Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

A conceptual representation of intelligence


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 clapstyx

clapstyx

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 04:28 AM

A conceptual representation of intelligence is an interesting goal challenge to try and create in itself with, I suspect, consciousness expanding ramifications inherent in the pursuit. Heres how I look at the structure of intelligence at a subliminal level:

If you consciously pursue perfect harmony with the truth the mind searches for any and every element of possible error in a statement, because harmony is about eliminating negative to perfection due deferences. And the same time it is looking to create support for a positive proposal, an extra dimension of logic that says "It doesnt matter what logic I use I still get the same answer so its probably literally an absolute truth" On that basis then intelligence is the ability to think on multiple levels simultaneously. An absolute truth is true in multiple ways simultaneously just as an expression of harmony also is. Once you have a sense of what an absolute literal truth is then its easy to find faults in statements that arent true to that degree and to improve the ones you create until they have that degree..like a mathematical equation that represents an occurrance in nature. One is an expression of the other if they have perfect equivalence. An understanding then of absolutely perfect equivalency then is an aid to thinking because you have a standard of comparison. For that I find it helps to go to extremes so I will go to the farthest extreme I can come up with at the moment.

Lets say there is an expectation that Christ if he proves his return will create an expression of global harmony..presumably with nature so that it is an all encompassing conception of harmony. There question is "What if it were done would be equivalency to that so that it were literally truly done?" That is to say what is a truthful equivalent to global harmony with nature. Now an intelligent person works out what the ultimate equivalency to create is in the first instance so you know the frames and terms of reference of the mental challenge. Then you work out the standard and in this case it would be "everybody saying "Yes I agree it would be truly done on that basis" "That is a true equivalent as far as I am concerned" (or something like that to avoid individual pedantics).

From that point it doesnt matter in the slightest whether there is, was, or will be a Christ. The concept is there purely to think in terms of that scale of endeavour and to set a standard of perfection..given that most people who believe in that generally consider He was absolutely perfectly perfect. (I personally dont because if he was he would have realised that he should have written the bible himself from his own point of view so that we had that level of perspective to relate to allowing us to think on his wavelength..but thats beside the point even if it is true!! :phones: (The jews would have been right on that basis by the way).

So we move then to an evaluation of whether a guitar virtuoso with a confirmed ability to create an expression generally understood to be harmony (Eric Clapton as an example) with a guitar set up that expresses a given sound wavelength as visible light standing in a rainforest creating gestures of harmony that nature understands to be positive and harmony and directed at them (at the same time as the people further afield are participating in a rainbow making competition and going berserk planting trees to complete the gesture) such that the various birds and animals around that scene are actually participating in the expression and word spreads through nature and everyone on the planet understands why they are suddenly acting up.

Why do I ask whether this is an expression of equivalency to the creation of a conception of global harmony with nature? Because Clapton did it last week and he asked the media not to report on it so that people could judge for themselves whether he played God on that one in a second coming scene that was so close to the truth it may as well as been!

So has nature been acting strange in your area lately. In North Queensland they orient themsalves around His presence more than the presence of any other entity and they understand that as a commonality singularly equivalent to them all.

#2 Boerseun

Boerseun

    Phantom Cow of Justice

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6062 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 07:34 AM

This post made absolutely no sense to me. Can you maybe, and without using verbal gibberish, explain the topic in a few concise lines?

#3 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 03:55 PM

So in any valid conceptual representation of intelligence, Eric Clapton would be God?

I guess I could agree with that...

The attraction of the virtuoso for the public is very like that of the circus for the crowd. There is always the hope that something dangerous will happen, :)
Buffy

#4 jedaisoul

jedaisoul

    Understanding

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 493 posts

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:19 AM

Hi clapstyx,

Basically, I understood all the words you used, but not the meaning you meant to convey. Therefore I am unable to comment in that respect. However, I would suggest that you are dealing with complex ideas. If you wish others to understand your meaning, you need to structure and punctuate your sentences better. This is particularly so for those members and guests for whom English is a second language. For example:

A conceptual representation of intelligence is an interesting goal challenge to try and create in itself with, I suspect, consciousness expanding ramifications inherent in the pursuit.



I think this means:

"A conceptual representation of intelligence is an interesting goal challenge to try and create in itself; with, I suspect, consciousness expanding ramifications inherent in the pursuit."

A semi-colon makes all the difference! However, even this could be made more easy to follow if you broke it into two sentences and eliminated superfluous words:

"A conceptual representation of intelligence is, in itself, an interesting challenge to try and create. I suspect it would have consciousness expanding ramifications."

No doubt it could be phrased even better than this, but I hope this is sufficient to illustrate the problem.

If you consciously pursue perfect harmony with the truth the mind searches for any and every element of possible error in a statement, because harmony is about eliminating negative to perfection due deferences.


The begining of this sentence can be improved by puctuating it:

"If you consciously pursue perfect harmony with the truth, the mind searches for any and every element of possible error in a statement."

But the phrase "because harmony is about eliminating negative to perfection due deferences" is simply gibberish. I cannot puctuate it in any way to elicit a meaning. I'm sure that there are ideas in the OP that you are trying to communicate, but the language you have used is a barrier to comprehension. As Boerseun has suggested, can you phrase your ideas in a few simple sentences?

#5 wigglieverse

wigglieverse

    Suspended

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 127 posts

Posted 12 December 2007 - 06:16 AM

Harmony. yeh right, harmonic motion, and resonance are fairly common physical phenomena. Isn't it something to do with all those wave thingies everywhere?