point, something it is moving towards or it does. Not sure how I feel about this but at the very least leads to interesting speculation.

uncertainty
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: Identity

Post by uncertainty »

uncertainty wrote: So far as I can tell there are only two "realms" or "realities" that we as humans inhibit: the internal and the external. The internal is the "realm of the mind" and the external is the "physical universe".
Within the mental sphere there seems two main sub-spheres that human minds inhibit: the logical and the emotional. The logical sphere primarily advanced by males and the emotional by females (obviously a simplification). In the early stages of humanity primarily only the logical sphere mattered and thus men tended to dominate it. Moving forward (particularly in the context of AI) it seems the emotional sphere will play a larger and more important role. Think of how large of a role the arts play in modern day. I think correspondingly women may end up playing a larger and larger role in society. Also note that societies where women are "suppressed" art and the like tends to stall.

It seems to appear that in crisis periods the logical sphere is advanced where in awakening eras the emotional sphere take precedence. This explains why in crisis eras "traditional" ideologies of male, strength, and power oriented societies tend to win out.

John
Posts: 11478
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Identity

Post by John »

uncertainty wrote: > Within the mental sphere there seems two main sub-spheres that
> human minds inhibit: the logical and the emotional. The logical
> sphere primarily advanced by males and the emotional by females
> (obviously a simplification).
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FishbellykanakaDude
Posts: 1313
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 8:07 pm

Re: Identity

Post by FishbellykanakaDude »

John wrote:
uncertainty wrote: > Within the mental sphere there seems two main sub-spheres that
> human minds inhibit: the logical and the emotional. The logical
> sphere primarily advanced by males and the emotional by females
> (obviously a simplification).
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Firstly, that's "inhabit".

Secondly,...WRONG! :) <chuckle!>

The male/female divide is not emotionality. It is intentionality. Men and women intend different things (in the aggregate) by their decisions in life (aka their actions).

See: Peterson (( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54 ))
((( Even Better!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TK2-xYyNpYk , with some commentary about "these times". )))

Logic is a function of emotion, as the logical "whys" are "invented" by the emotional "whats". WHAT we want is justified by WHY we want it,.. the what is decided upon first ('cuz it feels good), and the why is "deduced" afterword ('cuz it sounds good).

Decision (the act of decision) is an emotional act, supported by the "fiction" of our invented logic.

Men are equally as emotional as women. Women are equally as logical as men. They simply have different whats and whys as to their wants.
uncertainty wrote:It seems to appear that in crisis periods the logical sphere is advanced where in awakening eras the emotional sphere take precedence. This explains why in crisis eras "traditional" ideologies of male, strength, and power oriented societies tend
Wrong. :)

Crisis period:
The "WHAT" is existential survival (existence itself). The supporting logic is "whatever it takes".

Non-Crisis period:
The "WHAT" is control to maintain stability. The supporting logic is "whatever we can get away with".

"Maintaining Control for Stability" is less "potent" than "Existential Survival".
"Whatever we can get away with" is less "potent" than "Whatever it Takes".

The energy source for societies is numbers of people committed to a few "causes". The more "potent" the cause (the WHAT) the more persuasive (potent) the logic (the WHY) for a greater number of people in a society.

..don't attribute to conspiracy that which is more easily attributable to stupidity!

Sexism is a conspiracy theory, and falling prey to arrogance and "immortality"/"invulnerability" is stupidity.


Aloha nō! :) <shaka!>

uncertainty
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: Identity

Post by uncertainty »

John wrote:
uncertainty wrote: > Within the mental sphere there seems two main sub-spheres that
> human minds inhibit: the logical and the emotional. The logical
> sphere primarily advanced by males and the emotional by females
> (obviously a simplification).
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Glad I could brighten someones day :D
FishbellykanakaDude wrote:
John wrote:
uncertainty wrote: > Within the mental sphere there seems two main sub-spheres that
> human minds inhibit: the logical and the emotional. The logical
> sphere primarily advanced by males and the emotional by females
> (obviously a simplification).
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Firstly, that's "inhabit".

Secondly,...WRONG! :) <chuckle!>

The male/female divide is not emotionality. It is intentionality. Men and women intend different things (in the aggregate) by their decisions in life (aka their actions).

See: Peterson (( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54 ))
((( Even Better!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TK2-xYyNpYk , with some commentary about "these times". )))

Logic is a function of emotion, as the logical "whys" are "invented" by the emotional "whats". WHAT we want is justified by WHY we want it,.. the what is decided upon first ('cuz it feels good), and the why is "deduced" afterword ('cuz it sounds good).

Decision (the act of decision) is an emotional act, supported by the "fiction" of our invented logic.

Men are equally as emotional as women. Women are equally as logical as men. They simply have different whats and whys as to their wants.
uncertainty wrote:It seems to appear that in crisis periods the logical sphere is advanced where in awakening eras the emotional sphere take precedence. This explains why in crisis eras "traditional" ideologies of male, strength, and power oriented societies tend
Wrong. :)

Crisis period:
The "WHAT" is existential survival (existence itself). The supporting logic is "whatever it takes".

Non-Crisis period:
The "WHAT" is control to maintain stability. The supporting logic is "whatever we can get away with".

"Maintaining Control for Stability" is less "potent" than "Existential Survival".
"Whatever we can get away with" is less "potent" than "Whatever it Takes".

The energy source for societies is numbers of people committed to a few "causes". The more "potent" the cause (the WHAT) the more persuasive (potent) the logic (the WHY) for a greater number of people in a society.

..don't attribute to conspiracy that which is more easily attributable to stupidity!

Sexism is a conspiracy theory, and falling prey to arrogance and "immortality"/"invulnerability" is stupidity.

Aloha nō! :) <shaka!>
I try. I fail. I get back up. I learn. Sorry for wasting everyone's time.

John
Posts: 11478
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Identity

Post by John »

Don't just fold because Fishy says you're wrong. Maybe you're
right and Fishy's wrong. He just likes to have fun.

The reason I laughed is -- I don't know who you are, even whether
you're male or female. But I assume that you're male and that you
have a wife or girlfriend, and if she finds out what you've written
about men and women, then you are in VERY DEEP TROUBLE. That's why I
laughed.

FishbellykanakaDude
Posts: 1313
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 8:07 pm

Re: Identity

Post by FishbellykanakaDude »

John wrote:Don't just fold because Fishy says you're wrong. Maybe you're
right and Fishy's wrong. He just likes to have fun.
Heck yeah! Don't worry about annoying me. Being (so-called) "contradicted" by my opinion of crap GIVES you Brownie Points!

..and I don't get annoyed anyway. :) I just "respond".
...if she finds out what you've written about men and women, then you are in VERY DEEP TROUBLE. That's why I laughed.
That IS a good point. <chuckle!>

Although,.. it could be argued that "uncertainty" was actually COMPLIMENTING women for being "the good pussycats" as opposed to us evil war-making testosterone riddled demons that we all KNOW we are!

<chuckle!>


Aloha bunches to all my fellow Y-Chromosome holders! Mahalo fo all da fun walaʻau (talk story).

John
Posts: 11478
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Identity

Post by John »

FishbellykanakaDude wrote: > Although,.. it could be argued that "uncertainty" was actually
> COMPLIMENTING women ...
In the situation being described, I doubt that "arguing" anything
would be a fruitful idea.

FishbellykanakaDude
Posts: 1313
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 8:07 pm

Re: Identity

Post by FishbellykanakaDude »

John wrote:
FishbellykanakaDude wrote: > Although,.. it could be argued that "uncertainty" was actually
> COMPLIMENTING women ...
In the situation being described, I doubt that "arguing" anything
would be a fruitful idea.
...apparently John is married.

Or at least NOT a basement bound "Player Unknown" playing geeky nerd troglodyte unaccustomed to the Scent of a Woman.


<chuckle, chuckle, chuckle, chuckle...>

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests