My thoughts didn't include "junk DNA", my thinking on such terms are
mixed in that some genes may not be useful or represent just another
failure point, but also that the supposed junk in one set of
circumstances may prove quite beneficial in others like a backup, an
alternate development chain or complex interdependencies we haven't
observed yet. You may have a connection in mind I haven't gleaned.
Developing the market sounds similar but I am trying to root out an
aspect of this that doesn't require jumping to a premature conclusion,
such as in 'intelligent design', materialism, rigid ontologies or
realism. Thanks for helping me explore here gabby, lets hope some form
emerges in expression. :)
On 3/21/2013 3:57 AM, gabbydott wrote:
Now that sounds more like you. :)
What you are describing or asking I now understand/interpret/hear in
terms of what I know about what they are trying to find out about
"junk DNA". Its purpose/function/added value. As for what you describe
as another way, I know/experience/see this in what the companies
describe as "developing the market". We are still on topic, aren't we?
2013/3/21 James <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
I have a feeling you are being charitable with me gabby (cringe).
What you say makes sense, and should add that the intent I refer
to is in excess of that needed for mere gene survival fitness. In
that sense I consider the adaptations as simulations and the
excess as breaking the barriers of meta-simulation, or in another
way, not just running within time but operating on it by taking
advantage of the rules and finding ways to bend them. Now it is my
turn to ask, does that make sense [to anyone]?
On 3/20/2013 3:01 AM, gabbydott wrote:
I don't know if this is good or bad, but i hear that you
haven't just heard about mirror neurons, that this is a
relatively consciously made up construct, a construct with
intent or purpose. Also it sounds strange when you say that
this neurological mechanism is strange (to you). That's where
my "parallel mirror neurons" come into play, i compare what
you say with what i have heard you saying before and add the
info as well as my judgement on what you say to my internal
"Virtualization" of you. The leap is more of a constant
exercise of differentiating between you and me while operating
on the virtualization of each participant, so to speak. Does
that somehow make sense to you?
Of course, I could go back to the group website and search for
the real data on what you have been saying on neurological
mechanisms. But this would be a completely new project. I'd
have to go back and construct a new image with my knowledge of
now.
But since you are still alive and still communicating, I find
it much easier and more purposeful to keep on listening to
what you say, to respond to it, and to rely on you saying, if
you disagree. Not a good position for me to be in, more of a
survival strategy. Now that's worth a leap into rethinking
mode. ;)
2013/3/20 James <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>>
My response was mostly a parallel narrative, my thinking on a
personal level is when does a system of components
transcend the
boudaries of automata and begin to engage in the operations of
intent. Where does gene fitness adaptation break loose into
something perceiving, interacting, understanding and
mastering? I
have heard that our ability to reflect and interact on an
intimate
level arises from a strange neurological mechanism called
mirror
neurons. If this is something like the virtualization
technologies
we have been building in technology then with a bit more
scale and
pondering our science may make the leap logarithmically.
On 3/18/2013 8:15 PM, James wrote:
I see this sometimes too Andrew, and we learn how our
internal
systems and culture drive and shape us, so we can
create. We
model from the simplest sensory stimuli on to
reflections on
the nature of our existence and what could be in a
simultaneous simulation of reality. Our world can be
full of
intent, or I should say we experience it thus due to our
capacity arising from our nature and drawing parables
in the
mist. It makes me wonder how many levels of abstraction,
simulation and foresight are necessary to represent
the human
element. That minds like ours are derived from nature is
astonishing and awe inspiring, that we reach so far
and yet
innocence is so fragile, the experience of awareness
is far
from today's science I think. Our synthetic
counterparts or
robots will have to wait.
On 3/13/2013 5:35 AM, andrew vecsey wrote:
Perhaps we are born into a world filled with negative
aspects rather than positive aspects so as to give
us a
direction. We are born small so that we can grow.
We are
born ignorant so that we could know. We are born with
negative aspects so that we could acquire positive
ones.
On Monday, January 28, 2013 12:11:39 PM UTC+1, andrew
vecsey wrote:
Why do so many of us remember negative
feelings easier
than
positive ones. Pain over pleasure. Bad news
over good
news. Why
does "bad" overshadow "good", immorality over
morality, despair
over hope, pessimism over optimism. Why does hate
appear to be
more powerful than love? Why is greed louder than
generosity. Why
is destruction of war so much faster than the
building
power of
peace. Why can one little lie destroy a
lifetime of
trust. Why are
lies more influential than truth. It all seems
so one
sided. Why
is that?
--
---
You received this message because you are
subscribed to
the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
emails
from it, send an email to
[email protected]
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]>
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]>>.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--- You received this message because you are subscribed
to the
Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it,
send an email to [email protected]
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]>
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]>>.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
it, send an email to [email protected]
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
--- You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected]
<mailto:minds-eye%[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
