.

And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again? Archilochus

Friday, November 17, 2023

ME Woes



Slavoj Žižek,"The depth of Palestinian suffering"
There’s a link between the attack and the unresolved status of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories

Away from Gaza, things are getting worse in the West Bank. I’ve received many messages from Palestinian friends raging at what is going on there.

To get an idea of the despair of West Bank Palestinians, remember the suicidal attacks on the streets of Jerusalem a decade or so ago. Usually what happened was an ordinary Palestinian would approach a Jew, pull out a knife and stab him, realizing they would be instantly killed by the other people nearby. Obviously I condemn these acts, though it’s worth noting that they involved no message, no shouting of…

I was at that time in Jerusalem and my Jewish friends warned me about the danger, advising me that, if I saw it coming, I should shout: “I am not a Jew!” I remember being deeply ashamed at the suggestion, knowing well that I wasn’t sure what I’d really do in such a situation. Today, in the face of settler aggression, despair among Palestinians in the West Bank is only getting worse.

Our duty in the West is to try to understand the hidden background of the ongoing shocking events: what strategies lie behind acts that appear suicidal? Analyzing the context of Hamas’s actions does not imply excuse or justification — any more than analyses of how the Nazis took power justifies Adolf Hitler. Hamas exploits the Palestinians’ plight as Hitler exploited that of ordinary Germans after World War One. The goal of the Hamas attack on October 7 wasn’t only to kill Jews, but to prevent any chances for peace in the foreseeable future — it was a war started with the aim of eternalizing war itself.

However unpalatable many find the argument, there’s a link between the attack and the unresolved status of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Palestinians are treated strictly as a problem. Israel has never offered them any hope, or positively outlined their role in the state where they live. For decades they’ve been kept in limbo, exposed to daily harassment by settlers and the Israeli state. Perhaps the first thing to do is to clearly recognize the hopelessness and confusion that can give birth to acts of evil. There will be no peace in the Middle East without resolving the Palestinian question. To put it in consciously naive terms: Israel should treat its Palestinian citizens as its citizens.

Instead, the first official “basic principle” of Israel’s current government, as laid out in December last year, is that: “The Jewish people have an exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop the settlement of all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan and Judea and Samaria.” Or, as Benjamin Netanyahu has stated: “Israel is not a state of all its citizens [but] of the Jewish people — and only it.”

In hindsight, the huge protests earlier this year against Netanyahu’s judicial reforms were the last cry of secular Zionism. Under the new government, the anti-Palestinian violence from settlers is no longer formally condemned. Even the US has voiced concern over the West Bank settlers’ attacks. In June, secretary of state Antony Blinken “conveyed concern” about them, and, as expected, got principled promises that Israel will look into it. How this will be done as long as Itamar Ben-Gvir is the national security minister is not obvious.

The presence of Ben-Gvir, leader of the ultra-nationalist Jewish Power Party, is the clearest indicator of the Netanyahu government’s shift to the right. Before entering politics, he was known to have a portrait in his living room of Israeli-American terrorist Baruch Goldstein, who, in 1994, massacred twenty-nine Palestinian Muslim worshipers and wounded 125 others in the West Bank, in what became known as the Cave of the Patriarchs massacre. As minister of national security, this person — once condemned by Israel itself as a racist — is now responsible for safeguarding the rule of law. On October 7 he announced that his ministry is purchasing 10,000 rifles to arm civilian security teams, specifically those in towns close to Israel’s borders, as well as in mixed Jewish-Arab cities and West Bank settlements.

Others in Netanyahu’s government are more extreme still. Earlier this week heritage minister Amichai Eliyahu — also a member of Jewish Power — said Israel should consider dropping a nuclear bomb on Gaza.

To find a way out, the first thing to do is to fully admit that we are dealing with a true tragedy. There is no simple solution to such a tragedy, except that advocated by Jewish Power and Hamas: the annihilation of the other side.

69 comments:

Anonymous said...

\\Our duty in the West is to try to understand the hidden background of the ongoing shocking events: what strategies lie behind acts that appear suicidal?

Is it?

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Only if you think that you are the world's policeman. I, for one, do not.

Anonymous said...

Well... you are free to bend you knees before World Thug then. ;-P

If there's no police -- there is yakuza. ;-P

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

At least with Yakuza, there is honour amongst thieves.

Anonymous said...

As in that Drunken Angel? ;-P

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Like the Don Corleone/Godfather saga better?

Anonymous said...

Of course... showing burglary and gangsterism as something normal and even representable is part of your culture...

and you then trying to ask "why they taking arms and killing people"????

Leopard cannot run away from his spots (c)

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Are you kidding, it's the precursor to modern government. Always was, always will be. It's a protection racket. It both creates and protects us from our desires.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

The only difference between gangsters and government officials is one of scale. As Bertolt Brecht said, "What is the robbing of a bank when compared to the founding of a bank?"

Anonymous said...

\\Are you kidding, it's the precursor to modern government. Always was, always will be. It's a protection racket. It both creates and protects us from our desires.

I have the same low assessment of it as idea of "social contract" or whatever.

I am -- systems engineer. ;-)

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

It is meant to create an illusion that there is a suspension of the use of "force". Yet without force, the "system" cannot sustain itself.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

It's ultimately why Schopenhauer's "world" was one of "will" and "representation". The law being a mere "representation" of "will". A "Will to Power" (Nietzsche).

Anonymous said...

\\It is meant to create an illusion that there is a suspension of the use of "force". Yet without force, the "system" cannot sustain itself.

Well... do you have pits for debters? Cutting hand of burglar? Beheading?

In your menu of punishments. Today.

Something do not add up... in this your argument.




\\It's ultimately why Schopenhauer's "world" was one of "will" and "representation". The law being a mere "representation" of "will". A "Will to Power" (Nietzsche).

Today... its just updates in SW. ;-P

Ancient wisdoms tend to grow unprecise and eewn outdated... with time.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Does this one?

summum jus summa injuria - Cicero.

Today we call it "Lawfare".

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Something do not add up... in this your argument.

It is not enough to lose "access" to the luxuries of society? To be cast into the lowest of low classes and life at the minimum of possible existences? To be reduced to the bottom (or second from bottom) of Maslow's pyramid? To experience the World as Structure, without Communitas?

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Most people aren't Stoics. They'd rather live in Athens than Sparta.

Anonymous said...

\\summum jus summa injuria - Cicero.

You again trying to scary pragmatist with logical paradoxes here. ;-)



\\It is not enough to lose "access" to the luxuries of society? To be cast into the lowest of low classes and life at the minimum of possible existences? To be reduced to the bottom (or second from bottom) of Maslow's pyramid? To experience the World as Structure, without Communitas?

You trying to scary prol and downshifter... with what exactly? ;-P



-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

The UnAchievement Society.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

...an Idiocracy. Got Tik Tok?

Anonymous said...

Means... I need to be scared of my surroundings??? :-)))))

What am I, paranoiac... to you??? :-))))))

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Paranoiac? I'm always paranoiac. Only having been dealt a mind bullet once, I no longer fear them.

As for you needing to fear one from me, I doubt I could "set the scene" for one with you. I've shared too much candor.

Anonymous said...

\\As for you needing to fear one from me, I doubt I could "set the scene" for one with you. I've shared too much candor.

Sorry. I still too early to pass as native English speaker... cannot dechifer this.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

To deal someone a "mind bullet" one needs to be a bit more "mysterious"... not want to share their "background" with you. You must be perceived to be something that you're not. You know, kind of like "you". I'm perfectly candid about mine. Or am I? ;)

Anonymous said...

Pft! :-)))))

I cannot recall exact text of Lem about it... cause pretty much ALL of em beating around that bush. ;-P

Lem DEFINITELY tried to say something. Something that could be called... what that word you used -- "mind bullet".

But same time, did it with such a candidity...

so, maybe he was hiding something behind it. ;-)

Well... he explained even that. :-))))

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

I'm likely misusing the concept of a mind-bullet. I see the first level as how you interpret it... a kind of torpedo shock that get's you to question whether you are correct. The second level, which I was actually implying, gets you to question who you are and place you in a delusional state and question reality itself. This kind of "reality" where one goes chasing the objet petit 'a (3 body problem).

Anonymous said...

Yap. You have no experience with REAL eggheads. ;-)

PS Well... that is what DiBi basing his self-esteem on... wrongfully. He think that he is (because of actual PHD work done long time ago), but he isn't.

Joe Conservative said...

No, REAL eggheads let you do your job and respect your work product, because they know that their's is a very narrow specialty and that broader goals take teamwork. In other words, they know their lanes and respect the "structure" that created and maintains them. No, DiBi doesn't understands that his credentials (BS/MS/PhD) were built for the structure of a different system, Big Science, not the speculative skill of SciFi writing.

But then again, everything I needed to know, I learned in kindergarten. Like how to punch the playground bully. ;)

Joe Conservative said...

... then run away and hide. ;P

Anonymous said...

\\No, DiBi doesn't understands that his credentials (BS/MS/PhD) were built for the structure of a different system, Big Science, not the speculative skill of SciFi writing.

Yeah... and Feynman was realy just (not?) joking?



\\But then again, everything I needed to know, I learned in kindergarten. Like how to punch the playground bully. ;)

Dunno. Cannot empatise with that.

Have had no bullies in kindergarten. Or... forgot about em

School-wise... I punched them into their nose.

Anonymous said...

And not sure our cultures have congruent concepts of "bullying".

For example, do you have: "You cannot hit her, she's a girl"? Beaten into infant males... by close-by adult female?

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\No, DiBi doesn't understands that his credentials (BS/MS/PhD) were built for the structure of a different system, Big Science, not the speculative skill of SciFi writing.
/Yeah... and Feynman was realy just (not?) joking?


Not groking the reference. When he said...???


\\But then again, everything I needed to know, I learned in kindergarten. Like how to punch the playground bully. ;)
/Dunno. Cannot empatise with that.
Have had no bullies in kindergarten. Or... forgot about em
School-wise... I punched them into their nose.


Most of mine used the teacher to bully me.


And not sure our cultures have congruent concepts of "bullying".
/For example, do you have: "You cannot hit her, she's a girl"? Beaten into infant males... by close-by adult female?


Not any more. Our culture is post-modern with post-modern parents. It's really totalitarian/ disgusting. It's why Leftists HATE authoritarianism.

Anonymous said...

\\/Yeah... and Feynman was realy just (not?) joking?

\\Not groking the reference. When he said...???

You gave that ref -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surely_You%27re_Joking,_Mr._Feynman!

That is the problem with getting "wisdom" from Google.... :-(



\\Not any more. Our culture is post-modern with post-modern parents. It's really totalitarian/ disgusting. It's why Leftists HATE authoritarianism.

Yawn.

Perfectly what mom would do.


You still trying to oppose to 0-order conclusion -- "there is nothing new under the Moon".

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

The book has many stories which are lighthearted in tone, such as his fascination with safe-cracking, studying various languages, participating with groups of people who share different interests (such as biology or philosophy), and ventures into art and samba music.

So you think DiBi is trying to imitate Feynman with his blog? Or that Feynman never did it? Feynman grew up as an "average Joe". I don't think he was faking anything. Brooklyn? boy.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

You still trying to oppose to 0-order conclusion -- "there is nothing new under the Moon".

That's because there can be three (or four is you want to be clever) interpretative categories... like "things" finite, infinite, mixed (composed of finite elements and infinite forms), and none.

That, and there are no two "equal" things (like snowflakes). No two trees are alike. No two people are alike. Yes you can have fraternal twins, but they have completely different experiences the moment they split and lose their communicative bond (one ego becomes two egos). And they're always "becoming" and never just "being". I'd even posit that no two "atoms" or "protons" or "gluons" are exactly alike.

In other words, everything is new (and old) under the sun or moon (although "under" doesn't make very much sense... in solar system...which way's up (the top)?

Plato's "Parmenides" (w/Xeno)

When the recitation was completed, Socrates requested that the first thesis of the first argument might be read over again, and this having been done, he said: What is your meaning, Zeno? Do you maintain that if being is many, it must be both like and unlike, and that this is impossible, for neither can the like be unlike, nor the unlike like—is that your position?

Just so, said Zeno.

And if the unlike cannot be like, or the like unlike, then according to you, being could not be many; for this would involve an impossibility. In all that you say have you any other purpose except to disprove the being of the many? and is not each division of your treatise intended to furnish a separate proof of this, there being in all as many proofs of the not-being of the many as you have composed arguments? Is that your meaning, or have I misunderstood you?

No, said Zeno; you have correctly understood my general purpose.

I see, Parmenides, said Socrates, that Zeno would like to be not only one with you in friendship but your second self in his writings too; he puts what you say in another way, and would fain make believe that he is telling us something which is new. For you, in your poems, say The All is one, and of this you adduce excellent proofs; and he on the other hand says There is no many; and on behalf of this he offers overwhelming evidence. You affirm unity, he denies plurality. And so you deceive the world into believing that you are saying different things when really you are saying much the same. This is a strain of art beyond the reach of most of us.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

(cont)

Yes, Socrates, said Zeno. But although you are as keen as a Spartan hound in pursuing the track, you do not fully apprehend the true motive of the composition, which is not really such an artificial work as you imagine; for what you speak of was an accident; there was no pretence of a great purpose; nor any serious intention of deceiving the world. The truth is, that these writings of mine were meant to protect the arguments of Parmenides against those who make fun of him and seek to show the many ridiculous and contradictory results which they suppose to follow from the affirmation of the one. My answer is addressed to the partisans of the many, whose attack I return with interest by retorting upon them that their hypothesis of the being of many, if carried out, appears to be still more ridiculous than the hypothesis of the being of one. Zeal for my master led me to write the book in the days of my youth, but some one stole the copy; and therefore I had no choice whether it should be published or not; the motive, however, of writing, was not the ambition of an elder man, but the pugnacity of a young one. This you do not seem to see, Socrates; though in other respects, as I was saying, your notion is a very just one.

I understand, said Socrates, and quite accept your account. But tell me, Zeno, do you not further think that there is an idea of likeness in itself, and another idea of unlikeness, which is the opposite of likeness, and that in these two, you and I and all other things to which we apply the term many, participate—things which participate in likeness become in that degree and manner like; and so far as they participate in unlikeness become in that degree unlike, or both like and unlike in the degree in which they participate in both? And may not all things partake of both opposites, and be both like and unlike, by reason of this participation?

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Conclusion, "If one is not, then nothing is"

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Or perhaps to clarify...

Because the others have no sort or manner or way of communion with any sort of not-being, nor can anything which is not, be connected with any of the others; for that which is not has no parts.

True.

Nor is there an opinion or any appearance of not-being in connexion with the others, nor is not-being ever in any way attributed to the others.

No.

Then if one is not, there is no conception of any of the others either as one or many; for you cannot conceive the many without the one.

You cannot.

Then if one is not, the others neither are, nor can be conceived to be either one or many?

It would seem not.

Nor as like or unlike?

No.

Nor as the same or different, nor in contact or separation, nor in any of those states which we enumerated as appearing to be;—the others neither are nor appear to be any of these, if one is not?

True.

Then may we not sum up the argument in a word and say truly: If one is not, then nothing is?

Certainly.

Let thus much be said; and further let us affirm what seems to be the truth, that, whether one is or is not, one and the others in relation to themselves and one another, all of them, in every way, are and are not, and appear to be and appear not to be.

Most true.

Anonymous said...

\\\\No, DiBi doesn't understands that his credentials (BS/MS/PhD) were built for the structure of a different system, Big Science, not the speculative skill of SciFi writing.

\\So you think DiBi is trying to imitate Feynman with his blog? Or that Feynman never did it? Feynman grew up as an "average Joe". I don't think he was faking anything. Brooklyn? boy.

Feynman was Real Deal -- can anyone have any other opinion?

Davy -- not. Per se.

And well... Feynman didn't feel himself. Didn't behave like "part of the system".
While all meaning of that system -- to have such people hanging out around it. (geez... BBT (tv series))



\\You still trying to oppose to 0-order conclusion -- "there is nothing new under the Moon".

\\That's because there can be three (or four is you want to be clever) interpretative categories... like "things" finite, infinite, mixed (composed of finite elements and infinite forms), and none.

%-)

Sorry. Too big jumps between topics...

My answer was toward behavior of people... which you looks like loathing being demonstrating something unusual... while that is obviously and surely just the same old thing/behavior.

How it can go from here into there -- into discussion of something like "interpretative categories" -- I beg myself some slack. I dunno.



\\ I'd even posit that no two "atoms" or "protons" or "gluons" are exactly alike.

In relation to all other -- sure.

But, that whole spooky thing -- QM exist exactly because they are identical (that's why it is not possible to distinguish em in a double-slit experiment).




\\In other words, everything is new (and old) under the sun or moon (although "under" doesn't make very much sense... in solar system...which way's up (the top)?

Non-linear Mechanics -- Synergetics.



\\When the recitation was completed, Socrates requested that the first thesis of the first argument might be read over again, and this having been done, he said: What is your meaning, Zeno? Do you maintain that if being is many, it must be both like and unlike, and that this is impossible, for neither can the like be unlike, nor the unlike like—is that your position?

Tertium non datur... that is just a heuristic, still.



-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\\\No, DiBi doesn't understands that his credentials (BS/MS/PhD) were built for the structure of a different system, Big Science, not the speculative skill of SciFi writing.
\\So you think DiBi is trying to imitate Feynman with his blog? Or that Feynman never did it? Feynman grew up as an "average Joe". I don't think he was faking anything. Brooklyn? boy.
/Feynman was Real Deal -- can anyone have any other opinion?
Davy -- not. Per se.
And well... Feynman didn't feel himself. Didn't behave like "part of the system".
While all meaning of that system -- to have such people hanging out around it. (geez... BBT (tv series))


Well most of the "greats" were outsiders with their own "paradigms"... like Feynman's diagrams. Einstein was a patent clerk. But I suppose the credentials are necessary for the great man to be taken seriously, and his ideas to eventuallly (reluctantly) be adopted by those with similar credentials.


\\You still trying to oppose to 0-order conclusion -- "there is nothing new under the Moon".
\\That's because there can be three (or four is you want to be clever) interpretative categories... like "things" finite, infinite, mixed (composed of finite elements and infinite forms), and none.
%-)
Sorry. Too big jumps between topics...
My answer was toward behavior of people... which you looks like loathing being demonstrating something unusual... while that is obviously and surely just the same old thing/behavior.


No doubt... I have the bad habit of pressing repeatedly minor points. I'm always trying to point out the complexity, and then infer simplicity... cross purposes.


/How it can go from here into there -- into discussion of something like "interpretative categories" -- I beg myself some slack. I dunno.

Well, you make a statement or ask a question, and I have to interpret it in order to answer it. How I interpret it will make all the difference when making my response. Should it be literally, like you claim as being a non-native speaker? Is it "Culturally" tinged or tainted and need I shift perspective to answer? We have to share a common context from which to apply our logic, build a frame for it. Are you speaking "poetically" or in narrative form? Universals or specifics? "Nothing new under the moon" implies poetic... so perhaps my answer should be poetic... or philsophical. Or are we neighboring cells which share the same ego and context and see the questions (or more likeli, stimuli) as orders coming from within our own heads and act accordingly?


\\ I'd even posit that no two "atoms" or "protons" or "gluons" are exactly alike.
In relation to all other -- sure.
But, that whole spooky thing -- QM exist exactly because they are identical (that's why it is not possible to distinguish em in a double-slit experiment).


Perhaps our instruments simply are not, or can never be, sensitive enough to register the minor differences. The "limit" defines the form/ figure.


\\In other words, everything is new (and old) under the sun or moon (although "under" doesn't make very much sense... in solar system...which way's up (the top)?
/Non-linear Mechanics -- Synergetics.


I suppose, yes. Or perhaps a response of "I can't answer the question" is more appropriate.

Anonymous said...

\\Or are we neighboring cells which share the same ego and context and see the questions (or more likeli, stimuli) as orders coming from within our own heads and act accordingly?

See... lack of goal makes it all unstructured mess.

That's why I keep mentioning Meta-Thinking.

Point of View from Outside. From the cloud, if you want.

From that point territoty looks pretty much the same as map... isn't it? ;-)



\\Perhaps our instruments simply are not, or can never be, sensitive enough to register the minor differences. The "limit" defines the form/ figure.

Naaah.

There CANNOT be such a instruments.

You can test electron ONLY with anothe relectron.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\Or are we neighboring cells which share the same ego and context and see the questions (or more likeli, stimuli) as orders coming from within our own heads and act accordingly?
/See... lack of goal makes it all unstructured mess.
That's why I keep mentioning Meta-Thinking.
Point of View from Outside. From the cloud, if you want.
From that point territoty looks pretty much the same as map... isn't it? ;-)


Yes, but you can only see the "surface" of a map in 2D.

Maybe the goal can be divided and re-apportioned and layered at different levels (below the surface of "appearances"). Like Level 0, 1, 2, 3 requirements in a systems requirements document. What's the bandwidth of the system (like internet with http/ftp/etc. protocols)?

The only other thing to remember when we compare this to human efforts is that every component has its' own goals in various spaces, usually with very little regard for the welfare of the other levels. So as a simple example, you, as a complex system, will go out and you will do Jiu Jitsu or whatever. You'll have some call to go rock climbing and scrape a bunch of cells off your hands. And then you're happy, as a system, right? You come back and you've accomplished some goals, and you're really happy. Those cells are dead. They're gone. Right? Did you think about those cells? Not really, right? You had some bruising out, you selfish SOB, that's it. And so the thing to remember is that you know, and we know, this from history, is that just being a collective isn't enough. Because what the goals of that Collective will be relative to the welfare of the individual Parts is a massively open question.
Ends justify the means?


You keep rejecting the above other "intelligences" following different protocols and media.


\\Perhaps our instruments simply are not, or can never be, sensitive enough to register the minor differences. The "limit" defines the form/ figure.
Naaah.
There CANNOT be such a instruments.
You can test electron ONLY with anothe relectron.


How about a Muon? I don't know, I'm not a physicist.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Layered/tiered multiple intelligences... antifragile. :)

Anonymous said...

\\Yes, but you can only see the "surface" of a map in 2D.

It need perception... and even intelligence, to read a map... or distinguish some tracks on the ground.

Or ability to "see through" as geologists do, look at what under ground.



\\You keep rejecting the above other "intelligences" following different protocols and media.

Dunno. Where?





\\You can test electron ONLY with anothe relectron.

\\How about a Muon? I don't know, I'm not a physicist.

I was interested in particles physics... but that was long ago.

Still... if there'd be change of understanding/paradign THAT big, I would hear about it.

So... in shirt, it is in between the lines "all elementary particles CONSIST out all other particles".

That is what they do in LHC -- shooting one proton beam into another... and it produces all kinds of particles they analyze then... even "God particle". :-)

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\Yes, but you can only see the "surface" of a map in 2D.
/It need perception... and even intelligence, to read a map... or distinguish some tracks on the ground.
Or ability to "see through" as geologists do, look at what under ground.


...with muon tomography? ;)


\\You keep rejecting the above other "intelligences" following different protocols and media.
/Dunno. Where?


Cells solving problems in other spaces... tissues/ organs/ physical 3D... I can't find them, but I know I tried twice before... like described: But more interesting is the fact that each of these layers has certain problem-solving competencies. Each one solves problems in their own space, so cells are simultaneously solving problems in physiological spaces and metabolic spaces and gene expression spaces, and tissues and organs are solving those problems. But, for example, during embryogenesis or regeneration, they're also solving problems in anatomical space. They're trying to navigate a path from the shape of an early embryo or a fertilized zygote all the way up to the complexity of a human body, with all of the different types of organs and structures.

So the competency architecture refers to the fact that all of the parts inside of us and inside of all other creatures are themselves competent agents with preferences, with goals, with various abilities to pursue those goals, and other types of problem-solving capacities. What evolution has given us is this remarkable architecture where every level shapes the behavioral landscape of the levels below- and the levels below do clever and interesting things that allow the levels above not to have to micromanage, and to be able to control in an interesting top-down capacity.


You seem to not want to recognize these as "intelligences"...


\\You can test electron ONLY with anothe relectron.
\\How about a Muon? I don't know, I'm not a physicist.
/I was interested in particles physics... but that was long ago.
Still... if there'd be change of understanding/paradign THAT big, I would hear about it.
So... in shirt, it is in between the lines "all elementary particles CONSIST out all other particles".
That is what they do in LHC -- shooting one proton beam into another... and it produces all kinds of particles they analyze then... even "God particle". :-)


Speaking of G_d particles...Wasn't the atom supposed to be the "fundamental" smallest particle? Or have we all become Leibnitzians now? ;)

Anonymous said...

\\You seem to not want to recognize these as "intelligences"...

What's the nature of "definition"? It's whatever we can assign as a meaning of a word?
Or... there is some real world limitations?


\\Speaking of G_d particles...Wasn't the atom supposed to be the "fundamental" smallest particle? Or have we all become Leibnitzians now? ;)

Ditto.
Do you think that it's up to Humans to yoke Nature with what it should be???

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\You seem to not want to recognize these as "intelligences"...
/What's the nature of "definition"? It's whatever we can assign as a meaning of a word?
Or... there is some real world limitations?


Good question. There are other words for "types" of intelligences. Maybe we need more of these words which draw attention to distinctions and differences in intelligences. My "go-to" example would be the often misused word "chicanery". I like to think of it as in the ELO song "Can't get you out of my head"... the line... "walking on the waves chicane".

And so for me, it's a kind of "body demonstrated intelligence". Like a football player tricking his opponent with a body motion change pattern. Or a boxer with a combination punch with fakes. It's the pattern we refer to as "muscle memory" that athletes train to instill... a stored muscle-motor neuron pattern/ sequence from the cerebellum meant to outmaneuver an opponent. In other words... "chicanery". What dancers would call, a "choreography" for body movement.

My daughter was a dancer, and had a specific language for recording this choreagraphy filled with french words like plie, jete, gran jete, etc...


\\Speaking of G_d particles...Wasn't the atom supposed to be the "fundamental" smallest particle? Or have we all become Leibnitzians now? ;)
/Ditto.
Do you think that it's up to Humans to yoke Nature with what it should be???


No, I think it's up to humans to realize that our simulations of nature don't always need to see beyond the facades/faces/surfaces of the sets in the movie studio of reality.

Anonymous said...

\\Good question. There are other words for "types" of intelligences. Maybe we need more of these words which draw attention to distinctions and differences in intelligences. My "go-to" example would be the often misused word "chicanery". I like to think of it as in the ELO song "Can't get you out of my head"... the line... "walking on the waves chicane".

I think we can have it here as a split into philosophy... and sophistry.

I am interested in philosophy.

But you are free to propose to me your sophistry... to criticize. ;-)

Alike to that Bohr-Einstain debates... https://philosophynow.org/issues/45/Bohr_and_Kant_and_Zeno

Anonymous said...

\\What dancers would call, a "choreography" for body movement.

Do you see this weaklness in your example?

Footballists do compete with each other. While dancers -- cooperate.

As they say -- it need two for a tango. ;-)


\\My daughter was a dancer, and had a specific language for recording this choreagraphy filled with french words like plie, jete, gran jete, etc...

Yap.

That is one of the core... intrinsic. Real problems. Behind my idea.

Need to develop OWN inner language, to communicate inside team.

Language... not like any existing language.

We just NOT have a words for discussing behavior of COMPLEX systems.

Objectively. From Outside.

We have half-broken way to discuss it from inside... based on our subjective feelings. And instincts.





Anonymous said...

\\No, I think it's up to humans to realize that our simulations of nature don't always need to see beyond the facades/faces/surfaces of the sets in the movie studio of reality.

Elaborate?
If you please.

Anonymous said...

Ehm????

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\Good question. There are other words for "types" of intelligences. Maybe we need more of these words which draw attention to distinctions and differences in intelligences. My "go-to" example would be the often misused word "chicanery". I like to think of it as in the ELO song "Can't get you out of my head"... the line... "walking on the waves chicane".
/I think we can have it here as a split into philosophy... and sophistry.
I am interested in philosophy.
But you are free to propose to me your sophistry... to criticize. ;-)
Alike to that Bohr-Einstain debates... https://philosophynow.org/issues/45/Bohr_and_Kant_and_Zeno


:P


\\What dancers would call, a "choreography" for body movement.
/Do you see this weaklness in your example?
Footballists do compete with each other. While dancers -- cooperate.
As they say -- it need two for a tango. ;-)


Do they? Dancing IS a competition. One for "mate selection". It doesn't get any more "Darwinian" than dance.


\\My daughter was a dancer, and had a specific language for recording this choreagraphy filled with french words like plie, jete, gran jete, etc...
/Yap.
That is one of the core... intrinsic. Real problems. Behind my idea.
Need to develop OWN inner language, to communicate inside team.
Language... not like any existing language.
We just NOT have a words for discussing behavior of COMPLEX systems.
Objectively. From Outside.
We have half-broken way to discuss it from inside... based on our subjective feelings. And instincts.


To paint the outside wall "inside the frame". Like Beethoven's 9th. "Critique" of language.


\\No, I think it's up to humans to realize that our simulations of nature don't always need to see beyond the facades/faces/surfaces of the sets in the movie studio of reality.
/Elaborate?
If you please.


Like you were saying with Bohr/Einstein. Zizek's critique. The "incompleteness" of Bohr's quantum physics.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

...and Critique of "Intelligence".

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Nomad thoughts.

Anonymous said...

\\Do they? Dancing IS a competition.

Still... both sides achieve their goal in process... in result of that dance.



\\To paint the outside wall "inside the frame".

Dunno.

My point is purely pragmatical.



\\Like you were saying with Bohr/Einstein. Zizek's critique. The "incompleteness" of Bohr's quantum physics.

Does it? Who say?

Actually... QM is all around us.

Like, imagine that you and your pal decided to go to a pub.

You can EITHER... arrange time you'd meet there. Or... you can't go walking together.

So... either you'd know Time and Place where'd you meet him (depend on level of your pal relaibility).

Or... you'd know perfectly well Path... but without certainity of Time... or even Place -- if you'd decide to go somewhere else by the road.

That's... picture what Feynman invented to depict with his diagrams. ;-)


\\...and Critique of "Intelligence".

As always -- depend on your definition... and you STILL not provided your.



\\Nomad thoughts.

Pretentious... even in regard to that "Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud"

Anonymous said...

\\ Slavoj Zizek on Niels Bohr and ideology

Boring, boring, boring...

Feynman already told it, in his chapter about "Cult of Cargo".

Yawn.

And well... Lem...

Anonymous said...

Well... Houdini tried to test Afterlife EVEN.

So miserly tryes of Bohr to "test lucky charms"... pales in comparation.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\Do they? Dancing IS a competition.
/Still... both sides achieve their goal in process... in result of that dance.


Yet the goal remained unstated. Is it more than a feeling/ intuition?


\\To paint the outside wall "inside the frame".
/Dunno.
My point is purely pragmatical.


And mine just some Yin for the Yang of thought.


\\Like you were saying with Bohr/Einstein. Zizek's critique. The "incompleteness" of Bohr's quantum physics.
/Does it? Who say?
Actually... QM is all around us.
Like, imagine that you and your pal decided to go to a pub.
You can EITHER... arrange time you'd meet there. Or... you can't go walking together.
So... either you'd know Time and Place where'd you meet him (depend on level of your pal relaibility).
Or... you'd know perfectly well Path... but without certainity of Time... or even Place -- if you'd decide to go somewhere else by the road.
That's... picture what Feynman invented to depict with his diagrams. ;-)


Not simply illustrating Heisenberg's principle?


\\...and Critique of "Intelligence".
/As always -- depend on your definition... and you STILL not provided your.


Sure I have. Just apply Heisenberg to it. Intelligence is success in achieving desired result, stupidity is failure to achieve success. Quantum logic. Now where'd Shroedinger's cat get off to this time?


\\Nomad thoughts.
/Pretentious... even in regard to that "Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud"


I found it very perceptive. Jewishness as a re-codification of family/... tribe (religion)/ Zionist State (Israel). Reverse KPCOFGS

Anonymous said...

\\Yet the goal remained unstated. Is it more than a feeling/ intuition?

Self-fulfilling prophesy.

Or... I used that saying already: "Life... it's veneric desease".

Or... like in other snark: "It's herediary... if your Father didn't do that -- most likely you will not too". ;-P



\\And mine just some Yin for the Yang of thought.

Dunno. I don't speak Mandarin. :-)



\\That's... picture what Feynman invented to depict with his diagrams. ;-)

\\Not simply illustrating Heisenberg's principle?


Eeeehm???

But I would like to see it GRAPHICALLY illustrated. :-)



\\Sure I have. Just apply Heisenberg to it. Intelligence is success in achieving desired result, stupidity is failure to achieve success.

Little problem here -- circular reasoning.

To have desired result one need to be intelligent beforehand? ;-)



\\I found it very perceptive. Jewishness as a re-codification of family/... tribe (religion)/ Zionist State (Israel). Reverse KPCOFGS

Whatever.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\Yet the goal remained unstated. Is it more than a feeling/ intuition?
/Self-fulfilling prophesy.
Or... I used that saying already: "Life... it's veneric desease".
Or... like in other snark: "It's herediary... if your Father didn't do that -- most likely you will not too". ;-P


Intelligence... a self-fulfilling prophesy


\\And mine just some Yin for the Yang of thought.
/Dunno. I don't speak Mandarin. :-)


Only because you're just inside the Chinese Room...


\\That's... picture what Feynman invented to depict with his diagrams. ;-)
\\Not simply illustrating Heisenberg's principle?
/Eeeehm???
But I would like to see it GRAPHICALLY illustrated. :-)


Two separate but equivalent symbolic structures.


\\Sure I have. Just apply Heisenberg to it. Intelligence is success in achieving desired result, stupidity is failure to achieve success.
/Little problem here -- circular reasoning.
To have desired result one need to be intelligent beforehand? ;-)


So it IS just a feeling. Desire, BEFORE the fact that determines "intelligence". Prometheus/ Epimetheus. They are brothers, after all. Unlike Apollo and Artemis. Welcome to my world Dr. Pangloss. Can I get back to my gardening now?

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Intelligence... that which correctly interprets and translates between differing symbolic structures.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

It "feels good" if you do it right. Might even get a shot of dopamine.

Anonymous said...

\\Intelligence... a self-fulfilling prophesy

Still... it looks like definition which better suits Stupidity.

""
"A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!".
""



\\Only because you're just inside the Chinese Room...

:-))))))))))))

I admit. That is damn funny comment.

But I do not regard Searle's hypothesis as viable.

Because -- Structural Knowledge.

And... experience of programmer -- any program, when in machine codes -- ARE like that Chinese Room.

But that is usual task for any decent programmer -- to try to find out what gone bad with it.

And... I bet Neuroscientists can say even more... well, we discivered ALL path of a signal... like from our eyes and to deepest levels of out neocortex.

Even more then that -- we KNOW it from like 70th...

So... that Searle is just ignorant fool.



\\But I would like to see it GRAPHICALLY illustrated. :-)

\\Two separate but equivalent symbolic structures.

Whatever how. Just show it to me. ;-)



\\So it IS just a feeling. Desire, BEFORE the fact that determines "intelligence". Prometheus/ Epimetheus. They are brothers, after all. Unlike Apollo and Artemis. Welcome to my world Dr. Pangloss. Can I get back to my gardening now?

Yup.

If throw into a window all heard earned in last century knowledge...



\\Intelligence... that which correctly interprets and translates between differing symbolic structures.

Like computer program? But who are programmer of it? ;-P

Bill Gates? :-))))



\\It "feels good" if you do it right. Might even get a shot of dopamine.

That's just a feedback loop.

Yawn.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\Intelligence... a self-fulfilling prophesy
/Still... it looks like definition which better suits Stupidity.
""
"A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!".
""


How about "demonstrating intelligence by "Knowing/saying "where you're going" and "how you'll get there", and then arriving at said place by means previously stated?"

Or as Nietzcshe would state it in his GoM, "The breeding of an animal (or creation of a machine) that can promise".


\\Only because you're just inside the Chinese Room...
:-))))))))))))
I admit. That is damn funny comment.
But I do not regard Searle's hypothesis as viable.
Because -- Structural Knowledge.
And... experience of programmer -- any program, when in machine codes -- ARE like that Chinese Room.
But that is usual task for any decent programmer -- to try to find out what gone bad with it.
And... I bet Neuroscientists can say even more... well, we discivered ALL path of a signal... like from our eyes and to deepest levels of out neocortex.
Even more then that -- we KNOW it from like 70th...
So... that Searle is just ignorant fool.


Doesn't that make us doubly ignorant if we can't come up with something better?


\\But I would like to see it GRAPHICALLY illustrated. :-)
\\Two separate but equivalent symbolic structures.
/Whatever how. Just show it to me. ;-)


Sure: Smile: :) or Smile:Sonrisa

Can you read them both?



\\So it IS just a feeling. Desire, BEFORE the fact that determines "intelligence". Prometheus/ Epimetheus. They are brothers, after all. Unlike Apollo and Artemis. Welcome to my world Dr. Pangloss. Can I get back to my gardening now?
/Yup.
If throw into a window all heard earned in last century knowledge...


Money simply symbolizes labour time in its' exchange.


\\Intelligence... that which correctly interprets and translates between differing symbolic structures.
/Like computer program? But who are programmer of it? ;-P
Bill Gates? :-))))


DITMCO? That's who Gates bought DOS from to sell to IBM.



\\It "feels good" if you do it right. Might even get a shot of dopamine.
/That's just a feedback loop.
/Yawn.


Feedback? Or Control?

Anonymous said...

\\""
"A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!".
""

\\How about "demonstrating intelligence by "Knowing/saying "where you're going" and "how you'll get there", and then arriving at said place by means previously stated?"


Isn't it just orthogonal to what I just said.

Well... even dumb stooopid people need to feed themself -- means, aim their mouths and not eyes... with a fork.

Isn't that damn intelligent behavior? ;-) Damn smart of em?

Anonymous said...

\\Feedback? Or Control?

Is homeostasis is the way of control... what en interesting question. Naaah. :-)



\\DITMCO? That's who Gates bought DOS from to sell to IBM.

See?

"Turtles all way down". (tm)



\\\\So it IS just a feeling. Desire, BEFORE the fact that determines "intelligence". Prometheus/ Epimetheus. They are brothers, after all. Unlike Apollo and Artemis. Welcome to my world Dr. Pangloss. Can I get back to my gardening now?
/Yup.
If throw into a window all heard earned in last century knowledge...

\\Money simply symbolizes labour time in its' exchange.

If you see it logically connected -- good for you.

I -- don't. :-(



\\\\But I would like to see it GRAPHICALLY illustrated. :-)
\\Two separate but equivalent symbolic structures.
/Whatever how. Just show it to me. ;-)

Sure: Smile: :) or Smile:Sonrisa

\\Can you read them both?


I would refer to something like billiard... one where you not allowed to hit one ball with anything but another ball....



\\Doesn't that make us doubly ignorant if we can't come up with something better?

Depend on our goals...

If that to show sparkling smartness in a salon of prima donna -- probably not.

But in a company of smart aces... even good question could be admitted being sparkling.

Or... so they say. I myself never was in such company to confirm or deny it...

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\How about "demonstrating intelligence by "Knowing/saying "where you're going" and "how you'll get there", and then arriving at said place by means previously stated?"
/Isn't it just orthogonal to what I just said.
Well... even dumb stooopid people need to feed themself -- means, aim their mouths and not eyes... with a fork.
Isn't that damn intelligent behavior? ;-) Damn smart of em?


Only if the another option available to them was to use chopstix. ;)


\\Feedback? Or Control?
/Is homeostasis is the way of control... what en interesting question. Naaah. :-)


Not a "determinist"?


\\DITMCO? That's who Gates bought DOS from to sell to IBM.
/See?
"Turtles all way down". (tm)


Those are turtles? I stand on the shoulders of giants! Oh, wait, those only mark the transitions between turtle shells. :P


\\\\So it IS just a feeling. Desire, BEFORE the fact that determines "intelligence". Prometheus/ Epimetheus. They are brothers, after all. Unlike Apollo and Artemis. Welcome to my world Dr. Pangloss. Can I get back to my gardening now?
/Yup.
If throw into a window all heard earned in last century knowledge...
\\Money simply symbolizes labour time in its' exchange.
/If you see it logically connected -- good for you.
I -- don't. :-(


Time is money!


\\\\But I would like to see it GRAPHICALLY illustrated. :-)
\\Two separate but equivalent symbolic structures.
/Whatever how. Just show it to me. ;-)
\Sure: Smile: :) or Smile:Sonrisa
\\Can you read them both?


You can't?


/I would refer to something like billiard... one where you not allowed to hit one ball with anything but another ball....

No cue stick? Sounds difficult. I don't do telekinesis.


\\Doesn't that make us doubly ignorant if we can't come up with something better?
/Depend on our goals...
If that to show sparkling smartness in a salon of prima donna -- probably not.
But in a company of smart aces... even good question could be admitted being sparkling.
Or... so they say. I myself never was in such company to confirm or deny it...


Me neither. :(

Anonymous said...

\\Only if the another option available to them was to use chopstix. ;)

They can eat with their hands... that is wondrous too. ;-P


\\Not a "determinist"?

Dunno.

See. There's still mountains and seas of misunderstanding in between us...

but, thank you for letting me learning it.



\\Time is money!

Not.

Or... go buy me one second of Einstain... or Feynman.



\\You can't?

Dunno.




\\No cue stick? Sounds difficult. I don't do telekinesis.

That's it!

We trying to imagine Physics as billiard with sticks... while there is nowhere to have one... maybe except Gawd...



-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

\\Only if the another option available to them was to use chopstix. ;)
/They can eat with their hands... that is wondrous too. ;-P


Did they make a promise first how to eat? Did they then keep it?


\\Not a "determinist"?
/Dunno.
See. There's still mountains and seas of misunderstanding in between us...
but, thank you for letting me learning it.


"Free will" then. And good for you if you're learning anything from an a-hole like me. I feel like I'm just wasting your time.


\\Time is money!
/Not.
Or... go buy me one second of Einstain... or Feynman.


I can't do time travel. But both were paid for their "thinking". Even if all of it wasn't in "money", but other forms of currency. (ps - most people don't want to connect with you, they're FoMo's who want to "swipe right" or confirm their bias'. Your atopos scares the sh*t out of them!)


\\No cue stick? Sounds difficult. I don't do telekinesis.
/That's it!
We trying to imagine Physics as billiard with sticks... while there is nowhere to have one... maybe except Gawd...


Motionless motion? Plato's 10th? (Bartleby) "I'd rather not..." I guess we're back to theology.

Anonymous said...

\\Did they make a promise first how to eat? Did they then keep it?

Yeah... and why I still surprised.

While that is so natural who drowning in words... instead of looking into common sense of things of real world.

"If you know only words... you know nothing"



\\"Free will" then. And good for you if you're learning anything from an a-hole like me. I feel like I'm just wasting your time.

Well.

If i able to learn something from Derpy... or DiDi and DiBi.

I think you have no need for such self-depreciation.

Feigned, or not. :-)




\\I can't do time travel.

See. ;-)



\\But both were paid for their "thinking".

For posterity.

And might be for NOT thinking... too much, too. Probably.



\\Your atopos scares the sh*t out of them!)

Hardly...

Is it possibly to fear something one dunno?




\\Motionless motion? Plato's 10th? (Bartleby) "I'd rather not..." I guess we're back to theology.

As Lem (in a form of Golem) said: "if I'll use organum as my instrument... people would start to think about church... but, so be it".