Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Papus79]

This conversation appears to have been brought about by a piece of illustrative fiction that Jason wrote recently called Psychotron, however the conversation so far has been circling Heidegger, Bergson, Wittgenstein, and Deleuze. While I have some familiarity with Jason both through his interviews and having read Prometheus and Atlas he's getting into the weeds here of what his idea of the spectral revolution is and what gets interesting is his elevation of language - ie. a cosmic background of chaos ordered by Logos (which he suggests is like in kind to an AI) and that we're something it creates to, as Selwyn gave the example, 'feed prompts back to it'.

While I've never been one to take the idea too seriously that literally everything is language (science fraud and con artistry doesn't change physics) it's perhaps a different story if we're looking at shells within shells or a recursive version of this where a Logos is pinning our world down, giving us our physics, and essentially drawing on Tiamat (Chaos) to make it.

Anyway it's a wild ride and pretty entertaining and I'd be curious as well to see what other people versed in the above philosophers think on Jason's conclusions.

[Xenophon]

This conversation appears to have been brought about by a piece of illustrative fiction that Jason wrote recently called Psychotron, however the conversation so far has been circling Heidegger, Bergson, Wittgenstein, and Deleuze. While I have some familiarity with Jason both through his interviews and having read Prometheus and Atlas he's getting into the weeds here of what his idea of the spectral revolution is and what gets interesting is his elevation of language - ie. a cosmic background of chaos ordered by Logos (which he suggests is like in kind to an AI) and that we're something it creates to, as Selwyn gave the example, 'feed prompts back to it'.

While I've never been one to take the idea too seriously that literally everything is language (science fraud and con artistry doesn't change physics) it's perhaps a different story if we're looking at shells within shells or a recursive version of this where a Logos is pinning our world down, giving us our physics, and essentially drawing on Tiamat (Chaos) to make it.

Anyway it's a wild ride and pretty entertaining and I'd be curious as well to see what other people versed in the above philosophers think on Jason's conclusions.

I was once shot at a bit. Like you, I did not then (or now) take seriously the notion that I was faced with a problem of language.

[Papus79]

I was once shot at a bit. Like you, I did not then (or now) take seriously the notion that I was faced with a problem of language.

Right, for that to be a thing I think you yourself would need to be made of that same language - meaning we wouldn't experience such a system as language from within it rather it could only be that from the outside, otherwise we're popping into the kinds of strange alternate universes like they were in Hitchhiker's Guide. That would put us in a place however where we could only use such a 'language' if we ourselves were able to step outside the system.

In a way it also rhymes with Wolfram's structure where intelligence is above consciousness and that top level Jason describes reminds me a bit of Wolfram's ruliad.