From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of curtisdeltablues
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 7:39 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Bolinsky animates a cell | Video on
TED.com

 

  

--- In [email protected]
<mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , "Rick Archer" <rick@...> wrote:
>
> You don't see infinite intelligence at work here Curtis?:
> http://www.ted.com/talks/david_bolinsky_animates_a_cell.html
>

Great video, thanks Rick. I love TED talks. He makes a better case for
limited rather than infinite intelligence for me. Despite my enthusiasm for
the brilliance of his use of arts integrated learning, which is bound to
engage the student's brains more completely, I am also aware that this
technique is only as scientifically accurate as the analogous visual
language is used by the programmer. I was concerned with his use of the term
"irreducible" at the beginning of his talk because this is not a principle
in cellular biology that I know of. In fact it has been specifically refuted
by the knowledge we have of the evolution of cells. So he may have tipped
his hand too quickly and scientific accuracy should concern us moreso
because our mind's ability to detect the difference between
electromicroscopic images and these animations is absent. I kept thinking
that I was seeing into a cell, which is wonderfully compelling but wrong.

As a refutation of an idea of an infinite intelligence at work, I present
this guy's body. An obvious result of our brain's evolution where his
recently added rational thinking processes telling him to push away from the
desk and jog around the building he works in occasionally has been trumped
by the lower brain's attractions to high fat high sugar food in excess of
his activity. So instead of dropping down and doing say 10 pushups every
half hour, he has been compelled to download Twinkies and chips washed down
by gallons of Mountain Dew which tricks the brain into believing it is
nourishing like a ripe fruit would be if it was that sweet, hijacking his
amigdalla and hippocampus into compelling him through dopamine rewards,
beyond all reason, to continue a lifestyle that is killing him. And all of
this with the perverse kicker that he "knows better"!

Finite intelligence seems to cover the presentation for me. But that doesn't
mean I didn't love it just as much. If the underlying case being made is
that life is amazing and beyond our conscious comprehension, I am all in!

Happy Thanksgiving, the holiday which demonstrates more than any other that
our brains are a conflicting mess of impulses, higher and lower, unless of
course you are putting out tofu turkey, in which case moderation is much
easier since our primitive brains are not fooled by our conscious mind's
absurd assertion that it is just as good as a heritage breed turkey who
lived a life of fabulously nutritious feed until his last, inevitable, bad
day! The same inevitable day we will all face despite our wonderful
imaginations that our beliefs have altered the fact that we are much more
like turkeys than the gods of our literature and computer animations. Finite
not infinite in the end.

I don't know whether intelligence is "infinite" or not, but to me, the
universe does not look like it came about and is maintained through random
collisions of little billiard balls. It seems to me that every level of
creation, from the sub-atomic to the cosmic, animate and inanimate, is
governed by inconceivable vast intelligence. Can't think of a better word
for it, except perhaps "God", but that one carries a lot of baggage.

 

Reply via email to