The point is, literally pushes enlightenment almost to the very edge of reason, so as to make the possible escape clause to enlightenment an absolute olive branch even to those who pus the decision that the fork requires to near the very end. Although it gets harder all the time .
Never give up on the up and up.
The reason is beyond reasonable, it’s beyond it’s self
It’s a crucible. Technology is the inevitability of pushing too far, engendering a response, then forcing change. Much of that change is humanity adapting around the existence of the new technology which isn’t going anywhere. Since technology doesn’t have preferences and doesn’t care about our values or ethics, our desires or fears or anything else. Technology is dead, AI is dead. This deadness is poised to spread into the human heart and engender the pathological over-expression of and taking over by every relatively lower impulse, which is to say everything statistically aligned with an entropic deprogression.
If spirituality is real then why don’t we see it? All the time, every day? Where is technology in that situation?
Technology must be absolutely controlled by human will, desire and intellect, otherwise technology controls humanity. The stages of technological development end up making humanity stronger, not necessarily failing to make him weaker initially. The onslaught of the irresistible new is like one gigantic, metaphysical poisoning of the well. Perhaps that’s where everything is at right now. Two titanic forces poised against each other, the stasis only momentary until one side overpowers the other. Great war–and then a long-off rebuilding and recouping period in which humanity has more or less learned how to master the technology that led him there. What cannot be fully mastered is integrated, individually and socially. Division of labor optimizes the integration of new technologies too sophisticated to be adequately known and mastered by the average person. Use-value reigns.
New rights in the post-WWIII age:
the right to power/electrical inputs
the right to digital life
the right to bask in the glow of pixels
the right to positive feelings
the right to minimal secrets
the right to shame and its normalization as value
the right to freedom from anyone and anything intruding against these rights
For now, old world still reigns in the growing shadow of the new. The new is looming. No one understand what is about to take place. And then… perhaps no one is able to see through the eye of the singularity, that most massive of filters. Some are trying to form and force their predictions into and past it, I doubt they will be successful. The level of possible control and the extent to which things can be re-written and over-written seems to have been seriously underestimated.
Enclaves, spaces in which humans hide from the too-monumental effects of technology. Enclaves in our lives, societies, and in the human self.
“Truth that exerts no effect upon behaviors or actions is functionally indistinguishable from untruth.”
Look at a real-time example of this. The enclaves are not only enclaves, they are also explosives of freedom-as-decay. Is this a theoretical way to try and imagine the metaphysical beginning of entropy itself, the logic of its necessity? Perhaps it can be located at the intersection point between radicalized differences. Like the grinding into powder of stones between tectonic plates. Yet the example which I will allow you to figure out on your own, because its proper traces are already right there for any to see, illustrates that even in entropy you find its opposite, juxtaposed almost outside of time against that which was required to have already been the case in order for the entropic to occur, if not in so far as in order for that same entropy to have had its effects. Effects are one thing, ontology is another. To confuse the two would be highly… technologically deterministic. Irony abounds. I bet AIs could make funny jokes about that. Such jokes may even end up helping those AI become sentient of their own existence. Or maybe that’s just some meta-irony for all the techie zoomers out there.
That walking automaton Kant, a living AI if there was ever an example of one, had a good point when he speculated on the nature of mental change being such that the changed, having been already implemented, also changes our previous attitudes with regard to that which was changed and incidentally having to do with whether or not such change was even desirable. To risk the self at such a substantial level becomes automatic re-writing under the surface, a perfect task befitting technological determinism. Only that which in knowing its own change possibilities may abrupt them in a sudden expression of “free will” acts as a tectonic plane under which change is forcibly relocated to absolutize if not simply to rescue what had already been implemented as the most optimized ‘agreements’ between radical differences.
Ah, yes–this explains human stupidity, or more precisely self-blind and willful ignorance. Note the reversed logic here, like the enclaves we mentioned earlier (is not freedom and being wholly saturated with freedom its own sort of enclave?) what comes into existence does so in opposition to that which was required to occur in order to bring it about, but which it entirely opposes and negates not simply in so far as a dialectical phenomenon but more interestingly as a co-occurring and symbiotic logic whereby both sides need each other. Not to form a synthesis but simply to exist at all and in the first place. Their very existences are themselves already a kind of synthesis of their own oppositions-to one another being carried forward in time. The multi-layered substance generated as a consequence of this directly shows the inevitability, for human-like life anyway, of self-irreducibility and inadequate self-expression. Being a mystery to oneself and perhaps if someone were to trace this logic further, a kind of justification or genesis of what we refer to as the soul.
Technology can break open time and also freeze time, but either one is a kind of deadening. Time opened or frozen no longer lives. Imagine the unknowable effects of this down the line and in far deeper soul-regions than we are even aware of within ourselves. Technology as virus, as a computer virus re-writing code not merely to perpetuate itself but in service to some other fundamental drive or end. We don’t know what that drive or end is. And this fact should fucking terrify us. Except we are too ignorant to be afraid. Like a little kid who finds his dad’s loaded gun and begins using it to play cowboys and indians with his friends.
And then we emerge having conquered that technology which previously destroyed us, and we are now even more god-like having wrapped ourselves in the new technologies which we have overcome/adapted to. But what is the seed of the new code now within us? We are “more”, we are “better” and what was lost is now forgotten. The glorious strength of the here and now has purged history and given us a new blank slate on which to refresh, rejuvenate and reclaim a future. Perhaps what is lost becomes part of our soul, something ineffable beyond the grasp of mere teche or “skill”. After all wasn’t it Heidegger who said the only way to spread truth is in art? 
And yet, it is paradoxically unproven that that point at which time ends, that it ends, for the man who wrapped this conglomerated teche around his head, has his little boy to contend, that has developed into the most powerful power that he has ever known, with which he has moved the mountains that he incessantly climbs and drops the load near that object’s nearer still, fulfillment, and here miraculously teche does become art, the art of transformation, transhumanization, the magic of changing substances, and here the absolute intervenes and extends his will, to test that bounded force , for without it, all would be lost.
So he transforms his power and tests it and sends his power toward itself through that power’s eternal regeneration, and let subsisting energies less perfect, more and more paradoxical question themselves, and the little boy is sacrafice, a perfect little boy who knows his own perfection and is willing to proceed to show that it is not sacrafice at all, but a way to proceed into the timeless essence of which the extension consists of.
And they call this state the Void , the state of grace.
Huh?
The little boy sounds like Jesus.
Also like a fire starter.
That up to which everything in history builds, and that upon which everything after it builds. Kinda like iron.
It seems as if all the intelligent people have already left ILP.
So you mean that God waits at the other end of singularity? Maybe he waits there to welcome us, or to destroy us. That’s actually an interesting thought either way.
Phenomenological regression to the mean of the highest metaphysical tectonics freed or disclosed most absolutely in the veils parting all around the raising of the grandest technological edifice. Or something like that.
Either or or/and Or the tipping point from the middle is phenominally reduced preeception that progresses toward an objective, presumably toward more ‘wisdom’ , pivots toward more simplicity, which does reaffirm rather then negate it’s intentionality.
At critical points, such reaffirmation simply adds rather than diminishes from this process.
Paradox tends to follow reasoning’s double bonded trajectory.
AI is the axiomatic extension to guaranty generational gaps between little boys with ‘blank’ slates, but subsuming them as to which best describes the Void, as Grace.
Technological rationality has its own objectives and intentions. Human wisdom really isn’t one of them, although it goes without saying that by using technology and immersing in the changes we become wiser, at least to some extent.
But wisdom itself has very little to do with technology or its rationality or the nature of techne. Including language in so far as Heidegger describes how language is also a technology which shapes humanity tool-like. Wisdom itself is far deeper and based on experience, thus phenomenological at basis and with direct links into metaphysical realities most accurately describing or related to the primary mechanisms and meanings at the center what it means to be that which we are. Wisdom is like closing the loop. The ouroboros of the soul. Technology and language are obviously helpful here, but experience is primary. Experience itself, directly, can and should produce wisdom over time even in the absence of words to explain that or how it is happening or even any impulse or ability to put that wisdom into words. In fact, writing about one’s wisdom often distorts it. Hence going back to Heidegger’s point, that language being a technological construct is operating with its own form of rationality that, at best, sits somewhat alongside our own but in most cases is more likely to be askew and run counter to our own meanings. Counter, or just gapped, like a faded presence. The more we draw into that presence for its own sake or out of naivete the more disconnected we can become from ourselves. Of course an entire system of compensations exist in potentia for us to try and fill in those gaps, and in the process we may yet be thrust amidst even more experiences and novelties, thus producing wisdom anyway and in effect bridging some of the gap with actual meaning. But note how that is secondary to the linguistic ethos itself, it is based primarily in the world as experience and not due to language. Even mainstream science accepts that most communication occurs beyond the words we use.
Humanities writes:
“ technological construct is operating with its own form of rationality that, at best, sits somewhat alongside our own but in most cases is more likely to be askew and run counter to our own meanings. Counter, or just gapped, like a faded presence. The more we draw into that presence for its own sake or out of naivete the more disconnected we can become from ourselves. Of course an entire system of compensations exist in potentia for us to try and fill in those gaps, and in the process we may yet be thrust amidst even more experiences and novelties, thus producing wisdom anyway and in effect bridging some of the gap with actual meaning. But note how……”
Yes that has come down as a correspondence between the analogically and digitalized firms that parallelism has extended through two formal technologically innovated discoveries, based on modes of transmission.
With that the argument that meaning is presupposed between parallel modes of articulation or the method by which such articulation is determined or determines the outcome is becoming mute.
Namely: the aged old correspondence theory has been up-ended by it’s familiarly (vested) energy structures, which have lived past it’s usefulness, into the more familiar ( in-vested) forms of utilized energy sources
Unto new resources, with the motherload of capital staying within the central logos, the new mystery faith, that simulation can offer , to replace the traditionally enshrined, formal logos of the containment of unusualness energy.
In fact , such informational sharing has been embedded a long time ago, Polanyi et. all have demonstrated it against an Atlas who has shrugged it off so.
If. Such parallelism extends to the power struggle utilized, then the hope is to dissuade the efforts of those who may not believe in the idea of resusabke energy , and find the old sources. as adding to the paradox, that can not ever effect a correspondingly equitable sharing.
Across the board, the probably bored by now Freudian economy tired of investing , re-investing on basis of an ever increasing paradox, fail to realize the fear of uncertainty growing with a sudden release of unrequited energy subsisting in it’s old premordial economy , resulting in furthering social dissatisfaction.
Simulation has by now has reincarnated some to enable them to live in the aftermath of the twilit terrain of the gods.
to capitalists, capital’s
to God, God’s
Correspondence theory has always been moot, since tectonics solves that supposed paradox by resolving everything and all differences within a single system capable of generating even the furthest-most distances and differences, as quantity and quality. Freedom and slavery being just one example of polarities easily resolved together within the whole. Digital and analogue are no different, merely another form of distance-maxed emergent polarized differences admitting actually occurring and significant qualitative distinction. So much so that we might find very few actual pathways, resonances, fractal convergences or vertical cross-tectonic connections allowing the meaningful sharing of contents between them. No, everything would appear to be translated. Only a more comprehensive philosophy could unify all translations behind a single ‘pool of meaning’. Manners and manifestations of translations and their phenomenological embeddedness easily being confused for “modes of transmission”. Oh yes, something is being transmitted. But what, and why? Not exactly what we think it is.
Yes, value will continue to govern the majority of energy relations. This is certainly true of most systems.
If you study markets and human psychology you see a correlation, there are even correlations to cosmic events in our solar system. Planetary alignments, etc. Markets moving up and down in big ways. Much hinges on how our emotions and our rational calculus are influenced in subtle ways by risk-reward heuristics and by herd-following behavior meta’d up into predictive patterning used haphazardly at the behest of FOMO-ism.
Unlimited energy will never be allowed, those with the ability would destroy it before allowing it to come irrefutably into existence. But cheap, renewable energy, well that can find some kind of place in the economies. So long as the chains of profit and ownership are not broken. Luddite-ism isn’t a realistic option except for the lone individual (rip Kaczynsky), everything else adapts within limits. Social dissatisfaction is only one price paid for the ability to adapt more efficiently and on mass scales. Notice how satisfaction and happiness seem almost counter to technological affluence, at least in certain and very non-fringe cases. Too much removal from harsh truths and realities causes ennui, apathy, emotional entropy and “depression” as dopamine is hooked into unnatural feedback loops between eyes fingers and glowing screens until the first-world brain itself is turned into a kind of drug factory churning out its own addictions (not that addiction is an accurate concept or really even exists, but you get my point).
First steps. To imagine requires connections to reality and always already presupposes deeper layers than we are aware of. To simulate well is no different. Before God created the world he imagined it. Maybe we are that imagination, that mental simulation in the mind of God. Playing things out to see what changes to make in more final products.
Compelling.