Is there reason to believe that Musk is interested in a libertarian-utopian 
vision?      If specialness is a rare instance of unique, it seems reasonable 
to take what he's said in public at face value:  That by having humans on both 
planets, "humanity" can be saved from disaster.   That's like a Noah's Ark type 
argument that would suggest that people are more interchangeable.   There's no 
need to keep the copies.

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Steve Smith
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 2:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Future Generating Machines...

I don't know if we are converging in our acceptance/dismissal of "the myth of 
individuality" or not, but for the moment I am hallucinating convergence. 

I think the distinction we are arriving at *might* be that *every snowflake is 
unique* but that this is true in the very same way that *every stone is unique* 
and *every tree is unique*.   I think the point you are making is that that 
(intrinsic?!) uniqueness should not be conflated with specialness?  

The pinon closest to the bedroom in my house which I sat under and climbed in 
regularly for most of my elementary school years *was* quite special *to me*, 
up to and including feeling guilty/uncomfortable when I let my father talk me 
into trimming one of the lower branches to open up a larger canopy to sit 
under.   I could have "groomed the hell out of"
the tree, maybe even nailed up a platform and made a treehouse in it, but I was 
(for better or worse) hyper-aware of the details that made it unique.   My 
imagination/memory includes (I think) many of it's details including some of 
the larger roots humping up out of the ground and the places I needed to avoid 
gripping whilst climbing to avoid getting pitch on my hands.

I believe that Musk's delusion includes the ideation that by moving himself 
(and ~1M other individual peoples) to the surface of Mars (and/or distributed 
through the asteroid belt) will allow the "forcing culture" to change enough to 
match some libertarian-utopian vision he holds.  

I *think* when you debunk the specialness of the individual you are saying that 
the uniquenesses (specific construction of any given
snowflake) is mostly irrelevant in many/most contexts.  

My nephew is a budding materials scientist with a particular background in 
crystallography (his father is a minerologist) and he recently walked me 
through, in particular, some of the idiosyncrasies of quartz crystals and the 
myriad uses those specifics can yield various useful properties (in industry).  
 I went looking for the basis of Kurt Vonnegut's Ice-9 only to find that we are 
up to 18 distinct crystalline forms...  and of course (in the spirit of the 
individual/unique) those don't include the combinatorics implied by 
contaminants (or intentional dopants, etc.) which I assume are the basis of the 
plenitude (effective infinitude?) of snowflakes individuals.  

Individual human beings in the context of groups larger than Dunbar# pretty 
much get their meaning through their utility which reflects a combination of 
their affordances and their circumstances as much as the long-term 
relationships (2,...n-wise) they have with other individuals (not to mention 
domesticated/wild/familiar animals, edifices, plants, etc.)



 of On 3/29/21 3:11 PM, uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ wrote:
> Aha! Yeah, we probably do share it. But 2 points in space can be in the same 
> state *without* having a common driver. I.e. inter-subjectivity does not 
> imply communication. En garde! So you may share the same sentiment with an 
> alien consciousness near Sirius. And, although it sounds like I'm just 
> joking, I'm actually trying to say something serious, which is that 
> individuali[ty|sm] carries something like a "locality arrogance" ... the 
> impression that one blob in the pervading field(s) is somehow special or 
> unique, different from all the other blobs. Maybe our modern problem of 
> celebrity and institutional bloat is a function of a finite and fairly small 
> set of possible states of being? And now that we're up to 8B people, each of 
> us is guaranteed to share state with some N others? And anyone who thinks 
> they're somehow special or unique is simply ignorant of those who share their 
> state? If we experience a massive die off, those of us that survive will 
> again be true individuals?
>
> Or, even if the space of states is actual infinite, perhaps there's only a 
> small number of forcing cultures and we'd *have* to fly out to Sirius in 
> order to get out of those overwhelming flows.
>
> On 3/29/21 12:27 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
>> I think I *share* the sentiment you present here, though through 
>> other mechanisms (than psi) to dissolve the (illusory/delusional) 
>> boundaries between self/other or more aptly self/whole.   You are 
>> apparently more-better at (or at least more committed to your version 
>> of) this than I am which I envy/aspire.
>>
>> I suppose all I'm teasing at here is the apparent paradox of (for
>> example) the "two" of us, trying to serialize things about our "inner 
>> states" to "communicate" between two "individuals".    In the 
>> abstract, I accept the premise that what I consider to be an "individual" 
>> (e.g.
>> me, you, 400+ people reading or hitting delete on this message) is 
>> more a locus or cluster or relative concentration  in a high 
>> dimensional field.    Maybe the only answer is to ingest a quantum of 
>> the right mushroom...   or fast/dehydrate until I meet Joseph or 
>> Brigham across a campfire in an arroyo...  or meditate until my 
>> spirit leaves my body and apprehends the cosmos directly...
>>
>> We two "illusory individuals" *appear* (from the perspective of 
>> illusory
>> individuals) to be communicating (poorly or otherwise)....
>

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe 
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

Reply via email to