‹ First  < 6 7 8
 
   
 

The Trouble With Trioonity

 
jdrnd
 
Avatar
 
 
jdrnd
Total Posts:  5899
Joined  25-08-2009
 
 
 
18 April 2018 08:09
 
nonverbal - 18 April 2018 07:27 AM

Have you considered critiquing trioon the way you might critique a fellow doctor’s writings? That is, I don’t remember you ever getting specific in your anti-trioon posts.

 

I did somewhere.  I think the thread was called “Trioonity is nonsense” or something like that
You were away.


...what do you think of Trioonity?
Can YOU explain it in English?
A world view that is supposed to simplify how we understand things should not require a complex explanation/translation.

 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1896
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
18 April 2018 08:23
 
jdrnd - 18 April 2018 08:09 AM
nonverbal - 18 April 2018 07:27 AM

Have you considered critiquing trioon the way you might critique a fellow doctor’s writings? That is, I don’t remember you ever getting specific in your anti-trioon posts.

 

I did somewhere.  I think the thread was called “Trioonity is nonsense” or something like that
You were away.


...what do you think of Trioonity?
Can YOU explain it in English?
A world view that is supposed to simplify how we understand things should not require a complex explanation/translation.

Something as simple as human cognitive function, eh?

Okay, I’ll take another look at the thread you mention. Thanks.

 

 
 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1896
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
18 April 2018 08:34
 
jdrnd - 18 April 2018 08:09 AM

. . .

...what do you think of Trioonity?
Can YOU explain it in English?

When I was in my mid teens, I sort of lost my way mentally. Our family doctor had successfully hypnotized my mother to quit smoking cigarettes, so I asked her if she’d take me to Dr. Rifleman to see if he could assist me in some way. She of course was glad to take me there. Our exceptionally bright and modern family physician had nothing to offer me about what I was experiencing. Granted, he was not a board certified shrink, but if only he’d presented some system—any system!—that contained internal consistency, I’d have had some cognitive tools to assist me in escaping my then-current Vatican 1 mind theory which was literally driving me insane.

Nhoj is speaking English. I majored in English teaching and as a result was compelled to read all kinds of stuff for several years while in school, and much of it only slightly coherent. Nhoj has an unusually strong grasp of English.

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6856
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
18 April 2018 08:54
 

I think we’ve reached the point where we (again) agree to disagree. I think the crux of our disagreement can be pinned down to this:

Nhoj Morley - 18 April 2018 01:11 AM

Your model lacks a condition or state where there is no Flashlight, no consciousness as you describe it, but a person that is still fully operational and conversational.

No, it doesn’t. In fact, I think that there was probably a time when human beings with our same brains existed in just the state you describe: fully operational and conversational, but without the subjective model of reality that I say is constructed by the process of consciousness—the so-called “zombies” that philosophers posit “there’s nothing it’s like” to be one. Mr. Hippo without Mr. Flashlight—or the illusory Mr. Now.

(Of course, it depends on what you mean by “fully operational.” Einstein never would have discovered that E equals MC squared without the model. But in terms of surviving and reproducing—“fully operational” from the standpoint of Darwinian evolution—these non-conscious humans would have been fully operational.)

Today, no such humans exist, except possibly occasional “raised-by-wolves” children. Consciousness is learned at an early age through exposure to conscious others. Once possessed by consciousness, there’s no escaping it. The best we can do is coax it into the role of passively observing Mr. Hippo. Which is the state I think corresponds to your Mr. Now. Contrast this with the state in which most of us exist most of the time: in which the model has nothing to do with whatever Mr. Hippo is doing. Instead of passively observing Mr. Hippo driving your car, you’re replaying the argument you had with your wife last night, thinking of all the things you should or shouldn’t have said. Meanwhile, Mr. Hippo drives the car.

The other thing I’m still not buying is:

Nhoj Morley - 18 April 2018 01:11 AM

I am suggesting that much of the head’s inside goings are plainly visible from the outside.

I say that what you suggest is “plainly visible” from the outside is pure conjecture on your part. It doesn’t even seem to be an application of “theory of mind,” since what you’re speculating about others appears to be different from your own mental experience. I’d thought that maybe you’d had some experience of your own that you were projecting onto others, but that doesn’t appear to be the case.

 
 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3865
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
18 April 2018 14:30
 
 
 
jdrnd
 
Avatar
 
 
jdrnd
Total Posts:  5899
Joined  25-08-2009
 
 
 
18 April 2018 17:12
 
nonverbal - 18 April 2018 08:23 AM

Something as simple as human cognitive function, eh?

EXACTLY.

Using an inscrutable explanation to explain a complex function is counterproductive.

 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1896
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
18 April 2018 17:42
 
jdrnd - 18 April 2018 05:12 PM
nonverbal - 18 April 2018 08:23 AM

Something as simple as human cognitive function, eh?

EXACTLY.

Using an inscrutable explanation to explain a complex function is counterproductive.

Yes, Occam’s razor is of course a good starting point, and trioon seems unusually efficient to my ear since it relies on metaphor more than literal, wordy, explanation. Do you prefer Freudian terminology? Plenty of Freudian therapists remain on the scene to this day plying their trade. Talk about wordiness, right?

 

 
 
jdrnd
 
Avatar
 
 
jdrnd
Total Posts:  5899
Joined  25-08-2009
 
 
 
19 April 2018 03:36
 
nonverbal - 18 April 2018 05:42 PM
jdrnd - 18 April 2018 05:12 PM
nonverbal - 18 April 2018 08:23 AM

Something as simple as human cognitive function, eh?

EXACTLY.

Using an inscrutable explanation to explain a complex function is counterproductive.

Yes, Occam’s razor is of course a good starting point, and trioon seems unusually efficient to my ear since it relies on metaphor more than literal, wordy, explanation. Do you prefer Freudian terminology? Plenty of Freudian therapists remain on the scene to this day plying their trade. Talk about wordiness, right?

No No not wordiness, but tasty.
Let me explain!

Instead of cinema based terminology, in another post, I had proposed a food based terminology.

Trifoodity.

Instead of pre cinema, post cinema, etc
My world view would be explained using the concepts of
Precooked, cooking and postcooked.

Trifoodity is the more flavorful way of explaining human cognitive function.

 

[ Edited: 19 April 2018 03:38 by jdrnd]
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6457
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
19 April 2018 11:33
 
Antisocialdarwinist - 18 April 2018 08:54 AM

I’m still not buying…

That is plainly visible. Whoops.

Again, the difference is not in whether one can model at all but whether one can shepherd the making of the model from an additional perspective or ‘third eye’. Without the addition, one can still model but in a comparatively limited manner. Granting modeling perception (cinematically) to non-human creatures shortens the leap of evolution between us and them. No need for going from zombie to Einstein in one enhancement.

Today, no such humans exist, except possibly occasional “raised-by-wolves” children.

In trioon, there are no zombie humans including wolf-children. A simple monoon creature (with a single in-composited perception) might arguably qualify, but why couldn’t it be like something to be just hippo?

What is non-zombie-ness? Brand X non-zombie-ness is the Hard Problem. In trioon, it is simply the result of having two de-correlated perceptions (bioon). Can Bill’s Razor slice anything thinner than that?

Consciousness is learned at an early age through exposure to conscious others. Once possessed by consciousness, there’s no escaping it. The best we can do is coax it into the role of passively observing Mr. Hippo.

Trioon pushes your first sentence’s phrasing one step over to make room for non-zombies. In our times, self-narrating consciousness is learned (and comes naturally for a few) through exposure and instruction to self-narrating others. Your next sentence demonstrates the need for a three-stage model. From where or what do you coax ‘it’ into passively observing Hippo? Could it be a planned disciplined shepherded by an extra and narrative-able perception? Or some wild and implausible idea?

Which is the state I think corresponds to your Mr. Now. Contrast this with the state in which most of us exist most of the time: in which the model has nothing to do with whatever Mr. Hippo is doing. Instead of passively observing Mr. Hippo driving your car, you’re replaying the argument you had with your wife last night, thinking of all the things you should or shouldn’t have said. Meanwhile, Mr. Hippo drives the car.

This driving scenario is plausible for both non-narrating (Mr. Now) and self-narrating (Mr. Flashlight) types or states. If your wife was arguing about the design details of a nuclear reactor, that might favor Mr. Flashlight but not safe driving.

The other thing I’m still not buying is: I say that what you suggest is “plainly visible” from the outside is pure conjecture on your part.

The term conjecture can apply to all examinations of this subject. What makes mine pure?

It doesn’t even seem to be an application of “theory of mind,” since what you’re speculating about others appears to be different from your own mental experience.

Trioon describes a simple mental machinery that can produce a variety of mental experiences including mine, yours and everyone else’s.

I’d thought that maybe you’d had some experience of your own that you were projecting onto others, but that doesn’t appear to be the case.

I used to do that. Trioon made me stop. “Tis unnecessary.

I would have concede that making myself believe that I don’t have a one-off alien visual ability and that what is screwing up for me is something that is working more correctly in other people is a projection on my part. Consider having to own the alternative explanation. I hope I am being logical. The doctors agreed.

Our engagements are always illuminating for me.

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6856
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
21 April 2018 09:00
 
Nhoj Morley - 19 April 2018 11:33 AM

Our engagements are always illuminating for me.

Likewise.

 
 
‹ First  < 6 7 8