THE UNIVERSE IS GODLESS. THE MIND OF MAN IS NOT. AND WE CAN CHANGE THE UNIVERSE. —“How does one cope with this fact? Like why acquire agency for the sake of acquiring it? I know you’ve mentioned that philosophy answers this for us – would you care to elaborate?”—Yiannis Kontinopoulos TO WORK TOGETHER TO BECOME THE GODS WE DESIRE. That is the end result of the Natural Law.
Source: Original Site Post
-
The Universe Is Godless – But for Us
THE UNIVERSE IS GODLESS. THE MIND OF MAN IS NOT. AND WE CAN CHANGE THE UNIVERSE. —“How does one cope with this fact? Like why acquire agency for the sake of acquiring it? I know you’ve mentioned that philosophy answers this for us – would you care to elaborate?”—Yiannis Kontinopoulos TO WORK TOGETHER TO BECOME THE GODS WE DESIRE. That is the end result of the Natural Law.
-
Defending Molyneux Again
Context: Molyneux’s claim that he’s most influential philosopher working today. Is Molyneux Influential among philosophers, Intellectuals, Politicians – or among common people? Some of us work in R&D (like Research Academics), and some in Education (like Teaching Academics). Stefan is by far the most popular Teacher reaching the most people – by far.
By that logic,shouldn’t Mark Dice,Crowder,Shapiro,Peterson be put above Stefan in reach according to ur criteria”—Checkov Pavlov @slimshadyrap98
There is, empirically, a demarcation between philosopher/philosophizing the demarcation is a) the internal consistency (grammar of constant relations) that the speaker relies upon for his arguments and b) the publication of a work of at least one novel idea in that grammar. There is a demarcation between a philosopher and public intellectual, in the USE of that grammar of constant relations. My specialty is the disambiguation of science (operationalism), natural law, rational philosophy, justificationism, sophism, pseudoscience and supernaturalism. You just engaged in conflationa and sophism in the Abrahamic model (GSRRM, Pilpul, Critique). And it’s unlikely that the others you mentioned know the difference. Peterson practices science but relies on suggestion using wisdom lit rather than operationalism. It’s Borderline theology. You can claim that Stefan didn’t produce a durable work of philosophy – and that would be true (Zizek either). And that it is difficult to disambiguate from self help (wisdom) rather than decidability (truth). But he practices the grammar of philosophy, and has produced a work.
-
Defending Molyneux Again
Context: Molyneux’s claim that he’s most influential philosopher working today. Is Molyneux Influential among philosophers, Intellectuals, Politicians – or among common people? Some of us work in R&D (like Research Academics), and some in Education (like Teaching Academics). Stefan is by far the most popular Teacher reaching the most people – by far.
By that logic,shouldn’t Mark Dice,Crowder,Shapiro,Peterson be put above Stefan in reach according to ur criteria”—Checkov Pavlov @slimshadyrap98
There is, empirically, a demarcation between philosopher/philosophizing the demarcation is a) the internal consistency (grammar of constant relations) that the speaker relies upon for his arguments and b) the publication of a work of at least one novel idea in that grammar. There is a demarcation between a philosopher and public intellectual, in the USE of that grammar of constant relations. My specialty is the disambiguation of science (operationalism), natural law, rational philosophy, justificationism, sophism, pseudoscience and supernaturalism. You just engaged in conflationa and sophism in the Abrahamic model (GSRRM, Pilpul, Critique). And it’s unlikely that the others you mentioned know the difference. Peterson practices science but relies on suggestion using wisdom lit rather than operationalism. It’s Borderline theology. You can claim that Stefan didn’t produce a durable work of philosophy – and that would be true (Zizek either). And that it is difficult to disambiguate from self help (wisdom) rather than decidability (truth). But he practices the grammar of philosophy, and has produced a work.
-
The Rules of Consciousness
THE RULES OF CONSCIOUSNESS WHEREAS 1. Our attention rotates in a competition between sensation(observation and construction by prediction and reward identification), imagination (possibility by association), holding attention on a goal (possibility by continuous opportunity seizure), and releasing predicted actions (in pursuit of the goal). WHEREAS 2. We rotate between sensation (observation and construction by prediction), anticipating (goal prediction), and storing (remembering by stimulating and rehearsing), on a 1/10th of a second rotation (Theta) creating competition and choice. AND WHEREAS 3. There is no observer, other than memory of an observation. 4. There are no observations other than sequences. 5. There is no comparison of observations other than to previous sequences. 6. There is no order in sequences other than that created by sequences. 7. There are no sequences other than those of sensations. 8. There is no existence sensed, other than those changes in time. 9. Without change we cannot sense time. THEREFORE Existence is a verb Experience is a verb Imagination is a verb Consciousness is a verb. Because Acting is a verb – and we can only act in time. AND THEREFORE Without action, we produce no existence, no experience, no sequence, no memory, no consciousness. AND THEREFORE There is no observer other than the observations (hierarchy of increasing of sequences of memories in time. AND THEREFORE We see what the camera sees. We do not record images, but sequences of related stimuli. “I AM, MEANING, I EXIST AS, THE HIERARCHY OF MY MEMORY IN MOTION”
-
The Rules of Consciousness
THE RULES OF CONSCIOUSNESS WHEREAS 1. Our attention rotates in a competition between sensation(observation and construction by prediction and reward identification), imagination (possibility by association), holding attention on a goal (possibility by continuous opportunity seizure), and releasing predicted actions (in pursuit of the goal). WHEREAS 2. We rotate between sensation (observation and construction by prediction), anticipating (goal prediction), and storing (remembering by stimulating and rehearsing), on a 1/10th of a second rotation (Theta) creating competition and choice. AND WHEREAS 3. There is no observer, other than memory of an observation. 4. There are no observations other than sequences. 5. There is no comparison of observations other than to previous sequences. 6. There is no order in sequences other than that created by sequences. 7. There are no sequences other than those of sensations. 8. There is no existence sensed, other than those changes in time. 9. Without change we cannot sense time. THEREFORE Existence is a verb Experience is a verb Imagination is a verb Consciousness is a verb. Because Acting is a verb – and we can only act in time. AND THEREFORE Without action, we produce no existence, no experience, no sequence, no memory, no consciousness. AND THEREFORE There is no observer other than the observations (hierarchy of increasing of sequences of memories in time. AND THEREFORE We see what the camera sees. We do not record images, but sequences of related stimuli. “I AM, MEANING, I EXIST AS, THE HIERARCHY OF MY MEMORY IN MOTION”
-
The Industrialization of Agency.
THE INDUSTRIALIZATION OF AGENCY. Agency. Truth and Oath Duty and Commons Excellence and Heroism Sovereignty and Reciprocity The Natural Law, Judge and Jury Markets in – association – cooperation – production – reproduction – commons – polities – war. The Eugenic Civilization.
-
The Industrialization of Agency.
THE INDUSTRIALIZATION OF AGENCY. Agency. Truth and Oath Duty and Commons Excellence and Heroism Sovereignty and Reciprocity The Natural Law, Judge and Jury Markets in – association – cooperation – production – reproduction – commons – polities – war. The Eugenic Civilization.
-
No. Don’t Conflate Arousal and Consciousness
Gak. No. Confusing Arousal with Consciousness is like confusing the light switch with the light. Just ’cause we can turn off the switch doesn’t tell us how the light is created. We can interfere with any number of parts (Colostrum) and shut down experience. That doesn’t tell us anything. The question is, how does that mushy wetware synthesize past memory present experience, and future prediction, from millions of nerves (measurements) into our rather amazing conflated experiences of past, present and future? (cortical hierarchy, parahippocampal, perirhinal, entorhinal cortices and subiculum.) How do we shift between narrow focus, near perception, environmental perception, self perception, and deep introspection and imagination? (thalamus) Why is it we can react so quickly that we can hit a curve ball with a bat? (basal ganglia, cerebellum, and cortical prediction) How do we Assemble memories and experience them? (Hippocampus) What is that feeling of me? (mostly, hippocampus) Why can’t we pin it down. “Cause it’s a verb not a noun”. The continuous change in state in a hierarchy of ever smaller cycles of time….
-
No. Don’t Conflate Arousal and Consciousness
Gak. No. Confusing Arousal with Consciousness is like confusing the light switch with the light. Just ’cause we can turn off the switch doesn’t tell us how the light is created. We can interfere with any number of parts (Colostrum) and shut down experience. That doesn’t tell us anything. The question is, how does that mushy wetware synthesize past memory present experience, and future prediction, from millions of nerves (measurements) into our rather amazing conflated experiences of past, present and future? (cortical hierarchy, parahippocampal, perirhinal, entorhinal cortices and subiculum.) How do we shift between narrow focus, near perception, environmental perception, self perception, and deep introspection and imagination? (thalamus) Why is it we can react so quickly that we can hit a curve ball with a bat? (basal ganglia, cerebellum, and cortical prediction) How do we Assemble memories and experience them? (Hippocampus) What is that feeling of me? (mostly, hippocampus) Why can’t we pin it down. “Cause it’s a verb not a noun”. The continuous change in state in a hierarchy of ever smaller cycles of time….