The soul can be thought of as the differential between you and a perfectly rational agent. There are obviously very differently shaped souls, sufficiently characteristic that we also map the souls of others to recognize our own tribe, and those we love.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
The most common forms of tribalism, however, do seem far more algorithmic than the development of the soul.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RitaJKing
I now think that we are NOT a tribal species. We are a state building species, while tribes are reputation and group based singletons. Homo Neanderthaliensis was tribal, and we obliterated them. The evolution of the soul was part of this.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
The evolution of the soul and obliteration of Homo neanderthalensis was largely due to storytelling capacity and meaning making.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RitaJKing
Yes, the latter is the identification with extrapersonal purposes, the former a tool to achieve convergence.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Extrapersonal is difficult to define when the only thing that separates us from the rest of the cosmos is a skin and the perception of individual consciousness.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RitaJKing
It turns out that our minds and our organisms don't exist on the same plane. We are not social primates, we just happen to run on the brain of one of them. We are only partially and sketchily identified with the organism itself and identify with/regulate many things outside of it
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
Not even really primates, more like canvases for bacteria and viruses.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RitaJKing
I don't buy the strong microbiome puppeteering hypothesis, if that is what you are alluding to. The microbiome is probably more like a coevolving bioreactor that we need to produce precursors of several of our neurotransmitters (among many other things).
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
But purity and corruption are sometimes hard to distinguish when it comes to coevolution. Imagine where we'd be without mitochondria.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
They don't refer to an objective truth, and only appear relative to a suitable systemic decomposition. You can also say that you are the representative of the set of parasites that have convinced you that they are you.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
Does anything other than mathematics refer to an objective truth?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RitaJKing
I suspect that any universe that produces regular patterns must have a ground truth. Embedded observers cannot recognize whether their models match the groundtruth, but they may be able to map the (infinite) space of theories that can explain the observations.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 18 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.