Intelligence is Self Teaching

"A physical scientist does not introduce awareness (sensation or perception) into his theories, and having thus removed the mind from nature, he cannot expect to find it there." -- Schrödinger 1958
Intelligence is very difficult to define, at least among academics in the west. Reductionism and materialism appear only to provide models of intelligence and consciousness that appeal to their authors and proponents and fail to come up with an elegant model of intelligence and consciousness that most could accept and understand. Does Nature herself have a point of view here and how would she define intelligence if she could?
As of this writing, I have sat with the Amazonian medicine known as Ayahuasca around 40-plus times. A few years ago a friend made the introduction. I always heard exotic stories of the Amazonian concoction said to be the most powerful and true hallucinogen on earth. I was intrigued by its reported efficacy in treating addiction, mental illness, anxiety, and physical ailments which included claims of healing from brain tumors and AIDS, in addition to reports of profound experiences communicating directly with nature. I was indeed eager to see what all the hoopla was about.
I found a local Ayahuasca group in Los Angeles. The first 20 or so of my journeys were with this wonderful, wide eyed, non traditional, trusting little peace posse with little to no experience with any true Amazonian practices or intensive training other than simply sitting with the medicine in a dark room and singing what you know and trust. I found the experience deeply bonding and extremely transforming as I noticed large amounts of stress and anxiety melting away from my life. It was indeed proving itself to be personally effective. Naturally I found myself coming to the ceremonies as often as I could for about a year and a half.
That wave came crashing down when the organizer of our group invited us to sit with a highly regarded, respected and traditionally trained Curandero from Peru, a true Maestro, who came to Los Angeles for a few ceremonies. This individual was known for supplying a true Amazonian Shipibo ayahuasca ceremony to the states and Europe, even traveling to Russia to give ceremonies.
Immediately after a few rounds of ceremony, our little local Ayahuasca tribe's sponsor declared he would quit holding ceremony until he received proper training, himself humbled by our Peruvian maestro's many icaros, plant dietas, and practice. Our tribe was in a position to either continue sitting with this new curandero and his sitters from Los Angeles whenever he came to town, or simply move on in our lives without continuing an Ayahuasca practice.
Naturally, I wanted to continue exploring a relationship with this medicina.
Before I took the medicine on the first evening of this new Maestro's ceremony, I found the interaction with many in his group a bit difficult compared to the very open and loving experience I was used to in medicinal ceremony in my little local Ayahuasca tribe. I was curious, yet also finding myself very suspicious. Who were these people? It hit me that I was about to go into a very deep place surrounded by a bunch of people with whom I had no bonding, trust, or camaraderie.
I drank the medicine the curandero supplied me, noticed its remarkably bitter and stringent taste distinct from the thick chocolaty Hawaiin grown ayahuasca I was used to.
I returned to my place and felt the medicine come on powerfully. At the very beginning of my journey the maestro began his hypnotic chanting, his singing "to the plant spirits to call them forth" into the ceremony room. For the first time, I could actually see "spirits" in the room, one of them lying down in front of me. As if to announce itself to me, the spirit of the plant said something to me directly, seemingly a non sequitur that bore no connection with any part of my journey nor any internal dialogue in my life that I was aware of. The medicine appeared in my head with a very strong pronouncement, and then became silent while I heard the maestro perform a very complex and extended list of icaros and rattling that appeared mathematical in its precision.
"Intelligence is Self Teaching" she said.
As simple as it reads to you is as elegant as she revealed it to me. Bamf! It was an internally present phrase quite clear and articulate. The medicine revealed and then vanished silently. The rest of my journey was incomprehensible, impossible to put into any language, yet this very simple phrase stood out clearly and succinctly.
Intelligence is Self Teaching. Hmmm...
Naturally, over a period of a few months of reflection, I approached this very analytically. Where did this idea come from? Did I stumble upon it before? Was it already there somewhere in the contents of my mind? Our western paradigm suggests that it "must" have come from contents of my brain somehow.
I was aware that any definition of intelligence is entirely suspect by biologists, mathematicians, computer scientists, brain researchers, and most importantly Western philosophers. Deconstructism showed that intelligence is spiraling down through a collapse of meaning by a factor of 1. Advancements in AI, Artificial Intelligence, heralded by such mavericks as Ray Kurzweil, believe intelligence can be built from the ground up, 1 step at a time.
Doing a google on definitions of intelligence one can quickly surmise the landscape. All seem to seek, conflict, or hope for one single proposition that can both hold up under extreme deconstruction as well as mathematical and logical analysis, something that is both intuitive yet programmable.
I attempted to see if anyone out there online ever mentioned the phrase so I googled it in quotes, Intelligence is Self Teaching. Not one single return, the phrase did not previously exist online. I was a bit surprised it held its uniqueness in Google search. According to Google, this is the first time this phrase has been recorded in the history of search of billions of webpages. By the time this article is published somewhere online, you will only see this entry in the listing, or various blogs or social networks picking it up as the first return and entry recorded via SEO by Google's "self teaching" algorithm. It is a completely original phrase that has no prior existence, so it is not likely I stumbled upon this phrase via any philosophical text or treatise, nor have I found anything close to it being defined previously along these lines. The phrase is logically simple and complete. x=y. If apart of any previous Western philosophical text or philosophical proposition, any academic paper, how could any rational philosopher fail to define it so succinctly?
It stayed for me, tossing around in my mind for months while I went on to continue with sitting with Maestro whenever he came to town. 17 or so more ceremonies have happened since, never a single peep, insight, or intuition came to me more about this phrase that was revealed to me by the medicine, or at least it didn't appear so at the time. My continued experience with his traditional approach was proving incredibly transformative and for the first time I "got it" about the traditions of Vegetalismo, the way of the plants in Shipibo traditions. It felt initiatory. I continued sitting with Maestro Curandero, I began to augment my journey with Amazonian tobacco juice, and learned to trust the Maestro whom now I consider "brother." I began to bond with the new tribe and go deeper into the ways of the medicine, and my life was showing the proof in the success of my journeys into traditional Amazonian Vegetalismo.
Finally, after 6 months of 2-4 ceremonies a month since she "popped" this proposition into my head, she gave me a dramatic conclusion to the narrative she began with that simple phrase. As if to prove to me that this proposition did not just stem from the contents of my mind, to prove to me the vast intelligence that is nature, the ayahuasca and tobacco showed me in my last three ceremonies that not only was this just a proposition thrown out there to me by none other than herself in all of her glory, but that it was a narrative she was spinning for me, a journey she has taken me on in the past 17 or so ceremonies, a full 6 months of my experiences in traditional vegetalismo practices.
On my last night with her since, She showed me that I contained inside myself a special intelligence that was tapped into at an early age, due to traumatic experiences that happened to me as a young child, and that I "self taught" myself to become more intelligent, to avoid dealing with a very disturbing and philosophically confusing childhood. She showed me the role my own auto-didactic approach to learning since I was a very young child, plowing into books about science and mysteries at the age of 8 years old, played upon my many ideas, creations, and projects that I've carried on until my early 40's. Since I had always felt deeply insecure about my own intelligence, it was a beautiful and profound personal revelation for me. For the first time in ceremony, I cried. As if to establish in my mind the credibility of traditional practice, she made me aware that this proposition came immediately after my first exposure to Amazonian ceremony where plant teaching spirits are called forth by a proper curandero, marking a clear distinction in ceremony from the more free-wheeling Cali style ceremony I knew and loved. What were once suspicions and trust issues regarding this new group turned into nothing more than my own fearful projections regarding the unknown and remnants of a confusing childhood. The very personal message was "keep walking down this path" and "there you will find me."
It wasn't just a simple and elegant phrase, it was a very deep and personal journey of knowing myself at a very deep and very cellular level. All the cells in my body are "intelligent." All of them communicate, all of them contribute, and all of them receive the collective intelligence back in return. Self Teaching selves and systems become synergetic with other Self Teaching selves and systems, and vast networks naturally form -- to see that my own intelligence is "self teaching" way down to every single cell and operation in my body right up and deep into my intuitions and then coupled with my rational thinking process. The exchange of viewpoint from my intuitive side to my thinking side was internally auto-didactic dialogue. Such elegant internal discourse, both my solar and lunar intelligence, my own genetic and organic process became fused with my conscious thinking process and internal intuitive process, melting into one thing, the results of a collective output that is the result of my own "intelligence network." Me.
This inner revelation, which is way too personal to sumarize and share more than I already have here, was so brilliantly orchestrated since the very first icaro that came out of mi curandero hermano's mouth in my very first sitting with him, in finding conclusion and resolution 9 months later, personally to me itself a sign of a vast narrative containing multiple arcs crafted by an intelligence that was working with me the entire time, teaching me deeper into the mystery of learning to self teach and the role that has played in my personal life and healing.
The proposition appears to me to be completely self evident, empirical, logical, intuitive, even playful. I consider now since that Intelligence is primarily an auto didactic force of nature. The degree to which a 'thing' is intelligent is to the same degree that the 'thing' is 'self teaching'. We cannot fathom, holding intelligence in this light, the complex forms and systems it can take on that transcend our own 'personal' intelligence. Social networks now are showing the degree of high wisdom, humor that can erupt from our 'collective' intelligence which is simply another layer in our 'species' intelligence. Vast synergies can form where objective, honest points of view erupt in an environment online where 'all sides contribute, all sides receive the collective output of all contributing', such as wikis and discussion forums show. Our natural human network is exposed online, and wikis, Google, and the internet as a whole completely exploits our 'self teaching' ability and naturally our intelligence increases as a whole. Our collective and self intelligence is reverberating, inside of us and outside of us.
"Self teaching" is evolutionary progress on all levels of biological nature, from our cells, organs, and bacteria all the way up to our conscious organizing and creative processes. Life teaches itself to adapt, adjust, seek, organize. All of nature is "smart," as we can learn in Jeremy Narby's wonderful book Intelligence in Nature, which even presented studies which show how slime molds can perform logical operations. Intelligence in nature is now understood by me as "Intelligence is Nature" and therefore so elusive to define inside of the reductionist paradigm. Yet the proposition continues to hold its relevance deep into the world of social media, and most importantly Artificial Intelligence, or at least it does to my philosophical interpretations of the technology.
My mind continues to wonder, is this a perfect definition for intelligence supplied to me via Ayahuasca experience and nature herself? For any techno shamanic philosophical nerd out there -- this is exciting stuff. So my first intuition is to "throw this out there" and see how it holds under honest scrutiny amongst my online and offline chums in the conflict of idea regarding intelligence and consciousness, both eastern and western, both mathematical and intuitive, which is part of the purpose of this article. I am eager to enter into rational, analytical, and intuitive discussion regarding this definition. I am hoping that any community that assists in refining it's revelation with me may hold the "holy grail" of intelligence itself, the ability to elegantly define it empirically and objectively, but most importantly intuitively and understandable by all, once and for all.
If not we will still become more intelligent in the process -- either outcome seems to prove the utility of this very simple proposition, Intelligence is Self Teaching.
ETA: A number of discussions have popped up around the internet regarding this article, and it went viral on Reddit and Stumbleupon soon after this publication. Some higher integrations have happened in these discussions that may provide further insight into the phrase. One commenter from the James Randi Discussion forum provided me some insight by supplying "Intelligence is Self Teaching like the Ouroboros is Self Eating." Another heated round of discussions with Reductionists who propose an materialistic view of consciousness produced an integration that allowed me to augment the phrase with "Intelligence is Self Transcending."
ETA #2 Sat April 3rd AM: So far, this article and the complimentary discussions have produced inside of me some very interesting integrations that are neatly expressed in three axioms.
1.) Intelligence is Self Teaching.
2.) Intelligence is Self Referring.
3.) Intelligence is Self Transcending.
A trail of these integrations are found primarily in the discussion on the James Randi critical thinking and skeptical forum (basically a hard edged materialistic forum).
Reddit/ SCIENCE
http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/bbvk5/intelligence_is_self_teac..James Randi Educational Foundation - a skeptical forum.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=169767
K.I.R. Keep It Real Discussion Forum.
http://realism.yuku.com/topic/1481/master/1/
Artificial Intelligence Forum
http://www.ai-forum.org/topic.asp?forum_id=3&topic_id=68943
Tweet
- 4-1-10
- rv's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version




.jpg)


Comments
deleted comment
comment is deleted
Intelligence is Self Teaching......
After reading this wonderful post andevaluating the linked 'philosophy' discussion, the pervading thought that comesto me is the assumed definition, or subject- of 'Self' as an inherent part ofthis statement.
The longer I consider the concept, the clearer the paradox seems to become. (paradoxical clarity-another discussion) I share your reactions to the depth and complexity of this simple phrase....
How remarkable that prior to your article,there was no google result on 'Intelligence is Self-Teaching' as a search term. I feel a 'warm & fuzzy"(for lack of a better description) resonance with the concept-I have come to apoint in my journey where I feel a great peace and contentment in my understanding of the nature of human existence as part of an eternal fractal symphony. I also share your thoughts onthe significance of the internet as an additional layer in this three dimensional consciousness-an invisible cocoon which allows us to develop our collective consciousness and get to know ourselves as dimensional beings- despite the constructs of consciousness by which we are bound.
By this I mean that people who would not hear of discussing concepts so far outside the comfort zone in which they reside-are the same people interacting with others globally-finding like minded individuals all over the planet and interacting with them, or not, the knowledge of their existence being liberating in and of itself.
But I digress; or do I? Apparently I am a 'techno shamanic philosophical nerd'-because I am finding this extremely exciting!
quote:
"I am hoping that any community that assists in refining it's revelation with me may hold the 'holy grail' of intelligence itself, the ability to elegantly define it empirically and objectively once and for all."
This sentence is very interesting: this truly is a revelation-common words, a simple phrase-but clearly it is much more than that. Your characterization of the refining of this revelation and reference to its significance is visionary. But to assign an empirical definition to it is the conundrum-this little statement can be dissected in so many ways-the usage of each word in different combinations with each other -while not differing in order is indeed playful!
You understand this proposition on a dimensional level-as do I. It is a great challenge of our human experience to find language which can in some way communicate cosmic truths in this realm. I am beyond debating over definitions with people and their respective schools of perception-but the prospect of sharing this exploration 'sans prejudice' is ever so intriguing.
I am myself doing some googling and I look forward to further discussions on the subject. I will leave you with this-Terrence Mckenna speaks of thoughts-not as my thoughts or your thoughts, but THE THOUGHTS.....
intelligence are so
Thank you for breaking the ice!
Thank you so much for the introspection and shared glee only us techno shamanic nerds can experience :)
Nice article
I dig it. But the Western Philosophy nerd in me has one complaint, namely, why so down on the Western tradition? It's a braid composed of many strands, and one of the major ones, the Idealist school, has always had more-or-less this idea as its divining principle, especially since Schelling and Hegel introduced the notion of evolution to the discussions of the timeless Nous that fascinated Plato and Plotinus.
Unfortunately, this is a school of thought we English speakers tend to miss out on as, aside from Whitehead and Berkley, most Anglo-American thinkers have participated in a kind of reductionism that makes intelligence incomprehensible (even as the quasi-mistaken notion of an "objective" as opposed to "subjective" world helped to make modern science possible).
The highest thinkers in all traditions (or at least my favorite ones) have always proceeded with an awareness that Creation is an Intelligence seeking to know itself and--as above, so below--our human selves mimic in the microcosm the way of the macro.
These thoughts are becoming more accessible to the modern mind (shaped largely by the reductionist wing of the "Western" tradition that in the minds of many IS Western Philosophy) and are even disclosing themselves with a fullness that would have been impossible prior to our knowledge of cosmology, biology and evolution.
This is what makes your interactions with the Ayahuasca spirits so fascinating--those beings have been in communication with humans for millenia, but any higher-dimensional entity can only communicate with a human being by using the conceptual/linguistic toolkit available to that human's Imagination, even as the entity helps said human to transcend those very concepts!
The result, an elegant phrase: Intelligence is self teaching.
G-Pack
Hey thanks for the comment. I am sorry if that came across, I am not frowning on any aspect of the western tradition, either the idealistic schools nor the reductionist/hard materialistic schools, I just think they have a proper relationship that is not appreciated by many of their proponents, mainly the reductionists.
Reductionism is fine by me in science (with the exception of dealing with whole systems) but I believe is a poor place to put philosophy, and I absolutely agree that no one understands them but those that already agree with a materialistic paradigm.
You might find the discussion happening at JREF to be interesting in this regard, it was quite intentional that I took this discussion to that forum, which has a higher than average participation of well educated materialists. Actually some of the best integrations I have had regarding this has been on that forum. Jump in if you want to flex your western philosophical nerd muscle :)
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=169767
Thanks again,
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
Although I found this
Although I found this journey of yours to be thoroughly intriguing, I can't help but make at least one minor criticism concerning the "self teaching".
I certainly agree that all of nature is intelligence, in the same way that all that exist is consciousness. However, where I tend to disagree, is when intelligence is equated with self.
I might ask, who or what is this self, you refer to?
@ tyga1au -How does this idea refer to 'self'?
Indeed an excellent question tyga1au - and if your critique is that i have simply failed to define it, I agree. It was also intentional, as this phrase itself has reflected upon me how 'self' can be defined and understood in the first place, beyond my own inner intuitive understanding.
One of the integrations that has occurred from this social media project so far (on one of the forums discussing this) is an 'augmentation' of 'self teaching' that adds 'Intelligence is Self Transcending'.
This is potentially very rich philosophical territory - and I am still in the learning, integration, and understanding process regarding this. A self is a material thing in the terms of our bodies, and then there are ideas about self, which all are potentially false, or mysterious, but potentially illuminating none the less.
An ironic occurrence is that both the materialistic school and the buddhist eastern school agree on a few things. Self is an illusion! Materialism is producing that conclusion, but without asking the deeper philosophical questions, at least as far as I can see.
Anything you can add here is of course quite helpful!
Rome.
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
The Self I've experienced
After experiencing Self in three hierarchical levels during a pair of Holotropic Breathwork sessions, my answer today would be that the greater Self is an ocean of kosmic consciousness. I have yet to experience anything more vast than this ocean, so I must at this point consider it to be The Field, The Source, The All. The glimpse I was given was not just of its warm fluid expanse, but also of its human component; its sea of human consciousness.
The next smaller, but still unfathomably vast level that I experienced was my own transpersonal consciousness; the total sum of every thought and every emotion I have ever had in all of my thousands and thousands of lives on Earth as a human—my Self in its complete historical form. This level felt like a droplet in the sea of unity human consciousness.
The third level I experienced was my contemporary Self, from the year 1948 until now; still quite large in the volume of its record and in the detail of its experience, my contemporary Self as a work in progress. This level felt like a molecule within the droplet, within the sea, within the ocean....
In all three cases I feel a need to capitalize the 'S' in Self because there is really no consequential distinction between them at all.
Self-Selflessness
Muscles "self-evolve" by their own flexing ... emotions by their interactions ... it just seems to be a question of "association" ... what we associate with determines the progressive outcome.
Sometimes the greatest lessons are learned from the greatest mistakes. Like those toy robots of old ... that turn around only when they bump into the wall.
Only "self-learning" when "self" can't go any farther down such a path. Like these alternative cultures {all true culture is self-learning personified} that only "evolve" and thrive as obsolete uses of intelligence hit dead ends ... how is any of it not "self-learning"
Intelligence could be translated as that which is "told within" .. our natural intuitive state. In the Empirical method they experiment so they can "rule out all they do not know"
Where as the "starving artist" version "waits patiently" until "ideas" actually form out of the ether{s}
Like Einsteins idea of riding a light wave, which led to "theory of relativity" ... was truly "told from within"
Jesus fasted ... watched and waited ... {as the temptations away from wisdom worked themselves out} ... the Buddha sat under the tree and watched as all that was not enlightenment passed.
I would ponder that knowing is eternal and internal .. like the Sanskrit term "Cit" ... as we journey through "Samsara" we learn mostly what doesn't work over lifetimes, until all thats left is the realization that out trying against the grain has been counter productive.
Buddhi {Sanskrit-intelligence} simply organizes the thoughts to match the now realized "Cit" - "eternal knowing" ... just like our self-learning muscles still follow the dictates of the brain to a degree.
It appears as ideas are coming to us, when just as "quantumly feasible", the "lack of intelligence" is 'but coming full circle to the original potential for true "workability"
Karma is all the trying that doesn't work out
Dharma is the underlying principles we come back to time and time again ... the "always so" ... after all the "maya" - "that which is not" ... all too painstakingly becomes faced with it's own illusive nature.
@ Pippalayana - very interesting...
I really enjoy plenty of what you wrote. I especially apreciate your reflection on culture being a self teaching entity, which of course expands the definition of 'self' and an extension as 'collective' which potentially is a higher ordering of self.
Your reply also to me highlights to me a very intriguing irony occuring in the body of global philosophy - materialism is starting to come very very close to the very same insights that Buddhist and Eastern Models already are, yet from a completely different advantage point. Clearly there is a dialectic going on there, similar to our own internal dialectic of 'intuition' and 'thinking'.
It seems to me that the global dialectic on 'self' and 'being' and 'collective' is reaching a synthesis - a very interesting thing to consider considering the times we are living in.
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
New Age Synthesis
Rome,
I enjoyed reading and relating to the journey you described ... thank you for so freely sharing! For a little fun for the sake of wordplay ... in the article you stated that nature is intelligence and if we applied the algebraic transitive property (think back to 7th grade - such simple wisdom!) ... one could logically flip the equation and say that intelligence is nature.
That the two naturally flow together and one is not the antecedent to the other but the relation exists when we finally balance the scales and set the two equal to each other. We find intelligence and transcend our human nature when we bring nature and balance back into our lives.
As a foot note ... recently I've felt the call to spend more time in nature and revel in it's simplistic beauty. The world has no need for rational, empirical explanation when sitting under an old Oak tree reading the words of Emerson or Thoreau!
Peace and Love,
Lee
Edit: I've had a chance to ponder your thoughts some more. I've studied Hegel in class this semester, and his dialectical model of thesis -> anti-thesis -> synthesis which I believe can be applied the intelligence is self-teaching ... you have man in nature (before our soulful voyage into duality) --> man's rejection of nature and emergence of organized civilzation --> and now the returning home to our eternal nature free from all the 'static and illusion' that culture inundates us with on a daily basis. Our current generations finds itself in the midst of this synthesis, and on the precipice of birthing a new culture by the rejection of the old value systems that we are finding too cumbersome and unfitting for our home in the new vibration. As one of your readers commented, the "Ouroboros is Self Eating."
Dialectic and Self
Hey Lee, Thank you for your participation here. The relationship between 'self' and 'intelligence' is interesting because a self needs to be intelligent to know, even if improperly or poorly defined, that it is a self to begin with. No intelligence = no self. Some form of intelligence, it appears, must exist for a self to be a self.
As for dialectics, I myself am a dialetictian, although not necessarily Heglien or Marxist, but naturally share some things in common with them. To me, the higher dialectic, the 'meta' process, is a transference between that which is true (in objective existence, mutually viewable or perceptible in it's form), false (that which is an idea regarding it's objective existence, a representation of objective existence), and mystery, unknown. The consideration of those three values, I believe, expands intelligence.
I do accept that there is a 'historical dialectic', a process which ideas evolve, die, and synthesize through all human history. Clearly the internet has quickened this process beyond our ability to model it. I agree that humanity is in a process of massive synthesis, and this will tend to lead us to a greater era of human freedom and expression. Regardless of all the doom sayers out there, fearful of the sky collapsing at any moment, fearful of conspiratorial plots to enslave humanity, the true fact is that all of us as a whole are getting smarter, living longer, are living more peacefully with our neighbors, have greater access to resource than any other time in human history. Humanity, I believe, is set up to win and win big.
And agreed on the oak tree! we do not need materialism to appreciate material reality :)
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
Interestingly enough, the
Interestingly enough, the ouroboros could be seen as a torus, or a doughnut shape. Metaphorically speaking, if the tetrahedron is the smallest fundamental volume, then the torus is the fundamental momentum. Think of the tetrahedron as the particle (fractal) and the torus as the wave (Spin). Or something similar metaphorically.
Self can be understood relatively easily. Self, is like a feed back loop (ouroboros). The self is like looking into a mirror and mistaking the reflection to be the person. Self then, is a misidentification, a person-alisation. From this perspective, the self is a limitation, a differentiation, a formed conceptualisation. A uniquely individual manifestation, formed out of an unlimited infinite collective consciousness.
But where is this self then when the mind goes blank, as it does every night, in those periods inbetween dreaming? Where is the self when one blacks out, goes under anaesthetic, is in a coma? Where is the self when the self is momentarily annihilated, arising again to begin dreaming, thinking, living?
I agree then with the comment, "intelligence is self transcending." However, I would tend to place this in a context which to me seems more inteligable.
From the vast infinite emptiness (void, potentiality, fullness) emerges intelligence, from intelligence emerges the self. From the collective emerges the individual. We can see this for example, self evident in the complex structure of the human body, 50 trillion or so cells, collectively working together, to produce the illusion of unique individuality.
There is much, much more that can be said on this topic, which can go on seemingly forever. It ought to be understood then, that all forms of conceptualisation, are inherently limited manifestations of mind, and therefore, shall never adequately fulfil our longing for answers. I'm certain you already knew this though.
Oh yes, I can see what you
Oh yes, I can see what you can see here. The self is never known, but in a state of constant knowing about itself. Any idea about itself is inherently false. However, the ironic thing is we can come to know 'others', other selves, in a way that we ourselves cannot know ourselves, which creates an entirely 'other' feedback loop all together.
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
All these concepts do sound
All these concepts do sound funny. Yes, the self cannot know itself. The circular momentum suggest that there is a self which can know itself, which further suggest that there is a knower and a known, a dual self, so to speak.
The knower cannot know itself, as this would require a projection of content into the sphere of knowing, in which case the content becomes a conceptualisation of the knower, which is a formalised idea of self. The knower, consisting of no content at all as such, but merely the witness of content, cannot be known. This would be like looking for a telescope with the telescope you are looking for.
You make the suggestion that we can know another knower, another self, but this is not entirely true, as the content which is known about the other knower, is always going to be a projection of what we interpret about what we think we know about the other knower. The other knower becomes content within our own experience with which we cannot ever be certain about.We cannot know with any absolute cetainty whether or not there are any other knowers at all. In this respect then, we are entirely alone in our wake state (all content, differentiation, individuality), which in general terms, mimicks to some extent, the other states of consciousness, such as dreaming and deep sleep, where we find singular unified awareness in dreaming (some content, differentiaion and integration) and an absolute oneness in deep sleep (no content at all, integration, collective).
In this regard, nothing can ever be known with any certainty, as the content of the knowing IS the knower.
This reminds of a famous old quote,"when you know yourself, then you will be set free". And simliar quotes.
This quote, rather than suggesting that the knowing of self is the key to freedom, is suggesting that once the truth of the self is revealed, the self is no longer of any benefit to clarity, rather, the self disolves, leaving only the knower, non-duality.
Actually, it has just occurred to me, that this quote above is almost identical to the one you suggest, "intelligence is self teaching", or in other words, intelligence is when you know the self. Once known however, the self disolves, leaving only the knower, the intelligence.
okay let's try this..on self reflecting systems :)
I as an individual can always come to know my private space and my private space is always hidden to other selves in some sense. Since the private space is potentially infinite, it is or can never be completely known, but there is continual knowing, and forgetting.
As a self, I can see and experience my private side, however I cannot see myself as others see me. I cannot see my 'dark' side, the side of me that is governed outside of my conscious waking self. My dark side is perfectly viewable to others, often without my knowledge.
An vice versa. This to me is the dynamic that governs the knowledge and understanding of self. We can see in others that which they cannot see, and back to us they see what we cannot. Through honest, expressive and dynamic communication, that is how we come to know ourselves fully.
We need each other to understand ourselves, to confirm our existence. So thanks for posting on this topic :)
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
http://www.selfdesign.org
hmmm, maybe meme - I think I know you!
Does the name 'bubblefish' ring a bell or the numbers 0,1,and 2 hold any meaning for you? If your the person I think you are, nice to see you again, funny we found each other if so, but actually not so surprising. Thanks for that video, it's an investment in time to watch, but have it bookmarked none the less.
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
Yup
It's me.
Brent in the video I also know.
My step son has attended his school, and I worked with their organization Self Design in the past. Currently attend parenting classes with Brent once a month.
This guy was an influence on Brent...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humberto_Maturana
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopoiesis
UPDATE:
So far, this article and the complimentary discussions have produced inside of me some very interesting integrations that are neatly expressed in three axioms.
1.) Intelligence is Self Teaching.
2.) Intelligence is Self Referring.
3.) Intelligence is Self Transcending.
A trail of these integrations are found primarily in the discussion on the James Randi critical thinking and skeptical forum (basically a hard edged materialistic forum).
The discussion is long, and gets really good after page 7 or so.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=169767
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
fractal?
i'm sorry if i'm repeating a theme that has already come up in the bigger discussion forum. but from "Intelligence is Self Teaching." i interrupt that as a kind of feedback system. The kind of feedback system that creates some of the most beautiful fractal patterns demonstrated in nature.
don’t get lost in heaven
fractal?
i'm sorry if i'm repeating a theme that has already come up in the bigger discussion forum. but from "Intelligence is Self Teaching." i interrupt that as a kind of feedback system. The kind of feedback system that creates some of the most beautiful fractal patterns demonstrated in nature.
don’t get lost in heaven
Agree on the feedback loop,
Agree on the feedback loop, did not consider the fractal nature as of yet, thank you for pointing me in that direction, albeit with a warning "Don't get lost in heaven." Well that's what I got my lil four year old for, he keeps me nice and grounded :)
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
la resident
Ayahuasca in Los Angeles
Oh yes, quite a few of them. I'm actually surprised by the high number of them I hear about now. An author of a book on Ayahuasca told me that it's one of the fastest growing sub cultures in the world.
Rome
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
One step further...
Perhaps:
Intelligence is self teaching. Wisdom is Self teaching self.
Does this ring true?
No, I don't believe so, not
No, I don't believe so, not in my understanding. Self teaching self would be akin to the blind leading the blind.
"When I realize I am nothing, that is wisdom, and when I realize I am everything, that is love, between the two my life moves." -Nisargadatta Maharaj
I am aware
Good point
That is a good point zezt.
I have never taken psychedelics myself, but the whole experience is something that intrigues me. I look forward to investigating this whole new world of consciousness, but the availability of these mind altering substances is very difficult to obtain in my part of the world. I have though read many accounts and spoken intently to people I know who have experience in this regard.
One account that I find exceptionally appealing, is that of Aldous Huxley, in his account of taking mescaline for the first time, as described in "Doors of Perception". From this account, I understand that the nature of reality is that of vastly infinite intelligence, indescribably radiant, where even something normally so mundane as creases in clothing, may be experienced as transcendent and enthralling a living experience as the highs of spiritual manifestation. I got the impression also, that this was merely only the tip of an ephemeral iceberg, one which ebbs and flows continually not solid nor stagnant, but resonating up and down the gradient of perceptual awareness, like a sliding scale of consciousness, always somehow, simultaneously both sumptuously conscious and blissfully ignorant.
WOW!!!
Good imagined foretaste but WU you sure got some surprises to come. Explaining psychedelic experience is of course impossible, not only because it is always unique, but even --personally speaking--the one who has taken it forgets the awesome power of it UNTIL having ingested some again. This is not to say that you don't integrate the insights forthcoming from ecstastic experience, but a good analogy would be trying to explain sexual orgasm to a child, and actaully live it now. You are only IN it when you are in it. Life is a dyanmic onctinuum, and when you are sad your sad, when happy happy. When you are sad you cant BE happy cause your sad at that moment, and likewise trying to 'be sad' when happy would be ludicrous and trying to be sad would break you out into giggles which could defeat the purpose lol
But as a challenge, if I were trying to describe for you an aspect of psychedelic experience it would be that ALL senses are alive and interfused with breathing reality. ALL is breathing in ecstasy. So it is not like these silly films which try--bless em--to 'show psychedelic experience' by making things wave, or fragment, or throb. it cannot be captured because they cannot communicate this interfusion WITH that. And also the seeming to see through a veil. 'Veil'? It is like you are seeing very clearly into *meaning* of form and action........ Direct! But with the deepest ecstatic love~~~
Evolution
This reminds me...
I had a similar occurrence- the phrase "Intelligence is emergent in complex systems" has had itself lodged in my head for two years now. also no hits on google. Not saying it really means anything but it's definitely led me down some interesting thought-paths...
Intelligence is emergent from intelligence.
Intelligence is demonstrably emergent in complex systems. Take for example, the intelligence which emerges from the fertilisation of an ovum by a sperm, which results in a fully grown functioning adult body. The intelligence of complex thought was undetectable until the growth was sufficiently complex enough to enable conscious awareness of ones inner and outer environment.
I think though there needs to be a distinction made between intelligence which emerges as a result of the formation of a complex organism, and the inherent intelligence which enabled the organism to form from essentially nothing. It is true that intelligence may emerge from a complex system, such as a human for example, but what I think we need to appreciate more, is that of the intelligence which underlies all of the universe, an intelligence which for example organises the relationships between a nucleus and its electrons, or a star and its planets, or the spin of a galaxy or the expansion of the universe or the properties of a black hole.
I'm not suggesting that this necessarily requires a god like intelligence or creator, but it does suggest that there is an intelligent organising system inherent in the universe which is related to but not the same intelligence as critical thinking, an intelligence which precedes complex systems, rather than an emergent property of.
ha, nice one. a thoughtful
ha, nice one. a thoughtful contemplation on the topic with an added marketing plug to boost PR via RS. Oh man I love the internets.
Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem
Rupert Sheldrake
Excellent
Source mantra
Good article