> Try experiencing red without visualizing it, naming it or imagining associated objects.
can be commanded to be done without being able to objectively qualify what exactly is occurring when one 'experiences' red?
How does one know when 'has experienced red' has occurred? How are they able to qualify this as a comparative to 'has not experienced red'? When I read this it honestly sounded like the author was telling me to find god.
Snarky commentary aside, while I think this is an interesting picture for the descriptions of thought, the processes for reasoning about software complexity can develop independently without fitting any of these models, and those heuristics will modulate and mold the adaptive abilities of the developer on a similar scale of overall improvement.
> These phenomena will slowly start to convert from being some “runaway kids”, living in the shadows never lit by consciousness, into “rightful citizens” of the psychical space, with overall balancing and efficiency-improving effects.
This scares the crap out of me and would make me want to run like all hell. You can learn and teach thinking using multiple techniques and you can teach those techniques without enforcing a clear right and wrong. Instead, trust that the experience and influence of the world marching along to the beat of time will help direct people better than an authoritative command on what reduces software complexity and what does not. The summation of a lot of 'wrong' might wind up being one big 'right'.
The funny thing really is that when one uses the a reasoning system to reason about their reasoning, assuming they are reasoning with the correct reasoning, they often wind up contradicting themselves.
> Try experiencing red without visualizing it, naming it or imagining associated objects.
can be commanded to be done without being able to objectively qualify what exactly is occurring when one 'experiences' red?
How does one know when 'has experienced red' has occurred? How are they able to qualify this as a comparative to 'has not experienced red'? When I read this it honestly sounded like the author was telling me to find god.
Snarky commentary aside, while I think this is an interesting picture for the descriptions of thought, the processes for reasoning about software complexity can develop independently without fitting any of these models, and those heuristics will modulate and mold the adaptive abilities of the developer on a similar scale of overall improvement.
> These phenomena will slowly start to convert from being some “runaway kids”, living in the shadows never lit by consciousness, into “rightful citizens” of the psychical space, with overall balancing and efficiency-improving effects.
This scares the crap out of me and would make me want to run like all hell. You can learn and teach thinking using multiple techniques and you can teach those techniques without enforcing a clear right and wrong. Instead, trust that the experience and influence of the world marching along to the beat of time will help direct people better than an authoritative command on what reduces software complexity and what does not. The summation of a lot of 'wrong' might wind up being one big 'right'.
The funny thing really is that when one uses the a reasoning system to reason about their reasoning, assuming they are reasoning with the correct reasoning, they often wind up contradicting themselves.