Not directly. I’d hear of him in passing during my studies. For me it’s more of the physicality of thought. It’s something that can be measured, exists in the mind, on paper, in spoken words, can be passed around.

 Not directly. I’d hear of him in passing during my studies.
For me it’s more of the physicality of thought. It’s something that can be measured, exists in the mind, on paper, in spoken words, can be passed around.
 Oh, I don’t think we’ll ever be able to fully measure it all. It’s far too complex too darn quickly.
You’d need to know not only the entire history of a person to understand a single thought, you’d need to know everything about the inspirations of those that inspired the person, and so on.
===
The physicality of it amazes me because it happens at such a tiny scale at such fantastical levels of complexity that it astounds me that we can simplify so much of it into a few algorithms, or lately we can shove a bunch into a modeler and it comes up with decent ranges that can approximate what we suspect to already be true.
  • Like

and yet I don’t think we can capture it all. I’m not denying a spiritual character at all: I don’t think we can capture that aspect. And I don’t know what happens after death in any way. The complexity of things is so immense that I see no reason that things couldn’t go on somehow.
I simply haven’t an idea.
Another aspect of what I’m referring to, and explaining poorly I think is things like: planning.
Planning is fiction.
And yet planning can also assist causing.
  • Like

—-

what I’m reading at present. The physicality aspect is neuroscience-ish but I’m also firmly in the camp of the importance of make-believe and belief.

===

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


four × 2 =

Leave a Reply