Very interesting, thanks! When/where do you argue beliefs is a bad term? A thought came about language, you say the system is not predicting using language or pictures. Language has problems (Wittgenstein, Gödel etc) so that’s good. But isn’t the neural representation itself constituting a language? A private language for that human perhaps, but still theoretically a language? With the same issues as any language? It’s almost a paradox, the neural language cannot work yet it seems to work. Is this the opening to the sacred?
‘It is not enough for the world to be beautiful — one must also deign to rejoice in it.’ Grothendieck
This artwork was created a few weeks before my son was born.
It bears witness to the world as it was and as it will be when he needs to contemplate it.
Thought: As AI takes over it may recognize that 90-99% of labor is to keep coherence inside and between organizations, does not produce value outside that, and is not needed in a coherent system.
AI may in fact largely optimize itself away :) but the sequence needs to play out.
*end of language = the work of Wittgenstein, Gödel, and later cemented by postmodernism. Lacan saw the subject as in language and therefore always lacking. Language is great but can’t fulfill all human needs. Look towards experience.
Aren’t we overcomplicating the meaning crisis? 1st person experience of acting virtuously vs non-virtuously clarifies meaning. Words can never fully reach clarity, and they are unconvincing anyway. Action and experience is key. We expertly deceive ourselves so seems a good idea to crosscheck with time tested ideas of virtue. They’re about the same all around; love, peace, truth, clarity, accountability, kindness etc. It’s really not that complicated. But difficult.
@RubenLaukkonen@DrJohnVervaeke