Posted February 14 (edited) In closing. I notice we have some users open - willing to consider many possibilities. Some users closed - certain of their conclusions. Remaining open can mean we never take a stance and use our rationality. But being certain of our conclusions, especially when we do not know, is the other side of the coin of this fools game. Beware of drawing conclusions and meaning making. The truth is never an idea, deduction, meaning, assumption or inference. Edited February 14 by Natasha Tori Maru It is far easier to fool someone, than to convince them they have been fooled. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 15 hours ago (edited) On 10.2.2026 at 10:52 PM, YIDIRYIDIR said: so basically, we can conclude that if humanity gets into some apocalypse and all human knowledge and technology gets wiped out. humans are more likely to invent a new technology model that works differently that what we have since they will have a different sequence of epiphanies and paradigm shifts than what the modern world went through. The fact is there are already different paths of technology, and discovering one didn't hamper discovery of the other. You don't need strictly need electricity to drive what we call a car. Combustions engines are strictly independent of the discoveries of electricity. But we also have electric cars now. We discovered both. It's easy to fixate on one or a few things but you probably underestimate how much innovation that exists and what has been tried but failed. It's not like people give up trying to find new ways just because an existing way exists. That would be to lobotomize half of our cognitive factulties. I think it's very hard to genuinely find a path of technology that was not discovered due to paradigm lock. You would have to go by some core assumptions about how reality works, like the existence of psychic phenomena. Edited 15 hours ago by Carl-Richard Intrinsic joy = being x meaning ² Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
