Guest guest Report post Posted March 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Harsha wrote: > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, of course. That is part of the fun! :-). > > > > > > Love, > > > Harsha > > > > > > Ahhhh ......Yes. > > > > Perhaps that is why the Buddha called it " suffering " . > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > Why bring Buddha in this? Speak for yourself (if you can! :-). > > Love, > Harsha Can any " self " speak for its self? toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 27, 2005 toombaru2004 wrote: > > > Can any " self " speak for its self? > > > > toombaru > > Do you wish to say something? Harsha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Harsha wrote: > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > > > Can any " self " speak for its self? > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > Do you wish to say something? > > Harsha Can any " self " speak for itself? toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 27, 2005 toombaru2004 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Harsha wrote: > > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Can any " self " speak for its self? > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > Do you wish to say something? > > > > Harsha > > > > Can any " self " speak for itself? > > > > toombaru > Does the hole make the donut? Harsha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Harsha wrote: > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , Harsha wrote: > > > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can any " self " speak for its self? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > Do you wish to say something? > > > > > > Harsha > > > > > > > > Can any " self " speak for itself? > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > Does the hole make the donut? > > Harsha Harsha, Is it your belief that the " self " can speak for itself? I am asking you in all sincerity.......but...... If you you prefer to avoid the question...I will understand. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 27, 2005 toombaru2004 wrote: > > Harsha, > > Is it your belief that the " self " can speak for itself? > > > I am asking you in all sincerity.......but...... > If you you prefer to avoid the question...I will understand. > > > > toombaru Dear Toombaru: I don't question your sincerity. What do you mean by the " self " ? Harsha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Harsha wrote: > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > Harsha, > > > > Is it your belief that the " self " can speak for itself? > > > > > > I am asking you in all sincerity.......but...... > > If you you prefer to avoid the question...I will understand. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Dear Toombaru: > > I don't question your sincerity. What do you mean by the " self " ? > > Harsha Written earlier today: toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > Yes, of course. That is part of the fun! :-). > > > > Love, > > Harsha > > > Ahhhh ......Yes. > > Perhaps that is why the Buddha called it " suffering " . > > > > toombaru > >Why bring Buddha in this? Speak for yourself (if you can! :-). Love, Harsha In the above exchange, I was asked to " Speak for myself (if I could). I asked you if you believe that the " self " that you refer to above (using the consensus dictionary meaning for " self " ) can speak for itself. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 3/27/05 9:25:08 AM, anders_lindman writes: > > > > And common sense could never tell us if a machine was being conscious > > or not. For example, a Turing test could possibly give as a clue if a > > machine could think or not, but it would tell us nothing about if the > > machine is self-aware or not. The capacity of thinking is not the same > > as being self-aware. Thinking does not automatically imply consciousness. > > > > al. > > > > P: Well, Al, let me indulge you. Suppose one day, someone invents a robot > that not only could do things (we have those already) but could talk about > what it > does) even if that action is new to him. And if the action is completely new, > the response to a question about it, could not be preprogrammed. So, the > robot > stops vacuuming the floor, and you ask it why, and the robot says: > " Your pet mouse escaped from its cage, and was eating a piece of cracker > right > in front of me. " If the robot has never been programmed to stop for a > mouse, > or to recognize a mouse, and gave this as a reason for stopping, you must > conclude: > > a) it learned it on his own. > b) It is aware of it because it gave that knowledge of the mouse as its > reason for stopping. > > This household robot might be equipped with only clever AI. To be self aware is not the same as intelligence. No matter how smart the robot appear to be, we cannot from that smartness tell if the robot is being aware of itself or not. A robot might some day invent a cure for cancer, or compose highly creative art and poetry, maybe even become the president of the U.S.A., but we would still don't know if that robot is self aware or not. Such robot would of course be very aware of the world around it and possess high intelligence, but would it be self aware? For example, the robots scientists experiment with today can perhaps recognize human faces, know the difference between up and down e t c, but are not self aware; they have no consciousness. al. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 In a message dated 3/27/05 11:13:25 PM, anders_lindman writes: > Al: A robot might some day invent a cure for > cancer, or compose highly creative art and poetry, maybe even become > the president of the U.S.A., but we would still don't know if that > robot is self aware or not. Such robot would of course be very aware > of the world around it and possess high intelligence, but would it be > self aware? > P: Al your question was how can we know if the robot is aware? Self aware= aware of self. How do you know you have a self? What is a self? Are self and awareness two different thing? So, if the robut can give a credible reason for its actions without that reason having been previously programmed, we must conclude it's aware of its motivations. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 In a message dated 3/28/05 7:50:34 AM, freyjartist writes: > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > Awareness embraces everything, > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > contains it all, including knowledge > of itself. Also that Awareness > doesn't necessarily have to > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > P: Says Freyja, waiving to everyone... as she joins the conga line at ........................................................Toomb's Zombie jamboree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Dear Toombaru, Since you were speaking for Buddha, I suggested that you speak for yourself instead. You now ask whether it is possible for a " self " to speak of " self " and say that the consensus dictionary definition of the " self " will do. I am no longer sure what we are talking about and of the point of the conversation. Not that that is important, but there are practical constraints of time (and stamina) to carry out such dialogue. With respect, Much love, Harsha _____ toombaru2004 [cptc] Sunday, March 27, 2005 7:21 PM Nisargadatta Re: Originary Mimesis > Ahhhh ......Yes. > > Perhaps that is why the Buddha called it " suffering " . > > > > toombaru > >Why bring Buddha in this? Speak for yourself (if you can! :-). Love, Harsha In the above exchange, I was asked to " Speak for myself (if I could). I asked you if you believe that the " self " that you refer to above (using the consensus dictionary meaning for " self " ) can speak for itself. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Dearest Harsha, When the dialogue is 'Singular' one can speak from whatever 'personage' that enters into the spoken. Be it Buddha, Toombaru, Jesus, or Harsha or Anna. Withholding no-thing and no-one, Anna - Harsha Nisargadatta Monday, March 28, 2005 8:48 AM RE: Re: Originary Mimesis Dear Toombaru, Since you were speaking for Buddha, I suggested that you speak for yourself instead. You now ask whether it is possible for a " self " to speak of " self " and say that the consensus dictionary definition of the " self " will do. I am no longer sure what we are talking about and of the point of the conversation. Not that that is important, but there are practical constraints of time (and stamina) to carry out such dialogue. With respect, Much love, Harsha _____ toombaru2004 [cptc] Sunday, March 27, 2005 7:21 PM Nisargadatta Re: Originary Mimesis > Ahhhh ......Yes. > > Perhaps that is why the Buddha called it " suffering " . > > > > toombaru > >Why bring Buddha in this? Speak for yourself (if you can! :-). Love, Harsha In the above exchange, I was asked to " Speak for myself (if I could). I asked you if you believe that the " self " that you refer to above (using the consensus dictionary meaning for " self " ) can speak for itself. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 > Al: A robot might some day invent a cure for > cancer, or compose highly creative art and poetry, maybe even become > the president of the U.S.A., but we would still don't know if that > robot is self aware or not. Such robot would of course be very aware > of the world around it and possess high intelligence, but would it be > self aware? > P: Al your question was how can we know if the robot is aware? Self aware= aware of self. How do you know you have a self? What is a self? Are self and awareness two different thing? So, if the robut can give a credible reason for its actions without that reason having been previously programmed,we must conclude it's aware of its motivations. Faithe: A robot will never invent a cure for cancer, or write a poem, etc. A robot may be used in the process of developing a cure, etc. It will be the programming and wiring installed that makes the robot capable of churning much more information, more efficiently and accurately than an individual human mind can handle. Similar to all machinery which makes man's life more comfortable...an efficient furnace, a vehicle that moves more quickly than the legs of man, the airplane that allows man to fly, etc. A robot has as much of a chance of being " aware " or " self-aware " as a human does of creating something from nothing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 3/27/05 11:13:25 PM, anders_lindman writes: > > > > Al: A robot might some day invent a cure for > > cancer, or compose highly creative art and poetry, maybe even become > > the president of the U.S.A., but we would still don't know if that > > robot is self aware or not. Such robot would of course be very aware > > of the world around it and possess high intelligence, but would it be > > self aware? > > > P: Al your question was how can we know if the robot is aware? Self > aware= > aware of self. How do you know you have a self? What is a self? Are > self > and awareness two different thing? > So, if the robut can give a credible reason for its actions without > that reason > having been previously programmed, we must conclude it's aware of its > motivations. f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that Awareness embraces everything, doesn't see divisions or roles, and contains it all, including knowledge of itself. Also that Awareness doesn't necessarily have to be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 3/28/05 7:50:34 AM, freyjartist@a... writes: > > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > > Awareness embraces everything, > > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > > contains it all, including knowledge > > of itself. Also that Awareness > > doesn't necessarily have to > > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > P: Says Freyja, waiving to everyone... as she joins the conga line at > ........................................................Toomb's Zombie > jamboree. > haha! you mean the conga line at the wedding of a child of a barren woman? (this IS a Niz list) OOOOPAH! ;-) > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Harsha " wrote: > Dear Toombaru, > > > > Since you were speaking for Buddha, I suggested that you speak for yourself > instead. You now ask whether it is possible for a " self " to speak of " self " > and say that the consensus dictionary definition of the " self " will do. I am > no longer sure what we are talking about and of the point of the > conversation. Not that that is important, but there are practical > constraints of time (and stamina) to carry out such dialogue. > > > > With respect, > > Much love, > > Harsha Buddha was just another talking head that happened to find its self sitting next to a thin spot in the bubble. Harsha, I always feel the kindness in your words. Thank you for this exchange. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " carolina112900 " <freyjartist@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > In a message dated 3/28/05 7:50:34 AM, freyjartist@a... writes: > > > > > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > > > Awareness embraces everything, > > > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > > > contains it all, including knowledge > > > of itself. Also that Awareness > > > doesn't necessarily have to > > > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > > > > P: Says Freyja, waiving to everyone... as she joins the > conga line at > > ........................................................Toomb's > Zombie > > jamboree. > > > > > haha! > > you mean the > conga line at the wedding of a > child of a barren woman? > (this IS a Niz list) > > OOOOPAH! > > ;-) > And there's two ways you can dance: with the gun pointing at your feet or without the gun pointing at your feet. f. It's all meaningless. > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > Awareness embraces everything, > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > contains it all, including knowledge > of itself. Also that Awareness > doesn't necessarily have to > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. The " self " .....can never have knowledge of itself. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > > Awareness embraces everything, > > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > > contains it all, including knowledge > > of itself. Also that Awareness > > doesn't necessarily have to > > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > The " self " .....can never have knowledge of itself. > > ......for a very good reason. > toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " carolina112900 " <freyjartist@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > > > Awareness embraces everything, > > > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > > > contains it all, including knowledge > > > of itself. Also that Awareness > > > doesn't necessarily have to > > > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > > > > > The " self " .....can never have knowledge of itself. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > Oh, there's that self word again. > > yes, i know, the eye cannot see itself > seeing, etcetera etcetera. > > > > What makes all this stuff up? > > > f. I do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > > > Awareness embraces everything, > > > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > > > contains it all, including knowledge > > > of itself. Also that Awareness > > > doesn't necessarily have to > > > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > > > > > The " self " .....can never have knowledge of itself. > > > > > > .....for a very good reason. > Toomy, I just can't quite live without your stories. > > > > > toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 In a message dated 3/28/05 8:15:24 AM, freyjartist writes: > P: Says Freyja, waiving to everyone... as she joins the > conga line at > > ........................................................Toomb's > Zombie > > jamboree. > > > > > haha! > > you mean the > conga line at the wedding of a > child of a barren woman? > (this IS a Niz list) > > OOOOPAH! > > ;-) > P: Yes, I think that's what I meant. I heard the honeymoon was a fiasco, and she has been trying to file for divorce, or at least disconnect the feeding tube, but not even the star agents of the Bureau of Ontological Nondual Investigations (BONI) have been able to locate the guy. I'll keep you informed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " carolina112900 " <freyjartist@a...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > > > > Awareness embraces everything, > > > > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > > > > contains it all, including knowledge > > > > of itself. Also that Awareness > > > > doesn't necessarily have to > > > > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > The " self " .....can never have knowledge of itself. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > Oh, there's that self word again. > > > > yes, i know, the eye cannot see itself > > seeing, etcetera etcetera. > > > > > > > > What makes all this stuff up? > > > > > > f. I do. OK. What does I mean according to " you " or I. f. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " carolina112900 " <freyjartist@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " carolina112900 " > <freyjartist@a...> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > f. Maybe the manifestation of AI shows that > > > > > Awareness embraces everything, > > > > > doesn't see divisions or roles, and > > > > > contains it all, including knowledge > > > > > of itself. Also that Awareness > > > > > doesn't necessarily have to > > > > > be limited to a flesh/blood/bones thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The " self " .....can never have knowledge of itself. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh, there's that self word again. > > > > > > yes, i know, the eye cannot see itself > > > seeing, etcetera etcetera. > > > > > > > > > > > > What makes all this stuff up? > > > > > > > > > f. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I do. > > > OK. What does I mean according to " you " > or I. > > f. I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " carolina112900 " <freyjartist@a...> wrote: > > > > > > > > OK. What does I mean according to " you " > > or I. > > > > f. > > > I am I am is a concept. What does it mean? What does concept mean? What does anything mean? It means what it means, that's all. As a meta4 for thoughts, Niz would say, when you walking through a crowd of people, do you walk on the people or do you walk inbetween the people? f. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
