integer on Sun, 29 Apr 2001 08:59:15 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Syndicate: \/\ |
hello. which do you like more +? 0+000 or 0+002 +? may email ecdysone@eusocial.com your selection. [please also include your name] nn \\ the story in the cup of life 0+000 The problem is not information overload. There is always too much information. It is the misdirected search for meaning. "Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;" (Yeats, 19..) A private + dreamful chaos The signs which make up the code of the circuit between two individuals unlock the contents of the brain of each. Our models are designed to simulate select logical functions of the individual brain. In this they neglect the most important function of brains, which is to interact with each other to form families and societies (Fischer 1990; Brothers 1990), as shown by the necessity for acculturation and education in bringing young people to maturity. Meaning arises in social relations. It comes from inspired visions of isolated individuals only after they have been communicated. Yet each person is terribly alone. Why is this so? How can isolation be transcended? "Though my experience is not the whole world, that world appears in my experience and, so far as it exists there, it is my state of mind" (Leibniz 1947) Eighty percent of what any LGN cell listens to comes not from the retina, but from the dense interconnectedness of other regions of the brain. "When humans think seriously they think abstractly. They conjure up simplified pictures of reality called concepts.theories. models. paradigms" (Huntington 1993) codes. signs. Everything which exists is a projection of a brain. All of us are the fantasy of 'dreaming butterflies'. All knowledge originates in the brains of individuals. Each mind begins within itself to construct its world view and comes later to the realization that other minds must exist, so that the initial position of every mind must be solipsistic (Rollins 1967) If knowledge is expressed in a private language within each mind, how can it be shared and verified as being the same in each mind? Rainer Maria Rilke (1982) described the way in which individuals resonate together in his poem "Liebeslied": Yet all that touches us, you and me, takes us together like a violin bow, that draws one voice from two strings. On what instrument are we strung? And which violinist has us in hand? O sweet song. 0+002 Genghis Khan's first flag was simply white. Subsequently a black moon was added. Learning is that by which intentional structures stretch forth and change themselves through self-organizing, chaotic dynamics. We infer that neurohumoral mechanisms exist in mammals for unlearning by a meltdown of intentional beliefs without loss of procedural and declarative memories, which enables understanding between self organizing brains by cooperative actions. We experience this as falling in love. ... dissolved into laughter, they play. Telemedicina is a distractive software program authored with NATO.0+55. It performs a real-time two dimensional FFT on characters or words entered via speech recognition, computer keyboard, sensors or text harvested from the Internet. The resultant visuals delineate the video-alphabet. Single letters may be data.based as static images. Words or sentences may be data.based as films (above examples) or static images. Likewise paragraphs or stories may be data.based as films or static images. Much as one can translate from one language to one other via software programs it may be desirable to translate from one video-alphabet to one other. Were one to learn a video-alphabet would one then locate sentences, per chance stories, on ceilings, windows, just as now one locates shapes reminiscent of real-life or imaginary data? Would one be able to read a garden, a plant, a tree's bark? If so, would our maps change? Would one's 'own' skin become the domain of stories within stories? (read me?) Would anyone prefer a video-alphabet to the state prescribed one? Would humans 'speak' in video-sentences? Would they communicate differently? In what ways? Would new languages evolve? Would a video-language differ from sign language? I have always liked to dance but had no reason to. Now I see that dancing with you is a quintessential means to bridge the asolipsistic gulf. I can extend my mental fingers and in turn be touched by mental processes in your mind. I conclude that philosophers and physicists may not comprehend brains until they follow Nietzsche in learning to dance. ... lets dance. -----Syndicate mailinglist-------------------- Syndicate network for media culture and media art information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de> to unsubscribe, write to <majordomo@eg-r.isp-eg.de>, in the body of the msg: unsubscribe syndicate your@email.adress