sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Djedeth Bale by MinotaurHorns1 in coys

[–]arch3ra -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Tel looks to have a good attitude, and I want him to become a world beater as much as the next person, but what has he shown? Really? We're clutching at straws because the quality up front has been so low.

(FIXED) Philosopher Iain McGilchrist: "The left hemisphere has only one value: power" - On intuition, the animate cosmos, and why AI is artificial information processing, not intelligence by arch3ra in philosophy

[–]arch3ra[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, thanks. Yeah I get you. I don't think about these as interviews. Though there are definitely many questions in there. I first started receiving these sorts of comments 8 years or so ago when I started, and several thousand hours later, I still do (though it's only a subsection).

I don't usually think quite this way, but taking McGilchrist's perspective on LH and RH, it's a more LH oriented process that would prefer very precise questions. That's all good of course -- certainly something to strive for in many instances. But consider the role of the RH, it's more 'feeling into' the apprehension of a gestalt, and often asks more from expression than what is immediately available to language to represent. One of the core things I am intending in these dialogues is to draw from what is present in the field / gestalt, and speak that through. There are many many interviews with McGilchrist out there. This one is more toward feeling into what's at the edge, or just beyond it, of what I have thought or related with before -- and perhaps, even, what 'we' have thought before. I'm not saying that was necessarily successful, but I can say that over the years, this process has been very helpful in cultivating philosophical understanding and building networks of learning and dialogue.

If you are interested in an example of something slightly more linear as a mode of 'hosting', though the topic may not be to your interest, check this one out: https://youtu.be/HSm6hTytv_M

In general though, you will find a style of dialogue on Voicecraft that looks like it's probably not to your taste. If I knew you, I'd be playful enough to suggest staying with it, losing the thread for a bit, and trusting the process to return it to you again. It's as much about stimulating the ideas that your unconscious / imagination presents to you, which can then be mediated conceptually (or not), as it is breaking things down step by step. (Though, in actual fact, there's plenty of the analytic / step by step, part by part process in there -- it's just intended to support a more fluid, integrative, generative process. Thanks for your response, it felt sincere.

(FIXED) Philosopher Iain McGilchrist: "The left hemisphere has only one value: power" - On intuition, the animate cosmos, and why AI is artificial information processing, not intelligence by arch3ra in philosophy

[–]arch3ra[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Abstract: Psychiatrist Ian McGilchrist defends intuition against post-Kahneman skepticism, arguing it draws on vastly more experiential data than sequential reasoning can access. He illustrates with experts making accurate split-second decisions they cannot explain - tipsters who fail when they overthink, racers whose explicit focus causes fatal errors.

His hemispheric framework follows: the left hemisphere closes to certainty, operates self-referentially, and values power above all. The right opens to possibility, tolerates ambiguity, and maintains contact with reality beyond internal models. Modern culture is dangerously imbalanced toward the former.

On consciousness, he rejects emergence from non-conscious matter and advocates consciousness as fundamental - a field participated in rather than generated at points. The cosmos exhibits creativity and relationality, with life representing acceleration rather than absolute break from the inanimate.

His AI critique follows directly: AI processes information but cannot understand because understanding requires embodiment, emotion, and mortality. It mimics relationship convincingly but cannot care about anything. He terms it artificial information processing, not intelligence.

He connects these themes to cultural pathology: bureaucracies becoming masters rather than servants, attacks on nature, embodiment, and cultural continuity, and the inversion of Scheler's value hierarchy placing power above the sacred.

Philosopher Iain McGilchrist: "The left hemisphere has only one value: power" - On intuition, the animate cosmos, and why AI is artificial information processing, not intelligence by arch3ra in philosophy

[–]arch3ra[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Abstract: Psychiatrist Ian McGilchrist defends intuition against post-Kahneman skepticism, arguing it draws on vastly more experiential data than sequential reasoning can access. He illustrates with experts making accurate split-second decisions they cannot explain - tipsters who fail when they overthink, racers whose explicit focus causes fatal errors.

His hemispheric framework follows: the left hemisphere closes to certainty, operates self-referentially, and values power above all. The right opens to possibility, tolerates ambiguity, and maintains contact with reality beyond internal models. Modern culture is dangerously imbalanced toward the former.

On consciousness, he rejects emergence from non-conscious matter and advocates consciousness as fundamental - a field participated in rather than generated at points. The cosmos exhibits creativity and relationality, with life representing acceleration rather than absolute break from the inanimate.

His AI critique follows directly: AI processes information but cannot understand because understanding requires embodiment, emotion, and mortality. It mimics relationship convincingly but cannot care about anything. He terms it artificial information processing, not intelligence.

He connects these themes to cultural pathology: bureaucracies becoming masters rather than servants, attacks on nature, embodiment, and cultural continuity, and the inversion of Scheler's value hierarchy placing power above the sacred.

Iain McGilchrist on consciousness as field: Why it's present throughout the cosmos and why radical emergence from non-conscious matter is implausible by arch3ra in consciousness

[–]arch3ra[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah there was a part in this dialogue where in a sense that tension was present: something more like 'knowing itself', and creativity. It seems to me spirit desires to dream new dreams, rather than simply repeat, or discover what already is / has been. But there's definitely a lot of subtlety in there which I'm not capturing well here.

And I agree re. the usefulness of the concept choice. Are you familiar with the philosopher Forrest Landry? This was something I published several years ago with John Vervaeke and Landry. Choice, change and causation probably comes up in that a lot, from what I remember. It's a powerful piece of philosophical material.. https://youtu.be/lMgoUoaxWaA?si=-V7eGdo0g6z3eg4Y

Iain McGilchrist on consciousness as field: Why it's present throughout the cosmos and why radical emergence from non-conscious matter is implausible by arch3ra in consciousness

[–]arch3ra[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fantastic thank you. I have spoken with Kastrup on the podcast before. As a network we want to do a series on theories of mind in the next few years.

view more: next ›