Carl-Richard

No disrespect taken

I'll put it on Spotify one day If not, I'll just play the ice cream truck melody, or the Sony Ericsson ringtone.

My own.

Exploding at minor things is more characteristic of borderline personality disorder than bipolar disorder.

Have you seen the polar bear playing the piano? ?

They're very much connected.

Yes it truly is. What people really care about when they ask if e.g. LaMDA is conscious is whether it has a first person understanding of the human speech it produces and the thoughts and emotions portrayed within it. We only seriously start asking the question "is it conscious?" the moment it starts emulating human behavior, so of course that is our interest. Nobody cares about non-dual red herrings about transpersonal consciousness.

Destiny's veganism position is a peak case of intellect without wisdom. You don't need a deep discussion to figure out why killing an animal might be wrong.

???

Your conscience is your higher self reeling you in towards love.

Just know that if you enter week 2 and you start manically posting 10 paragraphs every post, I'll BAN all of you

As a bit of a side tangent, it's interesting how many models invoke the concept of balance for establishing normativity. Wilber's "transcend and include" – you need a balance between the two, or else your development stagnates. Freud talks about a balance between the id, ego and superego, or else your psyche gets in conflict with itself. Plato likewise talks about the balance between his three aspects of the psyche (the man, the lion and the monster), just like neuroscience talks about the balance between the different brain hemispheres and hierarchies (neocortex, limbic system and the basal ganglia). And of course JP talks about a balance between order and disorder. So relying on the concept of balance is not a bad thing. If anything, it means you're doing something right ;D

I don't see how you can not do that though, just like you can't avoid order or disorder. But I can see how you can not do that in an unbalanced way though... So again, I would say it's still just a description, not a prescription.

How should you act though?

That's just balance. You should balance novelty and order. It would only be bad if the alternative teaches you more lessons. I don't see how that is the case. "Development exists" is just a description. I'm asking about how I'm supposed to act with this information (because that is JP's assertion with balance: how you should act). Btw, I apologize if I'm coming off as overly critical. It's just how I criticize myself when I make these kinds of models ?‍? I'm also usually better at wording myself. A lot of the confusion is on me.

You shouldn't actually be maximizing either though, so I don't see a new lesson. The only lesson is balance. Is the new lesson that "development exists"? Because that is not really a lesson. It's just a premise of the model. It's like saying the lesson of JP's model is that there is order and chaos. No, that just is the model. The lesson (or a lesson) is the necessity of balance. Does your model have such a lesson?

The statement "what JP thinks of as chaos, I think of as novelty" can be interpreted as you equating the two concepts. Also, why does excess novelty necessarily lead to chaos? No. I'm just not understanding what it adds in terms of concrete lessons. We already got the lesson of the necessity of balance from JP. What else you got?

You need him as a boyfriend at this rate ?

I changed my response. It's semantics in the sense that there was no new lesson added (or at least you didn't specify it). There was no novelty ? It's very simple. You first have form vs. formless. Then within form, you have order vs. disorder. The balance is life, health, intelligence, beauty, wisdom. That is the lesson. Novelty is neither order nor disorder, but it's a form of change, maybe development. You can have a state of order which changes to disorder or vice versa. I guess whether it's novelty or not depends on the particular forms that are being produced (e.g. a new species), or maybe even just an abnormally long or short period of either disorder or order can be considered novel. You can think of it as laying somewhere on the balance between order and disorder. Order and disorder are more fundamental.

Chaos is disorder (hence it's the opposite of order). Do you really think of novelty as disorder? How is it better?

These non-duality things don't negate distinctions in the relative realm. They don't change anything. Taking it as belief will corrupt your thinking.

The question is does AI experience human thoughts, feelings and emotions?

...it's not all fake ._.

What does that mean? Does LaMDA qualify? Do they give massages?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning Ti strikes again!