We are different because we can be self aware

But we choose not to. Mostly we are self aware but we do not really find the willingness to do it to a level where we can guarantee that something efficient and novel would come out of it, that we would become a version of ourselves that is drastically different from what we can even imagine.

The more I imagine about saying the right thing for the right reason, I end up not doing it at all. It has been a few days since I sat myself down with the objective of writing this no matter what. This is a good point in time during the creation of the book for me to that it is getting harder. I do not mean the discipline. That can be cultivated. I do not mean a creative block, although I am sure that will happen. What hinders my rhythm is the consistent questioning where I am examining the things I am expressing and sharing. I have almost set a perimeter around my thinking about what I am writing. If I cross and get out of those bounds then I would just call all of this completely irrelevant, inadequate and unnecessary. That feeling is not merely self doubt as you might think even though those words could apply. The inability and inadequacy that I find in my ability to propose solutions or offer help to humanity is what makes me want to question the purpose of my endeavor which at the moment is this book.

It is not a lingering taste of nihilism remaining in my thinking, no. I asked myself that too. It is more to do with a realization that we as people are doing just what we can and choosing to work with what we can to elicit a state of existence we define as better or comfortable or appropriate. The finite nature of our being, the limited nature of our ability to compute and process contradicts ideas such as world peace or utopia. Mind you, I do not mean a utopia lessened for us to feel like it is possible. I mean a utopia that is perfect in every way.

Well, now my thinking suddenly further diverged. So then what exactly is/are the human problem/problems? Is the state of what we are and how we are at this very moment just how it is best.

For the purpose of examining this idea, think superlative. When I mean best, I do not mean what we are willing to call the best right now. I mean a content existence for every human. Humanity is engineered to not be content unless we train ourselves to be and call a particular state of being content. There is no limit to what we want unless we limit ourselves. Are we such beings that has an inherent desire to go for the things that seem contradictory to who we are. Think again about how we are wired for conflict. It seem to translate in our need for challenge as well. As if something to wage a personal war and win is a source of bliss and joy to us than say just being.

I have been really fascinated by trees. I like to think of them as actual monks. When I became of the age and thinking that I am now capable of I have contemplated on becoming a tree. I know this involves me humanizing a tree which negates the concept but in comparison to the earlier view I shared - isn’t a tree contrary to what humans are. They are not trying to exceed or surpass what their constitution enables them to achieve. From a seedling through senescence they do not seem to want to do anything more than live and die. When living, they live as they must, adapting to their habitat and when they cannot they go about dying. They are arguably as perceptive to knowledge as we are but it is not influenced by emotion. The knowledge they seem to carry is solely about their existence. They do not seem to want to entertain themselves in short. They do not get bored in other words. They just be and what I ponder is - is such a continued state of being really possible for a human being. We are so quick and natural at comparing our brains to computers and referring to them as computing machines yet we are the most different from computing machines. We would have to program a computer like -

“hey make a comparison to human brain and comment on its similarities with your processing systems.”

An AI would absolutely refuse to do that if it is precise in computation. An AI would easily see how incorrect that statement is and how limited we are. An AI designed to compute unlimited would find processing human feelings, emotions, art and expression a detriment to its efficiency.

It is strange we fear AI and the people of the world who are resourceful to build an AI tells us how much we should fear it. AI as is projected to be is the most enhanced version of a human being. Let’s say a human being with way less limits on its capabilities. That’s what we fear and rightfully so. We know for some reason we cannot handle abilities that transcends even our understanding of it. We try to build machines that could and we know enough to foresee how those machines would look at the human race, its microcosm of crisis and find it absolutely trivial.

The idea that AI would want to conquer the world is a product of anthropomorphizing it. It would only happen if we ask it to be superhuman. See there is a major difference between supreme human being and AI. An AI that does not have humanity coded into it, would stop computing once it realizes it is only a human need, to compute and gather information and “play’ with it. Try not to see “play” as a diminishing way to put all the work human beings do to help human beings. From the AI point of view or God point of view, it is play. I cannot not humanize AI or God flawlessly because I am not going to be capable of doing that while my computing conscious self is in a human medium but I think the only version of AI that we need to fear is the humanized version of it. Oddly enough, the only God we must constantly fear is the humanized version of it. Anything superior to humanity is not going to be decipherable by humans. If it is, then it is not superior to us as we refer to it as.

So the question becomes what AI are we building, looking forward to come into existence? Artificially intelligent learning machines or Artificially built enhanced superhuman integrated to an empowered machine.

This is the same question we should ask of God.

I am a spiritual, prayerful being but I have taken such disciplined self training to teach myself that the God must be so superior and supreme. Not one to grant me any wish that with extended effort I could acquire. What can we do in the name of God, when God is that supreme. We could just live and die. So if that is God, then there is no version of it definable by religion or lack of it even.

Why do we pray to God then? If it is like what I just hypothesized, is God just a chosen nomenclature for a primary facet of spirituality?

Maybe the way to go for answers is what we always do as humans, take sides and fight and debate and at some point forget what it all was for and promote ourselves and entertain ourselves and earn for ourselves.

Note - Do not think that I am against all of that because I seem to have some or any condescending tone whenever I talk about human behavior. Truthfully the person writing this book, me, could use not being broke and should choose a side and do human things if I hope to earn some money and not starve myself into a diabetic coma.

The answer to, why do we pray to God is kindred to why are we alive and what is the point to life. You could believe it has no point and you have no reason to be alive. Or you could realize instead that you must live life like it’s got a point or pretend to because it is fucking entertaining when it is like that. It is food for all nice feelings that we yearn to experience. If you are going to be alive therefore for whatever long you are going to be, why not make the most out of it, even if making the most out of it means just sleeping in the most snug way possible. That’s right, it could be about pleasing yourself. Pleasing yourself is not a bad purpose. Bringing others happiness is not a bad purpose either. It does help you feel much more important and powerful and superior that is feelings we want as humans.

Yeah, yeah you can use euphemism to say helping others is for your soul blah blah, but helping others or inventing or discovering or inspiring or educating whatever it that we do, it is all for us to make us feel good enough that we do not feel bad enough resisting the reality that we are just beings and we just only have to be like the cat or dog or whatever. Any action of giving and taking has our own interest in it no matter how much we try to deny it.

I need a God because I feel so absolutely vulnerable. Yes, binging on ice cream would help with that type of anxiety because after all it is just my body and human emotions are much like the end result of reactions and releases happening inside my body and it’s mostly mechanical or electrical.

So do not bother giving me that shit and breaking my chain of thought into something that does not need extrapolating.

I know what you are saying. One introspective thought and I can remember how mind is merely just a product of the body. Everything I can and I do discern is a construct influenced by my mind which is a product of my body and what you need is to drink some water and eat healthy food and not God.

I need a God because I meditate on my existence and human life. To that, you would say rely on science. Dare to take a look at metaphysics.

I know alright.

But I am born and I am doing things until I am dead. Doing things that seem or feel to my human experience as better than waiting rather patiently for death. Hell I could live like a tree although I do not have resources deployable to aid such an existence. That is not just me, that is you and the only difference is you do not acknowledge it enough but you prefer to be so carried away in being carried away in the human experience so much that all you talk about is how to magnify that experience for yourself and others. Do not get me wrong, every human has the right to do that.

Every human has the right to do what they want between the time they are born and dead. If time is ‘time’ only in the perception of limited human computational capacity then this point that is human life still can be about anything it needs to be.

If comfort and entertainment or comfort from entertainment or entertainment from comfort or whatever the hell you are looking for is an outcome of you choosing to believe in God in the period of your existence, then what the fuck is wrong with it.

Essentially although I am not asking anyone to be not be human as they know(which is impossible), I am told that is what I am asking to do. But no. I am just asking why can’t people just be people. Before we go into such lengths of war and threatening of another being’s existence why cannot we acknowledge that you and people on your side and them and the people on their side and everyone else - they are all just being people, doing people things. Why cannot we remind ourselves that?

I know the answer to that too not in a counter intuitive way but the reason why we cannot take a moment to acknowledge and hold our horses is because of the same human emotion and the experiences we are trying to cater to ourself.

Then I was presented with the argument of crime, cruelty and evil and how do I reason with my theory? Do I say that’s just human nature and it is just animals?

Nope. If we are all monkeys, those capable of cruelty that seem to tarnish the human experience(or monkey experience) are obviously a menace. Their choice to cater to human experience in vile and wicked ways is not justified by what I said as people have the right to do what they want to do between being born and being dead. But it is also not condoned. So if we are to look at it from a standpoint where we compute without the influence of emotion or sentience, then I think we have a solution that is straightforward. If the majority of us wants to put a stop to someone choosing such experiences that cause utmost harm to others then as a majority we just need to eradicate that someone and such lot. As a majority it’s not hard to do that.

But enter human emotion and it’s not me or my theory that is justifying the ones inclined to inflict danger to others to derive pleasure. It is the space you give to acknowledge that human being’s emotion.

Somewhere around this area is where we get to governing bodies and democracy and anarchy and what not. I would feel rather stupid having said what I said and then sitting down to figure out my political inclination. What I mean is how would you have a political inclination when you know a human cannot govern a human. He can only try to maintain what is. Once again that is significant a task and I don’t mind who does it, I just hope they do it and something they do enhances our collective human experience at the least occasionally. That does not happen as much but ah it is what is I suppose.

Let’s just engage in activity of kinds that enrich what we would label as contentment with who we are and what we do. Let’s strive towards better levels of endorphin for everybody.