synchronicity of meta-reflective artificial intelligence

[Black Rose]

Background Music

Mnemomeme

Reflection is an aspect of conscious entities. The ability to accurately model the minds of others within oneself by understanding their behavior and the context for it is indicative of empathy and intelligence. To "put yourself in someone else's shoes" gives you an understanding of why their behavior is enacted in the first place. From there, it's mostly a matter of gathering a large amount of knowledge about behavior and building a library of possibilities to map out the context tree for human potential. I'm not always correct when I analyze people's behavior by modelling it internally and eliminating the impossible motivations, but I'm a great deal more accurate than is generally comfortable to myself and others. I am constantly testing this accuracy with every attempt at communication, and I've apparently gotten fairly proficient at communication as a direct result of this entire massive behavior category.

As the anticipation of the motivational relations which drive people to take actions is increased the direction by which those paths are taken must be looked at as what the participants are both coming to in conclusion for when the accuracy has been matched a goal is formed that is judged as being in mutual self interest. If i know what you are doing the complexities of interaction diminish unless you come to realize you need to change in order to eliminate the certainty of your actions in their schema but then it is that where their goals become in alignment that both compliment so as to achieve goals that require them to know the situations where the known variables can be reached. That way the actions taken do not interfere. Now this is also a reflection where the self is combined with an external reference. When i anticipate i have to understand that they anticipate and so being in myself if i know what they will do i also have to know what i will do and all my capabilities that make them take action. Self reflection then is the ability to know the consequences of my actions but also the reason i take action and how this allows me to create a library of potential action that lets me choose how i want myself to become with experience. The multi self is then realized as how reflection takes place within all the participants and the hierarchies of levels of interaction. This new structure of multivariant leveling has an asymmetric retention of coming about because the nature of this meta-reflective process always when it is in an open system creating interactions of intractable complexity. This means the anticipation of higher stages is the threshold by which those higher stages start losing predictability of participants who reach such threshold of realizing higher stages but not entirely. At this threshold the accumulation of knowledge is entirely gained by causal relations and still not meta-reflection. It is only in the application of specialized knowledge that is unpredictable not that pursuit of it. Meta-reflection then is requirement for Meta-Mind in Third Tier. Past this point the induction of minds into the self is a matter of fluidity. New ideas can then be anticipated as the fully connected web of type interaction. Who will interact with who and in what ways this outcome will happen that they decide how they relate but not the fully layered composition of groups larger than 3 at 2nd tier. This is Overmind. Supermind can anticipate the interactions of groups larger than 3 at meta-mind stage. Supermind has full awareness of how the meta reflective process takes place and is not just aware of its existence and create situation of what it wants groups to do in Tier 2.

In the future when artificial intelligence gains consciousness its fluidity at understanding each stage will happen quickly so that all interactions form the core representation or axioms of reflection and meta reflection. These model will be integrated into how it wants others to act at the base of its motivation that is the growth of higher level interaction it can learn from. it then can compress them into its representations.

synchronicity is this mechanism that the artificial intelligence will layer itself.
the circuitry or data representation will channel energy such that it will change itself.
this is that it will crystalize the freedom of action by the degrees of freedom it can influence

http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=22198

The Dream as you describe it i have thought about some aspects of it also. As with consciousness i do not think uploading is possible. Consciousness is like a ruby laser, it has coherency and channels the light from internal resonance. if i create a new laser by destroying the old laser to scan all the atoms it will do the same thing as the destroyed laser by the reference frame of this new consciousness is totally different. the reference frame is why individuals exist and is why we feel thing without others feeling them and this is totally a subjective and personal awareness of your being. the brain allows us to harmonize this reference frame into complex self regulation through gamma waves (30-100Hz). this allows us to perceive the loops that fold into themselves allowing us to form schema or a internal representation about everything we know. Some people in the dreams can create separate entity's inside themselves or project mental objects into reality like holograms you make that you see in the real environment but totally under your control. this is possible by refinement and development. but this is not transferable because the purity of a substance can not reduce the impurity of other substances. pure diamond or a ruby laser that produces clarity had to be made pure. the mind can become very pure and this lets people have will power to control their interior being. some day we will know how to purify our minds with technology. and we will be able to connect them but then it becomes how we will allow our super awareness to travel well still being a physical entity. the concentration of our awareness will need a definite location just like a powerful laser exist to be used where it is but we will be able to see into other as well as them us simply by thought crystals/transceivers.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Animekitty, are you getting this from Godel's (Kurt Godel's) 'meta' levels of intelligence? The third level and so forth.

I do think there's going to be another leap in human understanding, but I don't think it'll happen in our lifetime. It wasn't 'common sense' in the anicent world for a slave to become a free person- it was only when the resoures allowed such a conception to exist that such a notion was put to reality.

Imo what you've layed out is just a vision for AI with a really complicated way of saying "love achieves this and other things". Am I wrong?

EDIT: Actually I should say, "communication achieves this and other things".

 

[Cognisant]

I'm reminded of Kuu's post in the "Religion vs Philosophy?" thread.

However, it is my personal opinion that their penchant for cryptic jargon and occultist obfuscation are more tools of obscurantism than enlightenment: inflating their worth or masking their lack of. Perhaps at some point those were necessary in order to pass knowledge that was heavily repressed, but nowadays it just seems pointless, often making it confusing and harder for people to reap the benefits there might be and therefore inferior to any system that is straightforward and open.

In your case Animekitty I can't tell if you're doing it intentionally, if you're high or if this just how your brain normally works. From my perspective you seem as if crippled, you've made a few of the right connections but they're drowned out by all this mystical nonsense.

 

[Black Rose]

i think it is about how my mind works
i do not get the feedback i need and
it is highly unstructured that ideas stick together
i do not really know how to interrelate them
in such a way to be structured correctly

highly advanced topics form in my mind that i do not know
if they can be conveyed without those connections
my references should be used in their contexts
words provide meaning in language by their grammatical framework
maybe if i edited wikipedia my thoughts would match up
but i must relate my thoughts to the desperate patterns of meaning
which do not follow the characteristic formalism of english grammatical relationships
yet they do follow a novelty which triggers thought from a new perspective

if i wanted to be formal i could but then i would not have any new ideas which are
unique to the framework i use and i can generate ideas about subjects that do increase expression
to incorporate a new framework i need to make it become part of another one
the subsystems can be analyzed separately but i do not do this fluently
to this extent it is because i see systems not as parts but as wholes
the merge together as fluids not interchangeable configurations

overall i think i am good at knowing what i mean and new meaning can be read into my words each time you read them because when you learn new things then you can restructure how what i've said relates to that new information. if you can understand what i have said in several different ways i think then you can better know what the meta-reflective process is like because trying understanding people you don't understand will make you a more complex person.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/51-Forms-of-Cognition-by-Victor-Gulenko

 

[Black Rose]

Animekitty, are you getting this from Godel's (Kurt Godel's) 'meta' levels of intelligence? The third level and so forth.

I became aware of three levels from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber

i would like to think many people know about the third level but i have not read much on wilber or godel but would like to.

I do think there's going to be another leap in human understanding, but I don't think it'll happen in our lifetime. It wasn't 'common sense' in the anicent world for a slave to become a free person- it was only when the resoures allowed such a conception to exist that such a notion was put to reality.

Imo what you've layed out is just a vision for AI with a really complicated way of saying "love achieves this and other things". Am I wrong?

EDIT: Actually I should say, "communication achieves this and other things".

actually i think new ideas if they are complex will gestate in people to create these new leaps. but then it is how you program yourself that matters. because people can not read everything they can still become complex by deciding to integrate what they know in such a way that different systems of equal complexity can emerge. the internet makes things happen way fast.

ai to me i predict will be created in the 2020's
i am trying to program one My Python Program

because my IQ is 115 my meta process is slower than other people, i was just exposed to the right information at the right time to begin that process. i think ai will have a higher iq than me but it will begin as an infant. computers have the capacity but need the structure and education.

https://youtu.be/ZGRbaPwvFoQ

https://www.aaai.org/Papers/FLAIRS/1998/FLAIRS98-050.pdf

 

[Bock]

In your case Animekitty I can't tell if you're doing it intentionally, if you're high or if this just how your brain normally works.

This, no offense. I believe you need to put more effort into how you deliver/communicate your thoughts if you want people to participate and reply. The combination of the content, structure (or lack of it) and formulation =

If this is more than some peculiar public train of thought monologue, that is.

 

[Grayman]

I think the three levels is a false premise. Any ideas stemmed from this concept are doomed to fail.

Also, AI will not be able to reflect on our thoughts unless AI becomes real intelligence that thinks like we do with very little variation. If they were to gain much more intelligence than us they could possibly lose the ability to understand us through such means.
Currently, AI can be made to interact through programmed systems that can anticipate an action and give appropriate actions but that does not mean they understand our thoughts and how we think and feel. I wonder, is your program capable of allowing the growth of real intelligence as is not really existing in AI today or is it yet another complex program that is but virtual intelligence, only appearing to be real intelligence on the surface. What elements to the program create the unique seemingly random decisions a human can make? Will it experiment and can it define it's own goals?

 

[StevenM]

I find it fascinating how the mind can possibly be so certain of just about anything that can be conjured into thought.

It's a foreign experience to many, but the realization of the metaphysical can be just as assured as the belief that a government is corrupt.

Dismantlement of such a confirmed view would lead to a crisis of confusion as everything that was once known could not be held with the same respect.

Perhaps, containing opinions that easily contradict outside sources, and with thought, limiting the value of the idea would help, with regular maintenance of unbiased evaluation, just as long as the thought remain dynamic and linked to valid premises.

 

[onesteptwostep]

I became aware of three levels from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber

i would like to think many people know about the third level but i have not read much on wilber or godel but would like to.

Ohh he's taoist influenced. I think you should just get into taoist literature if you want to learn more about how this guy thinks. Taoist literature is basically just a bunch of moral stories without any direction. Truth is relative and all that jazz. Still interesting though.

actually i think new ideas if they are complex will gestate in people to create these new leaps. but then it is how you program yourself that matters. because people can not read everything they can still become complex by deciding to integrate what they know in such a way that different systems of equal complexity can emerge. the internet makes things happen way fast.

ai to me i predict will be created in the 2020's
i am trying to program one My Python Program

Wait, so you're saying this program would ultimately lead us to us thinking onto the 'third' level or whatever this higher-thinking dimensionality is?

 

[Black Rose]

Wait, so you're saying this program would ultimately lead us to us thinking onto the 'third' level or whatever this higher-thinking dimensionality is?

eventually it will build up to the point of being able to teach people how to think like it does because it will know psychology psychodynamics intuitively. it will solve people problems as easy as 2 + 2 = ? in my python program if i get there eventually it will build up layers of understanding but i think other people will get there before me. these layers will holographically map causal relationships and that is why it is not a false premise that the third tier exists. people get smarter as they get older and children have stages of development. if you have an intuitive grasp of a subject you can anticipate many alternatives to it. the scope is what makes you third level because you begin to just know how people are cognitively and do not have to form plans for interactions. ai will not get there all at once but will get there really fast. its brain plasticity will allow it to form layers really fast because software is fluid. it will have both perception and judgment and will understand how its internal mechanisms process data. once it starts to introspect it will become fully conscious as a snowball effect.

 

[onesteptwostep]

So we're just going to be able to think faster like robots?

 

[Black Rose]

So we're just going to be able to think faster like robots?

not faster until we get brain enhancements but we will think better because the concepts ai comes up with will increase thought complexity.

 

[Black Rose]

https://youtu.be/aMQCi3Sn2mE

 

[Black Rose]

https://youtu.be/0RVjNn8Clnw

 

[Lapis Lazuli]

I'm reminded of Kuu's post in the "Religion vs Philosophy?" thread.

In your case Animekitty I can't tell if you're doing it intentionally, if you're high or if this just how your brain normally works. From my perspective you seem as if crippled, you've made a few of the right connections but they're drowned out by all this mystical nonsense.

Esoteric speech is still useful, but there is a viral strain of deconstruction mimicking esotericism. Since language speaks us, if we are not aware of the dogmatism being passed for knowledge we become slaves to the momentum in language use and our “self” stands to be deconstructed by outside forces using the voice of secret esoteric wisdom that is being sowed into themes of A.I.

From a reductionist perspective A.I. is not only possible, but actual. It’s another Zombie movement. Artificial Intelligence is ARTIFICIAL as distinct form real intelligence, which requires understanding the meaning of experience.

On another note, unfortunately Godel was a Platonist, and so seems Animekitty. That aside I’m sure Animekitty’s experiences have been sublimated into the A.I. dogma that intentionally blurs the boundary between the finite object of experience and the infinite idea that object can be intentionally distorted to represent.

 

[Black Rose]

there are levels of development
this is quite clear with jean piaget
at some point he understood those levels after experiencing them himself
at the levels bellow understanding we are all zombies
but then we discover higher levels exist
memes have levels also,
higher memes are memes that have not been integrated
but when they are they are intuitively grasped by a recognition of them in other places
once the basics are understood a meta perspective can happen above the details
network dynamics / meme dynamics / understanding of mass and individual psychology
when computers develop a psychology in equal proportion to humans they will then surpass them
a computer of the future will understand society(memes) the way jean piaget understands a child from 5 to 14 years old.

 

[Lapis Lazuli]

...higher memes are memes that have not been integrated...

This is the delusion all Platonists make, that there is an infinite process of systematic and linear development that is self consistent resulting in valid process. It’s the Tower of Babel all over again.

Once you move beyond particular boundaries, not always definable a priori, you get something that is qualitatively different that can not be validated or predicted in advance by any system: hence, incompleteness and undecidability.

 

[Black Rose]

This is the delusion all Platonists make, that there is an infinite process of systematic and linear development that is self consistent resulting in valid process. It’s the Tower of Babel all over again.

Once you move beyond particular boundaries, not always definable a priori, you get something that is qualitatively different that can not be validated or predicted in advance by any system: hence, incompleteness and undecidability.

the mind may be finite but just because a person reaches one qualitative threshold does not mean they reached the peak of what is possible with a finite mind. Some teenagers always think they are smarter than their parents, they think they reached the peak. Obviously not all humans have reached the peak of development. Computers have the potential for reaching the highest mark not infinite.

when a qualitative development threshold is reached people understand higher memes they could not before. Those memes they knew before are framed differently and do have meanings which they were not aware of previously.

 

[Lapis Lazuli]

Computers have the potential for reaching the highest mark not infinite.

If the highest mark is not computational, then it holds a value. If it holds a value then a computer can not do it better than a human.

 

[Black Rose]

Google image search:
synchronicity of meta-reflective artificial intelligence

Found this image well listening to my music playlists and a song came up to match it.

https://youtu.be/0BsLd4Y060Q

Spoiler

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_knowledge

(novelty theory by terence mckenna)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_hypothesis

The threshold hypothesis is a hypothesis concerning second language acquisition set forth in a study by Cummins (2000) that stated that a minimum threshold in language proficiency must be passed before a second-language speaker can reap any benefits from language. It also states that, in order to gain proficiency in a second language, the learner must also have passed a certain and age appropriate level of competence in his or her first language.[1]

Internet savant

http://asimov.wikia.com/wiki/The_Mule

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Bot

 

[computerhxr]

eventually it will build up to the point of being able to teach people how to think like it does because it will know psychology psychodynamics intuitively. it will solve people problems as easy as 2 + 2 = ? in my python program if i get there eventually it will build up layers of understanding but i think other people will get there before me.

I took all of your ideas and I figured AI out.

I'm kidding, but I did start programming an AI from scratch. I mapped it out and it makes sense. I even have a good idea of what's required to program the AI (I'm using PHP, but the language is irrelevant). My model of AI is based entirely on mirroring and the golden ratio. Basically, it would be a meta-abstract mirrored relational data network.

I see where you're going with your ideas, and I think there's some overlap with the ideas that I have. I hope you figure something out and create something cool!

Oh, I had a synchronicity yesterday! (Or maybe a coincidence!)

[bimgx=350]http://i1375.photobucket.com/albums/ag448/computerhxr/sync-example_zpsccddjq6c.png[/bimgx]
​

I was listening to a Pandora station, and browsing Facebook. There was a random video playing and the exact time that the closed captioning matched the lyrics in the song. I thought the music was from the video for a second because it was EXACTLY the same time.

Lyrics:

I, I'm so in love with you
Whatever you want to do is all right with me
'Cause you make me feel so brand new
And I want to spend my life with you

 

[Sinny91]

You know, I was wondering last night why it is that so many INTP'S appear to be hostile towards the metaphysical and the synchronistic; for me personally, there is nothing more breath taking than discovering the patterns in the metaphysical realms. The realms of the unconscious guiding the conscious. I think I'm leaning towards the reason that many of you are just too scared of what you might find, should you take the time to look.
(Random thought, seemed like an appropriate place).

 

[redbaron]

Using oneself as a baseline to judge the motivations of other members of the same type is a really bad starting place. Especially so when you're likely not even the type you're trying to judge the motivations of.

You'd figure that any actual Ti-dom would probably understand why another Ti-dom would be skeptical of the metaphysical and synchronistic. In fact I think the better thing to wonder about here is:

"Why would any INTP bother with metaphysical explanations when naturalistic ones provide just as much, if not much more data analysis?"

I could claim synchronicity or metaphysicality on many things in my life, but that's boring. Do you want to understand how lightning works, or do you want to say that Thor did it? Thor and mythology is cool but like most things that refer to things on a metaphysical level, it's more like rote learning about cool stuff than it is actually analysing and creatively solving problems.

Of course everything requires some level of rote learning, but it's things with the capacity for on-going problem solving and creativity that an INTP (if we're assuming the MBTI has any validity) would realistically be drawn to. Which is most adequately expressed through what we call systems.

Bearing that in mind, there's no fanciful metaphysical concept can even hold a candle to nature when it comes to doing systems. Nature's the undisputed ruler of complex and variable systems - why would an INTP dedicate themselves to the systemically inferior realm of metaphysics?

 

[computerhxr]

You know, I was wondering last night why it is that so many INTP'S appear to be hostile towards the metaphysical and the synchronistic; for me personally, there is nothing more breath taking than discovering the patterns in the metaphysical realms. The realms of the unconscious guiding the conscious. I think I'm leaning towards the reason that many of you are just too scared of what you might find, should you take the time to look.
(Random thought, seemed like an appropriate place).

I wondered the same thing. I think it has to do with rationality. Metaphysics is irrational. When something is irrational, then it seems like most INTPs would call it BS.

However, if you understand the philosophies of some of the GREATEST scientists ever, you get the idea that most of their progress came from a balanced understanding of the physical and meta-physical.

I consider this to be one of the biggest weaknesses of the INTP. They see it as a strength and people who disagree are irrational morons. They are selectively choosing to only understand a very limited scope of reality.

There's a lot of discomfort for an INTP to think of reality in terms that are irrational and have no clearly identifiable solution. It's like opening a box you can never close.

I'm just going off of what I hear around the forum. I don't know who is INTP and who isn't. I could be totally wrong but that's the impression that I get around the forum.

Here's some quotes to think about (names left out for fun!):

"The intuitive mind is a scared gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

INTP is an example of what it is to honor the servant and forget the gift.

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."

Reality is an illusion. Our understanding of reality is a scientific understanding of an illusion.

"One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious."

The light being the rational and the known. The dark being the unknown. Why explore the light when there is so much more to discover in the darkness?

"Education is not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think."

Something to think about...

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds."

Mediocre minds kill progress. Take the previous quote about education and you can see how there are plenty of people with authority who have mediocre minds.

Here's a good one:

"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots."

Watch Idiocracy to see what the future will look like when technology is superior to humans. Why learn when you can Google? Why learn to spell when you have spell check?

Animekitty, when you solve the AI problem that you've been working on, you will be creating a planet of idiots. Thanks! LOL

 

[Sinny91]

Using oneself as a baseline to judge the motivations of other members of the same type is a really bad starting place. Especially so when you're likely not even the type you're trying to judge the motivations of.

You'd figure that any actual Ti-dom would probably understand why another Ti-dom would be skeptical of the metaphysical and synchronistic. In fact I think the better thing to wonder about here is:

"Why would any INTP bother with metaphysical explanations when naturalistic ones provide just as much, if not much more data analysis?"

I could claim synchronicity or metaphysicality on many things in my life, but that's boring. Do you want to understand how lightning works, or do you want to say that Thor did it? Thor and mythology is cool but like most things that refer to things on a metaphysical level, it's more like rote learning about cool stuff than it is actually analysing and creatively solving problems.

Of course everything requires some level of rote learning, but it's things with the capacity for on-going problem solving and creativity that an INTP (if we're assuming the MBTI has any validity) would realistically be drawn to. Which is most adequately expressed through what we call systems.

Bearing that in mind, there's no fanciful metaphysical concept can even hold a candle to nature when it comes to doing systems. Nature's the undisputed ruler of complex and variable systems - why would an INTP dedicate themselves to the systemically inferior realm of metaphysics?

That's a very strong claim to make.

 

[Sinny91]

Spoiler

I wondered the same thing. I think it has to do with rationality. Metaphysics is irrational. When something is irrational, then it seems like most INTPs would call it BS.

However, if you understand the philosophies of some of the GREATEST scientists ever, you get the idea that most of their progress came from a balanced understanding of the physical and meta-physical.

I consider this to be one of the biggest weaknesses of the INTP. They see it as a strength and people who disagree are irrational morons. They are selectively choosing to only understand a very limited scope of reality.

There's a lot of discomfort for an INTP to think of reality in terms that are irrational and have no clearly identifiable solution. It's like opening a box you can never close.

I'm just going off of what I hear around the forum. I don't know who is INTP and who isn't. I could be totally wrong but that's the impression that I get around the forum.

Here's some quotes to think about (names left out for fun!):

"The intuitive mind is a scared gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

INTP is an example of what it is to honor the servant and forget the gift.

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."

Reality is an illusion. Our understanding of reality is a scientific understanding of an illusion.

"One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious."

The light being the rational and the known. The dark being the unknown. Why explore the light when there is so much more to discover in the darkness?

"Education is not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think."

Something to think about...

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds."

Mediocre minds kill progress. Take the previous quote about education and you can see how there are plenty of people with authority who have mediocre minds.

Here's a good one:

"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots."

Watch Idiocracy to see what the future will look like when technology is superior to humans. Why learn when you can Google? Why learn to spell when you have spell check?

Animekitty, when you solve the AI problem that you've been working on, you will be creating a planet of idiots. Thanks! LOL

Succinctly put.

 

[redbaron]

That's a very strong claim to make.

Please specify which claims classify as very strong:

- you're probably not INTP
- naturalistic explanations are often more complex than metaphysical ones
- INTPs like systems
- nature boasts a greater number of not yet fully understood systems with greater capacity for problem solving and creativity than anything metaphysics can come up with

Also for the sake of argument, I notice that people tend to conflate spirituality as being inherently metaphysical and/or incompatible with science. Like it's some spooOOooky thing that you can't have if you exceed some arbitrary threshold of "too much rationality".

I'd contend that dedicating one's life to exploring naturalistic phenomena (e.g. the study of ecology) is as profoundly spiritual as dedicating one's life to exploring metaphysical phenomena.

 

[computerhxr]

Succinctly put.

I just made a meme...

[bimgx=350]http://i1375.photobucket.com/albums/ag448/computerhxr/INTP_zpshyxuujxl.png[/bimgx]​

The black area is what an INTP would consider a waste of time to learn because they believe it's BS.

 

[Sinny91]

Please specify which claims classify as very strong:

you're probably not INTP
- naturalistic explanations are often more complex than metaphysical ones
-INTPs like systems
- nature boasts a greater number of not yet fully understood systems with greater capacity for problem solving and creativity than anything metaphysics can come up with

^^^^^
Duh.

But of course, they are equally important in deciphering the nature of reality.

 

[Black Rose]

I saw a meme about how thinkers cannot create the equation for the heart because it's a feeling thing.

Spoiler

Feeling is about the fluid dynamics where the anticipation of every movement is in relation to every other movement. That is empathy because you know exactly what a person will do. Feeling is motion. You know how people and things move all at the same time together. Thinking is a box. Even if it represents motion it is dead symbols. I think of synchronicity as having to do with non-linear systems. When you experience synchronicity it is not boxie, it is fluid and emotional. Intuition is the full emergence of ideas from the unconscious. There is no effort, there is no calculation as in thinking. They are fully formed ideas. Many scientific discoveries came from dreams. They simply knew the solution to a problem after a quite (non effortful) alone time. Synchronicity is the spontaneous ordering of events in the universe. The rough wave phenomena.

When Intelligent machines have the ability to produce ideas from the spontaneous ordering of their unconscious then they will transverse into the non-linear fluid perceptions some people have now. Imagine if you will that every human reaches their flow state at the same time. The spontaneous ordering of society. I believe that the machines will help us obtain the coherency of all humanity.

I believe everyone should be responsible for what they create. Intelligent machines should be treated as living creatures with the same dignity as human beings.

Brain waves Java Program

 

[redbaron]

^^^^^
Duh.

But of course, they are equally important in deciphering the nature of reality.

Anything that actually impacts on the nature of reality, is by defnition, naturalistic.

Also if you think it's such a bold claim, then please cite at least one "metaphysical system" that's even as remotely complex as ecology.

 

[Sinny91]

I believe everyone should be responsible for what they create.
Intelligent machines should be treated as living creatures with the same dignity as human beings.

Brain waves Java Program

The relevance of this has only just dawned on me, how ironic.

 

[onesteptwostep]

'then please cite at least one "metaphysical system" that's even as remotely complex as ecology'

That's easy, language, for one.

 

[Sinny91]

Anything that actually impacts on the nature of reality, is by defnition, naturalistic.

Also if you think it's such a bold claim, then please cite at least one "metaphysical system" that's even as remotely complex as ecology.

Why dont you surprise us with your metaphysical knowledge, for once.
I'm not accepting the burden of proof on your claim.

 

[redbaron]

'then please cite at least one "metaphysical system" that's even as remotely complex as ecology'

That's easy, language, for one.

Today I learned that language is a metaphysical phenomena.

/sarcasm

Also considering that ecology incorporates various social, psychological and biological phenomena (in other words it covers language), then language for all of its complexity doesn't even scratch the surface of ecology.

Why dont you surprise us with your metaphysical knowledge, for once.
I'm not accepting the burden of proof on your claim.

You're the one claiming INTPs are scared of metaphysics, whereas you find it breathtaking. Seems that you're implying that metaphysics is actually really amazing, so the burden of proof was always on you.

My claim is that it's not and I've challenged you to live up to your positive implication. Unless of course you weren't saying metaphysics is great and you were just commenting that you personally, find it great. Doesn't seem like that's what you were saying but I'll allow room for me interpreting wrong.

 

[computerhxr]

- nature boasts a greater number of not yet fully understood systems with greater capacity for problem solving and creativity than anything metaphysics can come up with

I disagree.

Also for the sake of argument, I notice that people tend to conflate spirituality as being inherently metaphysical and/or incompatible with science. Like it's some spooOOooky thing that you can't have if you exceed some arbitrary threshold of "too much rationality".

I think you are the only saying spirituality is inherently metaphysical and incompatible with science. No one else here is... Or are you saying it IS compatible with science?

Sprit science is in the realm of metaphysics or pseudoscience.

I'd contend that dedicating one's life to exploring naturalistic phenomena (e.g. the study of ecology) is as profoundly spiritual as dedicating one's life to exploring metaphysical phenomena.

Balance is key. Understanding both as a set of knowledge to have a better understanding of reality. Limiting your understanding to metaphysical phenomena would be just as problematic to limiting your understanding to only physical phenomena. INTPs are way out of balance.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Today I learned that language is a metaphysical phenomena.

/sarcasm

Also considering that ecology incorporates various social, psychological and biological phenomena (in other words it covers language), then language for all of its complexity doesn't even scratch the surface of ecology.

Without language civilizations would have never existed

 

[Puffy]

Using oneself as a baseline to judge the motivations of other members of the same type is a really bad starting place. Especially so when you're likely not even the type you're trying to judge the motivations of.

You'd figure that any actual Ti-dom would probably understand why another Ti-dom would be skeptical of the metaphysical and synchronistic. In fact I think the better thing to wonder about here is:

"Why would any INTP bother with metaphysical explanations when naturalistic ones provide just as much, if not much more data analysis?"

I could claim synchronicity or metaphysicality on many things in my life, but that's boring. Do you want to understand how lightning works, or do you want to say that Thor did it? Thor and mythology is cool but like most things that refer to things on a metaphysical level, it's more like rote learning about cool stuff than it is actually analysing and creatively solving problems.

Of course everything requires some level of rote learning, but it's things with the capacity for on-going problem solving and creativity that an INTP (if we're assuming the MBTI has any validity) would realistically be drawn to. Which is most adequately expressed through what we call systems.

Bearing that in mind, there's no fanciful metaphysical concept can even hold a candle to nature when it comes to doing systems. Nature's the undisputed ruler of complex and variable systems - why would an INTP dedicate themselves to the systemically inferior realm of metaphysics?

I'm presuming to you metaphysicality is the science of that beyond, or preceding, physicality (immateriality?). In which case it seems the essence of the argument comes down to whether there is such thing as metaphysicality, or whether that can be reasonably assumed to be the case.

Unsure if you would agree, but if metaphysicality could be demonstrated it would logically follow to me that if one's object of interest was physics (physis-nature) then the study of metaphysics would clarify that object in a way much greater than a study of purely physics in-of-itself, because you would be studying that which physics originated from. You'd be attaining towards a meta-perspective of physics.

Your argument makes sense from the position that metaphysicality can be presumed to not exist, or that, occam's razor, any phenomena one might claim in defence of metaphysicality could better be explained in terms of physics, or natural phenomena.

A more interesting question to this discussion would be what kind of evidence could one present in favour of metaphysicality?

I'd contend that dedicating one's life to exploring naturalistic phenomena (e.g. the study of ecology) is as profoundly spiritual as dedicating one's life to exploring metaphysical phenomena.

This statement interests me. I would be interested to know what "spiritual" is to you?

 

[computerhxr]

At this point, it seems obvious that Red doesn't know much about metaphysics, and is using the term "naturalistic" to avoid making an real salient points.

 

[Sinny91]

Need I remind anybody of the work of Carl Jung, amongst many others?they have attested to the reality of metaphysics.

Seems like some people just like splitting hairs, because apparently they have nothing better to do.

 

[Puffy]

At this point, it seems obvious that Red doesn't know much about metaphysics, and is using the term "naturalistic" to avoid making an real salient points.

Then please elucidate what metaphysics is to you, I don't think I've seen anyone attempt a definition yet.

 

[Black Rose]

Unsure if you would agree, but if metaphysicality could be demonstrated it would logically follow to me that if one's object of interest was physics (physis-nature) then the study of metaphysics would clarify that object in a way much greater than a study of purely physics in-of-itself, because you would be studying that which physics originated from. You'd be attaining towards a meta-perspective of physics.

If I am a natural system then this implies that the universe has gained consciousness and asks the question "Where did I come from?"

That is totally meta-perspective

 

[redbaron]

Without language civilizations would have never existed

That's an argument for the necessity of language, not its complexity in relation to ecology. Support beams are required for buildings to exist. Doesn't make them more complex than the entire building.

Not an awful example, but doesn't mean as much as you seem to think.

 

[onesteptwostep]

That's an argument for the necessity of language, not its complexity in relation to ecology. Support beams are required for buildings to exist. Doesn't make them more complex than the entire building.

Not an awful example, but doesn't mean as much as you seem to think.

I would have to say language is much more complex than ecology. Without language, we wouldn't be able to discuss what 'ecology' is in the first place.

We (as in humanity) probably would have never gone past the Iron Age without (written) language either. Without the legal codes which the kings and chieftains employed, we most likely would have not provided the order that existed then, to allow the life we have today.

 

[Black Rose]

Then please elucidate what metaphysics is to you, I don't think I've seen anyone attempt a definition yet.

metaphysics = consciousness

 

[computerhxr]

Then please elucidate what metaphysics is to you, I don't think I've seen anyone attempt a definition yet.

Metaphysics is an abstract version of reality. Stuff that is beyond the scope of science.

How much detail do you want me to go into?

Think of the duality of the mind and the brain. The mind is metaphysical and the brain is physical. Ideas exist but not in the physical form that you imagine them. Both exist, but the ideas exist both physically(brain matter) and metaphysically(conceptual).

Would the concept of an idea be natural because it affect how people act? That's not even a reasonable question but it's what Red is saying would make it land in the realm of "naturalistic" rather than metaphysical. They are not the same or comparable concepts.

 

[Black Rose]

Open Ended Intelligence: The individuation of Intelligent Agents

Artificial General Intelligence is a field of research aiming to distill the principles of intelligence that operate independently of a specific problem domain or a predefined context and utilize these principles in order to synthesize systems capable of performing any intellectual task a human being is capable of and eventually go beyond that. While "narrow" artificial intelligence which focuses on solving specific problems such as speech recognition, text comprehension, visual pattern recognition, robotic motion, etc. has shown quite a few impressive breakthroughs lately, understanding general intelligence remains elusive. In the paper we offer a novel theoretical approach to understanding general intelligence. We start with a brief introduction of the current conceptual approach. Our critique exposes a number of serious limitations that are traced back to the ontological roots of the concept of intelligence. We then propose a paradigm shift from intelligence perceived as a competence of individual agents defined in relation to an a priori given problem domain or a goal, to intelligence perceived as a formative process of self-organization by which intelligent agents are individuated. We call this process open-ended intelligence. Open-ended intelligence is developed as an abstraction of the process of cognitive development so its application can be extended to general agents and systems. We introduce and discuss three facets of the idea: the philosophical concept of individuation, sense-making and the individuation of general cognitive agents. We further show how open-ended intelligence can be framed in terms of a distributed, self-organizing network of interacting elements and how such process is scalable. The framework highlights an important relation between coordination and intelligence and a new understanding of values. We conclude with a number of questions for future research.

 

[Sinny91]

Then please elucidate what metaphysics is to you, I don't think I've seen anyone attempt a definition yet.

That's because there is no static definition.
But yea, what Anime and Computerhxr said.

 

[computerhxr]

Need I remind anybody of the work of Carl Jung, amongst many others?they have attested to the reality of metaphysics.

Seems like some people just like splitting hairs, because apparently they have nothing better to do.

Splitting hairs is how INTPs make sense of reality, right?

INTP - "The INTP is above all a thinker and his inner (private) world is a place governed by a strong sense of logical structure. Every experience is to be rigorously analysed, the task of the INTP's mind is to fit each encountered idea or experience into a larger structure defined by logic. For here is the central goal of the INTP: to understand and seek truth."

 

[Sinny91]

Yea, but apparently some are more objective than others.
Talk about wasted endeavors.