Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Activity is Acuity, by this I mean to take as an hypothesis that the two terms refer
to the same thing, that the one equals the other.
This of course implies its inverse, Acuity equals Activity. I wish to explain a way
in which this statement may be looked at as a comment about consciousness. I
wish to say that consciousness may be measured in systems by measuring their
activity and as a consequence I want to explore the relationship between
consciousness and the Turing test, and the location of consciousness/location of
information problem
No psychosis without neurosis (james) but also no neurosis without psychosis!
<A spell is a thing that becomes more true when it is spoken it may be related
to paradox>
meaning is painted in layers onto experience in the direction of the arrow of time,
meaning is accruing. this means that in a sense there is a teleology to existence.
Speech is rich in activity, it sets up complicated air currents for example, this is
why language as spoken is both so rich in meaning and intelligence, and also so
ephemeral and transitory.
chess is similar to speech and language in this way, whilst the game is played, a
kind of consciousness dwells within the board and pieces
life is sensorial one can think of all biological matter as being sensorial matter in
some way. not simply eyes and ears are sense organs, even cells, dna, viruses
are sensorial, they interact with there environment, exchanging or transacting or
sharing information, and are therefore not only sensorial in that sense but also
conscious in that sense.
I would like to mention at this point that there is no bias in my use of the word
system. A system is never in any way really contained, except in as much as it is
marked out by a decision. it is arbitrary, consciousness is a quality of any space,
regardless of how you bisect or reduce it.
the painting layers analogy, the lego men into the lego box analogy.
drugs are pathways to new activity via the information exchange between what
where two separate systems; the substance and the subject, the environment and
the individual.
the shamen is one who learns to make his move using the whole board.
you can declare, reality only contradicts you if it can catch you in a lie 20
questions anyone? see Popper, Dewey, Philip k dick for the schizoid, social
outcomes.
<also game theory>
hypothesis:
<all experianceable things are similar in some way to all other experianceable
things, they all share a binary base, all things are dissimilar from all other things
in some way, to be definable as a thing in relation to the other it must have
uniqueness in some way.
only things that are in some way similar to all other things and also in some way
different to all other things may exist. why? because a thing must be uniquely
identifiable to constitute a thing at all, and must be able to transact with the
other in order to be an experience???>
things are only true in as much as they are similar to other things and false in as
much as they are dissimilar from other things (the other)
I would like also in this paper to explore the nature of memory and imagination
<these things are also an activity and therefore real they are different to
external experiences like bricks or dreams. they may be a complicated bodily
movement that mimics the movement of external things>
emergent phenomena.
the emergent quality of consciousness is not any different to the other emergent
qualities we see elsewhere in nature, such as the turning of liquid water into ice.
I am also interested in the way godel and the puzzle guide to godel relate to truth
viewed in my system can we pull truth and falsehood out of our fundamental
physics???
<I wonder to myself right now whether I have had an insight as systemic and
synthesizing as hegels Wittgensteins or hiedeggers?? Will I try to formalize this
paper only to discover through careful study that my idea is rubbish? or if not
rubbish then a fairly mundane idea?? I hope not, I hope that this idea is as
interesting to others as it is to me, and I hope further that it turns out to be a
genuinely useful idea in the world It would be a very nice feeling indeed to be
one of the genuine pioneers in a great science and new phase in human
thought. heres hoping I am not mistaken.>
So another question that occurs to me is; what should I study? psychology, that is
where I suppose the crux of my thought is, logic/mathes/fundemental physics,
that is what I am hoping to derive organic chemistry hmmmmm