PDA

View Full Version : The Perfect Human



afterburner
2006-Sep-13, 05:24 PM
Rather lengthy, nothing particularly new, but here is the Wednesday morning thought. Read it over lunch or something.

[Edit]: In short...A perfect human is in full control of all internal aspects of his or her existence.

First, think of something, actually do it, and do it for 10-20 seconds, remembering every detail of whatever it is (experience, theory, imaginary situation - anything).

That something you thought of is only one of many things you either know, or are capable of imagining. Lets say it was a memory that you though of.

The more you think about it, the more you are able to eventually remember about that experience. Without filling the experience with made up stuff - that is what you remember and know.

If you were to imagine what just happened there (the way I think of it), you can see a main thought, and other salient thoughts originating from that main thought. Almost like the branches of a tree.

Throughout history, many have invented something essentially identical, but were in different parts of the world and had no way of communicating with each other, not even through other people, or word of mouth (overhearing something). They thought of it independently.

The way they thought about it, is concentrate on some base knowledge that they accumulated, and spring "thought trees" from there. They spring enough thought trees from the base knowledge, and eventually are able to fill in the gap between the two or more thoughts, making the base larger, and in so doing, inventing something new.

This, now larger, base gets spread to more people, and now more people are able to use the new base knowledge. Other thinkers then spring new thought from the new base, and increase it even more.

I would argue that if you have 10 people with the same base, that lived for 1000 years, and did nothing but ponder all day, without talking to each other, they would come up with very similar ideas. From this, I would say, that there is only one right knowledge, which grows in a manner that any sentient and intelligent being can discover it.

It all seems to be a logical growth upon the base knowledge. When I think of this, I see (imagine) it as bacterial growth, getting ever larger, with many dimensions, as not only things "beside" each other are linked.

We all wear our own glasses with which we look at the world. These individual glasses are our knowledge (the connections we make in our heads when we experience the world), incorporating things like culture, language, religion and past experience. This is precisely why people have different outlooks on things.

When someone thinks that someone else’s outlooks on the world are incorrect, based on the fuller/larger base knowledge, the first someone can try to convince the second someone that he is indeed wrong.

The best way to do this, is by communicating with the second person, and seeing what his outlooks are, and why they are what they are. You can then, using your fuller base knowledge, fill in the other persons gaps or expand his base altogether, making him/her understand the faulty/incomplete outlook on whatever it is.

To do this effectively, the fist person must either explain, in as much detail as possible, his base knowledge, or answer every possible question that is asked by the second person, so the he/she sees the error.

The way I imagine it, is people have a “thing” above their head. The thing being their base knowledge or beliefs (the glasses they are wearing). When you communicate, the thing becomes transparent, and you compare "things". You then overlay their thing with yours, and see where the other person’s thing is incomplete, you can then correct theirs, and they can correct yours. The thing is, sometimes both of you do not know the "full" knowledge, and you can come to false conclusions, but think that you didn’t. This is bad for obvious reasons.

Anyways, when you explain things to other people that you know are 100% so to speak, you fill in their gaps, and expand their base knowledge. This is what educations is, im sure you all know that.

The problem is that you can only explain one though tree at a time. Not even the thought tree at a time, only one branch of the tree in one paragraph - It takes time. Sometimes we say: “I wish you could just get inside my head.” Sometimes, our knowledge is insufficient to convince or fill the gaps of the other person, so the other person disregards your input.

What Im trying to say is...That the people that developed similar or identical objects or thoughts, all did so from a similar base knowledge, which they expanded by using their noodle (springing thought trees).

I would argue that this knowledge simply exists, and different people "tap" it at different times, expanding the total, illuminated knowledge through publishing of books, journals THE INTERNET is a big one etc...

When you, or anyone else intensely thinks about something (a scientist about a new theory, for example), that someone tries very hard to think of the whole thing. He/she is frustrated because it is so difficult to grasp everything at once. That someone thinks in straight lines, thinking of one thing, then reminding himself of the other things sequentially. He/she thinks each branch of a tree that he is working on separately, and therefore cannot really grasp the entire thing.

Eventually, the scientist does this so much, that he/she thinks everything at once, but with that small part of his knowledge only. When this happens, the bigger picture unfolds, and other new branches are formed, which the scientist is then able to integrate with the base knowledge (EUREKA!). In this way the total knowledge is increased through the help of this scientist that sprouted thought trees, and was able to think the whole topic at once.

This eureka moment, happened when the scientist not only thought linearly, but all of the firing that is done individually in his brain, is done simultaneously. The scientist effectively knows everything about that particular thing, he can then use that entire body of knowledge to sprout new thought trees and make further connections. With the help of other eureka moments the body of illuminated knowledge grows and grows.

The thing is, that no one person knows everything. People specialize in different sectors. Furthermore, scientists don’t walk around with constant eureka in their heads. It ends, and you start thinking linearly again. (not everything at once)

Also, the knowledge is there, one just has to think about it the right way so to speak. It could have been one scientist that discovered something, it could very well have been someone else - the knowledge is there, its just untapped.

The human is technically the master of his body. Noone but you controls your heart beat, and other vital functions. When playing a guitar for example, noone but you willingly send electric signals down your arm and hand, so that you can play a song. Similarly, when you dream, noone but you created the artificial environment that you are in. It is you that creates sensations in the visual cortex and other parts of the brain to produce seeing, hearing, feelings etc...in your dream. The fact that you are not yourself when dreaming is a downside. Even notice, how in dreams you know everything about everything in the dream? Take that, and do it when wide-awake, and you’ve got yourself a eureka moment.

When awake, signals are sent from the senses to the brain and form experience. Going along with the notion that we are the masters of our own body, who is to say that a human cant focus on thought, and think in whole thought trees, from all perspectives, simultaneously, instead of think linearly and focus on experience.

What I'm saying is...withdraw attention (as hard as it may be) from senses, and focus only on though(in other words learning to channel). With practice and sufficient understanding of how to do this, one should be able to sustain the eureka moment not only across one particular topic, but all topics, and all of what that human knows.

If you are thinking and are completely aware of everything that you know, you can see the faults in your base, cover them, and expand the knowledge. Provided that you are also educated in the sciences, you can make all sorts of connections, and expand the knowledge by sprouting new trees (much like the scientist) in all areas of your knowledge simultaneously, expanding it indefinitely. (I would say)

All new knowledge that you encounter will aid in this expansion of knowledge. You will be able to expand more and more with this… based on my assumption that the knowledge is there, just untapped. Scientists making identical discoveries being the foundation.

So being a perfect human, you control completely your vital functions, thoughts, the entire endocrine system - everything. At will, you can block out sensory input and create your own environment - being double sided. With simultaneous thinking or awareness of all of your knowledge this can be quite something I presume.

By FAR the majority of people on this planet are not perfect/fully evolved as I described, but some 0.000001%, maybe less must be.

The individual glasses that everyone sees through, and not there when one is evolved. There is only objective knowledge and creativity. You see things from all perspectives at once, not just your own.

Back to the thought I asked you to think at the beginning…(Some of you didn’t do it, I’m sure. ) Think about it again, and notice this time how every time you “skip” when thinking something new about that thought/experience/whatever. You don’t really have the whole thing together, just bits. If you are one of the small percentage of people who can sustain full tree thought, you should be able to think of all aspects of that experience at once.

See that? Now imagine sustaining that thought, as well as all your other knowledge simultaneously.

The seemingly random chatter that goes on inside the heads of people, distracts them from life. If you look at where the those thoughts came from, you can see the base knowledge more clearly. Furthermore, controlling that chatter, by stopping it, and then chanelling it should provide for better whole tree thought. I think.


So my question to you is...Who needs a Ferrari when you've got something like the above?


Any thoughts?


Thanks

01101001
2006-Sep-13, 07:03 PM
Rather lengthy, nothing particularly new, but here is the Wednesday morning thought. Read it over lunch or something.

First, think of something, actually do it, and do it for 10-20 seconds, remembering every detail of whatever it is (experience, theory, imaginary situation - anything).

That something you thought of is only one of many things you either know, or are capable of imagining. Lets say it was a memory that you though of.
Here, lost interest and skipped ahead.


Any thoughts?
Rendered above.


Thanks
Don't mention it. Glad I could help.

afterburner
2006-Sep-13, 07:23 PM
Glad I could help.

0011101001000100

Swift
2006-Sep-13, 07:54 PM
So being a perfect human, you control completely your vital functions, thoughts, the entire endocrine system - everything. At will, you can block out sensory input and create your own environment - being double sided. With simultaneous thinking or awareness of all of your knowledge this can be quite something I presume.

By FAR the majority of people on this planet are not perfect/fully evolved as I described, but some 0.000001%, maybe less must be.

I skipped over lots of stuff, so maybe I missed something in the details.

I've thought about the ability to control your sensory inputs and body functions completely, and I'm not sure it would be a good thing. Sure, it would be nice to turn off a pain, particularly once you know about the problem (yes, I know I stubbed my toe, now turn off the alarm). However, I wonder if an override option on everything couldn't lead to problems itself. Let's say you overrode your autopilot and increased your heart-rate for some reason (I need to run very fast). Maybe you damage your heart by doing so. Having done process control, it sometimes is a lot easier when you only have to concentrate on a few critical things, rather than watch everything, even though it gives you more "control".

As you are describing "fully evolved/perfect", why do you say that even one person "must be", let alone 0.000001% (which is still about 60 people if I did the math right)? I actually doubt anyone has this ability.

Maksutov
2006-Sep-13, 08:11 PM
I know what a "perfect human" is. Her lawyer told me. http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

Swift
2006-Sep-13, 08:26 PM
Perfect (http://www.frontiernet.net/~lavey/leeloo1.jpg)

jrkeller
2006-Sep-14, 05:06 AM
Perfect (http://www.frontiernet.net/~lavey/leeloo1.jpg)

I was thinking more along the lines of Sandra Bullock, but Milla Jovovich works too.