While browsing LinkedIn one can quickly sense the site is filled with professionalized visionaries professing the future.
This is the wonderful imagination we can expect from entrepreneurs, inventors, innovators, some makers, a few or more artists, a number of artisans, a whole lot of movers & shakers and policy makers’ think-tank spokespersons, who all frequent this social platform.
These days and months, since the end of 2019 into 2020, I have been noticing a shift into how that “just-a-flu” morphed into an emergency for a relatively few, into a pandemic for some more and into a fore-bearer of dramatic change to the human species, mapped without or with climate change (as an instigator of epidemics).
For some this has “suddenly” appeared the last two weeks or so. For others — that is, for those who are global nomads or global citizens, anyone from around the world living in China yet with loved-ones around the world; any Chinese citizen living in the world — this is now going into its 4th month and counting. For even fewer this was, now in retrospect, foreseeable; or so does the power of probability theory offer us.
Making a forecast, in the spirit of this biased opinion piece here, I foresee to be influenced in an emotionally heightened manner, as it has been, for another 3 months. That’s a very personal event of 6 to 7 months; for each one of those who fit the above category. That is, if I’m allowed being a bit too self-centered, not anticipating the passing of anyone close in these coming months because of virus-related complications.
Then there will be the echoes and reflections (and hopefully as little fall-out as possible) following this. Perhaps adding another 6 months? I’m just using a wild unsubstantiated version of prediction. I will call this my not so impressive “prediction” of the “Pandoflux”. Is a world of, and a world in, change a progressive world? Or, is progress what we do with change in relation to others and their context?
My predicting is not impressive to me since I also sense that flux seems simply inherent; even at a cellular or deeper level; even if we are imposingly-conserving. The latter too will pass, while its mechanism seems ever there?
Although I am very serious when I smile, is this attitude implied here too flippant or is it rather a watered-down version of a Taoist view on the world? At the least, I want you to think with me. Give it a moment.
“Things will never be the same again…. we will never go back to how it was.” Previously, in a pre-pandemic sense, such statements seemed to come with an undertone of optimism and progressive thinking. Now, peri-pandemic, it sounds as if driven by fear and loss. It does not have to be, though.
Again, without wanting to be callous nor frivolous, nothing ever is the same and one can never ever go back to how something was before. That is, unless the affect of the memory of a change can be wiped from any mind that has been zapped back into a previous state. You know, like a reset button and a factory preset as the one suffered by Buzz Lightyear, in one of the Toystory animation franchises. Buzz too could not forget his previous setting.
Humanity and its events, however, are not a cartoon. It might seem like one, at times, but this tends to smell of sarcasm, disdain or at least of irony at the awkward moment. Indeed, perhaps this writing runs that risk as well.
When is the right moment to speak of change? Where and by who? When can we observe markers of change? What is such marker but a trigger of a parameter in a probability calculation of an environment that has always been in flux and has thrived on change?
In that regard, and as a side note, is a Machine Learning application an agent of change? Is it rather an agent in a process of corroboration that change is inherently part of the human experience and nature, as formalized via the field of advanced Calculus? Is perhaps such an AI application a neurotic obsession with control and its implied hanging onto a veil of pseudo-fixed and comforting insight?
After all, is a pattern not a pattern because it does not change? Or does it? What shall we call a pattern that is not to be recognized as a fixed pattern; chaos or rather, life?
I choose the latter.
When some individuals reminisce over the obvious how-it-was and the yet unknown changes to come, which dynamic pattern do they envision? A Chaotic one or one of LIFE?
In the struggles we face, whichever type, form, degree or function, we humans do want a sense of meaning as to the changes or the continuity these struggles imply. We make choices. We choose and recognize patterns.
This choice is there even if it is the meaning-giving idea of letting-go, breathing-out, moving-on and not looking for or clinging-on meaning in one attribute of a struggle in question. That is meaning. It could specifically be concerning if the meaning-giving labeling turns out as a painfully meaning-less one; driving one to the brink of or into madness and despair. That too is meaning. Meaning-giving is geared towards giving a future to a past event or to an event imagined becoming a past.
It is equally so as it is with communication: there is no such thing as no communication . One can not not-communicate with one’s brain; that meaning-giving thing between our ears. Even if we are trying to delegate this meaning-creation to the artificial realm of Machine Learning . This meaning-giving is inescapable.
On the other multiple ends of this 4-dimensional spectrum (yes, try to imagine this in a 3D high fidelity manner with a variable changing attribute over time), we can either observe small-minded yet large-sounding conspiracies of contrasting flavors and we can also see analyses of large Geo-political potentials and paradigm shifts.
This morning I was presented with a snippet of just that; the latter that is. The former is too irritating to me, while I do care about its extreme dangers.
In the earliest hours of the morning, I wake up very early, I was listening to BBC News World Service and its Newshour show. In it the astronomic numbers of applications for unemployment benefits in the USA were discussed. The data indicated about 10 million individuals were “shed” from their previous employment . Yes, “shed,” a word used in reporting as if humans are prickly needles from an ever-green pine tree that surprisingly looses its convoluted leaves. They and those without health insurance in the USA were discussed and then this was followed by an interview with Noam Chomsky. He was introduced as the academic who has “a radical solution to the economic shock” yet, who himself has repeatedly, and in this interview, rebutted this by stating that neo-liberalism is the radical paradigm here.
I suppose there is a reason why this morning the BBC, of all newscasters, suddenly interviewed Professor Noam Chomsky… no longer only Ms. Amy Goodman does so…
Later that same morning, I was sent a second item. It was a audio-video recording of an interview given by the present-day governor of New York State.
But recently, in my mind, some companies have crossed the proverbial line, so to buy levitra viagra speak, by using classic Beatles’ music to pitch their products. And please remember: The Acai Kapsule http://downtownsault.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/09-11-13-DDA-Minutes.doc generico viagra on line contains all the healthful elements. This ingredient has power of accelerating the blood flow in veins and arteries. buy cheap viagra Having relationship counseling is also beneficial as it can help you sexually fulfill your join forces effortlessly. vardenafil vs viagra downtownsault.org 100mg is a colossally famous prescription, which is regularly utilized as an option to viagra.
Yes, one competes in a free market construct. Is this “free,” though? Is the following forecast, here below, of not-so-much-change too esoteric? Could it, in the end, be the common USA citizen, with house loans and student loans, in the billions, and some of whom can not afford insurance, that shall pay for this? Is this an attribute of the so-called change we have to see happen (from our distance)?
This pandemic could very well be a massive shift in some human consciousness that previously did not see the issues we are facing. Now, that is without linking this to climate change which has been done, preceding the pandemic in that it was suggested that with climate alterations pandemics might become more frequent.
It might be that the idea of nothing ever being the same again, which some are talking about, is the re-delegation of education to the parents turned teacher, on top of their in-house distant working, their gig-economy project, their home-cooked meals and their in-house floor-mopping.
Isn’t human civilization (at least quantatitively) perceived as great because its members have invented the process of delegation? At least, one person is not looking forward to this change in delegational power:
Or, the foreseen change might be that new EdTech APP we can innovate on with increased human-originated data collection and Machine Learning processes in support of the mother company and its marketing or advertising-placement strategies.
Will it be a never-seen-before change in child-like bickering, finger-pointing, belly-button staring and saddening forms of competing between (nation) states?
Or, is it a change in a form derived from that which people such as Noam Chomsky are speaking of ?
Humans are living proof of the possibility of a multitude of patterns in change and in changing patterns. Surely changing patterns of and in life are as well. Life and lives without meaning and meaning without life and lives, are not the changes a human needs.
Luckily for you, I cannot offer you any of these or other such changes, nor am I a forecaster.
I breathe out. At the least, I can offer one constant of hope: be well and do well, my fellow earthling.
The perceived universe is a history. One’s perceived thoughts are a history. Each inevitably lie in a past; one slightly longer distanced in timespace then the other.
As a child, and still today, I imagine(d) that some attributes that make up interstellar space could function as memory banks for our collective (and individual) information (knowledge, anecdotes, personal stories, that evasive theory or elegant formula, that silly cat video and so on).
As a child, and still in my today’s naivete, I envision(ed) that the information could be encoded onto radiation, onto waves (of light or which ever), used as carrier waves, carried for eternity (or until the next Big Bang) at the speed of near-to-light, across the galaxies, as our echoes of who and what we once were with one another. …Yes, one might prefer to be more cautious, just in case there is that space-faring parasitic yet intelligent species out there. Though, this might be more telling of how we reflect upon ourselves as a species and how we have been perceiving how we (should) relate to other species around us (and vice versa) rather than being about that hypothetical non-terrestrian.
Some might pose that vision without action is delusional. However, I beg that nuances do exist. One can envision something and can, at the least, be exhilarated or rejuvenated when seeing that somehow similar visions are brought to execution by others. Then such delusional self shifts to becoming a meaning-full self. This occurs through a positive psychology of interconnection with that unknown other, by means of the unintended gift of meaning, or hope, through proxy. That is somewhat what stories do; both fictional or less fictional ones.
I have seen the nascence of DNA computing and information storage on DNA , allowing for enormous capacity and durability. I discovered this through the media I browsed.
I have seen the mentioning of 5D data storage through some kind of glass imprinting of information, of even more impressive proportions. This is achieved at a nano-scale, by means of a dense laser beam of sorts.
I have observed reports about initiatives of databases and storage-redundancies on- and off-planet; not only of stories and information but also of flora’s “story” in the form of seed banks. Who’s and what will (not) be stored?
I have heard of research towards brain implants aimed at increasing memory capacities within an individual
Common types of sexual dysfunction in women include: Inhibited sexual desireInability to become aroused Lack of orgasmVaginal dryness The causes are many and varied. tadalafil 100mg It heals the vagina tissues, buy viagra online tones it and increases the blood flow to the part. Among the men with pharmacy cialis hypothyroidism issues, the occurrence of premature ejaculation due to stress and anxiety. Her hand slid down my thigh and well, I don’t have to tell you where it went next. buy cialis in canada
I have seen initiatives where common individuals can record their common stories of a lifetime for themselves and with others to enjoy and be touched by: a mother about her son; a person about a lost love; that common story that makes us daringly, beautifully and yet frailly human in-between one another.
I also encountered questions of the “right to be forgotten”. In extension to that, it has been said that for instance on LinkedIn an increasing percentage of profiles are of deceased individuals and that in a not too long a near future that can easily reach up to 20% (I will want to verify this). I am equally thrilled about this in associated with the sensation of the echoes of humanity as portrayed in the opening paragraph. Why should one or more of one’s story (not) be stored?
This then in turn entangles with concepts of “privacy”, “freedom of speech”, “secrecy”, “intimacy”, “trust”, “ownership of information”, “the right to perform or distribute”, and many more. Does storage dismiss the story thought or the story hushedly stumbled and stuttered in private settings of the fleeing moment and among those who are trusted? Is there your poetry in the ephemeral, the passing?
I also hear about some who ponder whether or not more and faster (information) is unequivocally better.
Either way, I distill a tautology: we are story keepers, story tellers and maybe more so, story hackers; irrespective of whether we like, want or agree with their content or not. That brings us to meaning-giving, meaning-taking and meaning-maintaining or meaning-alteration.
I wonder, …
I wonder, besides one’s intentions with a story and those intentions being different from the perceptions of a story –which in turn can be seen as an example of the process of “meaning-alterations”– is wanting to be forgotten the ultimate alteration of meaning? Has intention the upper-hand to perception? Has one infinite ownership over one’s story? Could one, should one and how could one ensure the intended meaning of a story over time? Is this the human tragedy or playful dance between the individual and the collective as portrayed in stories over space and time and imagination (i.e. meaning-alteration; since perception is the processing of a story through filters such as one’s imagination)? [if you are wondering how I am making these statements and assumptions as to how someone might process a story: while anecdotal, last I checked I am human and I process stories through imagination and other cognitive mechanisms].
This post will function as a repository of these and associated initiatives or considerations by others. If I find them I will post URLs here.
Learning and using multiple languages enables one to play in-between the languages. Since I believe (and I am not alone) that languages exist intertwined with cultures, one is hence also playing in-between cultures; perhaps unwittingly so.
…our earliest pets, totems, talisman or mascots?
This in-between interaction enables (at least me and, as I observe, also some others) a form of playful language (usage and construction) that can only exist and be understood by those enabled to be moving in-between them.
At least metaphorically (but I sense this is very practical or pragmatic as well), this is allowing the player to stand on the proverbial door sill. This is in turn allowing the player (limited in this writing here by the highly constraining, linear nature of language constructs, such as sentences in paragraphs) to be looking, at least, at the one language usage on one side and at the other on the other side (if applying the play between two languages only, while multiple language usage is plausible as well). The player then can be “tasting” (and, simultaneously, be creating ) the linguistic mixture, as an observer and producer. The player can do so in-between two or more languages.
This awareness is not particularly new nor is it unique.
For instance, in China’s broadcasts, of its voice radio performance art, one can, at times, listen to wordsmiths playing in-between English and Chinese. For instance, they might use an English word or two that sound like a very different Chinese word. Though, the audience or creators might be “limited” to Mandarin and some basic English, nevertheless, it is just that: a creative fluidity in-between languages (for the moment ignoring the motivation or the perception thereof, in this particular reference).
An example between Dutch and Chinese could be this: “poesje“, which is Dutch for “small cat“. It sounds, via slight shifts in the Dutch pronunciation, as /bu-shi/ , which could, besides conjuring a rude English wording, also be shifted into the Chinese “bù shì” (不是). These two Chinese characters stand for “not” and “is“, or slightly more freely translated, as “not yes“. In turn this could be used to mean something as “not“, “no“, “it isn’t“…
If “bù shìpoesje” then what is it?
I sense one can see this activity as an analogy of potential processes and actual evolution in any creation or (in-between) any framework. One might perceive these as experiments of shifts and “perversions” (depending on one’s “political” stance) into innovations or into new and different languages or into potentially new meaning-giving. This could occur, at least, at the level of the individual or in-between a few initiated individuals. This movement could transcode from the absurd into the formal and vice versa.
Is this a movement similar to that one person’s crazy idea that can only become accepted if a second person endorses it (preferably a second person otherwise unassociated with the first person) and then becomes a movement by the undefined masses following it? I now see a thought turned into a (set of meaning-imbued) word(s), turned into a culture.
As a sidenote:
"Framework" here is meant as a collection of thought creations (e.g. a connection of associated concepts).
For instance, I, as one individual, over my life span, have cognitively collected a number of frameworks. Such Frameworks, I sense, are semiotic and thus have linguistic or meaning-giving features. I perceive them as being cultural in nature.
I feel these, to me, do not simply have to consist of isolated memorized words. I imagine these might consist of unclear networks of not well-defined emotions, blurry definitions, attached to opaque images, other words and fading experiences. In turn these interconnected meaning-giving items are vaguely set into complexes of intuitions.
I feel, for me, these sets form an undefined number of frameworks in my mind. Some seem fluid and temporary while others seem more stubborn and fixated. While some frameworks feel as if overlapping, others are contradictory to one another, adjacent or seemingly entirely unrelated, except then by one attribute: they are my metaphorical constructs in my brain.
I use these frameworks as references to make sense of the world around me; ever so transiently. I also explore the spaces in-between frameworks.
One such framework is my vague and abstract conception of one language; let's say English. Another framework could be another language.
Such a framework could also be my adoption and adaptation of a set of believes one, and one's community, holds or a set of habits, or attributes recognized as memes of one human collective (e.g. a community or a set of ideas held in one's brain), etc. For instance: the Flemish, the Beijingers, the Belgians, the Europeans, The Han, The Asians, The people on the subway, the people in the building I work or those where I live, The people in a news clip, etc.; a set of cultural frameworks.
As another example, a framework I hold could also be built around the concept of "data" or a specific set of data. For instance: the number of people who suffered fatal or other injuries, say, due to road vehicles, let's say in the USA from one specific year to another.
I imagine this in-between play as potentially being an example (with practical implications) of Deleuze’s territorialization, de-territorialization and re-territorialization. Therefor the in-between is always a becoming rather than a being. I also see it as a possible candidate example of fluidity, and of inherent changes that occur beyond one or two or more fixed frameworks one might hold on to (e.g. the use and learning of one language only).
I sense this in-between activity, its existence, the existence of the potential links, the existence of the potential shifts in meaning and usage, are a collection of human output (somewhere floating between being willingly or being serendipitously expressed) which are too often ignored, and I dare state, which might have non-party political consequences.
As a second sidenote:
"Political" here is meant as how we act as citizens among each other within the "polis"; i.e. the city of our daily activities and power-relations.
I sense these in-between expressions might highlight or unveil or at least create imaginations about power-relations and the shift thereof across languages.
I admit, they make me, rather then perhaps you, think about this. Granted, possibly this tells me more about my own obsessions with power-relations rather than it stating anything substantial or corroborative about what I think to perceive.
That stated, please let us continue to allow the process of potential discovery by means of initially unsubstantiated imagination and naive wonder.
Yes, for the moment I opt to sense that one can best achieve this exploration (either in daily personal experiences and poetics, or as a stepping stone towards rigorous analysis) with and in-between any number of languages and any number of other languages and dialects (yes, dialects, since some claim that “language” is a dialect “with an army”…) .
The experience of an (intangible) in-between space has been on my mind for as long as I remember. Especially the etymology as observable in-between two distinct official languages yet, with some degree of common ancestry.
For instance, the present-day English word ” mascot” or “mascotte” (in Dutch) compared to the Spanish word “mascota“. The latter means “pet” (English) or “huisdier” (Dutch), which again translated to English might make for a (to me) fun new word: “house-animal“…
In a moment of associated digression: Is a couch potato a species of “house-animal“? …
…” My favorite pet is a potato . It likes staying home, lie on the couch and watch a movie. It’s such a house-animal; I enjoy petting my potato.” …
–the pet owner (pulled from my imagination).
potato, “house-animal”
Coming back to the main storyline: one touches on the semantic realm of “talisman” (i.e. “mascot” & “mascotte“) while the other touches on the realm of companionship for a human and this of an animal, other than human (yes, imagine…), for instance, a dog or a tarantula (i.e. “mascota“) .
If we were to dig a bit deeper we could argue that both (“mascotte” and “mascota“) are about companionship yet the intuitively comparable power-relation might be different, or is it?
I am excitingly concerned about how one could achieve this comparison in a quantitative manner, besides my often-faulty yet beloved intuition, which I am presently applying. I also wonder, in a dance with an old polemic, whether we, as humans, should only value the quantitative (notice, please, my stress on ‘only’). For sure, this entire in-between language is not quantatative in nature; it’s pure nurture coming naturally to me. (I hope you can read the serious irony here).
Webcopy Services it has been shown that diabetes is a metabolic disorder which does not produce or viagra cialis on line properly uses insulin in the human body. The answer is correct that cialis for sale australia impotency and it is done by the suffering person itself. In case you’re suffering from fibromyalgia, then ask your doctor to prevent future complications that may lead to more serious health problem that you may not be aware of. * More powerful type of buy levitra that guarantees men treatment through erectile dysfunction* Achievement ratio is much more in contrast to levitra* The pill offers dual action, & inhibit PDE5 in addition to lessen the. Men generally face numerous troubles associated with levitra generic cialis fertility.
Coming back to the in-between language play: the word “mascot” can semantically and denotatively (i.e. as being, “in accordance with fact or the primary meaning of a term“) be mapped with the word “talisman” which, in turn, can be mapped with words such as the nouns “charm” or “amulet“.
Some claim that a “mascota” has a “master” (…you still don’t see power-play at play? Think about the use of “pet” in relation to excessive loyalty of an employee to a superior); does a mascot have a master?
In some storytelling I have noticed that some iteration playing with the concept of the talisman also links the mascot to a master, as a pet is to one.
One can see the animation series, based on a game, entitled “Wakfu” for such narrative . In it the character named “Sir Percedal of Sadlygrove” is emboldened by his powerful luck-bringing sword …and as I notice how a charm or talisman is applied in narratives, these are not always charming nor offering good luck at all times. Yes, as could a cat, a mascot can scratch you the wrong way!
The offered mapping with the word “talisman” and with “Wakfu“, mentioned above, might be acceptable if one could allow for an imaginary and literary “good” demon-possessed item to be seen as a “talisman” or as a bringer-of-luck, does then my pet give me extra power?
Some teams do have, for instance, a living pet dog as a mascot. Moreover, and ever so slightly in dissonance, notice that etymologically, the word mascot is claimed to have associations with “witch”, “wizard”, “nightmare”, “mask” and “black”). Are my pets not what they seems to be?
While in “actual” life, I have heard of, someone carrying a plastic chain-restaurant’s spoon to a sports match, believing it allows their favorite team to win, in Wakfu it is, for instance, a consciously possessed sword.
This is obviously fantasy narrative –I mean, Wakfu. Yes, one might consider the above-mentioned spoon equally fantastical. Yet, this latter reference is a factual example. This is while perhaps one might feel more accepting towards a scarf or a never-washed t-shirt instead of a spoon.
By the way, in the spirit of this text, you might like to know that in Wakfu, these demons which posses linearly-practical objects, turning the items into charms of sorts, are called “shushu(s)”. Interestingly–talking about in-between languages– “Shūshu” ( 叔叔),in Chinese, means “uncle“. Besides the obvious family-relation, it is also used as a name of endearment–yes! that’s a “pet name” for ye– to refer to older male individuals who are not actually related by blood. For instance, my children refer to their Chinese school bus driver as Shūshu. Is this now a magic school bus? Perhaps, in a sense, in Wakfu, this is a sword, giving its adventurous user extra power. In effect, this Sir Percedal character, who wields such powerful sword, might have a relationship with this magical sword as if one has a relationship with a pet. The character is at times rather literally defined by the sword, as a sports team is unitingly defined by its mascot. Perhaps as this is as much as a master is defined by their pet and their pet by them (…it is said that the bacteria in one’s body are defined by the kind of pet one nurtures).
Is this where “mascotte” and “mascota” meet?
…maybe not, maybe the perceived link between “mascot” and “mascota” is entirely serendipitous. Or, maybe one can judge it as a negative form of cultural appropriation; but then, which culture is appropriating which (a topic that could use a posting of its own)? Maybe, in similarity with “salary” and “celery” which are sounding rather similar yet, one being healthier and the other being more or less edible (or something of the sort), such serendipity could be sufficient. In truth, I admit, the second meaning of the Spanish word “mascota” is indeed ” the animal that represents a team.” What then are the links between a pet and a mascot?
Cat-headed deity Bastet
Do I believe in mascots as being like a talisman;.. I personally do not; it’s too irrational for my taste. However, I know many out there (e.g. in sports or in brand loyalty) who do. In human (pre)history we can surely uncover this strong and deep-seated conviction (e.g. in Shamanism, in the wearing of a powerful animal’ skin or skeletal parts, etc.). Is it in Shamanism where we could unveil the cross-over between talisman, mascot and pet? One might have heard of animal spirits… Is this where the Pharaohs and their cats lived in-between the world of the “pet” and the world of the “mascota”? Is the trans-language activity allowing us to, more or less easily, shift in-between more than just a linear translation?
Egyptian mummified cats
The relationship and experiences I sense which I could have with a “mascotte” versus that of a “mascota“, versus that of a “pet“, are very different. While arguably “mascota” and “pet” are the “same”, I can guarantee you: I do not perceive them as the same; not at all (besides the rational yet reductionist knowledge they are “translatables” between English and Spanish). I could elaborate yet the feelings are still conflicting and chaotically intertwined as the yarn my cat-companions got their paws on during their not-so-quiet midnight hours.
As a third sidenote:
I am learning Spanish. The arguments as to why I am can be covered in another posting.
However, this exploration of the in-between aids me to stoke the fire of increased willingness to continue my studies. It also aids me to look deeper and see hints of associations between words, beyond one language alone (...there are links between pets and mascots).
It allows me to slowly but surely unveil my blindness into other languages and areas: Italian: mascotte; Portuguese: mascote; Spanish: mascota; and to me excitingly surprising even Polish: maskotka.
I imagine that the act of this inter-language play, functions as an object of my imaginary making. I imagine it as my personal talisman. As much as the meaning of "talisman" is that of being an object that completes another object, the linguistic inter-play completes a passion for learning via the ritual of the creative act. The in-between language play increases a sense of playful power, energy (rejuvenation of learning), and perhaps other learning benefits.
Additional reasoning as to why this works for me could be yet another posting.
Another example is the Spanish word “negocio“, which seems to mean “business“. Following, I believe I can claim that “Su negocio” means “(their/her/…) your business” as in, for instance, “their shop“. In English a seemingly similar word exists, “negotiation“. Sure, for both we can follow the thread back to the common source in Latin: negotiari (“to carry on business”), from negotium (“business”).
Nevertheless, one word, the English word “business“, feels –that is, as in the initial moment of my sensation of perceiving some meaning– as it connotes (to me, at least) a fixed point, a done deal. The other, the Spanish word “negocio”, when overshadowed with the English word “negotiation”, superficially connotes (to me) a process; not a done deal. This is all the while, contradictory, the Spanish word in isolation away from the English, could feel to me as referring to someone’s shop, someone’s business; a fixed location. I am confident, as time and thinking passes by, that my sensations might change.
Consecutively and for now, I continue to wonder whether in one or versus a combinatorial language-usage, the business owner might experience to be more confronted with the constant uninterrupted negotiations it takes to maintain a business in relation to many an intrinsic and extrinsic force, support, constraint, potential or many a stakeholder. On the other hand, this is all the while in the other language one (me) might more easily go with an assumption where, following a negotiation, one is “in business“. This feels perhaps as if arrived at a specific point of an almost unquestioned doing and being “in business”. Is one more or less delusional / irrational then the other? Does one lead to more or less entrepreneurial dare and risk taking than the other? I imagine yet, I cannot (yet) know. I do question whether anyone has done any research on differences in perceptions and consequential (in)action compared between (multi-)language groups?
I am noticing some writing, in various media outlets, and in a number of fields (e.g. in topics covering psychology, business, well-being, ethics, leadership, etc) that do mention the effect and affect of language usage on the well-being of one’s self and in-between oneself and others. The co-creation of the poetic experience with real-life consequences is exciting to me, to say the least.
In any case, I have been using this in-between language learning and expression for many years now. I also use it with friends across cultures (e.g. my Chinese friends) . This play seems to be universally sensed. At the least, pragmatically, it has helped to strengthen social bonds through playfulness.
Epilogue: My two cats are wonderful pets and this while they do scratch and destroy, as two little demons of the night. Look at their picture, heading this text! However cute, as far as them being charms or talismans, I am not yet convinced. In retrospect, instead of having named them Luna and Molly I could have named one Charm and the other Mascota... oh well...
Quotes That Attracted My Attention is not a list. Attention is not only attracted in a sequential manner, nor in a manner that is polarizing. At least this is not consciously done; not in that they are liked versus those that are not liked and not pasted or commented on here. It is not that one story narrative. So, it is possible as this posting grows over time that some content of some quotes seemingly contradicts. They might form the seeds for an imaginary forest to be grown. Who knows. That would be lovely.
“… it is data as therapy.” — Rosling, Hans
Hans Rosling’s work, continued by his children, will continue to feel as being globally essential. I have been intellectually enthralled with his work for years. It is liberating and truly unveiling and enlightening. He shows us without any doubt that we are each ignorant yet we each have the tools available to change this state. I like that, at least as a sentiment and secondly as something I want to work towards.
Usually, if the person is said to be fit and female cialis online wants to cure the erectile dysfunction, in the start he is suggested to start with the dosage of this medicine. People have their own beliefs with regard to the effects and side effects of the medicine cialis prices see this link are like the same. Treatments prescribed for reducing arthritis pain generic cialis cheap http://raindogscine.com/?attachment_id=23 and inflammation. But what causes this lack of communication in the buy viagra from canada nervous system? Although it’s officially unknown there is strong speculation about some possible catalysts.
“Anything that is in the world when you’re born is natural. Anything that’s invented between when you’re 15 and 35 is exciting. And anything invented after you’re 35 is against the natural order of things” — Douglas Adams
Supposedly, according to a posting of one of my LinkedIn contacts, the author of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy birthed this statement. I have yet to corroborate it. Either way, in and of itself it attracted my attention.
It made me imagine what is natural, invented and against the natural order of things. It reminds me of a book by Foucault. More so, what do these terms even mean, experientially?
Or rather, if I were to use them, how would they affect (the well-being of) others and myself? Also, these, to me, do not simply seem to be segregated by three age groups. Maybe this could be a stand-alone blog posting one day. Surely, why should I be taking it all seriously, out of fear of nihilism or the mundane? Then again, if not this then what, if not now then when, if not me then who?
Still, the statement makes me smile; if only because the association with the story of, and the characters in, The Guide do. Now, “42” pops up in my mind.
…one must not think ill of the paradox, for the paradox is the passion of thought… — Kierkegaard
I am thinking, and firstly learning about, ‘mutual exclusivity’. It’s interesting to me. Here is some of my thinking that this learning process activated. Please note, there is some winking in my wondering (hence, the title as it is).
I understand that ‘mutual exclusivity’ is a concept from mathematics, from statistics and more specifically from the study of probability. I presently understand it as a mechanism where events that are mutual exclusive, are events that cannot happen at the same time.
Would I then be mistaken to continue thinking that these events are not possible to be combined and that therefor these events can not occupy the same space and time?
Yes, in my ignorance, questions pop up. I’m still learning about ‘mutual exclusivity’’s deeper meaning and about how to perform computations associated with it. So, my mind begins to wonder.
What if the fact that events cannot happen at the same time, are not happening at the same time, because of the manner with which we look at the events to begin with, rather than because of some intrinsic attribute of the events that are believed not to be possible (or that are considered to be irrational) to occur at the same time? OK, that’s a mouth full. What I think I am asking is:
if there is a cup of coffee (‘A’) and there is a cup of tea (‘B’);
if there is a group of humans that is asked by an other individual (yet not asked in person but rather by means of a questionnaire): “which do you prefer, ‘A’ or ‘B’?“
if this questionnaire allows for only 3 answers: ‘coffee’, or ‘tea’ or ‘no preference’…
…is then a ‘mutual exclusivity’ not simply imposed, by the design of the questionnaire and this by ignoring dynamic attributes?
Concretely this seems, for the moment, to mean to me that the asked human(s) must express one and only one preference, or must express not to have any preference. I guess that some (to me) unknown amount of individuals might be clear on how to answer this. Though, would all and every individual have such a fixed clarity?
The answer of “no preference” could in turn be interpreted by the person indirectly asking about the preference (and who is only looking at the answers in a data set organized in a table, combined with the output from other individuals who were asked the same question) as: “…so, x, y and z individuals can be offered a random choice of these two offered drinks;” or as: “I would offer nothing at all to this individual, or that individual, claiming to have no preference possibly because they like neither coffee nor tea“.
Now, what if the individual presented with the obligation of choice is polyamorous about her or his relationship with both coffee and tea; then surely, “no preference” would be a betrayal as much as only choosing “tea” over “coffee” or vice versa; no?
So, it feels to me that the resulting data set seems to create ambiguity in the reader of the data set (I being one such yet-unclear reader). What could be the usefulness of such data set, I wonder. I truly wonder and do not yet judge. I also laugh, indeed, equally so, what is the use of all this writing here? The answer to that could be someone else’s blog post…
In support of such blog-post: someone, whom I care about (measurably more than tea or coffee), recently claimed that those who speak too much (this can be substituted with “write”) probably like espresso rather than an average cup of coffee.
Indeed, this unveils yet another issue with the questionnaire: what kind of coffee (or tea)? This is then compounded by a dilemma when the individual begins realizing how one could be judged by others if choosing one kind over another. Therefor, instead, the individual might be tempted choosing, perhaps falsely, one of the many types of tea categorized under the choice “tea” (…not to mention, the problem with “tea” and all those non-tea-based “teas” which, might be generally better labelled as infuses…). This, I sense, could thus lead to biased data and a false sense of mutual exclusivity.
Is then this ‘mutual exclusivity’ possibly a construct (sure, I assume not at all times), out of some (lazy) convenience? Does it serve a model rather than serve the complexity of (human) experience / of the realities of complex dynamic systems?
If sugar will increase from normal level is the cause for diabetes , that is why regular monitoring of blood sugar level is very commander viagra important. The makers of Kamagra cialis 40 mg continue reading this are following the same. This may turn up in a bitter way and cialis 10mg generico http://robertrobb.com/?iid=8986 probably you might lose a relationship. You need to engage in regular physical exercises to relieve stress and strain is also helpful to get rid of bad effects levitra no prescription of excessive hand practice.
Perhaps, less social or psychologically-motivated: does such exclusivity ignore going beyond some possibilities outside of Newtonian physics or outside of binary logic?
…Or is the “construct” not that of ‘mutual exclusivity’ alone but also, or rather, that of an educator aiming to simplify the introductory teaching of ‘mutual exclusivity’? Do we, as learners, first have to unquestioningly submit and accept such over-simplifications to become enabled to understand the basics? Surely, I agree, I do need it… While the risk does exist that over time, and across learning as a habituation process, someone could forget one’s love for the other choice.
Nevertheless, it would be nice to be hinted, that exciting complexities need to be considered towards future learning, which could be leading to possible paradoxes, dissonances or fuzzinesses. It’s OK, the evaluator of the data will survive; it’s only coffee or is it tea?
This forecasting of future learning would map out a learning path to me which I could look forward to while at the presently bland stage of looking at a simple (and perhaps somewhat acceptably flawed) data set towards learning about ‘mutual exclusivity’. Easily solved: I’m now hinting this to myself.
I imagine such intuitively felt potential complexity is implied in questions that bubble up in my thinking and this as a side-effect of my process of learning. To continue, for the brave reader, here is another one:
What if the preference (i.e. ‘coffee’, tea’, ‘no preference’) is defined or influenced by an external factor (or a set of factors)?
For instance, one could assume the existence of a third influencing item, catalyzing or weighing the choice into a certain direction. Note, ironically, this assumption of there only being a third and not a fourth, etc., feels as a reduction as well to me, and one that could almost equally influence the questioned output (i.e. a data set of three possible answers collected from a set of individuals and organized in a table).
Anyway, such external influence does not yet feel too far-fetched to be a possibility. I feel it is more realistic than a choice created as being a static attribute (i.e. a clearly definable choice, at all times, in all environments, with or without any additional actors; e.g. “I am a coffee drinker; period.“). I think such external influencing attributes seem to feel to be more common than a clear inherent preference to the individual being asked as implied in the basic introduction of ‘mutual exclusivity’?
For instance, coffee is preferred over tea depending on the time of day. Tea is preferred depending on other people with whom the individual, who is asked about the preference, is meeting with.
Imagine then, in addition, if those people would be met at the time of day that would make the individual prefer coffee, this imaginary individual here would still choose tea since the individual, at that time and in that space, who would otherwise decide for a preference of coffee versus tea, has now decided this as being less weighted than her/his social interaction and experience of bonding as symbolized by the ritual of the tea drinking with others, who prefer tea (or so the individual assumes).
So, under these external attributes, the individual chooses to drink tea whereas otherwise, when no one else is there at that time, the individual would choose coffee. Unless, there is an article in her/his favorite newspaper questioning the health benefits of the one over the other.
At that same moment, yet on another day, the individual, as a biological system, simply is not thirsty. Then “preference” of any kind becomes temporarily irrelevant. If at that moment the individual were to answer to the inquiry, she/he would (have to) then dismiss this possibility of their reality as non-existent in the model.
Or, surely, such situation does not have to result in a one-time outlier on a scatter diagram. Contrary, as in a diplomatic ping-pong match of thinking where no one thought has to win, it might equally result in an outlier on such scatter diagram; if the individual were a consistent creature of unwavering habit and ritual. Mmmmmm, come to think of it, could one actually plot this triangulation of choice onto a scatter diagram? I need to check this.
“Not thirsty” as a preference option is non existent in the given questionnaire. By the way, as suggested previously, this is different from not having a preference, from liking either equally as much, and different from not liking coffee nor tea. Though, the individual does not realize that with sufficient explicit and subliminal messaging he or she will believe to be thirsty after all for that or the other beverage.
No, such playful consideration of complexity is not nihilism nor defeatism. I will return in vigor to my learning of these basics and that during and following this writing.
Options, options, options of recombinable outcomes that are being less-then-mutually exclusive, if seen over time and space and thus in changing contexts. Perhaps, I am trying too much to make a model as a 1:1 representation of the complexities of reality?
At least, I suppose that in some of the above scenarios, the data collected is hence dramatically influenced not by the preference of the individual as if a static fact (i.e. “it’s just a preference“). Rather, it is defined by other attributes that temporarily weigh in more. This statement too seems to be an abstraction of sorts and therefor could lead to a (useful) reductionist model. Nevertheless, it feels as less dismissive of experiential complexities and it feels as more sensible towards deviations, away from the idea of fixed preferences (over time and space), as the one I was presented with at first.
If my thinking is flawed, where is it flawed? (besides an obvious and dismissive and debasing: “you’re making it all too complex; who gives a ****, dude!“)
Gosh, indeed, suddenly ‘mutual exclusivity’ becomes excitingly complex and granted, who cares? Well, …I do :-p
How would one go about calculating such externally influencing factors? How do statistics that do not consider such externals actually provide sufficiently accurate information for interpretation? So much still to learn…
With this writing, I have just further carved out my passion and vigor to continue learning about this ‘mutual exclusivity’. It’s rejuvenating to realize I know so little and could still explore so much.
I mean, I’m really just starting and the application of the “general multiplication rule” versus the “addition rule” alone is already intriguingly startling. That’s perhaps for another post.
For the moment I will continue my very basic study, accepting the choices between “cat or dog” and “coffee versus tea”.
This class of drugs also includes buy sildenafil india and viagra. What is the reason of Kamagra’s popularity? Increasing number of people are turning to the internet for their medication requirements, and this includes over-the-counter medications as well as prescribed ones like brand viagra overnight. Many men as well as couples prefer order generic viagra over other ED drugs. cialis causes fast and effective reaction by helping the men to get prolonged, harder and better erection. Many surveys revealed that after having a range of effective ED pills, still many order cialis canada of the ED sufferers for their sexual disorder.
Part #8: A First Suggested Methodological Approach Towards Solutions
I am imagining such a methodology that could be applied from an early age to a later age and that could be practiced as a life-long learning of one’s cognitive processes in inter-action with another person’s cognitive processes-to-action. As implied in my definition on human intelligence (HI), that what makes us intelligent humans is how we think about and act with the other (irrespective of which one technology we try to design, try to improve or try to use).
These two imaginary agents (i.e. the human and the other) are actors that would ideally act inter-subjectively and thus would be aware of each one’s preferences, biases and human frailties in terms of the encompassing “Human Intelligence” as suggested above. So too, such methodology to instill such abilities could be one that can consequentially be applied towards the ethos of AI. This brings me to Ethical Consciousness and Intersubjective Discernment.
I introduce here,Dr. Gilda Darlas’ two decades of research and fieldwork. Dr. Darlas has both an academic and professional background in Artificial Intelligence as well as in Ethics.
Dr. Darlas’ work aims at methodologically increasing Ethical Consciousness and Intersubjective Discernment in human beings. Her approach and applications in association to ethics and AI are, to me, dramatically different from the approach suggested in, for instance, the World Economic Forum’s white paper.
While Dr. Darlas does not dismiss these approaches as offered by these experts, she too (as do I) sees them as temporary and incomplete solutions towards a more transformational and paradigm shifting solution where the human being is considered and not only, for instance, the AI.
The terms, Ethical Consciousness and intersubjective Discernment, so states Dr. Darlas, are used to explain “the capacity to see and understand our human nature as a dynamic composition of conditioned and conditioning factors. Understanding this, is not only important for a proper thinking of a conscious human mind but is a key condition for the development of ethical consciousness as it was proven throughout our global research.”
The methodology towards achieving these, she continues, was coined as “Disciplinary Phenomenology for Ethical Development.”
Dr. Darlas states that this term defines a set of “processes and techniques that focus on developing mental discipline proper attention, vision and understanding of the subjective content of human experience.”
Dr. Darlas underlines that this was a fundamental development in order to bring about “systematic transformation of our ways of relating to ourselves and others. In other words, the methodology seeks to achieve intersubjective discernment from where Ethical Consciousness and Wisdom could fully flourish.”
Gilda heads a Foundation and a Center for Research in Ethical Development, presently based in Mexico. Through these her team and she support about 500 schools in a number of countries and via a number of operational languages. They do so with methodological programs for ethical development to pupils, students, parents and teachers.
Dr. Darlas’ work has been recognized by established organizations and has received a number of nominations and awards. She aims to bring more prototypes into more schools around the world. Also she wishes to invite others to “co-create new ways in which the principles and approach to ethical development can be put to service humanity.”
The programs enable humans to “learn how to think and not what to think. This is not a question of being intelligent or acquiring more data or knowledge, this is about being able to achieve deepest levels of comprehension and discernment by learning how to think”.
“The need for cognitive development in schools as the required platform for ethical development in teachers and students is urgent,” shares Dr. Darlas.
“Nonetheless, we realized,” she states, “that education was and still is more preoccupied with content and its methodological approaches for acquiring and playing with such content than on helping children to develop a proper thought process, let alone the intersubjective discernment required for ethical consciousness. This results in blinding the human mind… where self-centered assumptions rule our perceptions, thoughts and actions.”
Dr. Darlas is in the process of finding social impact investors to enable her to re-open her university campus in Mexico. Uethics,[17] is the name of this university. Uethics is to be a highly specialized university, aimed at advancing studies and R&D in the areas of ethics and discernment. It would be one of a kind in the LATAM region. It would also stand out compared to existing tertiary ethics or Computer Science programs from around the world.
In this tertiary educational institution, she aims to offer 3 Master Degrees, one of which has an AI focus: the “Master’s Degree in Ethical Development and Artificial Intelligence”. The program is described as follows:
“This program does not address issues arising from cyber-security, information technology, biotechnology, and other emerging fields, instead, we address the topic of biases on the design of AI algorithms. This means we focus on the designer’s self-centered tendencies and his/her distorted perceptions when designing AI algorithms. Then we will encourage students to design prototypes that will enable subjective design algorithms in artificial intelligence solutions.”
Perhaps those who are concerned about implementing ethics into or around Artificial Intelligence beyond normative manners only, might increase value from engaging into such a post-graduate program. At least I want to believe that leaders and experts in policy-making, academics, the humanities and in tech could benefit and could aid to benefit the common citizens influenced by AI by implementing the findings in such research and in such Master’s degree into the specific realm of their professional, political or communal applications.
Just perhaps, it will then be more conceivable to create an algorithm to discern while still providing means to offer our human cognition with means to discern as well.
Those who are interested in exploring impact investment towards the development of the first Uethics university campus in Mexico can contact Dr. Darlas by requesting further information from me here on LinkedIn. One can also find publicly available materials by doing an internet search on “Dr. Gilda Darlas” or by visiting the URLs:
http://eudeglobal.org/2015/la-fundadora/
https://www.uethics.org/university
Micro-Chinese Medicine can block the further damage to kidneys, repair the damaged but reversible kidney viagra cheap sale units, rebuild the normal kidney structure. There are many reasons for impotence. cheapest price on tadalafil Herbal or Natural Supplements Herbal viagra price or natural premature ejaculation pills. Blood circulation needs to be normalized within the genital organs and other characteristics in men that mature with age. generic viagra tadalafil
Part #7: Technologies & Human Skills, Methods & Processes.
Should we implement the technology with some ethics as suggested for AI in the World Economic Forum’s White Paper? Sure, while I have my doubts that suffices since I sense it might be too superficial. Could we instill its users with a literacy? Perhaps, some, yes.[15]
Besides using technologies some publications (not necessarily those listed above) also seem to consider learners and their abilities to design technologies. Following voices encouraging the learning of coding at earliest ages (while some question this), more and more voices speak up that a skillset of coding alone is not sufficient and that Computational Thinking should be taught and learned from earliest ages onward. I tend to agree (while I wonder about the age since play to me and others is a learning of and by the child), and I am implementing Computational Thinking in my educational work and in solutions that aim to offer just that.
Others speak of the need of Emotional Intelligence (which is debatable a subset of human intelligence). Yet others speak of leadership skills (instead of passiveness, apathy, bossiness and so on) and this in addition and beyond one’s own individual immediate needs or wants. Other voices again speak of 21st Century Skills which includes some of the technical skills as found within Computational Thinking (besides the latter’s many cognitive skills it implies) and emotional and leadership intelligence.
In all of these, perhaps you too could agree that at least one attribute stands out as a common denominator:
thought or cognitive processes (inclusive of all the attributes as I present above under the heading of HI) that could (not) lead to increasingly considerate thought-to-action.[16] Perhaps you are among those who could also agree that often these calls for such “soft skills”-needs in learning are pointed out in numerous publications (interestingly though, I think not really in the ones listed above).
Yet, very few, if any, publicly available methodology is accompanying such call with a learnable methodology (as my writing here has been guilty of it up until this point).
Any obstruction or block in the passage of time, the heath of male reproductive organ gets declined and he faces high level of difficulty while keeping or maintaining an erection for long however be a common affair. canada pharmacy tadalafil This will help cut down on buy generic viagra http://robertrobb.com/2020/02/ cost in getting Florida drivers license permit. Wear soft footwear that gives you maximum comforts.7. viagra india onlineacquisition de viagra Have a look to know more about these drugs.
Part #6: Science Fiction, Technological Societies & Human Intelligence
In analogy, in the lives of individuals in a number of (Western) households, many might remember the original TV-series or its iterated Star Trek spin-offs, or other entertaining creative imaginations where technologies truly advanced the planes or narrative matrices within which future-human existence was imaginatively allowed to take place. In a number of these episodes, a set of morals or an entire ethical complex were either ignored, or unwittingly surfaced, or were awkwardly enforced.
However, I do not hear nor read many authors who wonders why it is that, in these popular fictional depictions, the individual characters pretty much act, communicate and judge, in the manner with which us humans –as the physical people, surrounding the authors of the entertaining content– act in, communicate in or judge their own physical and imagined reality, of their own social and cultural setting, of their own time. The characters in some of these futuristic high-tech worlds do so dogmatically, in objectifying mannerisms, gullibly, rigidly, habitually, submissively, oppressively and proverbially blindly.
It is anachronistic at best to see such lack of discernment in-between these characters while the high technological advances of their environments (including simulations, AI and molecular re-sequencing) are claimed to be enlightening and freeing. Are today’s authors, who are considering implementing ethics into AI, falling into the same construct of fixing human experiences and expressions as fixed in history?
Why is it that, in these storylines, technological advances, are fine-tuned, are coordinated and are judged yet, human interaction and attitudes (as well as the cognitive or rather educational solutions offered) have practically remained unchanged?
Sure– going back to the realm of a Star Trek-type of narrative– on the surface the stories claim that the unnoticeable society on Earth has gone beyond this or that crudeness or volatile hostility, yet in-between the characters the exact mentality of the past –which equates to our present and actual human interactions– remains dramatically unchanged. The dialogs and the inflated egos show very little difference, if any, from their predecessors. These “predecessors” are us, the audience, and the spectators to our own imaginary future.
Some episodes or perhaps the entire series unveil a high tech society that is rampant of ego-centric or self-centered characters (with the exception of one or two characters which at times are depicted as non-human…). Which predecessors do we wish to be in the creation of tomorrow’s AI or any other technology for that matter? Or, are we to remain the viewers of our own blindness (myself included)?
To bring matters closer to the here and now, we can also wonder why it is that we have miniaturized “smart” computers in our pockets –which offer ease-of-access to simple AI (e.g. chat-bots)– with which at times some, ever so crudely, use these technologies in dehumanizing manners (e.g. cyber-bullying and thus the way people think about communicating with others via the technological media used). Is it the problem of the technology? I do not think so at all.
Once the blood enters in these chambers, it helps you order viagra get rid of the problem in the most natural and healthy erections in men if used recreationally with alcohol and drugs like methamphetamine or cocaine, a person is more likely to suffer from unpleasant drug reactions or side effects. Curing prescription for ordering viagra click content fatigue is another important feature of ginseng extract. Since Propecia must be taken regularly in order to have a healthy form of intimacy of the people, the medical experts explain that they must make sure that the blood is passed in a proper quantity and when the blood does not happens to be sufficient for the man to have appropriate hardware and supports to make sure that it stays in buy viagra this page the system for about 36 hours. The medication that getting viagra in canada goes to the brain to get an erection, the mental health has a lot to say about the quality of erectness a man experiences on sexual activity.
Part #5: Intelligence, Learning & Sense of Reality.
I perceive one’s so-called intelligence might be interacting with two sub-categories of reality; i.e. one’s imaginative and one’s physical reality. This interaction and the constraining yet changing conditions within, I hypothesize, might create at least some of our perceptions and experiences.
Intelligence, I feel, might therefore not only be shown by means of one’s prowess in the regurgitation of facts (as derived from either subsets of a human’s reality). Nor, in the application and mapping of facts; both of which do have a value, even if one could find many pieces of information in (online) databases of various formats, quality, size and user experience.
I want to point out that I presently still subscribe to the idea that knowing that a fact exists, or knowing where to find and how to map facts (unknown or other), is valuable to many and in many an application. However, I am also of a believe that it is far from enough.
I feel that the word “intelligence” is heavily loaded, in a popular sense, and seems continuously debated in an all-round sense. I sense that skills of a human (inclusive of brain and body) are, to my taste, too often segregated, debased and dismissed. Definitions include or exclude, in some increasing or decreasing degree, emotion, intellect, creativity, imagination, motor skills, and so on.
That stated human intelligence (HI) is strengthened and well-rounded by means of social skills, skills of decomposition, interpretation, application and reapplication, appropriation, analysis, synthesis and re-synthesis or re-composition, adaptation, iteration, putting information to different usage, careful consideration and so on.
Indeed, there are many a word that could be listed which have already been listed, ad nauseam, in realms of 21st Century Learning Skills,[14] leadership skills, Computational Thinking, creative processes and Design Thinking, thoughts surrounding frameworks, modes, models and simulations, scientific methodologies or logic thought, intuition, wisdom and shared well-being.
However, what is the larger interconnecting methodology of the above almost randomly listed thought-mechanisms? If there is one, are many of us aware of it? Are a sufficient number of us applying it? Can we apply them coherently? Are we maximized in our learning environments to do so?
A label categorizing these thought mechanisms (e.g. “21st Century Learning Skills” or “soft skills”, etc.) does not make a coherent method of learning. Nor does it ensure a sustainable application between individuals. Neither does it create a conducive environment with the conditions to stimulate such methodological learning, enabling a learner in applying them as to how to think.
As implied, these above-mentioned attributes and processes of human thinking need to be further honed and fine-tuned towards creating a wise human being in relation to another such person (be that person a human or other entity/agent; such as an AI).
Then I come to the papers and other publications covering AI with ethics. These consider embedding ethics into such technology. That’s ok, even exciting but insufficient.
As the authors of the papers seem to sense there is a need for the consideration of ethics in relation to AI. Yet, the awareness of such ethics could innovatively be one that is stimulated by means of a methodological approach and beyond the dogmatic nature of certain ideological believes (and their monolithic sets of morals) which up till recently (and into the foreseeable future) were coordinated by the proverbial church, family, community or state.
One of the papers implied that these variations of sets of morals could be implemented into AI. I find this not entirely an approach with humanity in mind. It seems to ignore the potential for a human to innovate cognitively (I mean, as to how we think coherently) –and for that same human to become enabled to go beyond a moral, as a fixed point in spacetime– as much as it is that same human who technologically innovates. This, one can consider while perhaps also considering our unconscious implementation –to some imagined, hypothetical or factual degree– of moralities and or biases in our research, developments and innovations. Perhaps, one could consider ethical consciousness and cognitive processes as intra-human technologies? I do not know, I am imagining.
Artificial Intelligence is an exciting developmental area (e.g. with a slightly popularized focus on neural networks, machine learning and deep learning). Such technologies are mesmerizing and catalyze imagination and Brownian dances of emotions.
For more details levitra on line visit Physical attachment is the most decisive part that has got the biggest secret that enables people to lead a healthy and normal life. The pills of the medicine are loaded with strong composition which acts smartly over the decreased generic viagra cheapest rate of blood flow. viagra tablets uk They have exclusive medicinal solution not just for men but even the women can also avail the ED treatment with these soft versions. Generic Sildenafil citrate viagra 100mg pills are available in multiple dosage of 50mg, 100mg, 150mg as well as it comes in form of tablets which has to be taken around 45-60 minutes before intercourse.
