https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

for - quote - claim - natural impulse of finite minds - to revert from finite mind back to infinite consciousness - Rupert Spira

for - duality - infinite consciousness - mistaking itself for finite counsciousness - entangled with the content of experience - Rupert Spira

duality - infinite consciousness - mistaking itself for finite counsciousness - entangled with the content of experience - Rupert Spira - What does this really mean? - What does it mean to be entangled? - What does it take to get dis-entangled? - It would seem that falling into suffering through unbalanced - self-identify and - self cherishing - is what he is getting at

for - metaphor - John Smith (actor) - King Lear - Rupert Spira

metaphor - John Smith (actor) - King Lear - Rupert Spira - This is an interesting thought experiment - In the metaphor, the infinite consciousness is like John Smith and the finite human consciousness is like King Lear - The universal consciousness is playing the role of the finite consciousness but loses itself in the role - Spira says: - just as the only consciousness in each of our finite minds is universal consciousness nevertheless - King Lear doesn't know that - King Lear believes i am King Lear, a temporary finite separate person - just like our finite minds don't on the whole know that their reality is infinite consciousness<br /> - So although - the only person present in King Lear is John Smith and - John Smith knows himself just by being himself in the form of King Lear<br /> - he overlooks that knowledge and therefore as King Lear - he has to self-reflect on himself in order to arrive at the experience i am John Smith - What is the relationship between the infinite vs the finite consciousness within the same human? - This reminds me of Dasietz Suzuki's koan that surfaced at the time of his Satori experience - that the elbow does not bend backwards. - Within the bounds of the finite is the infinite

for - adjacency - key insight - quote - localization enables (infinite or universal consciousness) to perceive itself - Rupert Spira - discerning single voice at a busy party metaphor - existential isolation - umwelt

adjacency - between - key insight - quote - localization enables (infinite or universal consciousness) to perceive itself - Rupert Spira - discerning single voice at a busy party metaphor - existential isolation - adjacency relationship - quote - localization enables (infinite or universal consciousness) to perceive itself - Rupert Spira - This localization process enables (infinite) consciousness to perceive itself as the universe because - infinite consciousness cannot perceive its own activity directly - because if infinite consciousness were to perceive the universe directly - it would have to do so from every single point of view in the universe - It would be the deepest, darkest black image you could imagine - So in order to perceive an object - (infinite) consciousness must localize itself as an apparently separate subject so - the apparent localization of our self or - the dissociation of ourselves - as finite minds out of infinite consciousness enables - perception and - thought

• There is a metaphor that applies here:
  • At a busy dinner party, many people are talking at the same time
  • As the number of people approach infinite, the signal becomes more difficult to detect
  • In the same manner, as the activities of the universe are seemingly unbounded, how could infinite consciousness possibly observe its own infinite entirety?
  • Existential isolation is deemed depressing because it makes us feel intrinsically separated and disconnected from others, yet
    • it may be very necessary
  • Can you imagine hearing and understanding the voices of every human being, much less every living being?
  • An individual human does not have the capacity to process all that information
  • In the same manner, the body of every living organism is fine tuned for only one specific set of unwelts
  • How would we process the unbound amounts of information if we had an infinite number of different detectors?

Book Review: “Impossible Creatures,” by Katherine Rundell by [[Laura Miller]] in New York Times

I hadn't put her Donne work together with her children's writing...

Read Sun 8/25/2024 7:02 PM

• for: BEing journey - adapt to, DH, Deep Humanity

• comment

  • Potentiality coupled with limitations - Daseitz Suzuki and the elbow does not bend backwards.
  • The experience of the unnamable quality present in every moment - infinite potentiality
  • The mundane is the extraordinary. Even when we name it and discover it in all our scientific discoveries and articulate it, and mass produce technologies with it, is is still miraculous

• adjacency

  • Nora Bateson's book Combining and the Douglas Rushkoff podcast interview
  • potentiality
• adjacency statement
  • both are alluding to the pure potentiality latent in the moment
  • language can be contextualized as an unfolding of the space of potentiality to a specific trajectory. Each word added to the previous one to form a sentence is a choice in an infinite, abstract space of symbols that communicates intentionality and is designed to focus the attention of the listener to one very narrow aspect of the enormous field of infinite potentiality

• for: progress trap, abstraction
  • comment
    • we do not recognize the power of abstraction
    • through it, we begin to construct Indra's Net of Jewels, one jewel (idea) at a time
    • but each jewel (idea) that we construct is just a little knowledge, and as Dan observes, a little knowledge, compared to the endless knowledge reflected in any jewel is dangerous.
    • this then, is our dangerous predicament - we base technology on incomplete jewels of Indra's net
    • as we know from mathematics, when the finite meets the infinite, it can never win

!- example : permanent mystery - language - Willhelm von Humboldt phrase "infinite use" - has never been solved - Why do decide to say one thing among infinitely many others?

A good summary of James Carse's book "Finite and Infinite Games"

I'm sure I read this ages ago, but it's not in my notebook yet. Perhaps worth another pass for notes.

Simone, Costanza De, Antonella Battisti, and Azzurra Ruggeri. “Differential Impact of Web Habits and Active Navigation on Adolescents’ Online Learning.” PsyArXiv, March 1, 2021. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/hsvc4.

Two top-down approaches to note taking.

In evernote your notes live in Stacks, notebooks or notes.

In Notion and Workflowy you've got blocks than can be infinitely nested.

This idea that the mind must continuously and infinitely expand is the essence of progression and, seemingly, immortality. As humans, we are constantly growing whether its physically, mentally, emotionally. We are constantly learning and progressing while shedding some old ideas, thoughts, behaviors, attitudes, perceptions to become better and more than we once were as individuals and humanity as a whole. It is possible for humans to evolve later into beings that can grow in all aspects, but it is difficult to say that humans could do so in order to breach our minds' capacity and go beyond to reach infinite knowledge and infinite life itself. We are limited by human condition and always capable of more; however, no more matter how much we creep upon it, the infinite will always be out of reach.

Well is not. A scrapping web technique used for the Data Selfies project goes to the end of the scrolling page for Twitter (after almost scrolling 3k tweets), which is useful for certain valid users of scrapping (like overwatch of political discourse on twitter).

So, can be infinite scrolling be useful, but not allowed by default on this social networks. Could we change the way information is visualized to get an overview of it instead of being focused on small details all the time in an infitite scroll tread mill.

The I Am, the God in me is the one directing all Life

God is all there is.

"Commit this to memory. Head is body." (Infinite Jest, p. 159)

This statement seems to me a stretch-- a very far stretch.

What does it mean to have "infinite ideas"? And how do you arrive at the judgments "enough" and "as good" here?

Ideas don't exist in isolation; they are not individual fruits to be plucked from the world of thought. Ideas are built upon other ideas. They are embedded within each other, juxtaposed one next to the other, stacked, remixed; varied one from the other, sometimes as a derivation, sometimes an inspiration.

And in the face of this, what is the notion of "creation"? Given a certain base of knowledge, there are some natural next steps that can be built from those basic building blocks.

Here we have to disentangle the notion of discovery from creation. I think maybe that, in part, is the notion of patents vs copyright, but in the land of software we seem to have a tangled mess.