That's a very bayesian take (averaging of parents). Why shouldn't consciousness at a minimum have a random element that possibly moves one outside the box?
Dutton's work states that it's even worst than a simple average. His view is that some people have bad genetics not simply because of heredity but also because of deleterious mutations which do not average out, the deleterious mutations override the good genetics and win over them.
He basically says, you need two good originals to get a good copy or a slightly improved copy (offspring). One good original and one bad original would produce a mostly bad copy. Thus a continuous process of survival of the fittest is needed to improve the stock, when that process is gone there is a risk of extinction.
Personally, I do not believe completely in Darwinian evolution, rather that perhaps it is directed. Perhaps indeed the soul brings out an element that will uplift humanity and that there is a far more intelligent process at work that we do not understand.
All that said and done of course, I think we are attacking the "NPC" too much, we have fallen for the division they want us to fall in. Some "NPC"s are that way not because of lack of consciousness but simply because they have been too crushed in life due to circumstances and had no time to rise up. Others have had it too good that they didn't have many reasons to be skeptical about the establishment.
I may not agree with you guys about the semantics. I do believe evolution is real because we see it happening real time. The real question is what drives this force? (Is it an ability that everything has, is it a result of cosmic radiation damaging dna, or just a result of changes in environment) Do living things have the ability to pick what traits they want? You see many books/movies/animes about harnessing this ability to become god.
I 100% agree, the NPC thing is nonsense, just another issue to divide and distract.
I talked about this before, but after my time looking into neural nets and the structure of actual neurons which plants dont have but yet still show an ability to make decisions.
I believe panpsychism is proably closer to the truth of it.
Why shouldn't consciousness at a minimum have a random element that possibly moves one outside the box?
a) motion represents the outside; momentum represents the box, and the formed consciousness within the momentum of motion is consciously aware of being moved...unless ignored for the suggested movements by others.
b) maximum (whole) divides itself into minimum (partials) through box (momentum)...
c) potential (each partial choice) exists within potentiality (whole momentum aka balance)..
d) suggested RAN'DOM, noun - "course without direction aka want of direction", tempts one to ignore being (life) directed (inception towards death), hence "free" will of choice within the "dom"-inance of balance aka free-dom aka FREE (living) within DOM (process of dying).
e) motion outside the box (inception towards death); motion inside the box (up/down; left/right; forwards/backwards aka choice within balance).
That's a very bayesian take (averaging of parents). Why shouldn't consciousness at a minimum have a random element that possibly moves one outside the box?
Dutton's work states that it's even worst than a simple average. His view is that some people have bad genetics not simply because of heredity but also because of deleterious mutations which do not average out, the deleterious mutations override the good genetics and win over them.
He basically says, you need two good originals to get a good copy or a slightly improved copy (offspring). One good original and one bad original would produce a mostly bad copy. Thus a continuous process of survival of the fittest is needed to improve the stock, when that process is gone there is a risk of extinction.
Personally, I do not believe completely in Darwinian evolution, rather that perhaps it is directed. Perhaps indeed the soul brings out an element that will uplift humanity and that there is a far more intelligent process at work that we do not understand.
All that said and done of course, I think we are attacking the "NPC" too much, we have fallen for the division they want us to fall in. Some "NPC"s are that way not because of lack of consciousness but simply because they have been too crushed in life due to circumstances and had no time to rise up. Others have had it too good that they didn't have many reasons to be skeptical about the establishment.
I may not agree with you guys about the semantics. I do believe evolution is real because we see it happening real time. The real question is what drives this force? (Is it an ability that everything has, is it a result of cosmic radiation damaging dna, or just a result of changes in environment) Do living things have the ability to pick what traits they want? You see many books/movies/animes about harnessing this ability to become god.
I 100% agree, the NPC thing is nonsense, just another issue to divide and distract.
I talked about this before, but after my time looking into neural nets and the structure of actual neurons which plants dont have but yet still show an ability to make decisions.
I believe panpsychism is proably closer to the truth of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism
Just like the carl sagan quote,
"The cosmos is also within us, were made of star stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself."
I agree that we should be better at giving people a chance.
a) motion represents the outside; momentum represents the box, and the formed consciousness within the momentum of motion is consciously aware of being moved...unless ignored for the suggested movements by others.
b) maximum (whole) divides itself into minimum (partials) through box (momentum)...
c) potential (each partial choice) exists within potentiality (whole momentum aka balance)..
d) suggested RAN'DOM, noun - "course without direction aka want of direction", tempts one to ignore being (life) directed (inception towards death), hence "free" will of choice within the "dom"-inance of balance aka free-dom aka FREE (living) within DOM (process of dying).
e) motion outside the box (inception towards death); motion inside the box (up/down; left/right; forwards/backwards aka choice within balance).