Towards Human Autonomy
‘Knowledge, wisdom and the adaptation to it, is a root of human autonomy’ ~ Amorphos
Data and patterns
There is a formula for accurately predicting quake aftershocks, and strangely the same formula can be used to predict the most likely places criminal activity will occur. Nature cannot but go by such patterns, but a human can say, make an app utilising the formula in the same way as the police do, then the public will also be able to avoid those areas. Next your local bank robber can also use the same formula/app to now choose a different target to what was originally intended and predicted by the formula. Now the formula no longer applies and we have human autonomy!
Love
Just one example; we build up a set of characters based upon intuitions and people around us, drawing an image of the type of person we want a partner to be like. This is internal and so we relate it thus, then when we meet someone whom appears to meet the criteria it’s like; ‘ah i am in love’, and it feels like we have known each other all our lives, perhaps in another life etc, etc. Really, we do not know one another straight away, and we only feel we do because the partner is being represented internally i.e. as we know ourselves, we so project that familiarity upon others. Once we know how such things work, we then have autonomy over it.
Politics
Mostly about scale and accountability; if you have a large body e.g. the state, a mega-corporation, boss/worker relationship, or any collective, this is set against the individual in terms of power and loss of autonomy. It may be balance by accountability but if that in itself creates a power-body e.g. unions, and or a political movement against such things, then we have simply created yet another power body. Though one could say accountability requires a ‘body’. Obviously this is just a rough outline and set against a world constantly changing, thus in every issue and time, our political philosophy needs to be evolved accordingly. Human autonomy may be found not in the individual but perhaps only in the collection of all parties ~ it is a universal or nothing thing.
Mostly in the particular: an example; a reporter goes into ones place of work, she asks ‘how do you feel about the unemployed?’ and apparently this is unbiased. Yet she is immediately asking the workers mind to compartmentalise its intellect, factionalise humanity, drawing a duality between parties i.e. the set of workers Vs the set of non-workers. Hence the question begins with a prejudice.
So the worker says [as he is being programmed to do] ‘i think people should have to work ~ take any job’, the reporter being already aware of usual replies, quickly moves to the next level of unbiased questioning. Now the question changes to another, but it is further implied that the two questions are part of the same overall question. So now she asks; should ‘they’ get more money than workers? So now the question has moved to a potential prejudice [only concerning a minority] against the worker, now he feels disenfranchised and used or that his money is being stolen. So the duel prejudice [the worker now feels oppressed too] in the second question is used to substantiate the original prejudice in the first question.
Point being, that in this example the first prejudice has no initial basis but is rather substantiated as we create greater duality. Human autonomy here may perhaps be found in simply catching people out when they initiate such questionings.
Wiring; free will and universal freedom may be a wiring issue?
I am going to build a robot when the tech is here, it will have artificial neurons and be sentient. So my problem is that my future 3D printer [which works at the quantum level literally stitching objects together to form as sophisticated and complex forms as nature does], builds the robot, but it has no idea what to do, be or how to work at all. It needs a-priory informations and the respective instrumentations to function in the world, this naturally then places its sentience/free will as something of an afterthought, or as a subjective level of thought in its communicative area of brain. It can respond and make effect in the secondary sense but does not entirely control itself ~ in that we have already built in primary control such that it when it ‘wakes’ will know what how to interact with the world.
I could wire it so that as it learns its frontal cortex gradually takes command, but i doubt i’d want that ~ for it to control every aspect of its being, it is far more efficient to have move operations be automatic. Similarly to my robot, i could rewire myself in much the same way or indeed transfer my consciousness to it. Here the greater ‘human’ autonomy is in a subjective sentience rather than having full primary control.
Ps. Oh and then naturally as other humans cannot be trusted [they do things like have their own ideas, loose at Stalingrad etc, and that just won’t do] i am going to take over the world, so you guys better get there first! Lol
Can human autonomy be arrived at? Or is it actually better that it’s a constant battle? …but one we must surely always fight, and never let our guard down. We must fight mediolitic’s [media and politics as one entity] in every instance it shows itself to be flawed!
_