A conversation about anthro, determinism and other such deep stuff
Gary and I ended up having a nice, long talk about various related topics springing from our readings in The Moral Animal and The Journey of Man. I thought it might be good to show some of this conversation, so that other people can belatedly join it! i.e. You can make points off of the stuff Gary and I said. Gary said it was fine with him to post this. I included a lot of the convo in it to help y'all with context, but feel free to skip to the "juicy" parts! And please do post your thoughts on this, even if you haven't read these books; I'm sure you have thoughts on the thoughts that we raised. I used asterisks to mark deleted parts. Also, I've broken the convo into different parts, with these nice lj-cuts:
P.S. I took a good bit of time formatting of this, so I desperately ask you to please check it out and ponder some stuff and comment something serious. (Although feel free to be goofy, too.)
jethromatt99 (8:08:47 PM): hey, i got a couple of questions for you
jethromatt99 (8:08:56 PM): 1. are you still into discussing our two anthro books?
jethromatt99 (8:09:05 PM): i could try to set that up with joe
Pariah247 (8:09:09 PM): i read the first 40 pages of journey of man
jethromatt99 (8:09:18 PM): nice. whaddya think?
jethromatt99 (8:09:23 PM): you're still in the intro stuff, i think
jethromatt99 (8:09:32 PM): the background to anthro and genetics
Pariah247 (8:09:35 PM): i really like how they used to "classify" different ethnicities
jethromatt99 (8:09:40 PM): yeah!
jethromatt99 (8:09:44 PM): ain't that crazy?
jethromatt99 (8:09:52 PM): and separate evolution theories!
Pariah247 (8:09:55 PM): some islanders were put into a "monsterus" category or something
jethromatt99 (8:10:08 PM): europeans from neanderthals, asians from homo erectus, etc.
jethromatt99 (8:10:09 PM): lol
* * *
jethromatt99 (8:10:31 PM): i finished the moral animal [Gary already read this a good while ago.]
jethromatt99 (8:10:34 PM): man
Pariah247 (8:10:36 PM): awesome
jethromatt99 (8:11:02 PM): 1. Wright has formulated into words ideas that had been floating around in my brain the last couple of years
jethromatt99 (8:11:07 PM): 2. He has gone above and beyond
jethromatt99 (8:11:09 PM): it rocks
jethromatt99 (8:11:22 PM): although the last couple of chapters seemed sketchy
Pariah247 (8:11:25 PM): yeah, that book changed how i saw things, and i really pursued that line of thought thereafter
jethromatt99 (8:11:30 PM): i can see where he was going with it,
jethromatt99 (8:11:38 PM): but he didn't write that part as lucidly as he did the rest
Pariah247 (8:11:41 PM): he crammed a bunch of stuff in at the end that merited more pages
jethromatt99 (8:11:48 PM): YES
jethromatt99 (8:11:54 PM): i have one big question for you:
Pariah247 (8:11:55 PM): free will especially
jethromatt99 (8:11:57 PM): YES
Pariah247 (8:12:16 PM): that's the question that lies at the heart of everything
jethromatt99 (8:12:23 PM): at some points, he seems to advocate determinism, and a lot of his previous points point to determinism,
jethromatt99 (8:12:40 PM): yet, in other points, he talks of people choosing to act differently
Pariah247 (8:12:57 PM): yeah, but i do remember him saying at one point:
Pariah247 (8:13:08 PM): "on strictly intellectual grounds, free will does not exist"
jethromatt99 (8:13:11 PM): and at other points, he talks of people having natural tendencies (knobs), but that the knobs can be turned
jethromatt99 (8:13:12 PM): YES
Pariah247 (8:13:19 PM): knobs can be turned
Pariah247 (8:13:25 PM): but not within, per se
jethromatt99 (8:13:31 PM): environment, yeah
Pariah247 (8:13:34 PM): someone who goes through therapy can have their behavior changed
jethromatt99 (8:13:41 PM): i can totally buy into that
Pariah247 (8:14:05 PM): we're basically at the mercy of images that form in our heads, which guide our actions
jethromatt99 (8:14:05 PM): but, what seems not to add up is that he shows little hope for free will and then advocates people making a conscious choice to be more moral
Pariah247 (8:14:13 PM): i know
jethromatt99 (8:14:17 PM): what's your take?
Pariah247 (8:14:45 PM): well, we don't technically have free will, as he mentions, since "free" implies without cause
Pariah247 (8:15:10 PM): but it feels like we have free will, which is good enough
Pariah247 (8:15:38 PM): and that's explained by a lot of really complicated quantum physics that i can't really put into language
jethromatt99 (8:16:04 PM): but that is a convoluted line of reasoning (about it "feeling like free will")
jethromatt99 (8:16:06 PM): but yeah,
jethromatt99 (8:16:10 PM): quantum physics
jethromatt99 (8:16:25 PM): and, yes, ideas at this level have a hard time in the language part of our brains
jethromatt99 (8:16:25 PM): haha
Pariah247 (8:16:28 PM): perception is reality in a way . . . feeling is good enough
Pariah247 (8:17:40 PM): but personally . . . i can't use free will as an excuse for people to avoid, say, criminal behavior when they grow up ina ghetto
Pariah247 (8:18:11 PM): but yet, we have to punish them . . . it's really crazy
jethromatt99 (8:18:16 PM): yeah, therein is a paradox:
jethromatt99 (8:18:32 PM): if all come to believe they have no free will, then there can be anarchy
Pariah247 (8:18:34 PM): utilitarian priniples
Pariah247 (8:18:37 PM): right
jethromatt99 (8:18:41 PM): and people will just be like, "Well, I have no free will."
Pariah247 (8:18:46 PM): exactly
jethromatt99 (8:18:47 PM): oy
jethromatt99 (8:19:02 PM): here's a question:
Pariah247 (8:19:04 PM): once i get to this point, i always just say," screw it" and just try to enjoy life
Pariah247 (8:19:05 PM): haha
jethromatt99 (8:20:28 PM): is it possible for people to sometimes have free will (in the "I think, therefore I am" sense). In other words, if people are fully conscious of their actions and, say, have an understanding of evolutionary psychology, they can remove themselves from "the box." But, that, for the most part, people do go through life "as sheep." ?
jethromatt99 (8:21:24 PM): now, when i get to this point, things get so hard to articulate
Pariah247 (8:21:26 PM): well, i think once you have an understanding of it all, it just makes you second guess just about everything that you do and that everyone else does
* * *
Pariah247 (8:23:09 PM): ever heard of the "flynn effect"
jethromatt99 (8:23:12 PM): nope
Pariah247 (8:23:50 PM): a landmark study that showed that pretty much everyone in any civilized country on earth has rose in their IQ scores over the past 50 years
Pariah247 (8:24:07 PM): with each generation improving . . . that's why we have to re-norm the tests and thus make them more difficult
jethromatt99 (8:24:31 PM): what are the implications of that study, besides remaking the test?
jethromatt99 (8:24:41 PM): people are simply more educated?
Pariah247 (8:24:44 PM): anyway, the author attributes this increase to a general but very abstract increase in our problem solving ability
jethromatt99 (8:24:54 PM): oh, interesting
jethromatt99 (8:24:59 PM): so, "real IQ"
Pariah247 (8:25:01 PM): not really, because IQ doesn't necessarily have to do with achievement
jethromatt99 (8:25:04 PM): right
Pariah247 (8:25:11 PM): so there's some process that is just evolving . . .
jethromatt99 (8:25:12 PM): but, tests can be fallible; i wasn't sure if that was the reason
jethromatt99 (8:25:24 PM): man,
Pariah247 (8:25:25 PM): they're pretty statistically sound
Pariah247 (8:25:32 PM): so here's the thing:
jethromatt99 (8:25:40 PM): that'd take some big trend to have such large populations involving in sync
Pariah247 (8:26:02 PM): my thought is that this same increase in "abstract problem solving" has to correleate somewhat with our ability so grasp metaphysical issues . . .
jethromatt99 (8:26:03 PM): i mean, it's not like dumb people are simply dying or not reproducing
jethromatt99 (8:26:13 PM): yeah, i'm with you
Pariah247 (8:26:26 PM): . . . which would explain partly why we're far less "spiritual" than we were 100 years ago
Pariah247 (8:26:52 PM): we are better equipped to understand alternative explanations to previously unexplainable pheneomena
jethromatt99 (8:27:17 PM): but...and maybe you can answer this better after reading more of the Journey book...what is driving this evolution?
jethromatt99 (8:27:26 PM): evolution can't just happen because
Pariah247 (8:27:27 PM): that's the question that no one can answer
Pariah247 (8:27:30 PM): and the ultimate question
Pariah247 (8:27:39 PM): we can't comprehend it
Pariah247 (8:27:48 PM): because even if something WERE driving it. . .
Pariah247 (8:27:54 PM): what would be driving THAT force . . .
Pariah247 (8:27:56 PM): ad infinitum
Pariah247 (8:28:12 PM): it can't be solved with the human mind, because we cannot comprehend infinity
jethromatt99 (8:29:20 PM): but, we can solve what drives certain aspects of evolution....and, if our population is currently evolving, there should be theories as to how
Pariah247 (8:29:26 PM): no matter what theory anyone pushes forward, one can always ask, "well what came before that?"
Pariah247 (8:29:40 PM): yeah, we can explain aspects of evolution, but never the force that drives everything
jethromatt99 (8:29:52 PM): right, i think maybe i should've used another word besides "drive"
Pariah247 (8:29:53 PM): all we can come up with is God
jethromatt99 (8:29:56 PM): i didn't mean my question as deeply
jethromatt99 (8:30:07 PM): i mean, what evolutionary factor is behind this trend?
Pariah247 (8:30:25 PM): oh, that is actually solvable
jethromatt99 (8:30:59 PM): i mean, there are various factors on evolution: 1. Death (removal from gene pool). 2. No sex or lots of sex 3. Genetic drift (randomness) 4. Mutations
Pariah247 (8:31:32 PM): well, the human brain continually "drives" to understand its environment, which functions to accomplish everything you just said
Pariah247 (8:31:41 PM): the better we predict, the better our survival chances
jethromatt99 (8:32:01 PM): yes...
Pariah247 (8:32:05 PM): and predicting has a lot to do with utilizing metaphysical theories to explain the universe
jethromatt99 (8:32:31 PM): so, is this more than just genetic evolution that we're speaking of, but also...memetic?
jethromatt99 (8:32:41 PM): or is the brain actually changing?
Pariah247 (8:32:53 PM): brain is changing
jethromatt99 (8:38:12 PM): so, does free will require an infinitely powerful brain?
jethromatt99 (8:38:18 PM): (which, of course, cannot exist)
Pariah247 (8:38:37 PM): free will would mean that there would have to be a god or some magical force
Pariah247 (8:38:44 PM): and that we are all in possession of that magical force
Pariah247 (8:39:00 PM): but "magical" i mean that we can't possibly explain it naturally
jethromatt99 (8:39:03 PM): i tend to agree
Pariah247 (8:39:20 PM): every behavior has a neuro basis, which has a basis in atoms, which have basis in quarks . . .
Pariah247 (8:39:26 PM): and it goes on and on and on
jethromatt99 (8:39:46 PM): i tend to agree
jethromatt99 (8:39:51 PM): freaky, huh?
Pariah247 (8:39:58 PM): haha yeah
jethromatt99 (8:40:00 PM): and it's at this point that i say, "Ah well" and go on with life
jethromatt99 (8:40:02 PM): haha
Pariah247 (8:40:06 PM): right on dude
jethromatt99 (8:40:10 PM): but yet i always come back to it
jethromatt99 (8:40:11 PM): oy
Pariah247 (8:40:14 PM): cuz there's nothing we can do once we're aware of it
Pariah247 (8:40:53 PM): i say do your duty in life and ride off into the sunset when your time comes, haha
Pariah247 (8:42:07 PM): i say whatever is most fullfilling
* * *
Pariah247 (8:43:20 PM): for me, it's having a family and taking care of kids
jethromatt99 (8:43:30 PM): so, that is your "meaning of life"
jethromatt99 (8:43:30 PM): ?
Pariah247 (8:43:35 PM): yep
jethromatt99 (8:43:42 PM): very biological of you ;D
jethromatt99 (8:43:47 PM): wright would be proud
jethromatt99 (8:43:55 PM): and, i tend to agree with you
Pariah247 (8:43:55 PM): haha, well, it's built into me
Pariah247 (8:43:58 PM): i don't have to force myself
jethromatt99 (8:43:58 PM): precisely
* * *
Pariah247 (8:45:08 PM): just gotta do things that are meaningful to you . . .i like creating art projects and working with kids
Pariah247 (8:45:41 PM): that's the way i see it anyway
jethromatt99 (8:45:44 PM): here, check this out. it's something that got my mind going a few weeks ago. i sort of got tongue-in-cheek with it, but i really was deeply intrigued by it: http://www.livejournal.com/users/mattphillips11/10433.html
* * *
jethromatt99 (8:47:04 PM): i don't think many people can comprehend living side-by-side with another intelligent species
jethromatt99 (8:47:13 PM): terrestrial or extraterrestrial
jethromatt99 (8:47:22 PM): they make this big human-animal dichotomy
jethromatt99 (8:47:28 PM): which is false
Pariah247 (8:47:34 PM): haha they'd just be treated like every ethnic group was upon their discovery by white people
jethromatt99 (8:47:38 PM): BUT
jethromatt99 (8:47:53 PM): the big difference would be that Neanderthals really would be stupider
jethromatt99 (8:47:58 PM): intelligent, yes, but still dumber
Pariah247 (8:47:58 PM): yep
Pariah247 (8:48:02 PM): MUCH dumber
jethromatt99 (8:48:24 PM): so, would it be okay to "domesticate" them as we did with horses and such?
jethromatt99 (8:48:34 PM): or would we see them as "quasi-human"?
* * *
Pariah247 (8:49:03 PM): they basically "stopped" [evolving]
jethromatt99 (8:49:08 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (8:49:14 PM): they fit their environment well enough
Pariah247 (8:49:15 PM): so we're just way ahead of them
jethromatt99 (8:49:17 PM): until humans came
jethromatt99 (8:49:34 PM): here's a question for you, then: are humans more evolved than cockroaches?
Pariah247 (8:49:52 PM): we've underdone more changes
jethromatt99 (8:50:02 PM): true, in that sense
Pariah247 (8:50:03 PM): but there's a chicken and egg problem within that question
jethromatt99 (8:50:04 PM): good point
jethromatt99 (8:50:11 PM): yeah?
jethromatt99 (8:50:40 PM): oh the literal chicken-and-egg question is easy to answer: The egg came first.
Pariah247 (8:50:46 PM): once we began to develop foresight (quasi-free will i guess) we started that whole evolutionary arms race deal that wright talks about
Pariah247 (8:50:53 PM): which expedites our evolution
Pariah247 (8:51:01 PM): haha
jethromatt99 (8:51:19 PM): it's harder to answer why the chicken crossed the road
Pariah247 (8:51:23 PM): yup
jethromatt99 (8:51:26 PM): crossing the road must've served some genetic purpose
Pariah247 (8:51:27 PM): the world will never know
jethromatt99 (8:53:23 PM): haha
jethromatt99 (8:53:30 PM): man, evolutionary biology humor
Pariah247 (8:53:40 PM): a new low in geekdom
Pariah247 (8:53:42 PM): or maybe a new high
* * *
jethromatt99 (8:57:56 PM): okay, for starters, have you taken any computer science at all? if not, i'm sure you understand algorithms, though...very simple idea
jethromatt99 (8:58:26 PM): (and during the course of this thought, please do NOT think of The Matrix too much...this idea is really much different than the one in that movie)
Pariah247 (8:58:58 PM): i have a book by von neuman called "the computer and the brain"
Pariah247 (8:59:02 PM): that's about it though
Pariah247 (8:59:12 PM): i understand algorithms . . . they're basically just logic
jethromatt99 (8:59:14 PM): well, this doesn't have to do with neuroscience...not directly, at least
jethromatt99 (8:59:17 PM): yeah, precisely
jethromatt99 (8:59:24 PM): coded steps for doing something
jethromatt99 (8:59:30 PM): taking in variables and working with them
Pariah247 (8:59:44 PM): yeah, equations
jethromatt99 (9:00:07 PM): genes are really just variables in the evolution algorithm (no, that's not my deep thought; that's just a statement)
jethromatt99 (9:00:38 PM): Wrights book is very clear on that idea, using different language
Pariah247 (9:00:44 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (9:00:45 PM): and Wells' book, too
Pariah247 (9:00:54 PM): it all boils down to numbers
jethromatt99 (9:00:56 PM): okay, so here's the idea:
jethromatt99 (9:01:22 PM): The "algorithm" behind genetics is fairly simple...survival, procreation, drift, and mutation
jethromatt99 (9:01:36 PM): a 1920s computer could've handled such an algorithm
jethromatt99 (9:01:40 PM): now,
jethromatt99 (9:02:09 PM): picture a supercomputer that mimics the geology of a planet (one or two do exist...to predict future natural disasters)
jethromatt99 (9:03:00 PM): i.e. it has a program that contains a wealth of organized information on a planet
jethromatt99 (9:03:03 PM): with me so far?
jethromatt99 (9:03:17 PM): a. An organism algorithm
jethromatt99 (9:03:29 PM): and b. A "universe" program
Pariah247 (9:03:42 PM): yeah . . .
jethromatt99 (9:03:54 PM): (Yes, a whole universe would be too complicated to put into code form...but shortcuts can be used for what i'm about to propose)
Pariah247 (9:04:08 PM): well the first was actually done and talked about in the book kind of
Pariah247 (9:04:24 PM): best part of the book i thought. a cpu program called "tit for tat"
jethromatt99 (9:04:29 PM): i believe anthropological studies could be made if the life-algorithm was "unleashed" in the Planet program
jethromatt99 (9:04:36 PM): oh yeah, wright is big on tit for tat!
jethromatt99 (9:04:39 PM): follow this:
jethromatt99 (9:05:40 PM): Evolution itself could be studied, as people observing the program could see how early "organisms" branched out and evolved into more and more complex "organisms"
jethromatt99 (9:05:56 PM): is that followable so far?
jethromatt99 (9:06:00 PM): (i'm not done yet)
Pariah247 (9:06:10 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (9:06:22 PM): (it's not your brightness i doubt; it's my ability to articulate that i doubt)
Pariah247 (9:06:43 PM): np, i gotcha
jethromatt99 (9:06:48 PM): so many things can be studied using such a thing
jethromatt99 (9:06:57 PM): especially if more than one study were conducted at once,
jethromatt99 (9:07:04 PM): so that comparisons could be made
jethromatt99 (9:07:24 PM): the most mind-blowing stuff could be learn when "intelligent designs" appear in the program [Editor's note: Dammit, I meant to say "intelligent beings." No doubt this threw Gary off. Woops.]
jethromatt99 (9:07:27 PM): *learned
Pariah247 (9:07:29 PM): i know what you mean . . . i wonder if it has been done
jethromatt99 (9:07:36 PM): well not to the extent i'm thinking
jethromatt99 (9:07:44 PM): because computers aren't quite yet advanced enough
Pariah247 (9:07:54 PM): there are just so many factors that come into play
jethromatt99 (9:07:54 PM): each human brain is about 6 terrabytes
jethromatt99 (9:07:59 PM): right
jethromatt99 (9:08:00 PM): so many do
Pariah247 (9:08:01 PM): i read that
jethromatt99 (9:08:12 PM): i mean, nothing like humans would come about in the program, i'm sure
jethromatt99 (9:08:22 PM): if intelligent species arose, they'd be "alien" if you know what i mean
Pariah247 (9:08:38 PM): yeah
Pariah247 (9:08:49 PM): well, the problem would be time i think
jethromatt99 (9:09:05 PM): but, here's what's really far-out: If a computer could be used that was powerful enough (maybe possible in 50 years), people could actually LEARN from these fake beings
jethromatt99 (9:09:10 PM): yeah, evolution would have to be speeded up
jethromatt99 (9:09:16 PM): i'm not sure how well that could work
jethromatt99 (9:09:22 PM): and if that would invalidate the experiment
Pariah247 (9:09:23 PM): who knows what will happen in 500 years
Pariah247 (9:09:40 PM): nanotechnology i think will reshape the world
jethromatt99 (9:09:43 PM): plus, there could be studies with religious implications:
jethromatt99 (9:10:04 PM): what i proposed would basically be a Deist universe...the programmers would be the clockmakers
jethromatt99 (9:10:17 PM): BUT
Pariah247 (9:10:19 PM): maybe something has already started
jethromatt99 (9:12:40 PM): the programmers could choose to interfere with their intelligent beings. so, picture a Deist universe created and picture smart little nano-beings walking about, pondering the questions that we humans question. And many believe in God and some do not. Now, picture that same exact environment copied over to another program, only this time, the programmers alter the code so that random things happen that defy Physics. Would every single one of those nano-beings then believe in God? Such a comparison could have affect humans discussions on religion.
jethromatt99 (9:12:46 PM): it's possible
jethromatt99 (9:13:07 PM): like i said, there are supercomputers already in existence [that] condense Earth into digital form
jethromatt99 (9:13:15 PM): but i think they're only used for Geology
Pariah247 (9:13:34 PM): i think they would believe in god still
Pariah247 (9:13:42 PM): because we'll always need to cope with death
jethromatt99 (9:13:44 PM): would they believe in God MORE, i mean?
Pariah247 (9:13:48 PM): even if we can explain the unexplainable in our world
jethromatt99 (9:13:52 PM): i.e. would there be no atheists?
jethromatt99 (9:14:01 PM): in the nanoworld, that is
Pariah247 (9:14:07 PM): if we saw magic before our eyes, we couldn't just submit to natural explanation
jethromatt99 (9:14:33 PM): but, what is "magic" and what is simply the "not-understood?"
Pariah247 (9:14:40 PM): and i'm not sure we could create things that defy physics
Pariah247 (9:14:49 PM): cuz their physics would be the same as ours
jethromatt99 (9:14:51 PM): in a computer-generated world, we could
Pariah247 (9:15:07 PM): magic can't be explained by physics . . . we can't comprehend magic . . . it's like trying to think of a new color
jethromatt99 (9:15:09 PM): because we could suddenly give on of the beings the ability to float
jethromatt99 (9:15:15 PM): for example
Pariah247 (9:15:22 PM): even in a cpu generated world, we only have our own math and physical laws
jethromatt99 (9:15:30 PM): right, but we can progam magic in
jethromatt99 (9:15:36 PM): it's not real; it's digital
jethromatt99 (9:15:40 PM): just look at sci-fi computer games
jethromatt99 (9:15:56 PM): we could make a computer-Gary and suddenly give him the ability to shoot death rays out of his butt
jethromatt99 (9:16:07 PM): how would computer-Matt explain that?
Pariah247 (9:16:21 PM): but the physiscists and other various scientists would undoubetly study this death ray-shooting gary
jethromatt99 (9:16:39 PM): and they'd probably presume that there IS an explanation, even if they can't think of one
Pariah247 (9:16:43 PM): the laser would have to come from somewhere
jethromatt99 (9:16:50 PM): right
Pariah247 (9:16:59 PM): right, they'd immediately presume god until a better explanation came around
jethromatt99 (9:17:07 PM): well, i disagree
jethromatt99 (9:17:11 PM): well
jethromatt99 (9:17:19 PM): most of the nano-folk WOULD presume god
jethromatt99 (9:17:25 PM): but, would computer-stephen-hawking?
jethromatt99 (9:17:40 PM): or would he say, "I don't understand. But that doesn't mean that there isn't an explanation."?
Pariah247 (9:17:50 PM): someone like him would postulate a scientific explanation
jethromatt99 (9:18:06 PM): anyhoo, that's just one possible tangent such a project could take
jethromatt99 (9:18:20 PM): i mean, the life algorithm would be SO SIMPLE
jethromatt99 (9:18:28 PM): it'd just be tougher to create the environment
Pariah247 (9:18:36 PM): what'd be interesting is whether or not their thoughts would evolve even if their supposed brains didn't (assuming everything remains static in their world)
jethromatt99 (9:18:38 PM): and then have a computer to handle all of the variable
jethromatt99 (9:18:39 PM): s
jethromatt99 (9:18:46 PM): well, see,
jethromatt99 (9:18:51 PM): that's the difference
jethromatt99 (9:18:56 PM): this wouldn't be like the matrix
Pariah247 (9:19:02 PM): that's where stuff like memes come into play i guess
jethromatt99 (9:19:04 PM): evolution would be in the algorithm
jethromatt99 (9:19:29 PM): yeah, but wouldn't memes be a result of evolutionary devlopment?
jethromatt99 (9:19:33 PM): i mean, they don't exist on their own
jethromatt99 (9:19:55 PM): what i propose is that the original algorithm be of a simple single-celled organism
jethromatt99 (9:20:08 PM): but that, programmed in it are the mechanisms of evolution
jethromatt99 (9:20:32 PM): thus, brains would evolve
Pariah247 (9:20:52 PM): oh ok
jethromatt99 (9:20:52 PM): see what i mean?
jethromatt99 (9:21:03 PM): this is radically different than The Matrix
jethromatt99 (9:21:08 PM): in that, a static world was created
jethromatt99 (9:21:18 PM): and, besides, real human brains were needed
jethromatt99 (9:21:31 PM): this would be flexible, not static, and it'd be self-contained--all digital, no humans needed
jethromatt99 (9:21:59 PM): simply create the primeval world
jethromatt99 (9:22:08 PM): matter and the recipe for basic life
jethromatt99 (9:22:26 PM): the environment itself would have to be flexible, too--not static
jethromatt99 (9:22:36 PM): weather, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc.
jethromatt99 (9:22:43 PM): because that's what spurs evolution
jethromatt99 (9:23:09 PM): i'd also say that it'd be easier not to try to replicate earth
jethromatt99 (9:23:13 PM): that'd be too complicated
jethromatt99 (9:23:19 PM): but, any planet can be made
* * *
Pariah247 (9:25:42 PM): but i may be wrong . . . i just know that private experience is unique to all of us, and we can't say that our nano-people would have that
jethromatt99 (9:25:43 PM): i mean, the world created would be deterministic...but vastly more complicated than each "nano-being"
jethromatt99 (9:25:55 PM): assuming determinism
Pariah247 (9:26:07 PM): yeah, determinism is there
jethromatt99 (9:26:13 PM): i mean, just following Wright's logic out
jethromatt99 (9:26:22 PM): evolutionary psychology, baby
Pariah247 (9:26:25 PM): yeah, it's all probably logically sound
Pariah247 (9:26:33 PM): since everything ultimately boils down to math
jethromatt99 (9:26:52 PM): so, who knows,
jethromatt99 (9:27:01 PM): hence the experiment
jethromatt99 (9:27:05 PM): what do you think of the idea?
Pariah247 (9:27:13 PM): it's definitely possible
jethromatt99 (9:27:15 PM): i mean, i think scientists should try
jethromatt99 (9:27:20 PM): so many studies could be done
Pariah247 (9:27:23 PM): they probably have or are planning on it
Pariah247 (9:27:47 PM): but it's practically impossible in this day and age to simulate every factor that affects our behavior
Pariah247 (9:27:59 PM): boiling down to quantum physics
Pariah247 (9:28:07 PM): and whatever comes before that . . .
jethromatt99 (9:28:26 PM): right...it'd be the first cause sorts of things that could put a big asterisk next to the project
jethromatt99 (9:28:41 PM): i mean, a newtonian world would have to be programmed as the environment
Pariah247 (9:28:53 PM): if we ourselves can't understand the ultimate nature of our behavior, i'm not sure--
Pariah247 (9:29:01 PM): so it all goes back to first cause again
jethromatt99 (9:29:28 PM): right
jethromatt99 (9:29:34 PM): there would be limitations
jethromatt99 (9:29:44 PM): but, a newtonian world could at least be programmed
jethromatt99 (9:29:56 PM): it could still have worth
jethromatt99 (9:30:04 PM): just like Tit-for-Tat
Pariah247 (9:30:06 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (9:30:10 PM): studies like that aren't answer-alls
jethromatt99 (9:30:13 PM): but they sure have implications
jethromatt99 (9:30:32 PM): anyhoo, i was right proud of myself for that thought :-D
Pariah247 (9:30:37 PM): i think tit for tat is underrated
jethromatt99 (9:30:53 PM): and i give NO credit to keanu reeves
* * *
jethromatt99 (9:33:31 PM): well, that was my deep thought
jethromatt99 (9:33:36 PM): hopefully it was worthy of your time
Pariah247 (9:34:04 PM): yeah, it makes me think a ton, which i need to stop doing
Pariah247 (9:34:28 PM): i think there's a diminishing returns thing that goes on when you think too much
jethromatt99 (9:34:37 PM): i agree
* * *
Pariah247 (9:45:16 PM): haha you can show it to everyone if you want
jethromatt99 (9:45:58 PM): i think it'll be good to spur discussion for people who really wanna read it
Pariah247 (9:46:28 PM): yeah
Pariah247 (9:46:33 PM): as long as it doesn't scare anyone away
Pariah247 (9:48:31 PM): i must be off to watch wrestling
Pariah247 (9:48:56 PM): what better way to follow talk about quantum physics
P.S. I took a good bit of time formatting of this, so I desperately ask you to please check it out and ponder some stuff and comment something serious. (Although feel free to be goofy, too.)
jethromatt99 (8:08:47 PM): hey, i got a couple of questions for you
jethromatt99 (8:08:56 PM): 1. are you still into discussing our two anthro books?
jethromatt99 (8:09:05 PM): i could try to set that up with joe
Pariah247 (8:09:09 PM): i read the first 40 pages of journey of man
jethromatt99 (8:09:18 PM): nice. whaddya think?
jethromatt99 (8:09:23 PM): you're still in the intro stuff, i think
jethromatt99 (8:09:32 PM): the background to anthro and genetics
Pariah247 (8:09:35 PM): i really like how they used to "classify" different ethnicities
jethromatt99 (8:09:40 PM): yeah!
jethromatt99 (8:09:44 PM): ain't that crazy?
jethromatt99 (8:09:52 PM): and separate evolution theories!
Pariah247 (8:09:55 PM): some islanders were put into a "monsterus" category or something
jethromatt99 (8:10:08 PM): europeans from neanderthals, asians from homo erectus, etc.
jethromatt99 (8:10:09 PM): lol
* * *
jethromatt99 (8:10:31 PM): i finished the moral animal [Gary already read this a good while ago.]
jethromatt99 (8:10:34 PM): man
Pariah247 (8:10:36 PM): awesome
jethromatt99 (8:11:02 PM): 1. Wright has formulated into words ideas that had been floating around in my brain the last couple of years
jethromatt99 (8:11:07 PM): 2. He has gone above and beyond
jethromatt99 (8:11:09 PM): it rocks
jethromatt99 (8:11:22 PM): although the last couple of chapters seemed sketchy
Pariah247 (8:11:25 PM): yeah, that book changed how i saw things, and i really pursued that line of thought thereafter
jethromatt99 (8:11:30 PM): i can see where he was going with it,
jethromatt99 (8:11:38 PM): but he didn't write that part as lucidly as he did the rest
Pariah247 (8:11:41 PM): he crammed a bunch of stuff in at the end that merited more pages
jethromatt99 (8:11:48 PM): YES
jethromatt99 (8:11:54 PM): i have one big question for you:
Pariah247 (8:11:55 PM): free will especially
jethromatt99 (8:11:57 PM): YES
Pariah247 (8:12:16 PM): that's the question that lies at the heart of everything
jethromatt99 (8:12:23 PM): at some points, he seems to advocate determinism, and a lot of his previous points point to determinism,
jethromatt99 (8:12:40 PM): yet, in other points, he talks of people choosing to act differently
Pariah247 (8:12:57 PM): yeah, but i do remember him saying at one point:
Pariah247 (8:13:08 PM): "on strictly intellectual grounds, free will does not exist"
jethromatt99 (8:13:11 PM): and at other points, he talks of people having natural tendencies (knobs), but that the knobs can be turned
jethromatt99 (8:13:12 PM): YES
Pariah247 (8:13:19 PM): knobs can be turned
Pariah247 (8:13:25 PM): but not within, per se
jethromatt99 (8:13:31 PM): environment, yeah
Pariah247 (8:13:34 PM): someone who goes through therapy can have their behavior changed
jethromatt99 (8:13:41 PM): i can totally buy into that
Pariah247 (8:14:05 PM): we're basically at the mercy of images that form in our heads, which guide our actions
jethromatt99 (8:14:05 PM): but, what seems not to add up is that he shows little hope for free will and then advocates people making a conscious choice to be more moral
Pariah247 (8:14:13 PM): i know
jethromatt99 (8:14:17 PM): what's your take?
Pariah247 (8:14:45 PM): well, we don't technically have free will, as he mentions, since "free" implies without cause
Pariah247 (8:15:10 PM): but it feels like we have free will, which is good enough
Pariah247 (8:15:38 PM): and that's explained by a lot of really complicated quantum physics that i can't really put into language
jethromatt99 (8:16:04 PM): but that is a convoluted line of reasoning (about it "feeling like free will")
jethromatt99 (8:16:06 PM): but yeah,
jethromatt99 (8:16:10 PM): quantum physics
jethromatt99 (8:16:25 PM): and, yes, ideas at this level have a hard time in the language part of our brains
jethromatt99 (8:16:25 PM): haha
Pariah247 (8:16:28 PM): perception is reality in a way . . . feeling is good enough
Pariah247 (8:17:40 PM): but personally . . . i can't use free will as an excuse for people to avoid, say, criminal behavior when they grow up ina ghetto
Pariah247 (8:18:11 PM): but yet, we have to punish them . . . it's really crazy
jethromatt99 (8:18:16 PM): yeah, therein is a paradox:
jethromatt99 (8:18:32 PM): if all come to believe they have no free will, then there can be anarchy
Pariah247 (8:18:34 PM): utilitarian priniples
Pariah247 (8:18:37 PM): right
jethromatt99 (8:18:41 PM): and people will just be like, "Well, I have no free will."
Pariah247 (8:18:46 PM): exactly
jethromatt99 (8:18:47 PM): oy
jethromatt99 (8:19:02 PM): here's a question:
Pariah247 (8:19:04 PM): once i get to this point, i always just say," screw it" and just try to enjoy life
Pariah247 (8:19:05 PM): haha
jethromatt99 (8:20:28 PM): is it possible for people to sometimes have free will (in the "I think, therefore I am" sense). In other words, if people are fully conscious of their actions and, say, have an understanding of evolutionary psychology, they can remove themselves from "the box." But, that, for the most part, people do go through life "as sheep." ?
jethromatt99 (8:21:24 PM): now, when i get to this point, things get so hard to articulate
Pariah247 (8:21:26 PM): well, i think once you have an understanding of it all, it just makes you second guess just about everything that you do and that everyone else does
* * *
Pariah247 (8:23:09 PM): ever heard of the "flynn effect"
jethromatt99 (8:23:12 PM): nope
Pariah247 (8:23:50 PM): a landmark study that showed that pretty much everyone in any civilized country on earth has rose in their IQ scores over the past 50 years
Pariah247 (8:24:07 PM): with each generation improving . . . that's why we have to re-norm the tests and thus make them more difficult
jethromatt99 (8:24:31 PM): what are the implications of that study, besides remaking the test?
jethromatt99 (8:24:41 PM): people are simply more educated?
Pariah247 (8:24:44 PM): anyway, the author attributes this increase to a general but very abstract increase in our problem solving ability
jethromatt99 (8:24:54 PM): oh, interesting
jethromatt99 (8:24:59 PM): so, "real IQ"
Pariah247 (8:25:01 PM): not really, because IQ doesn't necessarily have to do with achievement
jethromatt99 (8:25:04 PM): right
Pariah247 (8:25:11 PM): so there's some process that is just evolving . . .
jethromatt99 (8:25:12 PM): but, tests can be fallible; i wasn't sure if that was the reason
jethromatt99 (8:25:24 PM): man,
Pariah247 (8:25:25 PM): they're pretty statistically sound
Pariah247 (8:25:32 PM): so here's the thing:
jethromatt99 (8:25:40 PM): that'd take some big trend to have such large populations involving in sync
Pariah247 (8:26:02 PM): my thought is that this same increase in "abstract problem solving" has to correleate somewhat with our ability so grasp metaphysical issues . . .
jethromatt99 (8:26:03 PM): i mean, it's not like dumb people are simply dying or not reproducing
jethromatt99 (8:26:13 PM): yeah, i'm with you
Pariah247 (8:26:26 PM): . . . which would explain partly why we're far less "spiritual" than we were 100 years ago
Pariah247 (8:26:52 PM): we are better equipped to understand alternative explanations to previously unexplainable pheneomena
jethromatt99 (8:27:17 PM): but...and maybe you can answer this better after reading more of the Journey book...what is driving this evolution?
jethromatt99 (8:27:26 PM): evolution can't just happen because
Pariah247 (8:27:27 PM): that's the question that no one can answer
Pariah247 (8:27:30 PM): and the ultimate question
Pariah247 (8:27:39 PM): we can't comprehend it
Pariah247 (8:27:48 PM): because even if something WERE driving it. . .
Pariah247 (8:27:54 PM): what would be driving THAT force . . .
Pariah247 (8:27:56 PM): ad infinitum
Pariah247 (8:28:12 PM): it can't be solved with the human mind, because we cannot comprehend infinity
jethromatt99 (8:29:20 PM): but, we can solve what drives certain aspects of evolution....and, if our population is currently evolving, there should be theories as to how
Pariah247 (8:29:26 PM): no matter what theory anyone pushes forward, one can always ask, "well what came before that?"
Pariah247 (8:29:40 PM): yeah, we can explain aspects of evolution, but never the force that drives everything
jethromatt99 (8:29:52 PM): right, i think maybe i should've used another word besides "drive"
Pariah247 (8:29:53 PM): all we can come up with is God
jethromatt99 (8:29:56 PM): i didn't mean my question as deeply
jethromatt99 (8:30:07 PM): i mean, what evolutionary factor is behind this trend?
Pariah247 (8:30:25 PM): oh, that is actually solvable
jethromatt99 (8:30:59 PM): i mean, there are various factors on evolution: 1. Death (removal from gene pool). 2. No sex or lots of sex 3. Genetic drift (randomness) 4. Mutations
Pariah247 (8:31:32 PM): well, the human brain continually "drives" to understand its environment, which functions to accomplish everything you just said
Pariah247 (8:31:41 PM): the better we predict, the better our survival chances
jethromatt99 (8:32:01 PM): yes...
Pariah247 (8:32:05 PM): and predicting has a lot to do with utilizing metaphysical theories to explain the universe
jethromatt99 (8:32:31 PM): so, is this more than just genetic evolution that we're speaking of, but also...memetic?
jethromatt99 (8:32:41 PM): or is the brain actually changing?
Pariah247 (8:32:53 PM): brain is changing
jethromatt99 (8:38:12 PM): so, does free will require an infinitely powerful brain?
jethromatt99 (8:38:18 PM): (which, of course, cannot exist)
Pariah247 (8:38:37 PM): free will would mean that there would have to be a god or some magical force
Pariah247 (8:38:44 PM): and that we are all in possession of that magical force
Pariah247 (8:39:00 PM): but "magical" i mean that we can't possibly explain it naturally
jethromatt99 (8:39:03 PM): i tend to agree
Pariah247 (8:39:20 PM): every behavior has a neuro basis, which has a basis in atoms, which have basis in quarks . . .
Pariah247 (8:39:26 PM): and it goes on and on and on
jethromatt99 (8:39:46 PM): i tend to agree
jethromatt99 (8:39:51 PM): freaky, huh?
Pariah247 (8:39:58 PM): haha yeah
jethromatt99 (8:40:00 PM): and it's at this point that i say, "Ah well" and go on with life
jethromatt99 (8:40:02 PM): haha
Pariah247 (8:40:06 PM): right on dude
jethromatt99 (8:40:10 PM): but yet i always come back to it
jethromatt99 (8:40:11 PM): oy
Pariah247 (8:40:14 PM): cuz there's nothing we can do once we're aware of it
Pariah247 (8:40:53 PM): i say do your duty in life and ride off into the sunset when your time comes, haha
Pariah247 (8:42:07 PM): i say whatever is most fullfilling
* * *
Pariah247 (8:43:20 PM): for me, it's having a family and taking care of kids
jethromatt99 (8:43:30 PM): so, that is your "meaning of life"
jethromatt99 (8:43:30 PM): ?
Pariah247 (8:43:35 PM): yep
jethromatt99 (8:43:42 PM): very biological of you ;D
jethromatt99 (8:43:47 PM): wright would be proud
jethromatt99 (8:43:55 PM): and, i tend to agree with you
Pariah247 (8:43:55 PM): haha, well, it's built into me
Pariah247 (8:43:58 PM): i don't have to force myself
jethromatt99 (8:43:58 PM): precisely
* * *
Pariah247 (8:45:08 PM): just gotta do things that are meaningful to you . . .i like creating art projects and working with kids
Pariah247 (8:45:41 PM): that's the way i see it anyway
jethromatt99 (8:45:44 PM): here, check this out. it's something that got my mind going a few weeks ago. i sort of got tongue-in-cheek with it, but i really was deeply intrigued by it: http://www.livejournal.com/users/mattphillips11/10433.html
* * *
jethromatt99 (8:47:04 PM): i don't think many people can comprehend living side-by-side with another intelligent species
jethromatt99 (8:47:13 PM): terrestrial or extraterrestrial
jethromatt99 (8:47:22 PM): they make this big human-animal dichotomy
jethromatt99 (8:47:28 PM): which is false
Pariah247 (8:47:34 PM): haha they'd just be treated like every ethnic group was upon their discovery by white people
jethromatt99 (8:47:38 PM): BUT
jethromatt99 (8:47:53 PM): the big difference would be that Neanderthals really would be stupider
jethromatt99 (8:47:58 PM): intelligent, yes, but still dumber
Pariah247 (8:47:58 PM): yep
Pariah247 (8:48:02 PM): MUCH dumber
jethromatt99 (8:48:24 PM): so, would it be okay to "domesticate" them as we did with horses and such?
jethromatt99 (8:48:34 PM): or would we see them as "quasi-human"?
* * *
Pariah247 (8:49:03 PM): they basically "stopped" [evolving]
jethromatt99 (8:49:08 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (8:49:14 PM): they fit their environment well enough
Pariah247 (8:49:15 PM): so we're just way ahead of them
jethromatt99 (8:49:17 PM): until humans came
jethromatt99 (8:49:34 PM): here's a question for you, then: are humans more evolved than cockroaches?
Pariah247 (8:49:52 PM): we've underdone more changes
jethromatt99 (8:50:02 PM): true, in that sense
Pariah247 (8:50:03 PM): but there's a chicken and egg problem within that question
jethromatt99 (8:50:04 PM): good point
jethromatt99 (8:50:11 PM): yeah?
jethromatt99 (8:50:40 PM): oh the literal chicken-and-egg question is easy to answer: The egg came first.
Pariah247 (8:50:46 PM): once we began to develop foresight (quasi-free will i guess) we started that whole evolutionary arms race deal that wright talks about
Pariah247 (8:50:53 PM): which expedites our evolution
Pariah247 (8:51:01 PM): haha
jethromatt99 (8:51:19 PM): it's harder to answer why the chicken crossed the road
Pariah247 (8:51:23 PM): yup
jethromatt99 (8:51:26 PM): crossing the road must've served some genetic purpose
Pariah247 (8:51:27 PM): the world will never know
jethromatt99 (8:53:23 PM): haha
jethromatt99 (8:53:30 PM): man, evolutionary biology humor
Pariah247 (8:53:40 PM): a new low in geekdom
Pariah247 (8:53:42 PM): or maybe a new high
* * *
jethromatt99 (8:57:56 PM): okay, for starters, have you taken any computer science at all? if not, i'm sure you understand algorithms, though...very simple idea
jethromatt99 (8:58:26 PM): (and during the course of this thought, please do NOT think of The Matrix too much...this idea is really much different than the one in that movie)
Pariah247 (8:58:58 PM): i have a book by von neuman called "the computer and the brain"
Pariah247 (8:59:02 PM): that's about it though
Pariah247 (8:59:12 PM): i understand algorithms . . . they're basically just logic
jethromatt99 (8:59:14 PM): well, this doesn't have to do with neuroscience...not directly, at least
jethromatt99 (8:59:17 PM): yeah, precisely
jethromatt99 (8:59:24 PM): coded steps for doing something
jethromatt99 (8:59:30 PM): taking in variables and working with them
Pariah247 (8:59:44 PM): yeah, equations
jethromatt99 (9:00:07 PM): genes are really just variables in the evolution algorithm (no, that's not my deep thought; that's just a statement)
jethromatt99 (9:00:38 PM): Wrights book is very clear on that idea, using different language
Pariah247 (9:00:44 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (9:00:45 PM): and Wells' book, too
Pariah247 (9:00:54 PM): it all boils down to numbers
jethromatt99 (9:00:56 PM): okay, so here's the idea:
jethromatt99 (9:01:22 PM): The "algorithm" behind genetics is fairly simple...survival, procreation, drift, and mutation
jethromatt99 (9:01:36 PM): a 1920s computer could've handled such an algorithm
jethromatt99 (9:01:40 PM): now,
jethromatt99 (9:02:09 PM): picture a supercomputer that mimics the geology of a planet (one or two do exist...to predict future natural disasters)
jethromatt99 (9:03:00 PM): i.e. it has a program that contains a wealth of organized information on a planet
jethromatt99 (9:03:03 PM): with me so far?
jethromatt99 (9:03:17 PM): a. An organism algorithm
jethromatt99 (9:03:29 PM): and b. A "universe" program
Pariah247 (9:03:42 PM): yeah . . .
jethromatt99 (9:03:54 PM): (Yes, a whole universe would be too complicated to put into code form...but shortcuts can be used for what i'm about to propose)
Pariah247 (9:04:08 PM): well the first was actually done and talked about in the book kind of
Pariah247 (9:04:24 PM): best part of the book i thought. a cpu program called "tit for tat"
jethromatt99 (9:04:29 PM): i believe anthropological studies could be made if the life-algorithm was "unleashed" in the Planet program
jethromatt99 (9:04:36 PM): oh yeah, wright is big on tit for tat!
jethromatt99 (9:04:39 PM): follow this:
jethromatt99 (9:05:40 PM): Evolution itself could be studied, as people observing the program could see how early "organisms" branched out and evolved into more and more complex "organisms"
jethromatt99 (9:05:56 PM): is that followable so far?
jethromatt99 (9:06:00 PM): (i'm not done yet)
Pariah247 (9:06:10 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (9:06:22 PM): (it's not your brightness i doubt; it's my ability to articulate that i doubt)
Pariah247 (9:06:43 PM): np, i gotcha
jethromatt99 (9:06:48 PM): so many things can be studied using such a thing
jethromatt99 (9:06:57 PM): especially if more than one study were conducted at once,
jethromatt99 (9:07:04 PM): so that comparisons could be made
jethromatt99 (9:07:24 PM): the most mind-blowing stuff could be learn when "intelligent designs" appear in the program [Editor's note: Dammit, I meant to say "intelligent beings." No doubt this threw Gary off. Woops.]
jethromatt99 (9:07:27 PM): *learned
Pariah247 (9:07:29 PM): i know what you mean . . . i wonder if it has been done
jethromatt99 (9:07:36 PM): well not to the extent i'm thinking
jethromatt99 (9:07:44 PM): because computers aren't quite yet advanced enough
Pariah247 (9:07:54 PM): there are just so many factors that come into play
jethromatt99 (9:07:54 PM): each human brain is about 6 terrabytes
jethromatt99 (9:07:59 PM): right
jethromatt99 (9:08:00 PM): so many do
Pariah247 (9:08:01 PM): i read that
jethromatt99 (9:08:12 PM): i mean, nothing like humans would come about in the program, i'm sure
jethromatt99 (9:08:22 PM): if intelligent species arose, they'd be "alien" if you know what i mean
Pariah247 (9:08:38 PM): yeah
Pariah247 (9:08:49 PM): well, the problem would be time i think
jethromatt99 (9:09:05 PM): but, here's what's really far-out: If a computer could be used that was powerful enough (maybe possible in 50 years), people could actually LEARN from these fake beings
jethromatt99 (9:09:10 PM): yeah, evolution would have to be speeded up
jethromatt99 (9:09:16 PM): i'm not sure how well that could work
jethromatt99 (9:09:22 PM): and if that would invalidate the experiment
Pariah247 (9:09:23 PM): who knows what will happen in 500 years
Pariah247 (9:09:40 PM): nanotechnology i think will reshape the world
jethromatt99 (9:09:43 PM): plus, there could be studies with religious implications:
jethromatt99 (9:10:04 PM): what i proposed would basically be a Deist universe...the programmers would be the clockmakers
jethromatt99 (9:10:17 PM): BUT
Pariah247 (9:10:19 PM): maybe something has already started
jethromatt99 (9:12:40 PM): the programmers could choose to interfere with their intelligent beings. so, picture a Deist universe created and picture smart little nano-beings walking about, pondering the questions that we humans question. And many believe in God and some do not. Now, picture that same exact environment copied over to another program, only this time, the programmers alter the code so that random things happen that defy Physics. Would every single one of those nano-beings then believe in God? Such a comparison could have affect humans discussions on religion.
jethromatt99 (9:12:46 PM): it's possible
jethromatt99 (9:13:07 PM): like i said, there are supercomputers already in existence [that] condense Earth into digital form
jethromatt99 (9:13:15 PM): but i think they're only used for Geology
Pariah247 (9:13:34 PM): i think they would believe in god still
Pariah247 (9:13:42 PM): because we'll always need to cope with death
jethromatt99 (9:13:44 PM): would they believe in God MORE, i mean?
Pariah247 (9:13:48 PM): even if we can explain the unexplainable in our world
jethromatt99 (9:13:52 PM): i.e. would there be no atheists?
jethromatt99 (9:14:01 PM): in the nanoworld, that is
Pariah247 (9:14:07 PM): if we saw magic before our eyes, we couldn't just submit to natural explanation
jethromatt99 (9:14:33 PM): but, what is "magic" and what is simply the "not-understood?"
Pariah247 (9:14:40 PM): and i'm not sure we could create things that defy physics
Pariah247 (9:14:49 PM): cuz their physics would be the same as ours
jethromatt99 (9:14:51 PM): in a computer-generated world, we could
Pariah247 (9:15:07 PM): magic can't be explained by physics . . . we can't comprehend magic . . . it's like trying to think of a new color
jethromatt99 (9:15:09 PM): because we could suddenly give on of the beings the ability to float
jethromatt99 (9:15:15 PM): for example
Pariah247 (9:15:22 PM): even in a cpu generated world, we only have our own math and physical laws
jethromatt99 (9:15:30 PM): right, but we can progam magic in
jethromatt99 (9:15:36 PM): it's not real; it's digital
jethromatt99 (9:15:40 PM): just look at sci-fi computer games
jethromatt99 (9:15:56 PM): we could make a computer-Gary and suddenly give him the ability to shoot death rays out of his butt
jethromatt99 (9:16:07 PM): how would computer-Matt explain that?
Pariah247 (9:16:21 PM): but the physiscists and other various scientists would undoubetly study this death ray-shooting gary
jethromatt99 (9:16:39 PM): and they'd probably presume that there IS an explanation, even if they can't think of one
Pariah247 (9:16:43 PM): the laser would have to come from somewhere
jethromatt99 (9:16:50 PM): right
Pariah247 (9:16:59 PM): right, they'd immediately presume god until a better explanation came around
jethromatt99 (9:17:07 PM): well, i disagree
jethromatt99 (9:17:11 PM): well
jethromatt99 (9:17:19 PM): most of the nano-folk WOULD presume god
jethromatt99 (9:17:25 PM): but, would computer-stephen-hawking?
jethromatt99 (9:17:40 PM): or would he say, "I don't understand. But that doesn't mean that there isn't an explanation."?
Pariah247 (9:17:50 PM): someone like him would postulate a scientific explanation
jethromatt99 (9:18:06 PM): anyhoo, that's just one possible tangent such a project could take
jethromatt99 (9:18:20 PM): i mean, the life algorithm would be SO SIMPLE
jethromatt99 (9:18:28 PM): it'd just be tougher to create the environment
Pariah247 (9:18:36 PM): what'd be interesting is whether or not their thoughts would evolve even if their supposed brains didn't (assuming everything remains static in their world)
jethromatt99 (9:18:38 PM): and then have a computer to handle all of the variable
jethromatt99 (9:18:39 PM): s
jethromatt99 (9:18:46 PM): well, see,
jethromatt99 (9:18:51 PM): that's the difference
jethromatt99 (9:18:56 PM): this wouldn't be like the matrix
Pariah247 (9:19:02 PM): that's where stuff like memes come into play i guess
jethromatt99 (9:19:04 PM): evolution would be in the algorithm
jethromatt99 (9:19:29 PM): yeah, but wouldn't memes be a result of evolutionary devlopment?
jethromatt99 (9:19:33 PM): i mean, they don't exist on their own
jethromatt99 (9:19:55 PM): what i propose is that the original algorithm be of a simple single-celled organism
jethromatt99 (9:20:08 PM): but that, programmed in it are the mechanisms of evolution
jethromatt99 (9:20:32 PM): thus, brains would evolve
Pariah247 (9:20:52 PM): oh ok
jethromatt99 (9:20:52 PM): see what i mean?
jethromatt99 (9:21:03 PM): this is radically different than The Matrix
jethromatt99 (9:21:08 PM): in that, a static world was created
jethromatt99 (9:21:18 PM): and, besides, real human brains were needed
jethromatt99 (9:21:31 PM): this would be flexible, not static, and it'd be self-contained--all digital, no humans needed
jethromatt99 (9:21:59 PM): simply create the primeval world
jethromatt99 (9:22:08 PM): matter and the recipe for basic life
jethromatt99 (9:22:26 PM): the environment itself would have to be flexible, too--not static
jethromatt99 (9:22:36 PM): weather, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc.
jethromatt99 (9:22:43 PM): because that's what spurs evolution
jethromatt99 (9:23:09 PM): i'd also say that it'd be easier not to try to replicate earth
jethromatt99 (9:23:13 PM): that'd be too complicated
jethromatt99 (9:23:19 PM): but, any planet can be made
* * *
Pariah247 (9:25:42 PM): but i may be wrong . . . i just know that private experience is unique to all of us, and we can't say that our nano-people would have that
jethromatt99 (9:25:43 PM): i mean, the world created would be deterministic...but vastly more complicated than each "nano-being"
jethromatt99 (9:25:55 PM): assuming determinism
Pariah247 (9:26:07 PM): yeah, determinism is there
jethromatt99 (9:26:13 PM): i mean, just following Wright's logic out
jethromatt99 (9:26:22 PM): evolutionary psychology, baby
Pariah247 (9:26:25 PM): yeah, it's all probably logically sound
Pariah247 (9:26:33 PM): since everything ultimately boils down to math
jethromatt99 (9:26:52 PM): so, who knows,
jethromatt99 (9:27:01 PM): hence the experiment
jethromatt99 (9:27:05 PM): what do you think of the idea?
Pariah247 (9:27:13 PM): it's definitely possible
jethromatt99 (9:27:15 PM): i mean, i think scientists should try
jethromatt99 (9:27:20 PM): so many studies could be done
Pariah247 (9:27:23 PM): they probably have or are planning on it
Pariah247 (9:27:47 PM): but it's practically impossible in this day and age to simulate every factor that affects our behavior
Pariah247 (9:27:59 PM): boiling down to quantum physics
Pariah247 (9:28:07 PM): and whatever comes before that . . .
jethromatt99 (9:28:26 PM): right...it'd be the first cause sorts of things that could put a big asterisk next to the project
jethromatt99 (9:28:41 PM): i mean, a newtonian world would have to be programmed as the environment
Pariah247 (9:28:53 PM): if we ourselves can't understand the ultimate nature of our behavior, i'm not sure--
Pariah247 (9:29:01 PM): so it all goes back to first cause again
jethromatt99 (9:29:28 PM): right
jethromatt99 (9:29:34 PM): there would be limitations
jethromatt99 (9:29:44 PM): but, a newtonian world could at least be programmed
jethromatt99 (9:29:56 PM): it could still have worth
jethromatt99 (9:30:04 PM): just like Tit-for-Tat
Pariah247 (9:30:06 PM): yeah
jethromatt99 (9:30:10 PM): studies like that aren't answer-alls
jethromatt99 (9:30:13 PM): but they sure have implications
jethromatt99 (9:30:32 PM): anyhoo, i was right proud of myself for that thought :-D
Pariah247 (9:30:37 PM): i think tit for tat is underrated
jethromatt99 (9:30:53 PM): and i give NO credit to keanu reeves
* * *
jethromatt99 (9:33:31 PM): well, that was my deep thought
jethromatt99 (9:33:36 PM): hopefully it was worthy of your time
Pariah247 (9:34:04 PM): yeah, it makes me think a ton, which i need to stop doing
Pariah247 (9:34:28 PM): i think there's a diminishing returns thing that goes on when you think too much
jethromatt99 (9:34:37 PM): i agree
* * *
Pariah247 (9:45:16 PM): haha you can show it to everyone if you want
jethromatt99 (9:45:58 PM): i think it'll be good to spur discussion for people who really wanna read it
Pariah247 (9:46:28 PM): yeah
Pariah247 (9:46:33 PM): as long as it doesn't scare anyone away
Pariah247 (9:48:31 PM): i must be off to watch wrestling
Pariah247 (9:48:56 PM): what better way to follow talk about quantum physics