It is essential that they are both at one with the world of the collective mind - move smoothly through everyday society - yet also permanently tense, angsty, unfulfilled, etc, because they are also necessarily standing apart from that everyday society as its critic and frustrated “other”. — apokrisis
Perhaps you can also comment on the self in relation to the community, as something like the way a body is held responsible. — plaque flag
Political dissent once dealt with real world issues, like the disequilibrium between labour and capital. But again citing Fukuyama, the political focus has shifted to the distractions of identity politics. — apokrisis
So the Bayesian mechanics approach of Karl Friston says all organisms are prediction machines - embodiments of Robert Rosen’s modelling relation - that work to reduce their levels of surprisal. In less jargon, we learn to predict reality in such routine fashion that we can control its flow without ever being surprised. — apokrisis
Have you looked into Moloch as a game theory metaphor ? — plaque flag
Moloch! Moloch! Robot apartments! invisible suburbs! skeleton treasuries! blind capitals! demonic industries! spectral nations! invincible madhouses! granite cocks! monstrous bombs!
We are machine elves dropped like a match on fossil fuels, maximizing throughput ? I'd like to know more about dissipative structures. — plaque flag
How might you account for technological progress ? Or the enlightenment goal of increasing autonomy ? In other words, how does timebinding fit in here ? — plaque flag
We became animals that uniquely consumed wood – all this unwanted savannah trees just poking out of the ground – and gained in terms of fat and protein. — apokrisis
Intelligence in the form of semiotic innovation as well as simple neurosemiotic capacity both needs feeding, and is justified by being able to consume more. The Second Law says if it is possible for organisms to degrade locked up negentropy – do better than the unorganised world was doing – then such organisms must evolve. — apokrisis
Ginsberg wails about Moloch. But the Beats celebrated the image of cool Neal Cassidy – driving the endless American highway in a big-ass car. Entropification personified. The flow experience of mindlessly riding a surging wave of gasoline and asphalt.
Once you learn to love a V8, what hope is there that you will lobby for hair-shirt Green energy policies? Burning gas has become a defining identity issue. — apokrisis
I would call it amusing PoMo tosh — apokrisis
PoMo style deconstruction, employing the usual suspects of Marx and Freud. — apokrisis
Political dissent once dealt with real world issues, like the disequilibrium between labour and capital. But again citing Fukuyama, the political focus has shifted to the distractions of identity politics. — apokrisis
Fossil fuel forced us to move up to a world valued in dollars. Most folk want to move it back to a world valued in dignity, respect. Or even just likes. Even just attention. — apokrisis
This criticism of the Left is very much in line with Zizek’s.
Maybe it’s because postmodernism is his philosophical milieu that he comes across as postmodernist. — Jamal
Zizek is famously critical of postmodernism, — Jamal
Zizek agrees with the argumentative technique of Immanuel Kant's transcendendental idealism. For example, he believes that the subject only emerges once a Rational Being imposes ideal forms onto the objects of bare perception. Drawing on psychoanalysis, he understands the imposition of these forms as the subject unconsciously repeating the scene of a traumatic encounter. However, at the outset, this is a "primordial repression" of an encounter that is imputed to be traumatic only in hindsight. The subject that emerges in this way has to be further "hystericized" before it can become the subject engaged in emancipatory struggle. — absoluteaspiration
↪apokrisis
the whole idea of “100% reduction to material cause” is the reductionist delusion.
— apokrisis
But if something is not 100% reducible to the fundamental reality, it is strongly emergent. Later, it seems to me you're denying strong emergence as well. I don't understand. — Eugen
But if something is not 100% reducible to the fundamental reality, that's strong emergence. — Eugen
- Agree. In strong emergence, that is exactly what happens.Yep. That is how the reductionist ends up with substance dualism. The mind just pops out as a whole new class of property with its own causal story. — apokrisis
- So there is an ultimate fundamental reality from which everything else emerges. The difference is that this reality is not ''material", palpable but some kind of platonic mathematical/logical world. And from that world emerges the rest.The very thing of “stuff” is emergent from the deeper “thing” of a logical vagueness, a Peircean Firstness, an Anaximanderian Apeiron. — apokrisis
Any thoughts on how AI might affect our existential or technological or thermodynamic situation ? I think a storm is coming, beautiful and terrible. — plaque flag
Would this be easy to see ? I can imagine some analogue of evolution. We clone (with modification) the ones we like as if they were dogs or sweet sweet corn. Maybe DNA and source code will use us as moist robot labor.They can’t be “conscious” or even intelligent in any autonomous sense until they are in a modelling relation upon which their moment to moment existence relies. — apokrisis
Like any technology, these systems exist as extensions of our dissipative interests. They amplify us rather than replace us. — apokrisis
So a sense of self emerges from the process of becoming the still centre of a world in smooth predictable motion. You and your target are one. Two halves of the psychological equation. The wider world is likewise reduced to a continuous flow. The brain is modelling reality in a cleanly divided fashion which is not a model of the world, but a model of us in the world as the world’s still and purposeful centre, with the world then passing by in a smooth and predictable manner. — apokrisis
Maybe DNA and source code will use us as moist robot labor. — plaque flag
Can we segue back to Zizek by noting AI are brains minus the need for Lacanian psychoanalysis and therein lies the relevance of such gobbledeygook? The symbolic escaped its hairy cell and fully alive in blissful self-ignorance? — Baden
AI doesn’t need to represent the real world by design. It is only a machine and not an intelligent dissipative structure as we supply both the bottom up metabolic resources and the top down telos. We build the data farms and power grids. — apokrisis
The words have visceral meaning for us. — apokrisis
The agony of being bounced about in the realm of your own thoughts, chasing the core of being that thus becomes precisely the mysterious absence, etc. — apokrisis
It is all a hollow charade if you are talking about actual consciousness. — apokrisis
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.