I find transhumanism and belief in this so called technological singularity fabricated by Ray Kurzweil to be nothing more than another way to cope for death just like religion and belief in the afterlife.
Think again, think it over carefully: all of what you say is valid using your own mind - brain configuration, only one in a trillion possible, but you cannot know or see the world through new minds. Let alone the “social” aspects, we are talking of things that are way past even society or the individual. The modified brain - mind may contain many people inside one, may contain an entire civilization, a giant sized brain the size of a skyscraper, or it may be one, or it may switch back and forth and navigate all the intermediate states.
We will design new minds, as in the Encyclopedia of Modified Minds, having thousands of pages, each page describing a completely different block diagram of possible minds - brains, or computers running programs designing new minds by the billions a second and connecting them.
Yes there will be some local logic here and there, there will be some randomness here and there, and there will be wild chemicals inside modified minds, there is no limit.
And each mind will live in a new universe, a new virtual reality. It is mind boggling to think of the possibilities, aside from the fact that you would have to solve the problem of designing the new mind and connecting it to your own to test it out, and how much do you want it to be connected ? How much do you want to let go of your own will power and consciousness ? At what point are you the new mind ? Do you want to remember your previous mind or do you want to create false memories of what your previous person was ? Aren’t all memories false ? Yes they are, all is a lie, all is contradiction.
Now, go on, show me that logic is still valid. Especially since I can always assign anything I want, lie to myself and others. Oh no, I can’t, I am in contradiction. All contradictions are welcome.
Check out:
brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22324
Good luck.
“And each mind will live in a new universe, a new virtual reality.”
Promises of heaven and such.
I Also do not follow Transhumanism but I do not think the afterlife is simply a concept people fabricated to alleviate the fear of death, I’ve heard that argument many times before and do not find it to be true in many cases. I do not plan on ever merging my body with technology, technology to me is meant to be a tool to be created and used I do not wish to become technology, to weaken myself by trying to “fix” myself.
Encyclopedia of Modified Minds
For example, at page 2,345 you will find this particular block diagram or description:
Emotion box is set up to produce sense organ stimulus (mix of visual and sonar), but the array of sense information can be memorized and added to other signals so as to create a large array of new sense organ types and information relationships: the difference between each new sense organ type (of which there are now a few thousand) is far greater than the difference between what we normally feel from sound, vision and touch.
10 dimensional touch systems, 20 dimensional sound systems, etc.
But the emotion box also interacts with the pseudo-logic box (it is all false logic, nothing consistent is even needed or necessary, it is one huge make believe system of symbols, equations, and circuit designs) and creates false thought processes, 40 dimensional will power machines interacting through sentimental circuits creating imagined pasts, etc.
We will be designing philosophical machines that will dissect, through infinite recursion machines, every philosophical problem to the vanishing point. We will construct existence from its elementary particles, we will have many completely new physical universes available having completely new laws of physics executing high speed evolution creating trillions of new life forms and new civilizations that will be creating their own new civilizations. We will have many brains in a vat, in a never ending array of other brains in a vat containing other brains in a vat, universes in a vat, gods in a vat, you name it.
Oh, but you are using logic to describe the modified minds, er no, the modified minds will use other entities to describe other entities, logic will have been overcome and dissected to the vanishing point. And lies and contradictions are accepted, actually they completely thrive on lies, contradictions because being as wrong and as false as possible is a virtue. They will not only be wrong, a lie and false, they will be as wrong, a lie and as false as possible, to the very extreme, just for the fun of it, just to show their power, their infinite power.
Now, go on, tell me that logic is not dead.
hint, hint… Logic is Not Dead, it just took a vacation…
Check out:
Another scientific justification to try out as many mind designs as possible, as many information systems experiments in terms of modified minds as possible since only Information Relationships exist. So we can lie and demolish logic and invent new universes with new laws of physics. We can invent all and anything, since true and false no longer hold.
How Logic Dies
Take a universe having 3 items, A, B and C. Now the existence of A in a point of space and time ( but even independently of how the universe is made, it can have no dimensions or any other structure, not necessarily like ours with space and time) means that at that point B and C are turned off, don’t exist, are not present, you can say (not following any real logic here, just for description purposes):
A = (not B) and (not C)
If you have B in that point then
B = (not A) and (not C)
Now, in order for there to be a contradiction in that universe, you would have to have a new entity X representing a contradictory item such as being both B and C at the same point (same point in space and time):
X = (not A)
and you could have another Z representing all three items existing at the same point A, B and C.
Z = A and B and C
Now, play around with the combinations, and extrapolate to a universe with millions of particles, groupings, delimitations, parts or parts of other parts, etc. and extrapolate to the items A or B, etc. being events, entire narratives, or just items, people, civilizations, histories, planets, or just short stories, or anything imaginable, this mechanism makes it such that a contradictory universe can exist.
After all, I read on these forums that to consider anything, you must consider everything that that anything is not. So, this is how logic dies. Considering items made up of more than one distinct thing, like an item being a few holes in a sphere containing all items, when normally any item is just one hole in the sphere of all items.
But to live and have the experience of a contradictory universe, you must manipulate your mind - brain and neural circuits, they must be designed to perceive such a world.
But you say, you used logic to get to a non logical universe, and I say, who cares, you can use any tool you want to get to any result you want, there is no metaphysical necessity to follow any particular path or interactions or tools to reach any conclusion.
By the way, I just like to make things up, I like writing cool sounding blocks of text, I could care less if it is all wrong and false, that is the job of real scientists and engineers to discover, and there are many of those today anyways.
Real philosophy just likes to play, just forces anything it wants, real philosophy cannot be judged, it just is. A real philosopher has no necessity to be right, actually a real philosopher tries to be as wrong as possible.
Is that a “true” statement?
To deduce whether logic is dead, at least things must occur;
- Define “logic”
- Use logic to make your case.
Logic, reason and rationality are only dead to those that are illogical, unreasonable, and irrational.
I really like this.
You want some real philosophy, I am giving it to you, enjoy.
Logic is Dead:
-
Because I say so. Am I wrong ? Good, I could care less. I can’t touch or see wrong, where is wrong ? What is wrong, is it a rock, can I interact with it ? Or I care so much that I am wrong, it is killing me. Now what ? I may just keep on being wrong forever, trying to solve the same unsolvable problems forever and never solving them (man constantly does just that, solves the same problems he knows how to solve over and over again, nay, even the molecules of his cells, and the entire body, keeps on processing the chemicals and vital functions in the “correct way”, solving the same problems correctly over and over again until it can’t, just like we try to solve the same unsolvable problems over and over again and also solvable problems over and over again, a loop, an obsessive loop). Or I may assign them as solved. Maybe I like being wrong. How’s that ? Maybe we should search how wrong we can get, the limits of falsity and wrongness. Granted, much may imply pain, but then we are only a 1 transistor circuit, just navigating pain/pleasure.
-
Who says I am wrong ? Another mind, brain. Oh, I see, or is it the majority of minds and brains ? But still, the tree doesn’t say I am wrong. Nor does that electron in that corner on the wall, electron number 4566756788, yep, that one there, he doesn’t think I am wrong. Now what ? And aren’t all these minds - brains just quirks, just whims, idiosyncratic information processing machines that natural evolution programmed through a completely random - chaotic process over millions of years ? So what makes those brains - minds in any way a reference system, a fundamental reference of truth ?
-
And what if what I mean by logic and dead have some kind of meaning that no one else knows or can understand ? prove it to me. I can always say, “you don’t understand”: now what ?
Go on, tell me Logic is Not Dead, Tell me how wrong I am, I need to be wrong, I like being wrong. Now what ?
That lends to the “Philosophy Is Dead” thread.
I just hope it isn’t enlightening to anyone. If it is, then why would it not be obvious from the get go.
Criticism accepted. Actually, in most forums I always encounter mostly criticism, conflicts, very seldom does anyone have anything constructive or interesting to add to the discussions. It is as if the language itself, the mental environment is always either this or that, no linearity, the communication is always a kind of subtle conflict, we are programmed to conflict. No serialization of work, no accumulation of results.
On modifed minds, even if you don’t believe that they can be programmed and changed, just from the outset, as humans are already configured, we are an infinitely programmable machine, any kind of behavior, culture, interaction amongst humans can be programmed, just look at all past civilizations and ways of doing things. We can associate any sequence of symbols to any emotions, feelings, behaviors, to any possible transaction between people, or objects, etc. We barely scratched the surface of how we can be programmed just as we are, by just changing the language structure, the interactions, the rules of engagement, thought patterns, etc.
scienceforums.net/topic/6192 … ely-exists
"A contradictory item is always true no matter what because even if it is false it is true and vice versa. It is a win win situation where you can amply assign anything, you can do all you want, everything you invent is true. In others words YOU BECOME YOUR OWN BOSS.
These universes are within a larger space that does not have any requirements to respect, niether mathematical or existence or true or false or anything at all. Hence this superspace contains all possible things imaginable. But this superspace is also contained within our universe because MATTER IS INFINITE AND THIS UNIVERSE CONTAINS ALL UNIVERSES POSSIBLE AND IMPOSSIBLE WITHIN ITSELF AND ALL THE UNIVERSES THAT ARE NOT EVEN CONTAINED WITHIN ITSELF."
"This thread is proposing the infinite-infinite universe where all conceivable possibilities exist within our infinite universe. This theory completely allows any contradiction within it’s terms because that would be just another possibility (or combination) so a red planet exists and doesn’t exist at the same time. Anyways the theory is COMPLETELY CONTRADICTORY and makes no attempt as to limit the contradictions. IF every conceivable idea, concept, matter, universe, planet etc. exists then there is no need for any explanations of anything since everything is just a given combination from the infinite amount of combinations. You need to explain something if there is only one possible path within a multitude, but in the infinite-infinite universe all the paths are simultaneously present including no paths and only a few (there goes the contradicton which is acceptable). This is somewhat an aesthetical view of the universe. "
“The theory is true and demonstrated because it accepts all contradictions within it, even the fact that it is false. It is at this point that we can hardly behold the infinite-infinite universe because it is the only thing that is definitely true! Contradictory item is the only one that is true. OF course all logical discorse falls apart, and you can say nothing or everything, but it is like the zero. The “FULL SET” wherever it is.”
“I can also say that the theory is false because “I SAY SO” and therefore overide the “FULL SET”; such is the extension of this set…but the set doesn’t exits ETC. ETC…”
“This theory has been proved true. Therefore this is the ultimate grand unified theory of physics. This theory is true even if it is false because within the infinite-infinite universe all contradictions reign.”
“A contradictory item (or concept, or object ) is the only one that exists in the universe because it can deceive all logic and reasoning and as such does not depend on any reasoning to exist.”
"If contradictory item A is such that A=3 and also A=17, and A exists and A also does not exist, then A is the most sure thing to exist because it can always escape any logic regarding its existence. Its existence does not depend on any logic any rule or any constraint, not even the one of being true or false. It is hard to reason with this item because all reasoning breaks down, but this proves that it is the most sure thing possible, since nothing can contradict it, as it actually accepts and thrives on contradiction. "
"An even stranger item would be a partially contradiciting item. Say A=13 and A=17 but A not equal to 12. This would be a contradictory item that has some exceptions. A is also a tree and the moon but not the letter “W”. "
Now, go on, criticize these masterpieces…
I win. I always win, I will always win no matter what, why am I so good at winning ?
How I like to win, I always win. And all of you who believe that Logic is not Dead lose.
Oh, I lost, how I like to lose. I like it either way, win or lose, I win…
Criticism can (and should) be constructive and interesting.
That is also due to the architecture of forums. They disinspire point by point settlements toward progress and inspire irresponsible negativity toward conflict and chaos.
Eistein once said: " the important thing is to never stop questioning." Although I disagree with your version of logic which i refer to as thought process I respect your position. I believe it true I cannot prove you wrong under your system of definitions.
Unfortunately, you are going to keep getting conflict any person that thinks must hold a position or truth otherwise he wont be able to think. If you attack their belief, truth, they will respond with equal force. Every belief hold by any human being is emotionally driven, it is there for a reason, objective discusiion without moderation will always result in emotional remarks, (chaos).
People will never change their concept of truth unless it is convinient to do so, remember that and you will become a good politician.