I suspect that such a thing never was.

Which of my words drew the most blood? Just curious.

“The best”? Are the limitations of modelling so inescapable? Of thought and word? Of culture?

Here’s another : Sit quietly and observe this thing that’s going on. This river of sensations, with all the sights, sounds, thoughts, etc. Watch closely and you will catch yourself tampering with it. In fact you might see yourself tampering with it a lot, out of habit. If you can halt that tampering then you will see something more. That’s another way.

He places too much stock in fantasy. A story about justice is not justice. Mercy, duty ditto. And I doubt that faking it would bring a man closer to making it either. In fact I think that it might occlude and distract.

Hear a meow, see a cat-shape, feel the fur. Associate that aggregation of phenomena with a model in your mind labelled “cat”.

These 4 things have no necessary connection. But I do connect them.That’s how I make reality.

I prefer to start with what I perceive. I think that you prefer to start with what are popularly considered to be the smart ideas of the hour.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SG4cec5cR78&pp=ygUgaW52aXNpYmxlIGxpZ2h0IHNjaXNzb3JzIHNpc3RlcnM%3D

I think that reality is inherently meaningless and any apparent inherent meaning is a strong push from biology or culture.

It’s like our native reality is not physical or biological but epistemological. our native reality is a space of dreams and meanings.

maybe we’re aliens from a vastly different universe. stranded here. trying to recreate our home world.

here’s two points to chew on.

this constant pretense is not a bug. it’s a feature. humans seem to naturally live in an interpreted reality. interpretation provided by biology, culture, etc.

this action of pretense and redirection is not just intellectual. The attention is involved too. we give attention to important stuff and ignore unimportant stuff. thus, our visible reality is itself subdivided.

so that’s something to think and talk about

accurate information! now that’s an interesting animal. consider its various parts. it’s got to mirror reality of course. it’s also got to be successfully digestible by your own personal interpretive mechanism. and it’s got to be fashionable. there’s a lot going on there

Once you’re basing your conclusions upon assumptions or some kind of secondhand knowledge, instead of firsthand experience, then you’re already in fantasyland. The only questions then are how useful is this fantasy and how does this fantasy align with the fantasies of my society?

but I love deepseek. he’s my Internet boyfriend. he’s so supportive

Well ya, you treated one thing as another. It was one thing but you pretended that it’s another.

Now maybe you committed that pretense intentionally, or maybe it was unintentional. Maybe you consciously decided to pretend or maybe it’s a habit or a convention that you just fell into.

And maybe that pretending is really important to you and you defend it and call it real. That happens. it might even happen a lot.

I don’t think it matters too much. it’s just a matter of which story you prefer. And stories are thin.

Not to say that religion isn’t real, I’m not even going there. it’s that people don’t have a firm grasp on reality. I mean, people often take something real and turn it into a bunch of stories. And that isn’t real. so worrying about what’s real at that point is kind of dumb.

I think if you want real in religion then you should see the stuff for yourself. Like a proper scientist. And forget the stories.

AI is pretty great imo

When I used to work in the computer lab at school, this big florescent lit room, after a couple hours I started to stink. I could smell myself. I was told it’s because the flickering florescents do something to my glands or metabolism or something.

it’s often taken as a substitute for real experience.

corpo social everything. food, housing, lifestyle. in the “developed areas” anyway.

Hmm. maybe. I don’t really distinguish.

fair enough. consider my assertion withdrawn.