What if reality was something completely different than what we feel it to be? What if one day you woke up and discovered that everything you thought about the world, including who you are, where you live, and the people around you—was all just a dream?
__________________
Gender: Male Location: Welfare Kingdom of California
I don't know in which way to address this dilema....should I use Ryle's Ghost in the machine idea...or should I go with Descartes mind and body dualism?
Alright, whoever wakes me up first gets my choice.
Hell, if it were a dream I'd wake up and write a book about all the crazy sh*t I've seen, heard, and read from this life....since none of it would be known, I could get rich off of others' cool ideas.
Or maybe books wouldn't exist. Then I'd be screwed.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's no one to hear it, did it really fall? And does that tree even exist? Classical science has changed its mind about this again and again, and lately it has taken a direction that is remarkably similar to what the wisdom of Kabbalah has been saying for thousands of years.
But first, a brief history detour. For centuries, scientific research was based on the belief that reality and the observer are two distinct entities. Reality was thought to be objective, to exist regardless of whether there is someone observing it or not. In other words, scientists thought that the tree exists in the forest whether there's anyone to see it or not. But further research in the 20th century proved this to be wrong, and that reality is relative - it depends on the observer.
In the 1920s, Albert Einstein was the first to introduce this concept. He showed that the observer's velocity causes his reality to change. Later on, scientists went even further and concluded that reality does not depend just on the observer's velocity, but that it is altogether subjective and exists exactly to the extent that the observer perceives it. In other words, we perceive everything through our own properties, so that if our properties change, our perceived picture of the world changes as well.
This discovery revolutionized the scientific world; however, it was no innovation to the world of Kabbalah. For centuries, Kabbalah books have described that reality is relative, subjective, dependent on the observer, and changes according to his attitude to it. Kabbalah has always advanced the idea that the picture we perceive depends solely on us and does not exist outside of us. In fact, the reality we see is a reflection of our inner qualities, and if we change our qualities, we will perceive a completely different reality.
So both Kabbalah and science aim to broaden our picture of reality through scientific research, but when it comes to changing the observer's qualities in order to do so, they part ways.
Even though a scientist may know that the findings of his research depend on his own qualities, he doesn't work on developing himself as a part of his research. In other words, whatever an ordinary scientist investigates understands and reveals, remains as something that is "outside" him.
A Kabbalist, on the other hand, develops himself as a part of his research. He doesn't just recognize the fact that reality is subjective, that it depends on the observer's qualities, but actually utilizes it. Hence, a Kabbalist's new finding is a profound feeling and understanding. It becomes an actual part of his reality. This is why Kabbalist's call it an "attainment" or "Hasaga" in Hebrew, meaning that one tangibly "grasps" the feeling and knowledge the way one grasps something with his very hands.
How do you know everyone else on KMC is not software which can pass the Turing test?
Turing Test
- You are sitting at a terminal linked to another terminal which you can't see. If, by interacting with that other terminal, you can't tell whether it is operated by a person or a machine, then the machine has passed the Turing Test.
- A hypothetical test for computer intelligence, proposed by Alan Turing in 1950, involving a computer program generating a conversation which could not be distinguished from that of a real human.
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
I'm not a fan of the Turing Test. There's plenty of iterations that could fool a humans without sufficiently establishing sentience. It's a fun intellectual exercise for various cognitive psychologies, but not something that gives us a clearer picture of the mind or reality.
When I was 8, my best friend and I tried to convince each other we were robots. One day, I saw him get hurt and asked, "If you're a robot, how come you feel pain?" (I figured I had him with that one.)
He replied that his dad (who "built him") gave him the ability to feel pain...a good answer I immediately adopted.
Still...for software, "we" are all pretty convincing.
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 13th, 2008 10:25 PM
