Topic: Limits to Human Cognition
started by: whiskey@throttle
quote:
Originally posted by whiskey@throttle:
In other words, you can't break 100mph in a 3-cylinder Geo...
sure ya can, add a nos and your good to go
------------------
Hey DKB shu'p with all that jibba jabber ya crazy foo!
for example, have have mathmatical equations about how to predict electron positions using quantum mechanics, but we have no idea why they work or why the universe works that way.
another example-it is theorized (and pretty well accepted as of lately) that there are 11 dimensions. It is possible that what causes electromagnetic radiation is the same thing that causes gravity (curvature of space time, except in the instance of electromagnetic, the curvature of another circular dimension, which is why there can be 'charges'). what if one or more of thoes dimenions was an extra time dimension? can you go left and right as well as forwards in time? what would that be like?
my point is that most humans aren't able to fathom those possibilities in their entirity, but we are able to make logical predictions and models of the universe. if we were totally incapable of even imagining the universe, how have we come up with theories like quantum chromodynamics to begin with?
i got told about it by a second year astrophysicist and he said that he reinvented his own maths to prove it and came up with the 11 dimension thoery
This message has been edited by Dark Knight Bob on February 13, 2001 at 02:52 PM
But did you get my point about inherent limitations?
To recap: the lady noted in the linked article can see a 4th primary color, an ability that 99\% of humans lack.
What if there was a being that possessed a certain trait that allowed it to determine that there are, in fact, 302 dimensions, rather than the theorized 11? Better yet, how about a being that, due to its advanced cognition, could detect errors in accepted quantum chromodynamic theory?
See what I'm saying?
It reminds me of the Kantian discussion we touched on in Phaedrus' infamous "< Come With Me >" thread. I wonder if this info will help Phaedrus, Catknight, and co. realize that humans are not only unaware about the true workings of the universe, but that we usually do not even realize our ignorance to begin with.
I think the existence of tetrachromats conclusively proves our arguments on human limitation as correct: we, as a species, lack the means to reach omnipotence. The mutations noted in the linked article validate the claim there are things about life and nature that “normal” humans cannot even conceive, simply because our bodies are limited vessels.
In other words, you can't break 100mph in a 3-cylinder Geo...
quote:
I think the existence of tetrachromats conclusively proves our arguments on human limitation as correct: we, as a species, lack the means to reach omnipotence.
Okay, semantical impossibilities of any being in existance actually being omnipotent aside, I really don't see how this proves your point. While you're right in observing that this article demonstrates that there are limitations to human data input (perception), it suggests nothing about the capacity for creative thought either through logical extension of what we already know or (hypothetically impossible) random thought.
More specifically --> the hypothesized model of an 11-demensional reality is in fact not based directly on evidence gathered from perception (duh), to some degree there is an extension of analysis on the perception we do have. While you're right that we don't (currently) have the biological means to observe the hypothetical 302 dimensions, that doesn't limit human thinking in such an impossible fashion as you might imagine, since it does nothing to stop people from theorizing about a 302-dimensional reality, either by reasoning it's possibility through extended analysis on what we already know, or through a 'random thought', which would (hypothetically) not necessarily be dependant on sensory input.
------------------
There may be blood on the tracks, but the trains are on time.
quote:
While you're right in observing that this article demonstrates that there are limitations to human data input (perception), it suggests nothing about the capacity for creative thought either through logical extension of what we already know or (hypothetically impossible) random thought.
I think it does. The article presents a notable example of one way in which most humans remain oblivious to the true nature of the universe. I mean, who would have thought a 4th primary color actually exists?
The truth is that we would have never known if it weren't for the tetrachromatic mutants. And who’s to say there isn’t a fifth primary color still unobserved by homo sapiens?
I base this as a foundation to posit that there are hundreds (maybe thousands) of similar situations. Overall, I believe the secrets to understanding the universe are out there, yet our minds/bodies are too underdeveloped to not only process them, but to even know that they exist. Hence, my conclusion that our species will never reach omnipotence.
Again, my favorite analogy: if you put on a pair of red glasses, everything you see would be limited to the hues between pink and crimson. If you were born with such limited eyesight, and had no frame of reference, would you ever know that colors like blue exist? Doubtful…
Who is to say that the human mind isn’t a similarly limited device, akin to the red glasses?
Sure, it's a speculative philosophy, but I find it to be far more convincing than the one promoting ideas of humans as masters of the universe.
quote:
While you're right that we don't (currently) have the biological means to observe the hypothetical 302 dimensions, that doesn't limit human thinking in such an impossible fashion as you might imagine, since it does nothing to stop people from theorizing about a 302-dimensional reality
Theorizing is one thing. Conclusively proving, and thus knowing, is another. Omnipotence is not defined by assumption.
edit: fuck
This message has been edited by whiskey@throttle on February 15, 2001 at 10:12 AM