A Conversation With Daniel

[moremojo]

I was just wanted to make sure that everyone checking in on this thread feels welcome to join in the discussion. I'm sure that's what Daniel has in mind...that the conversation shouldn't be limited to only him and the person to whose question he's responding.

[injest]

you don't put a Shetland in the Kentucky Derby...I think I will just watch...

[moremojo]

you don't put a Shetland in the Kentucky Derby...I think I will just watch...

Jess, I love ya!

[Aussie Chris]

My question for you Daniel builds on Scott's question about the meaning of life and your response in reference to science.

The context for the question is the experimental scenario of a sheep in isolation within a room.  The sheep has been "trained" to press a lever with a light blue circle over it to obtain sustenance.  Later the sheep is introduced to a second lever, this one a deep red square over it but this one sets of a loud noise that scares the sheep.  The location of the levers changes every few days and in time the sheep learns to accurately associate the symbols above the levers with either sustenance or danger until it no longer mistakenly presses the lever with the red square.  In fact, eventually it avoids all areas of the room where red squares are located whether a lever is there or not.

My ruminations at this point of the conversation is from the perspective of the sheep.  The gender of the sheep is not relevant for this discussion, but for the simplicity of writing I will say "him".  So the sheep thinks to himself that he has finally figured out the nature of the universe.  He has experimented for a long time and has figured out that light and round edges means food while dark and pointy edges means monsters.  He has learnt that he must remember this because nature is not fixed and so what was light and smooth today can become dark and sharp tomorrow.  He wonders, is it because of his actions that these changes occur?

Here are some rhetorical questions about the passage for consideration:

1) What is the meaning of life from the sheep's perspective?  Is he mistaken?
2) The sheep has learnt to experiment through trial and error the nature of sticks, light and dark, and edges.  How does this relate to the sheep's "purpose in life"?
3) The sheep sees the science in nature but doesn't get it exactly right (from the perspective of the human observer) because he excludes colour and geometry.  Is this significant?

Here is my question then Daniel:

What has science got to do with the meaning or purpose in life?

[injest]

My question for you Daniel builds on Scott's question about the meaning of life and your response in reference to science.

The context for the question is the experimental scenario of a sheep in isolation within a room.  The sheep has been "trained" to press a lever with a light blue circle over it to obtain sustenance.  Later the sheep is introduced to a second lever, this one a deep red square over it but this one sets of a loud noise that scares the sheep.  The location of the levers changes every few days and in time the sheep learns to accurately associate the symbols above the levers with either sustenance or danger until it no longer mistakenly presses the lever with the red square.  In fact, eventually it avoids all areas of the room where red squares are located whether a lever is there or not.

My ruminations at this point of the conversation is from the perspective of the sheep.  The gender of the sheep is not relevant for this discussion, but for the simplicity of writing I will say "him".  So the sheep thinks to himself that he has finally figured out the nature of the universe.  He has experimented for a long time and has figured out that light and round edges means food while dark and pointy edges means monsters.  He has learnt that he must remember this because nature is not fixed and so what was light and smooth today can become dark and sharp tomorrow.  He wonders, is it because of his actions that these changes occur?
Here are some rhetorical questions about the passage for consideration:

1) What is the meaning of life from the sheep's perspective?  Is he mistaken?
2) The sheep has learnt to experiment through trial and error the nature of sticks, light and dark, and edges.  How does this relate to the sheep's "purpose in life"?
3) The sheep sees the science in nature but doesn't get it exactly right (from the perspective of the human observer) because he excludes colour and geometry.  Is this significant?

Here is my question then Daniel:

What has science got to do with the meaning or purpose in life?

when I got to here what I thought you were going to talk about was religion. Because to me this is the beginning of a religion.

Yesterday I did X and Y happened. the day before I did X and Y happened...today I did X and Y did NOT happen. Did I do X wrong?

One thing that I think about the instinctive reaction most children have is to blame someone else...."It wasn't me!" so the next logical step is to say "Well, I did X the exact some way so .....some other force is making the Y not happen. I will change how I do X and maybe this force will let Y happen..."

from there it is a small step to telling others about this nameless faceless force....and give it a name..

*Jess limps off the course to keep from getting run right over!*

[injest]

I kilt the conversation thread!! 

[Daniel]

yes hello everyone.  my computer did go down..... i just now got it to start working again.

the keyboard does not work though, so will still need to have it repaired...

am using the on-screen keyboard right now... slow going - but better than none.

[Daniel]

Scott: Tangents are alright in this thread... we can always scroll back up and see what we were originally talking about.

Chris: I find it interesting that you used an example of psychological science to question meaning and purpose.  But as to science having anything to do with meaning, the short answer is this... It doesn't. The long answer: Costructed awareness (facts) does not always trump experiencial knowledge. It seems as though working from a basis of experiencial awareness is more flexible than working with facts... Likewise, experiencial knowledge does not always trump nonexperiencial knowledge. If we have seen nothing else as a result of our species evolution, I hope we acknowledge that diversity depends on flexibility, and that noodiversity is as important as biodiversity. I wll come to your other questions and example a little later... This feels like I am doing a crossword puzzle, putting in one letter at a time.

Jess: What you are describing is the type of cause/effect relationship science seeks to understand. For the most part, it is successful... but there are stll X/Y events where science has not yet proven cause, only correlations.

[Aussie Chris]

Daniel.  About the only thing I understood in your explanation was this:

But as to science having anything to do with meaning, the short answer is this... It doesn't.

I'd like to think that I am reasonably intelligent, but I've not done university psychology so I'm unfamiliar with your terminology.  Could you please explain: Costructed awareness (facts), experiencial knowledge, nonexperiencial knowledge, and noodiversity?

[Daniel]

Chris:

Most of the terms I use are made up on the spot - usually combining two concepts to create another one.

Constructed Awareness: A specific thought form or pattern that is drilled into us at a very young age and which we always believe to be true and logically sound. These are the thoughts we recognize as being real without having to think it out.  (i.e. 2+2=4... the fire truck is red...etc.) These awarenesses are already constructed when we mentally register them, so there is no specific act of cognition or process of knowledge.

Experiencial knowledge: Knowledge based on personal experience or observation of events.  (i.e. This is a shortcut... It is easier to do it this way... If you thrust your hand through a pane of glass, it will hurt and bleed in thus manner.)

Nonexperiencial knowledge: Knowledge based on some other reality than factual awareness or experience, usually intuitive or deeply emotional in nature. (i.e. I feel like we should go this way... It feels like I'm doing this wrong for some reason... This doesn't seem right.)

Noodiversity: This is a word I invented based on the idea of noontological evolution, I think perhaps it should be noontodiversity. Either way, it refers to the growth in amount and variety between various modes or styles of consciousness, much like biodiversity references variety among lifeforms.