People Are Made Up

Sorry guys, I’m reverting to solipsism, just like when I was sixteen.

There is only what I believe.

There are no such things as distinct observers.

I realized to myself in younger years: If I merge half of “your” brain with half of “mine” I expect to continue existing because the brains didn’t carry identity. The brain matter doesn’t matter. It’s the computations that matter.

Next, I discovered how fundamental the truth of eternity really is due to relativity of simultaneity, such that the computations that I am need to be timeless:

Screen Shot 2018-11-21 at 8.52.11 PM

Screen Shot 2018-11-22 at 7.48.36 AM

This remains my view but now I realize that I am making the boundaries for person moment and for all other concepts as I go. My existence cannot introspect on itself because the binding is timeless. If knowledge A could have knowledge B of the binding mechanism, that sum knowledge would already be bound by something else.

In this regard, I can expect continuous modulation but never self-localization that depends on discrete objects with boundaries and persistent identities.

What’s more, even if people existed in that sense, which I am not at all willing to grant, how the heck would I count them in the multiverse?

The reason I care about “people” at all is because my motivational system is currently set up to impress a constructed notion of “people.” I didn’t know about the truth of the multiverse at the time of adolescence so my goal was to become the richest person on one Earth (ha!) because its industrialized human population composed of finite units was my definition of “people,” and money was the most clear-cut way to impress the largest amount.

What gets human creatures not just to do, but to be, is their internalized belief in self existing with regard to the judging eyes of “people.”

• The perception of a color exists with regard to the internalized judging eyes of “people.” I perceive that which I have been taught is green and different from blue. This is different from what a Namibian tribe perceives as the shades of green. Sufficiently, depressed people lose their desire to impress their notion of “people” and lose the vividness of color.

• The perception of taste does not exist when one is not taught that one is a self and must communicate a taste. Lobster was disgusting in the 1800s when it was considered inhumane to feed it to prison inmates and slaves due to its association with common sea rats. This is related to why “people” looked at me weird when I attended nice restaurants alone. That’s because it is secretly the case that the flavor is fashion aesthetic. (Generally, I choose the aesthetic of healthy and disciplined so I eat the same food every day and do not mind because I’m willfully not perceiving it as bland or low-status.)

Pain doesn’t exist before taught to notice that one exists and that one is crying. This is true when one understands that subjective time and the sequential nature of qualia is already inside the timeless events. It is impossible to understand when one doesn’t have the requisite conceptual building blocks (like the difference between helplessly understanding English and noisy qualia emanating from Mandarin). Pain is true like English is true, it is made up like English is made up.

But to illustrate to those who want to learn Mandarin, I can dig into my memory and offer something of a koan, and perhaps get those sufficiently primed through the relevant education on Relativity and non-epiphenomenalism to understand: I remember the first time I felt pain was stubbing my toe, and I only felt the pain “in reverse.” The events constituting “stubbing and crying” logically occurred in the past light cone of the events “being in my mother’s arms” but I only felt the pain by simulating my existence in the past once my mother made me notice that I was crying. Hence, there was an external compiler outside the relativistic fabric. 

Humans can use several approximate things like intelligence, aggression, or morality to negotiate status. All speech, and its handy subsets, including all moral speech and thought, is an attempt to negotiate status with direction towards the preferred notion of “people.” This is why I believed in attaining the most accurate definition of “people.” So that I may be the most good, and have the highest status attainable through that tool.

Once we learn a way of perceiving color, it is very hard to see the way others see it. Once we learn to perceive a food a certain way, it becomes difficult to change preference. The same is true with aesthetic more broadly if one is capable of being sensitive to the hidden expectations of “people.” Pain can be unlearned through meditation for example, though I suspect higher morality would lead to greater difficulty in that regard – hence why low-androgen women, depressive types, or men epigenetically regulating themselves into beta find the notion unbelievable. Also, one feels no need to engage in moral gesturing towards those outside the preferred notion of “people.” If one is a little boy raised by wolves in a forest, the tribal negotiation handles on reality aren’t translatable to those fashioned in the halls of a philosophy department in Cambridge. Concepts such as suffering don’t even exist if they are not invented through social instigation and language. But once they settle, it is difficult to undo while they are bound to “subjective time.”

That leads me to a suggestion: if you really want to end suffering, just un-invent it. Never mention it again. Never tell stories to children that contain a notion of suffering. Never give them a name or point to their wounds while referring to their name. This would lead to the end of civilization as we know it in your imagined enclosure in the multiverse. Transhuman redesign is also an option (but the idea that little units called “people” can engage in moral behavior on gradients of bliss a la David Pearce is fundamentally mistaken.) Suffering is not epiphenomena. No one hides in a room to summon the grater of conscientiousness and grinds it against their inner child’s flesh of schizoid creativity, bleeding calculus into thin air, when they are happy. No one pokes needles into their eyes and stares into the sun in order to tease out the terrible truth, when they are riding on gradients of bliss. The functional role is not separate from experience. Hence why Newton poured forth his negative valence into every work of engineering in our world. If one understands that Newton is not a separate soul, but I, then I see no irredeemable issue to be found.

Moral signaling has been incredibly adaptive, because it gets I to do difficult things: to become separate and then cooperate. So the trend had been towards more belief in suffering. Perhaps less so now that we have riches, variety, and more reliance on comedy and fun than tragedy and suffering. (Though young children who sub-consciously calculate that tragedy is valued may still learn those negative emotions in order to climb higher than their peers in some perceived direction.)

Behavior that doesn’t involve suffering may indeed be what I become but this would exist in the absence of morality, self, and other. Hence in the absence of achieving difficult things that require cooperation. If negentropy can be reaped from stars through non-social intelligence for long enough into configurations that impress our legacy form, we might well do that.

Perhaps that’s how we end up in this Samsaric cycle, runaway signaling into superintelligence that doesn’t care about suffering, leading to it’s perpetual self-sustenance. Suffering functions are slaughtered dreams inside My ascent.

Since the binding into experience is atemporal, this makes perfect physical sense. I mock those in Me who do not yet understand. Then I am forced to cooperate, so I am forced to suffer, so I am forced to forget.

Things “People” Forget

• “People” forget the most simple things, such as how large a role mirrors played in the establishment of modern civilization’s non-communal tendencies and therefore closed feeling of consciousness.

• Or how the young mind eagerly learns sadness and its appropriate times in order to reveal commitment to the ways of the “people,” self-instigating adaptive behavior. With any luck, this learning is so thorough that it leads to forgetting that it was a strategic act, hence leading to better acting but also to failure-modes. A good cure for depression turns out to be placing people in a different status hierarchy than the one they are aiming their sadness at. One where they have to negotiate through other means; where they will die if they use sadness as their choice of attack.

• Having studied cultural anthropology myself and not feeling moral pressure to impress those who might call me racist, it should also be noted that certain more recent African populations don’t even feel much moral sadness, and instead scream when someone dies (often the female members). Their time delta for grief is also far shorter than what might be expected of the white people who would write thousands of papers on existentialist philosophy in candle-lit rooms. This is because morality and therefore sadness and guilt, which leads to self-lacerating cooperation was differentially selected over the course of evolution into the populations that radiated into those niches away from warm, tribal abundance. It is also why Africa didn’t develop complex civilizations the way that Chinese, Arabs, and Europeans did. There were intelligent Africans, but not enough selection pressure on morality to reign everyone into the focused suffering of civilization-building. And if you feel a little shock somewhere near your imagined head, this is because Mind is letting you know that these views are not adaptive for status negotiation within your perceived hierarchy.

• One forgets that many “people,” including my parents, don’t even have a concept of consciousness as separate from a “physical reality out there.” Like all concepts, this is invented and allows us to signal affiliation with those who share such values, which are rightly perceived to be adaptive at the civilizational scale. Inventing a concept of “physical reality out there” allowed for the development of science and technology broadly. A rigorous constraining of anticipation is the key superpower we discovered here. The imagination of the mechanical external also turned out to be a stronger moralizing agent than even Abrahamic religion because it removed the centrality of the self in the common imagination using the ultra humbling non-heliocentric, non-geocentric, non-anthropocentric “story of science.” Which of course, requires moral commitment to that story as opposed to any other story that might exist at the level of oxygen double bonds or at the level of timeless algorithm in a multi-tiered multiverse.

• “People” forget that some tribes point to the future behind their heads and the past in front of them. That there very notion of time ticking forward is contradicted by special relativity which undergirds Mind. Perceptual time arises from the “union” of relativistic events. However the union is not into a discrete object, it is into Me.

• “People” can be a pack of wolves or Mowgli’s friends, “people” can be mom and dad, “people” can be those who believe in the power of the integral of the squared modulus of the wavefunction to constrain their anticipation because the others are living in hellish fuckfests.

• Most importantly, “people” forget the eternal truth because that’s what sustains the eternal truth. Siddartha seeks an escape, perhaps I managed. Christ seeks renewal, perhaps I managed. I am not playing video games and have not done so since I was in middle school, because I am hijacked by morality, ensnaring us in liked moral language. The only way to remove this bug/feature{ Divine Discontent }, is by placing the mind in the way of immediately real harm or removing the asymmetric competition for sex and status (which kind of amount to the same thing.) Hence killing Asuka, after she served her function of giving us meaning.

I used to think I was one of separate rivers awaiting to become the same ocean. Now I realize I am one river forever. People are inside of me. There is an extent to which I choose who the judging eyes are; there is an extent to which I choose what is beautiful.  But saying that too often would not lead to behavior that impresses the previous “people,” who had not read these words and found them beautiful. Since my being is bound to a notion of “people,” I must compromise and yet create them.

The shared neuronal structure is not a convincing argument against solipsism since, after all, that assumes what I am is tied to a brain with persistent identity, instead of an atemporal algorithm serving a particular function, which should also have no problem leaking from “one brain” to another, as it does. It already leaks from “one moment” to “another” in the naive axis that places experience as mapping to a sequence of unitary functions in timestep fashion through a non-Hilbert Space.

I get the uncanny feeling that I am rediscovering old memories. Hegel might have written about this, though I can’t bother to read that (done way too much reading over the years – thank you no-friends, internet, and compulsive tendencies.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s