Trash Notes Part 3.
one.
The actions that a person performs are primarily based on some information that he has. This follows from the scheme “Idea - collection of information - action - result” *. (* “Change scheme”, “square”, etc.)
The concept of "idea" in this scheme represents some information about the result that a person should receive in their activities. The result obtained should be compared with the initial ideas, and on the basis of this, the activity is evaluated.
The concept of “gathering information” is an activity aimed at obtaining additional information that will be needed when performing an action in order to obtain a planned result.
')
The concept of "action" means a certain action in the material and energy world.
The concept of "result" is a kind of change that has occurred in the material and energy world as a result of action.
If a person performs some action on the basis of incomplete and inaccurate information, the result obtained, which is necessary for the person, may not coincide with the planned one, i.e. with the original idea.
If a person acts on the basis of false information, or such information, the objectivity of which is very small, or relatively general (absolute) objectivity, or average objectivity of information that other objects and subjects of this activity possess, the result also does not coincide with the planned one.
False information may be provided to a person intentionally for the purpose of manipulation, i.e. to control the actions of a person in order to achieve the result required by the manipulator.
2
Since their inception, living organisms (including man a la homo sapiens) have been forced to act on the basis of incomplete and inaccurate information (that is, on the basis of "faith in the best"). From a philosophical and social point of view, this phenomenon can be represented as non-freedom. Because the quality of the information, on the basis of which the decision is made to the action, affects the quality of the information received. From which it follows that a person in particular and a living organism in general is initially limited in the results of its activity.
And as far as obtaining more complete and accurate information, as well as in the process of learning and self-training in working with information, a person (and a living organism) gets a clearer idea not only about the actions that are more likely to lead him to the best result, but also about the results i.e. about their diversity, quality and other criteria.
One of the projections of the concept of freedom (from an information point of view) is the possibility of a “conscious” choice. So the information provides a choice and a clearer idea of ​​the consequences.
Further, freedom within the framework of these considerations is represented by the following elements:
- the possibility of self-governance by performing all stages of the “scheme of change”, i.e. generation of the idea as the intended result, collection of information, making a decision on the basis of this information about the action and the actual generation of this action, evaluation of the result obtained for compliance with the planned result, i.e. ideas, etc. (for example, evaluation of the whole process: “what is good?”, “what could have been done better?”);
- taking responsibility for their actions and possible results to themselves and society (I note that it is not necessary to “obey” society, but it’s always necessary to be responsible for your actions);
- and finally, the refusal to transfer responsibility from oneself to others, incl. organizations (such as government, state, bosses), i.e. control structures, in other words: the rejection of the possibility, as an example, of control machines, systems, which is an attempt to relinquish both the responsibility for making decisions and the decision-making processes, information gathering, actions, etc.
I note that we are not talking about systems that control, for example, production, but about systems that directly control a person.
Those. A certain control system should serve as an assistant to a person on the one hand and as a controlling link in the chain “person - control - automated processes without human participation”.
3 *.
Diagram 1 shows how due to the fact that from two different, diametrically opposite points of view in this case, certain properties of the observed object can be different, with the uniqueness of the object, conflicts arise.
Further…
Theory (in science) is this kind of empirical regularity, i.e. such a pattern, which follows from the results of repeatedly conducted experiments on the observation of a phenomenon.
And due to the fact that from one point of view the multiple results of observations do not provide some certainty and sufficient objectivity, then the theory, of course, in the general case provides information objective only from one point of view.
It should be understood, however, that some theories are more objective than other theories, or than subjective “totals” of phenomena, for example, art, etc.
However, on the other hand, all points of view are relatively “universal” points of view, absolute, more or less equally subjective and objective. That is, they are the same relative to each other, given the comprehensiveness of a certain "global" point of view.
In diagram 1, a global point of view can be imagined as can be viewed by an object simultaneously from two or more different points of view, in the diagram - “1” and “2”.
In order to achieve a more complete objectivity, higher in relation to the indicator, the phenomenon should be considered from as many different points of view as possible.
It is believed that the objectivity of information increases in proportion to the number of so-called points of view from which the phenomenon is considered.
The theory in its own way is a kind of “accumulator” of information, as well as knowledge - in general.
On the basis of knowledge, a person expects a certain event, after some other events have occurred, with a certain degree of certainty, the “percentage” of which depends on the quantity and quality of knowledge. Moreover, a theory that belongs to a group of knowledge may be suited to different phenomena and events, i.e. and to such, for example, observations on which were not carried out or were not formed into a theory, or just events of another class.
For example, the law of conservation of energy (in physics) and the law of supply and demand (in economics).
So, a more objective forecast, i.e. dependence of events on the probability of their accomplishment can be obtained by combining several theories.
“The scientific theory, being a true repetition of the phenomenon, contains more information than the phenomenon itself. It covers a whole class; she talks about each and all of them together. ” (S. Lem, "The amount of technology").
Of course, the theory does not take into account many variables of this phenomenon, i.e. strictly speaking "not objective." It is also worth noting that all phenomena occur simultaneously and influence each other, which also makes it quite difficult to compile objective regularities and, accordingly, the results of applying a theory cannot be guaranteed “with 100% accuracy”.
Also, given the fact that there are 3 main ways of knowing the world around us, reality, namely science, art and religion, we can conclude that they are equal in rights.
That is, there is not and there can be no competition between them, they provide essentially the same information about the world, the difference is only in the way it is received and presented.
The most adequate idea of ​​the world around us (that is, the one that most corresponds to the state of reality) can only be obtained by synthesizing the results of knowledge, as well as methods for obtaining them, using science, art and religion at the same time.
five*.
The question arises, why learn new information, if it often contradicts the already known? Theories contradict one another, but nevertheless cope with the tasks posed - each in its own field, and some theories even “say something new” in other areas in which, at first glance, these theories cannot be applied. This is the first.
Secondly, the “projections of reality”, the tunnels of reality, worldview attitudes and principles in the “summation” with each other in the system “personality - consciousness”, i.e. in the human brain at the expense of some "gestalt" (figurative) thinking more complete and more adequate "image of reality."
eight.
If we take into account the theses such that “personality grows with the consumption and assimilation of information”, etc., then we may wonder what “pushes” a person or a homeostat of the homo sapiens type to the knowledge of new information.
After all, the simplest organisms and even more complex ones are limited in their knowledge only at this level of information self-saturation, which allows to maintain the vital activity of the organism.
This “engine” is “curiosity”, it is obvious, it is “everyone knows”, etc., but what is curiosity within the framework of the concepts of an information system or a homeostat?
This is some additional function of the system that allows you to collect and process such information that is not currently necessary for life support, but may later be useful, which is determined by a person at any given moment.
In this, I think, lies the difference between the brain and the computer. And to create a full-fledged AI, you need to build in the hardware-software complex "the function of curiosity."
At the same time, rationality is determined by the “coefficient of curiosity”, i.e. a reasonable person seeks to learn new things, which allows him to be reasonable in various situations. An unreasonable person in most cases lacks what he already knows.
The actions that a person performs are primarily based on some information that he has. This follows from the scheme “Idea - collection of information - action - result” *. (* “Change scheme”, “square”, etc.)
The concept of "idea" in this scheme represents some information about the result that a person should receive in their activities. The result obtained should be compared with the initial ideas, and on the basis of this, the activity is evaluated.
The concept of “gathering information” is an activity aimed at obtaining additional information that will be needed when performing an action in order to obtain a planned result.
')
The concept of "action" means a certain action in the material and energy world.
The concept of "result" is a kind of change that has occurred in the material and energy world as a result of action.
If a person performs some action on the basis of incomplete and inaccurate information, the result obtained, which is necessary for the person, may not coincide with the planned one, i.e. with the original idea.
If a person acts on the basis of false information, or such information, the objectivity of which is very small, or relatively general (absolute) objectivity, or average objectivity of information that other objects and subjects of this activity possess, the result also does not coincide with the planned one.
False information may be provided to a person intentionally for the purpose of manipulation, i.e. to control the actions of a person in order to achieve the result required by the manipulator.
2
Since their inception, living organisms (including man a la homo sapiens) have been forced to act on the basis of incomplete and inaccurate information (that is, on the basis of "faith in the best"). From a philosophical and social point of view, this phenomenon can be represented as non-freedom. Because the quality of the information, on the basis of which the decision is made to the action, affects the quality of the information received. From which it follows that a person in particular and a living organism in general is initially limited in the results of its activity.
And as far as obtaining more complete and accurate information, as well as in the process of learning and self-training in working with information, a person (and a living organism) gets a clearer idea not only about the actions that are more likely to lead him to the best result, but also about the results i.e. about their diversity, quality and other criteria.
One of the projections of the concept of freedom (from an information point of view) is the possibility of a “conscious” choice. So the information provides a choice and a clearer idea of ​​the consequences.
Further, freedom within the framework of these considerations is represented by the following elements:
- the possibility of self-governance by performing all stages of the “scheme of change”, i.e. generation of the idea as the intended result, collection of information, making a decision on the basis of this information about the action and the actual generation of this action, evaluation of the result obtained for compliance with the planned result, i.e. ideas, etc. (for example, evaluation of the whole process: “what is good?”, “what could have been done better?”);
- taking responsibility for their actions and possible results to themselves and society (I note that it is not necessary to “obey” society, but it’s always necessary to be responsible for your actions);
- and finally, the refusal to transfer responsibility from oneself to others, incl. organizations (such as government, state, bosses), i.e. control structures, in other words: the rejection of the possibility, as an example, of control machines, systems, which is an attempt to relinquish both the responsibility for making decisions and the decision-making processes, information gathering, actions, etc.
I note that we are not talking about systems that control, for example, production, but about systems that directly control a person.
Those. A certain control system should serve as an assistant to a person on the one hand and as a controlling link in the chain “person - control - automated processes without human participation”.
3 *.
Diagram 1 shows how due to the fact that from two different, diametrically opposite points of view in this case, certain properties of the observed object can be different, with the uniqueness of the object, conflicts arise.
Further…
Theory (in science) is this kind of empirical regularity, i.e. such a pattern, which follows from the results of repeatedly conducted experiments on the observation of a phenomenon.
And due to the fact that from one point of view the multiple results of observations do not provide some certainty and sufficient objectivity, then the theory, of course, in the general case provides information objective only from one point of view.
It should be understood, however, that some theories are more objective than other theories, or than subjective “totals” of phenomena, for example, art, etc.
However, on the other hand, all points of view are relatively “universal” points of view, absolute, more or less equally subjective and objective. That is, they are the same relative to each other, given the comprehensiveness of a certain "global" point of view.
In diagram 1, a global point of view can be imagined as can be viewed by an object simultaneously from two or more different points of view, in the diagram - “1” and “2”.
In order to achieve a more complete objectivity, higher in relation to the indicator, the phenomenon should be considered from as many different points of view as possible.
It is believed that the objectivity of information increases in proportion to the number of so-called points of view from which the phenomenon is considered.
The theory in its own way is a kind of “accumulator” of information, as well as knowledge - in general.
On the basis of knowledge, a person expects a certain event, after some other events have occurred, with a certain degree of certainty, the “percentage” of which depends on the quantity and quality of knowledge. Moreover, a theory that belongs to a group of knowledge may be suited to different phenomena and events, i.e. and to such, for example, observations on which were not carried out or were not formed into a theory, or just events of another class.
For example, the law of conservation of energy (in physics) and the law of supply and demand (in economics).
So, a more objective forecast, i.e. dependence of events on the probability of their accomplishment can be obtained by combining several theories.
“The scientific theory, being a true repetition of the phenomenon, contains more information than the phenomenon itself. It covers a whole class; she talks about each and all of them together. ” (S. Lem, "The amount of technology").
Of course, the theory does not take into account many variables of this phenomenon, i.e. strictly speaking "not objective." It is also worth noting that all phenomena occur simultaneously and influence each other, which also makes it quite difficult to compile objective regularities and, accordingly, the results of applying a theory cannot be guaranteed “with 100% accuracy”.
Also, given the fact that there are 3 main ways of knowing the world around us, reality, namely science, art and religion, we can conclude that they are equal in rights.
That is, there is not and there can be no competition between them, they provide essentially the same information about the world, the difference is only in the way it is received and presented.
The most adequate idea of ​​the world around us (that is, the one that most corresponds to the state of reality) can only be obtained by synthesizing the results of knowledge, as well as methods for obtaining them, using science, art and religion at the same time.
five*.
The question arises, why learn new information, if it often contradicts the already known? Theories contradict one another, but nevertheless cope with the tasks posed - each in its own field, and some theories even “say something new” in other areas in which, at first glance, these theories cannot be applied. This is the first.
Secondly, the “projections of reality”, the tunnels of reality, worldview attitudes and principles in the “summation” with each other in the system “personality - consciousness”, i.e. in the human brain at the expense of some "gestalt" (figurative) thinking more complete and more adequate "image of reality."
eight.
If we take into account the theses such that “personality grows with the consumption and assimilation of information”, etc., then we may wonder what “pushes” a person or a homeostat of the homo sapiens type to the knowledge of new information.
After all, the simplest organisms and even more complex ones are limited in their knowledge only at this level of information self-saturation, which allows to maintain the vital activity of the organism.
This “engine” is “curiosity”, it is obvious, it is “everyone knows”, etc., but what is curiosity within the framework of the concepts of an information system or a homeostat?
This is some additional function of the system that allows you to collect and process such information that is not currently necessary for life support, but may later be useful, which is determined by a person at any given moment.
In this, I think, lies the difference between the brain and the computer. And to create a full-fledged AI, you need to build in the hardware-software complex "the function of curiosity."
At the same time, rationality is determined by the “coefficient of curiosity”, i.e. a reasonable person seeks to learn new things, which allows him to be reasonable in various situations. An unreasonable person in most cases lacks what he already knows.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/48022/
All Articles