As I learn about these ‘adaptive self-adjustments through internal mechanisms’, it reaffirms my white-pilled understanding that it is not randomness that creates potentialities. There is still no need to assign intelligence or intent to the process. It is evidently clear that when a potentiality is actualized, the actor's intent nor intelligence is not necessary.

#grownostr #christian #creation #evolution #science #bible

As a boomer trying to jettison old notions of ‘cause/effect’, ‘intent/outcome’, and ‘intelligence/ignorance’, I am becoming afflicted with a different way of seeing things that is not easy for me to share, though I will try.

Believing is a process by which our experience and understanding is shaped by theories, theologies and theater of our time. There need be no assignment of intelligence or truth to such beliefs. What is more important to the process than truth is a possibility for stable complexities to emerge. It is not necessary to assume intelligence or intent for emergences, though it does seem necessity to assume a community of individuals acting, thriving, communicating, and communing in a shared understanding that limits possibilities. The theories, theologies and theater of our time seem to be a prerequisite for the potential of emergence. That these words all have their etymology in ‘Theos’ makes it more interesting.

I believe a coherent conversation about this subject is possible, but I am still learning the language and I am probably not the best spokesperson.

#creation #evolution #ChristianTheism

Does not going 100% mean you have different wallets for coinjoined and not coinjoined?

https://sparrowwallet.com/docs/mixing-whirlpool.html

There is much to be gained with an understanding of complex adaptive systems theory. None of it more interesting than understanding the etymology of theory, theology and theater and how they are related by more than etymology.

#creation #evolution #ChristianTheism

How dare you! You have stolen my dreams and my life with your empty words of transcendent truth and beauty beyond my experience, while all you can advocate is a campaign for personal ideals. How dare you!

BTW, I too think if we lose when we are not all in. Making it an issue with humanity winning or losing turns it into an onward Christian soldier sort of thing.

How dare you! You have stolen my dreams and my life with your empty words of transcendent truth and beauty beyond my experience, while all you can advocate is a campaign for personal ideals. How dare you!

BTW, I too think if we lose when we are not all in. Making it an issue with humanity winning or losing turns it into an onward Christian soldier sort of thing.

Signaling continued decline of US global hegemony, the White House (the President?, God knows) demands, like Pompey stamping his foot, with expectations of legends springing forth from the ground to execute his demands. Thus what happens when the leaders accept deals that the people don’t.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/30/world/europe/kosovo-serbia-troops-nato.html

#news

#politics

What is the truth behind one’s actions other than desires for things with which one wants? Do those desires come from a core self or are they created from the experiences afforded to one in life? I don’t understand where personal accountability plays in this scenario. Personal mastery in action in fulfilling one’s desires might be more of a player.

As you try to maintain an opinion (i.e., argue) in a conversation, shutting up is not a successful action. First, you are still confounded, and Second, the value of your own opinion was withheld. The process of selecting a solution was lost, just as in an evolutionary dead end.

As a boomer trying to jettison the baggage of such notions as ‘cause/effect’, ‘intent/outcome’, and ‘intelligence/ignorance’, I am becoming afflicted with a different way of seeing things that is not easy for me to share, though I will try.

Perhaps we could agree to consider financial systems as instruments through which we (others) impose forces, the economy itself seems to me to be the arena wherein such forces are exercised, observed, felt, etc. The ecomomy is the environment wherein human action occurs, not the instrument of manipulation itself. Would it be fair to consider Bitcoin an emerging Financial System?

Being manipulated may also be understood as ‘believing’. Believing has its Pros and Cons, but it needs no assignment of intelligence or truth. People are all believers of some sort or the other. Some objective judgment on whether the economy is fair or not fair doesn’t matter to what emerges as much as whether it is acceptable to those with options. I do believe options are emerging and acceptability is being reoriented. I try to see that as based not on knowledge but based on what works somehow within a community of believers. Growing such a community seems a worthwhile human endeavor. There are many ways of participating in that endevor.

Those who have benefited from a stable complexity delivering such benefit to them may be no less manipulated than others. We all ways of protecting that stability, yet our means do vary. Change is always a threat and always a necessity to growth. The information we share in social contact might best be understood as more about ourselves than the world. That a set of such information can result in a prevailing consensus does not make it true, but it does make it possible. I think of that as a good thing.

I embrace an absence of knowledge. To me, information is that which I receive from my senses. Objectivity is agreement on whether you see what I see and vice versa. Reality is the community we might make of it.

I am interested in this #orangepill subject but still learning the language. Can you help me with questions about this subject?

Is there a standard definition ‘to orangepill’? I get the gist that it is some sort of transfer of understanding in or believing in #Bitcoin performed by another. When someone has been orangepilled, does that means they share the proper consensus on Bitcoin? I am partial to the description of a free market economy supported by a sound exchange and store of value, but don’t believe Bitcoin is the only path. Am I not orangepilled?

Economy, as an instrument, suggests there is an intelligence and intend behind the proper use of that tool. I try no to understand the economy as an instrument to be wielded or manipulated by intelligence, but as a consensus world within which all our individual social interactions occur. The interactions (actions, connections, edges, forces, etc) are pronounced successful or unsuccessful only by those within the consensus. I can’t get to a sharing of eternal truth from here, but I am coming to understand that sharing may be enough, if the sharing provides success. Is it necessary to assign intelligence to ‘what’ wields the instrument called the economy?

My thinking is individuals moving in our economy makes the world (similar to quanta in motion). We don’t have to assign intelligence to it, or somethings else that is keeping people dumb. The best we can do is share what we are thinking and if that sharing creates a path to new consensus, the world will change.

Thank you

#asknostr

Why should I believe Obama ever said this? If you can’t help me believe, then your own credibility becomes questionable. That doesn’t help anything.

Technology changes things, but it is still relatively locally and temporarily.

I might have misread something that went like: ‘evolution is nature’s way of processing carbon to a higher state of entropy’. It makes more sense now I am learning of the abundance of carbon in the universe.

I don’t know much about complex adaptive system theory, but it gist I get is that the things that emerge into our experience are the processes of nodes (individuals) in connections with other individuals. What we call an individual (human or quantum) or a connection (speech or electro-magic force) changes in our descriptions. It does appear that it can’t be turned off.

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,

Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

You say we need to replace Politics? Politics is the method by which authority to imprison, wage war, and tax is established. Which comes first the end of politics or the #transparent #decentralized #protocols? Perhaps under such protocols there would be no need for imprisonment, war or taxes, but it is not something I believe.

The process of replacing politics is not something we can collectively decide - We can only decide individually. I do believe we can act together as individuals, but the records show there is no predicting what happens to #society then or whether is remains human as we understand it.

I always considered those standing behind me to be a fickle sort. Their stance and bent are not based on knowledge, but their participation changes everything.

To this old man, the political discourse hasn’t changed, but the hype and brazen media manipulation aspects of the current discouse are providing more amusement than in times past. I acknowledge that to a young person who is trying to set bearings, it might not appear amusing, but don’t think it has ever been much different.