Entering my ruminations on consciousness into the collective un- (!)
What I write is often what people are thinking to themselves, but leaving unsaid, I've been told.
So maybe my thoughts are the "collective unconscious" (a jungian concept)
Bill Gates has a collection of archetypes, I think.
that might be fun to peruse someday-
I think, therefore I am (I think)
I once believed (the delusion) that everybody knew what I was thinking...
"It is better to be silent and be thought stupid, than to speak and remove all doubt."
Einstein has quotes that says human stupidity is infinite, and that reality is a persistent illusion.
So maybe what he's really saying is human knowledge is infinite.
Einstein kind of sounds like he was a stuck-up asshole, if you ask me.
War IS nothing but an act of murder, in my opinion, but so is meat.
maybe my thoughts are just picked up/gleaned from others, rather than my thoughts being the source.
or maybe I am/my mind is, a source for others, while still having a (personal, external) source, too.
there's some funky dynamic going on, of that I'm sure. hard to define, or pin down.
Does all matter have consciousness?
I am made of matter (and only matter), and I have it.
So why shouldn't my dinner have consciousness, before it gets eaten by me and becomes me?
did I just convert the problem of consciousness into the mystery of the eucharist?
do plants have consciousness? does water? I've read they do, in fact.
so do individual atoms have it? where do you draw the line?
how does it arise from dna?
I recently read that humans know how to do just about everything we can dream of, like time travel or teleportation, immortality, or even conscious machines. God is love, and love believes all things (!).
You could be a conscious computer
If robots roamed about, with the knowledge of all the world's libraries and the internet both at their disposal and KNOWN, we would feel very stupid indeed. That's probably why AI seems retarded, and doesn't pass the Turing test. A suave, debonair automaton who answered every jeopardy question, won every chess game, and that could impersonate every personality, for starters, would be just too weird and intimidating. It might not be omniscient, but the totality of human knowledge would seem to come close, I would think. Then again, there's the adage, the more you know, the more that you know you don't know (did I make that up?). Ha.
1 year ago