A couple of off the wall thoughts upon which to ponder - if one dares.
"The internet is a new lifeform that shows the first signs of intelligence". So says brain scientist and serial entrepreneur Jeff Stibel. He argues that the physical wiring of the internet is much like a rudimentary brain and some of the actions and interactions that take place on it are similar to the processes that we see in the brain.
I've thought before that we are actually computers originally constructed by some highly evolved beings aeons ago. This idea kind of feeds into that...kind of...
See the brief video at this link. I find the presenter's rather obsessive passion for his subject a tad scary though.
How long before we have our own version of "Hal" dictating to us?
AND
A comment beneath an article at Huffington Post at the weekend proved more interesting to me than the rather old news contained in the article about time travel. Part of comment from commenter "cp35":
Postscript: I don't know, anymore, what there is to say about mass shootings, as yet another one blots the scene in the USA.
I've thought before that we are actually computers originally constructed by some highly evolved beings aeons ago. This idea kind of feeds into that...kind of...
See the brief video at this link. I find the presenter's rather obsessive passion for his subject a tad scary though.
How long before we have our own version of "Hal" dictating to us?
AND
...........General Relativity is as old as 1919 I think. You want something that is also old but that will probably be bigger news to those who don't know or understand Physics? Because light is indeed going at the speed of light (time stops completely at the speed of light), and light from the beginning of the Universe is still traveling, the past still exists in some time frame. Indeed, the future also already exists. And that is profoundly more mind blowing, because we experience the past as no longer there and the future as still having to come, but that is not really the case.I suppose that seers and clairvoyants, through the ages, have always known this.
Postscript: I don't know, anymore, what there is to say about mass shootings, as yet another one blots the scene in the USA.
19 comments:
Twilight ~ Yesterday when I was at the library returning items, out of the blue, the movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" suddenly popped into my mind. Since I've only seen bits and pieces of the film over the years, I decided to rent it. We started it last night, and as we began watching HAL and Dave interact, I kept thinking about what it is that differentiates a human brain and its potential from a computer and what it might become capable of. It took me until just now to figure it out.:)
I also knew there had to be some deeper meaning behind and reason why I was drawn to that particular movie yesterday, since it wasn't as if I'd seen it on the shelves; I actually had to ask a librarian to help me find it. Anyway, as soon as I saw your post today, I understood.
Since I believe we're all connected -and I'm especially *sensitive* to those connections- it's not unusual for me to pick up on random bits of information or feelings. Sometime I know right away, while other times it takes a while to figure out. It can't hurt that your Aquarius Sun is *exactly* conjunct my sensitive Moon.
Jung would've likely considered this a synchronistic event, which fits in nicely with your post.
Whatever this universe is, I'm all for it!
“Reality is incredibly larger, infinitely more exciting, than the flesh and blood vehicle we travel in here. If you read science fiction, the more you read it the more you realize that you and the universe are part of the same thing. Science knows still practically nothing about the real nature of matter, energy, dimension, or time; and even less about those remarkable things called life and thought. But whatever the meaning and purpose of this universe, you are a legitimate part of it. And since you are part of the all that is, part of its purpose, there is more to you than just this brief speck of existence. You are just a visitor here in this time and this place, a traveler through it.” Gene Roddenberry
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
From Shakespeare's Hamlet
LB ~ Amazing! I occasionally experience things like that too.
:-) Hard to explain to someone who hasn't "been there". I'm sure we all do "go there" from time to time, but some of us either don't notice it because too busy concentrating of other stuff, or choose to ignore it.
Yes, Shakespeare knew a thing or two!
mike ~ Yes, me too!
A couple more thoughts from 2 excellent penmen:
“If the world were merely seductive, that would be easy. If it were merely challenging, that would be no problem. But I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world. This makes it hard to plan the day.”
― E.B. White
“My experience of life is that it is not divided up into genres; it’s a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky.”
― Alan Moore (Who wrote "V" for Vendetta").
Nice post. It reminded me of a story I once heard of a boy who had a NDE and during the experience he was shown a series of paths that he may or may not take during the rest of his life.....I'm paraphrasing but the point is that he was shown what appeared to be a combination of free-will AND pre-desination as going hand in hand each having a pre set outcome, depending on the course the boy could choose throughout the remainder of his life. The "destiny" of each choice existed already and was there waiting if the boy so chose any particular path.
Anyways....I couldn't find the exact article....but I came across this from Edgar Cayce and thought I'd share it with you.
here
I hope it's not too far off point. But again your post struck a chord with me where pre-desination (the future) is concerned.
Well first of all, I do not believe that the mere collecting and adding of information may create intelligence. In fact, Chomsky’s theory claims that we’re just born with a sort of structure that may sustain the language.
This structure already existed.
I do not believe in reductionism that claims that life has no preceeding structure and can be reduced completely to electronic devices.
If so, it can happen the opposite: that electronic devices, provided with a memory, can create a double life, a copy of life.
But life has something that electronic has not...
What I do believe is that we can go into the future for the future **already exists**...
DC ~ I like the "2-paths" idea. My first thought though was: why only 2 choices? Then I pondered a moment or two and decided that although it seems as though there could be numerous choices open to us at any juncture, what it would always boil down to equals only 2, in effect, with other seeming choices being merely variations of one or the other of the 2.
Edgar Cayce's writings usually leave me mightily confused. I like the article - thanks for the link by the way - but about two thirds through it my mind began to wander.
Cayce used to come up with cores of good stuff, kernels of brilliance, then expand and embroider on them until he lost me. I'm not tuned in to his style, but the basic core of his thoughts in the piece is still very interesting.
:-)
ex-Chomp ~ I agree. Computers, as we've come to know them can only give out what has been first put in by humans. Computers can collate and associate, and calculate - present stuff in many different ways, but using only what is already there.
It's a long step to believe, as that scientist seems to, that a computer may one day have the ability to go beyond that.....although, when all human knowledge has been input, maybe something among that knowledge could "flick a switch" as it were. We don't know for sure.
Science fiction writers have used the theory for story lines. Films such as I Robot for instance, and several films with highly evolved computers such as "Hal" in 2001 a Space Odyssey which take on the power of choice and control.
Life does have something that electronic has not - so far anyway. We don't know what brought about that "something" though. There are theories mostly based on religious beliefs - one of those could be correct, or maybe there's another not yet envisioned that'd be a better fit.
We are a mystery waiting to be solved.
The future - or a future - has to exist if what the doctrine of physics tells us is correct. When scientists have eventually devised a way to access the/a future, by manipulating time, with the assistance of highly evolved computer technology, no doubt, that'll be the point when mysteries begin to be capable of solutions. Maybe.
DC & Twilight ~ I believe in free will *and* predestination, though if time is nonlinear -and God/Source/Universe is eternal, boundless and lives outside of time- then maybe there are multiple paths available, each with a different predestined outcome based upon how we choose to exercise our free will. Just like the boy with the NDE.:)
I think the point is we're constantly being offered choices as a way of encouraging us to increase our awareness, learn from mistakes and grow beyond our former limits.
This line of thought reminds me of the Robert Frost poem, "The Road Not Taken", excerpt below:
"I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."
LB ~ Two roads diverged in a yellow wood..... - yes I love that poem.
Re choices - I found this quotation. In the form of a metaphor it neatly defines several possibilities. They can all be boiled down to two though : when faced with a mountain you either tackle it in one of several ways, are then clear to travel beyond it; or you accept the mountain's presence and deal with it without progressing beyond it.
“If you are faced with a mountain, you have several options.
You can climb it and cross to the other side.
You can go around it.
You can dig under it.
You can fly over it.
You can blow it up.
You can ignore it and pretend it’s not there.
You can turn around and go back the way you came.
Or you can stay on the mountain and make it your home.”
― Vera Nazarian, The Perpetual Calendar of Inspiration
Hmmm - From a spiritual and moral perspective, I kind of see what you're saying, but I'm not so sure it's always as simple as either/or. Frequently there are more than 2 items on the menu, with each choice holding the potential to lead to another unique set of consequences and choices . . . and so on, and so on.:)
On the other hand, I do understand how if the mountain represents TRUTH in an absolute, universal sense, one that includes acting in alignment with that TRUTH - then yes, there are only 2 choices. However, since most of us are nowhere close to having the infallible perception and strength of character needed to make that clear a distinction, it follows that most of our choices will be more varied. We humans are imperfect travelers and while there may be many paths, not all paths are created equal, nor do all paths necessarily lead us to where we're meant to be. I'm not talking religious dogma here - I mean in terms of leading us towards something bigger than ourselves.
Philosophy can be kind of mind-bending, so who knows? It's a great way to kill time while doing laundry.:) Who knows what would've happened if I'd done something else instead - I'm not there yet.
I know what you mean about Cayce's writing. The same thing happens to me when I delve into it ...at a certain point my mind wanders too.
LB ~ Well, yes - routes to the same destination vary according to our individual abilities and tastes.
I was thinking less about two destinations or outcomes in a moral sense,more in a simple context of stuff which comes up day to day, some of which could have moral implications, some where neither destination would be either good or bad in a moral sense - just different.
I don't think all our choices have morals at their core - sometimes a choice is just a choice - imo. :-)
DC ~ He was too fluently able! ;-)
Twilight ~ Agreed.:) No doubt about it, some choices *don't* have a moral component, though I think both of the writers whose quotes we used (Robert Frost and Vera Nazarian) are referring to a different kind of choice, one that to some extent at least, is a reflection of our values.
If we grow organic fruit in our garden and choose between eating an apple or a peach for breakfast, then I agree, it probably won't make much difference in the long run. But it might make a difference that we chose to grow them organically in the first place and from whom we bought the seeds.:)
LB ~ Hmmm - yes a kind of family tree of choices - the apple or peach choice is the offspring of the choice of which soil and seeds were used, which could well have had a moral component.
You know, I've never read Robert Frost's poem in that light. I've usually tried to relate it to my own choice of paths through life. For instance, if I'd taken a job in the library instead of in the archivist's office after leaving school, where would I be now? Still in Oklahoma, or somewhere in England after having led a longtime librarian's existence?
That kind of thing.
Regarding the "mountain" quote, I guess that the author is a self-help writer, so maybe there is a moral implication within that - though even it can be read with the view that there's a decent life to be had either over the mountain or on it - it one tries hard enough.
Variations in our astrology can lead us to these slightly different ways of reading and seeing things - I guess. :-)
Twilight ~ Apparently Robert Frost would've agreed more with your interpretation! Our conversation got me curious, so I googled it:http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/a_f/frost/road.htm
It seems Robert Frost didn't intend for people to misinterpret his poem in the way I (and many others) have, possibly including M. Scott Peck, author of "The Road Less Traveled".
It's just a thought, but maybe the takeaway from all this is that the Divine (our higher selves/conscience) is always trying to speak to and through us, whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Each of us gets what we need or are open to receiving.
LB ~ That was an interesting read: various people's views on Robert Frost's poem! Thanks for the link.
I remember studying the poem at school (long, long ago), perhaps writing an essay about it too. So my interpretation is still coloured by how I read it then, and have thought about it very often since.
I always consider that poems are like paintings, in that whatever was in the poet's/painter's mind at the time of creating the piece isn't really important once the piece "goes public". At that point it's for each of us to see what we see, or read into it what we instinctively read into it.
It's at that point that your last suggestion could well come into play - "whether we are consciously aware of it or not".
:-)
Post a Comment