Tag Archives: cognition

a girl thinking – sitting on top of a building in the future

The Future is safe

We as humans are subject to only insights, perceptions or cognitions.  We are constantly fighting for truths of interpretation and cannot take any responsibility for different opinions. Our cognitive intelligence – in the vast majority of cases – is simply too irrelevant to integrate different opinions into our world view. Because of this reason, the world we create is often situated at the lowest level of cognitive possibilities. This concerns our political leaders and at the same time their oppositional rivals.

The true and neutral analysis of social structures requires both – emotionally and politically independent observers. Only then will it be possible to shape the future in a relevant way. Fortunately, in the one-way streets of political developments – when current intelligences reach their intellectual limits – something like a new cognitive horizon always emerges – a new wise way of shaping society. This means that even if societies reach their limits, something new will always emerge from the deepest hopelessness and a state of uninspired emptiness.

So – we don’t have to be afraid of the great stupidity. We do not have to be afraid of untalented thinkers and low-intelligent governments. We can always trust in the future. The future is always safe and certain. It has been safe for 2.8 million years now – since humans created the first hand axe – and it will continue to be safe in the future.

 

A tiger and People who don't know about themselves

The Cognitive Cage (of perception)

[draft, subject to trans-formation, written in 2015, updated in 2018]

All the fights between people on this planet can be explained by the cognitive cage. The cognitive cage is a room that no intelligent and no non-intelligent person can leave.

While being inside its cognitive cage – it can be a king or a queen or a chancellor – one can only act in the cage. There is no possibility to relevantly act outside of this cage. The cage is holding back every creative idea or intelligent thought about how problems can be thought and solved on the outside.

The cognitive cage is a form of evolutionary communication. It only allows formations and transformations that belong to the expressive room inside the cage. Therefore, some global, regional or private relevant problems cannot be addressed.

a dog behind a fence

 

The cognitive cage is very much related to ideology. Ideology only allows for some ideas to follow or communicate their specific form of expression. At the same time many other forms of perception or opinion are not allowed to express their thoughts. This is about Power – societies that are due to power broadly do not accept other opinions and perceptions – because they’re in their own cage (of perception) as well.

After the very introduction of shared mental perceptions and highly cognitive understandings, individuals began to establish their own perceptions and ideas of the best society and the best world very fast. This way democracy began to be defined as something one can influence on the basis of his or her single-power – in his or her lifetime – on the basis of her or his ideas.

Then it turned out that the contribution of people actually could improve democracy – the strenght of a society – and that these people need to be heard and talked to in order to maintain a successful democracy. But most of the times these influentual people stand outside the cage and cannot be heard on the inside.

If the differences between those inside and those outside of the cage become unsolvable a war or revolution takes place. The only result of this is the death of many innocent people and a change to who is in and who is outside of the cage. This is the very inspiration of evolution: It changes societies but it doesn’t change interdependencies profoundly.

Communication is a powerful tool of exchange while ideology is a violent piece of hatred and war. Maybe communication actually can add something like an interface to cognitive cages, although this is not yet clear and not yet scientifically understood. But: As long as ideology is still understood as something that can change the world in an improving manner, world won’t get better in no way. Ideology and democracy (the aspect of communication in the meaning of exchange) are not similar. In fact, they stand on opposite sides of the possibilites that can create future.

Ideology – on either side – is the enemy of intercultural communications as well as it is the enemy of communication and communicative exchange at all. People blinded by ideology – not: ideas / ἰδέα or idealism – will in no way be able to shape the future world in a positive manner at all. Ideology very often carries hatred and hatred will unfold its bad taste across the world very fast.

The world needs ideas and visions and agoras to talk about these ideas on an equal and shared basis. This way Greece is much more than only a basic and relevant basis of European Culture. It has been the past and it will be the future.

[Some considerations in this article might be contradictory]

A human-like AI on planet earth exploring possibilities

cognition

[updated: April 2018]

Cognition is not an easy process, it is looking for and taking into account many different parameters. But one thing is for sure: real cognition will not develop itself on the basis of mediocre intelligences because it is not the average of intelligence in a certain amount of human beings..

In many ways the world in 2016 or 2018  is filled with mediocre intelligences. And the average IQ in a society is not what is called cognition. Cognition is an ability that only appears in societies that have established a creative framework of thinking. In all societies people have cognitive talents but only in scientifically oriented societies real cognition is an everyday part of the societal development.

Even powerful secret societies or intelligences are obviously having a problem to attract new and creative intelligent people – if this wasn’t true the world wouldn’t be this much out of control. This is indicating that some countries or societies are losing the status of a “cognitive society”. Only in cognitive societies things like social welfare, social care or human rights have a future. Other societies cannot uphold such a status because their econonomical and cognitive status is too low and this leads to crime, violence or huge differences in the quality of life among people.

In time and regarding civilizing processes cognition has always been a reliable partner – a partner to every new creative city, to every new inspired concept and a relevant contribution to the further development of equality.

In 2016, 2017 and 2018 this all seems to come to a temporary and transitory end. Intellectual concepts tend to fight against each other instead of talking with each other. This seems to be a sort of a test: How far can intelligence among humans go before it starts to hate itself and to fight against itself.

We had evolutionary tests like this before: People were fighting on the basis of their supercreative and superintellectual ideas in order to gain social awareness for everyone. Today we simply begin to ignore some intelligent parts of society because of newly developed ideologies that are not aware of the overall processes.

Instead, people begin to follow medieval or even older concepts that are relevant but that cannot uphold civilisational concepts like social care or social welfare. They’re fighting for a status that will set millions of people all over the planet off from even basic human solicitude. They’re beginning to devide humans into sexes, races and cultures and they are not willing to grant every human being a dignity or the freedom to develop his or her life freely on the basis of his or her individual perspectives. They’re achieving the complete opposite of what they are longing for. Factually, this is or can be the end of democracy and civilization.

At the same time these people think, that they are progressive and they call other people who don’t share their opinions racist and sexist although they are the most racist and sexist people on the planet. They copy the strategies of fascists and name themselves future-oriented but they make the world a bad and evil place because they are not able to cognitively understand that people are people and that each individual person has the right to speak for him- or herself and that ideology is probably THE basis for almost EVERY dead human being in history that died through the application of violence. They set female and male people in a state to hate each other because of their sex and because of their gender. And as because female and male human beings are only forming what we call humankind through their unification this is a fight against humankind as such.

In almost every society or religion on the planet (in Europe, early America, India, Africa, Sumer, Akkad, China or Tenochtitlan) a concept like this – a concept that is strongly connected to the destruction of life – was always connected to the idea of a superdestructive and life-hating entity, such as the devil. Thus, we have to ask ourselves if our actions are pro or against life and which goals we want to achieve with what we do or what we fight for.

We are able to reconfigure minds and media and everything on the basis of cognition and intelligence. We can sever the abuse of power very simply. At the same time we see a great potential in those who are following their inspired ideas regarding the future of society.

It remains to be a very important political purpose to support new ideas and spaces. But at the same time we should be courageous enough to say STOP to every organized entity or organization that believes it is promoting humaneness or dignity but is not.

The difficulty is that different organized entities/organizations believe that they are fighting for the benefit of humankind. At the same time many people who are connected with such organizations are fed with hate speech permanently. And this is true for people that follow extremist communicators from the radical left and from the radical right. Thus, groups or crowds or masses happen to being set against each other although they probably never would have agreed on a development like this if they would have known what they are participating in.

If people would understand the whole basic design of evolution in which the diametrically opposed status in a society is apparently the most progressive concept they would probably act and behave differently.

The world feels to be random in many ways. And a reason for this seeming randomness might be the evolutionary algorithm that almost no one of us is taking into account when analyzing contemporary developments.

When we created signs and writing about 6000+ years ago, when we created diplomacy about 15000+ years ago, when we created philosophy about 4500+ years ago – we were always trying to tell people that this life is not the end. We were trying to tell people that the future of society will always be able to be in our past and in our present and that all the things that have been thought will always remain to be a part of everything cognitive. The question today is if we can keep this promise or if we have to let our civilizations vanish in time like so many others before.

– – –

When you for example observe the contemporary political developments between the UK, Russia, the US, the EU reagrding Syria you totally understand that these developments are not even on a low level or in any way progressive. These are medieval and antiquated developments. And in the face of machine intelligence you begin to sense something regarding the future of human intelligences in general.

[UPDATE, July 2018: This process has received a useful upgrade, based on a better international cooperation that is beginning to address the relevant issues more precisely.]

It is a matter of fact that some beings that “own” half of the world are not able to come up with something creative anymore. Even their made up conflicts are superboring. This is a very relevant indicator for the overall intelligence of evolution. It means that either humankind as a species is becoming irrelevant or that there are maybe some inspired people on the planet who can carry the idea of creation further in a relevant way. Or not.

colorful sensory motions on the surface of the planet

The sensory evolution 2 – the scenario

A – Sensors and detectors

Sensors and detectors will be everywhere. In your body in your flat, in the tram, in the car, at your workplace – simply everywhere. And they will measure simply everything: Your heartbeat, your gestures, your facial expression, your words, your mood – how much you drink, what you drink or eat and when.

Of course your fridge will be equiped with sensors, your washing machine, your doorbell, your windows (how often you open it) and of course your dog’s metabolic system will send a signal to your electronical perception device (watch, phone, glasses, brain implant – whatever) when it needs food, water, air, interaction or motion

Regarding detectors researchers describe a technology that can  measure and influence students’ attention for educational software:

"Accurate detection of student affect can support a wide range of interventions with the potential to improve student affect, increase engagement, and improve learning. In addition, accurate detection of student affect could play an essential role in research attempting to understand the root causes and impacts of different forms of affect."

Source: http://www.columbia.edu/~rsb2162/EDM%20Affect%20Detection%20V22%20final.pdf, page 1

B – Scanning behaviour

One can expect, that in 2025 many parts of our lifes will – at least subtly – be connected to data capturing and analyzing systems. Insurances, car makers, software and research companies, employers, administrations, marketeers, secret services and of course online stores will know our preferences, some of them will know what we like, many of them will know what we do and an increasing number of data experts will possibly know who we will be according to the patterns that shape our behaviour.

When institutions begin to combine the data profiles from different sources they can generate a very precise profile of each person that is connected to the internet and that is observed by automatically analysed CCTV (face recognition) – even today. Only a few things are not accessible. The more sensors or detectors are scanning your behaviour the more you are completely observable: What you do, what you say, what you eat, what you buy, what you would like to buy, who you love, who you would like to love, your political preferences (instant changes of your preferences), where you would like to go, if you are subject to permanent reconfigurations or not and so on.

C – The anthropological connection and interrelation between technology and human existence

In the future almost every organisation that is collecting AND analyzing data about a person will probably try to make use of it. This will define a space of constant mutual analysis. > Perception > Self-analysis > Societal analyis > Cognition > Intercognition. As a result of this we will live in a more intercognitive space – a space of permanent self-improvements, intercultural and intersubjective  exchange and an enhanced reality of human-data-technology intercommunication.

Not only companies will benefit from this in a financial way. Senors and the analysis of sensory data will lead to new patterns of social interactions, behaviours and common understandings. We will experience a technology that is more and more interrelated regarding our native perceptions of life. An interconnective technology that is connecting us in an intelligent way – with each other, with permanently accessible data / knowledge storages (such as Wikipedia) and analytic intelligence.

Nevertheless technology is also subject to permanent change and reconfiguration. Over time technology has always been a trusted partner to human civilisation. One may ask: What is technology? Or: Why are we with technology? Why is technology shaping and reconfiguring our societies continuously? Some people think, technology can be understood by applying the term “capitalism” to this awesomely complex mental and material structure that defines our existence. But reality clearly shows us: Humankind and technology are bound together in a natural and even biological way. Human existence IS technology. And: Existence as such is not yet clearly definable.

D – A next extensive re-configuration on the basis of evolutionary progress

It is obvious that human driven civilisation is a technology driven civilisation and that only technology allowed us to develop things like democracy, the iPhone or feminism because it allowed us to emancipate ourselves from the fight for basic needs on an everyday basis. Technology enabled us to replace permanent foraging with conserving nutritions by baking bread (cereals) or by smoking or cooling fish and meat and vegetables.

And after millions of years we ended up with microwaves and satellites and sensors in almost every device because we only want to not why (we are here). Probably those sensors will change our lifes but still – nobody knows why. We will use the term “progress” very often but nobody will know what it really means. And again and again people will be fighting against people. As usual. Evolutionary almost non-relevant entities, filled with hatred and believes will yell and shout only to perform a role they don’t why they are performing them.

From this point of view a massive reconfiguration of communications and configurations is necessary (as intended by evolution). Probably this is what we experience at the moment (in mid 2018). Many traditional explanations don’t work anymore.

Soon: Data analysis and the limitations of the human brain

 

Scientific people exploring the world

The anthropological algorithm

[thoughts on the anthropological algorithm]

When people meet each other and exchange information they always exchange ideas and thoughts about a possible future. Every moment in the life of a human being – of a conscious mind – is interfused with a wide variety of impressions that touch the mind on a sensorial basis.

The mind – or consciousness – is a result of its sensorial input and the “analysis” > the cognition and recognition of its input.

Two human beings are always subject to a different input or perception and thus they always treat matter differently and they also act differently when it comes to designs of social interaction.

In time (and space) social groups that consist of members that have similar perceptions and cognitions use to develop a pattern of social and societal integration. At the same time other groups establish their own social and communicative pattern because they think the world will be a better place if their idea will be applied to every society. This is called ideology. Evolution uses ideology to accelerate developments. Two or more opponents are build, established and societally formed in order to fight each other.

This process – as a part of the anthropological algorithm / the anthropointrinsic algorithm – is used globally. Terms such as nation, tradition, gender, technology, power or self-esteem help to establish the algorithm in an efficient manner.

We find and identify oursleves in contexts like communism versus capitalism, nation versus nation, religion versus religion, progression versus tradition, men versus women, mental work versus physical work, black versus white, continent x versus continent y and so forth.

These definitions are inspiring us, they support evolution because they drive us to develop better solutions. But at the same time they prevent that people can internalize the universal perspective: That every and any existing human being is a very part of the current state or condition of the planet.

If we would realise that we as humans can actually live together on a very peaceful and comfortable basis we wouldn’t be in the need to rush further even if we don’t really have to. In a more balanced cognitive world the term “competition” would become an indicator for a shared human development instead of an indicator that stands for crises and the lack of analytic knowledge.

The human mind has to create technology – independent from the type of society the carrier of this mind is living in. That’s why the competition between different designs of society is almost always a competition on the basis of just a few superficial differences. The social and structural organisation of those competing societies is always very similar because every society is built on an anthropological / anthropointrinsic basis: Language, housing, nutrition, families, a social structure – laws, the use of technology and so on. Even the biggest issues and figths between nations, religions or people cannot belie the fact that a human society is always an anthropological society – any- and everywhere on the planet.

Probably the most important question in the 21st century is: Can we (inter-) connect our creative minds globally in a way that: At first we establish very open and free – soft – intersubjective and also intercultural methods of communication that allow us to heal our conflicts on earth and then – at 2nd – start to explore the space around us. A crew in an explorative spaceship – an enterprise – will probably be more succesful if it has already gone through all the possible and potential mental challenges that might appear while travelling through space before boarding.

A robot hand - a human handTherefore: Yes, we need to reconfigure our (cultural) infrastructure globally and as fast as we can. And yes: We definitely need more inventions in infrastructure, health, communications, interculturality, primary social care and services, education, understanding and sustainable analysis.

We also need more research regarding the future human-machine-intercommunication: Very soon there will be 4 types of human intelligence on the planet:

  • The human intelligence as we know it
  • A so called “artificial” machine intelligence of algorithms, made of inanimate matter that will be able to perform basic and advanced tasks on an automated basis – an IF>THEN intelligence that probably will be the basis for the development of a real inanimate intelligence
  • A machine intelligence that will surpass human intelligence on every level (still called human because we are the carriers of it)
  • The human intelligence with biological and material enhancements to the human brain and to the human body

The interconnection and inter-cooperation of those slightly different evolutionary pathways will – indeed – be very interesting. We will experience groundbreaking new forms of communication, social organization, products and also a change in how people will recognize their perceptive input. At the same time a very important question will be asked: Is there an actual future for the humankind?

[this text is subject to permanent reconfiguration]