From: Alex Ramonsky (alex@ramonsky.com)
Date: Mon Aug 19 2002 - 07:09:03 MDT
Michael Wiik wrote:
>[snip]
>
>My
>objective by button-pushing isn't intended to help people think *better*, it's
>intended to help them think *differently*.
>
That's almost exactly what Russian Intelligence said, sir! Differently,
as in agreement with whose ideas? Different isn't good for different's
sake...only if different is better is it a worthwhile different. I could
make people think differently by pulling their arms and ears off, only
unlike lashing folk with words, that's prohibited in the geneva
convention...
>
>[snip]
>OTOH, I have (apparently) saved three people (that I know of) from committing
>suicide. Two of them acknowledged this to me directly, long after the
>fact. The third had taken several dozen aspirin tablets in an attempt to kill
>themselves (or just perhaps as a cry for help) and I convinced him to let me
>call an ambulance. Note that I didn't just call the ambulance. I didn't impose
>a solution on him. But neither did I critically evaluate his life to see if
>suicide was a logical choice for him. (If he had lost consciousness, I would
>have called the ambulance).
>
I don't get the connection between saving lives and button-pushing. I
save lives most weekends in a medical centre, but never so far by
provoking patients into argument under false pretences. I cannot see the
value of this system because I do not see you have a right to 'trick'
people into thinking 'differently'. (Am I missing something here?)
>[snip]
>Given the record of psychiatry and psychology, I think it's debatable whether
>any are competent at all. It seems to me that the greatest strides in mental
>'health' have come from pharmaceutical research.
>
Spot on. Well said...Free beer for that man, say I : )
>
>
>My psychological education comes primarily from the 8-fold models of the mind
>filtered thru Robert Anton Wilson and Timothy Leary. I concentrate on the
>initial 4 stages, and am most informed by RAW's _Prometheus Rising_ (which
>I and apparently many others regard as his non-fiction masterpiece). One
>advantage of his approach is that it's devoid of most psychoanalytic jargon
>and seems very easy to understand.
>
Ooh gosh, I haven't looked at that kinda stuff since college...and my
memory leaves a lot to be desired. Thanks for the summary (which
followed). It _sounds_ very much like the Hindu 'samskara' theory, do
you know of this?
>[snip]
>I'm not trying to poke animals with a stick, I'm trying to ride a sandworm. I
>get out my maker hook, wedge it in a mental crevasse, try to force it open,
>and as the worm (or mind) rolls to avoid irritation, get it to see things
>differently.
>
What I'm saying is, maybe find a worm that doesn't mind you using it for
cognitive transport? If you tell people what you're looking for, then
those who don't want to be 'ridden' can get out of the way. This is fair
enough. More than fair, I think.
>
>I admit at first some people may react badly. But I think we (on this list)
>seem competent enough to integrate such changes into our personality w/o too
>much trouble. The ego is a lot less fragile than most people think (imho).
>
I don't have a problem with this either. My only objection was acting
covertly rather than in the open. If you tell people what you're up to
then they can join in of their own free will or choose not to. I'd join
in. This may surprise you, but my family and I use your technique almost
all the time. We have made it clear to each other that we may do it at
any moment in any discussion, so by joining in one lays oneself open to
the possibility...and in this context it really does sharpen up some
areas of cognition. So feel free to initiate any experiment to push
buttons in me. I can even give you a list of those I know about. Take me
apart. If I can't shift gear and keep up with you, then I need to get
smarter. This is experiment with consent and it's a backbone of honest
science only when it has as its foundation every sentient mind's ability
to choose, to comply or not to comply. Anything else is, like it or not,
a covert brainwashing attempt. And not acceptable, comrade : )
>[snip] I think folks on this list think
>cognitive enhancements will, at each step, help them improve. Like, maybe
>we'll be able to remember longer digit strings or something but otherwise feel
>exactly the same. But if we look at it as a fitness landscape, then we see
>that we have to come down from our local optima to find a higher peak, and I
>think that such a process will instead be very, very, painful.
>
>No pain, no gain.
>
> -Mike
>
I absolutely agree. I wish it were otherwise, but I haven't found
another way.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:14 MST