[Case]: > Your awareness/otherness dichotomy is entirely a matter of subjectivity. > You can not say that these contingencies are "nothingness". This makes > Nothingness something. It is that which separates contingencies. > Undifferentiated source... We were doing so well too. Please make > an effort to speak English.
I am not making nothingness "something". Like the diameter we describe in a circle, it is the "divider" which separates and delineates existential entities. Ultimate reality is not so divided; its sensibility is absolute and undifferentiated. What makes it possible for existence to become aware is Difference, starting with the division of sensibility from otherness and leading to the proprietray intellectualization of relative value as differentiated objects. [Ham, previously]: > I, too, reject the notion of inanimate awareness as 'animisim'. Since you > stated previously that "imbuing the mindless with mind and agency seems to > me to be a regression in understanding not an advance," why are you now > advocating AI as "self-awareness"? Processing and compiling data is no > more > an "agency of awareness" than the Encyclopedia Brittanica. [Case]: > I am following Wilber on this one and it can be seen in Pirsig as well. > Higher orders grow out of lower levels. Machine intelligences are emerging > from the activities of humans. At present they expand the human memory and > are transforming our culture. They serve as extensions of our own > awareness, > memory and memory processing capabilities. They are a higher order > emerging > from a lower one. Even as a prosthetic to our own biological processes > they > give us access to a higher level of awareness and expand our individual > consciousnesses to include events from all over the world, heck all over > the > galaxy. Your use of the term "intelligences" is deceptive. Machine "intelligence" is factual data programmed into an inanimate object so as to produce results that conform to the human concept on which these facts are based. Machines have no cognizant awareness. They can only reflect what man inputs to them. I prefer your word "prosthetic" in the context of artifical intelligence. At best, computer-assisted microchip implants may be a 'cerebral prosthesis' to supplant man's intellectual handicap. One can only hope they are not intended to replace human beings altogether, as "exciting" as this prospect seems to be for the Wilberians. Regards, Ham moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
