About a week ago, I wrote a post continuing the development of a model of creativity and intelligence, although at this model might be seen as a tad overstated). In that post, I outlined an ansatze for the semiotic scaffold that the human noetic machinery manages, bridging the gap between mechanism (network and pathway) all the way to meaning and intent. (the rest below the fold) First let me review where the model stands.

  • The human creative process is viewed as a AI like expert system and symbolic pattern recognition machine which is looking internally at a sea of noise.
  • My original posts on this allowed that a significant criteria for these systems to decide if a particular pattern or decision was good was based on aesthetic judgements.
  • The expert system/pattern matching machinery is in turn programmed and tuned by results of the same said machine.
  • The ansatze noted above is that the noise being viewed is not random electrical noise in the brain, but a window into a very different alternate reality, the noetic realm which is not a philosophical construct but is real.

Now, in maths and physics, an ansatze is a guessed solution to a problem, which is then shown to both solve the problem and secondly is (hopefully) proved to be unique. This is the only method for solving problems when there is no constructive method for working toward a solution. One must guess the answer then show that it works. In this case, the ansatze might be judged as interesting because in fact it provides us a possible answer to some long standing issues. What issues might these be?

  • Carl Jung in his research came to believe that there were evidence that the psyche had access to real data that transcended time and distance.
  • Modern research (noted in a class) finds that Buddhist masters have perceptions of others emotional states and thoughts which shows an advanced degree of perceptiveness. The current explanation is that the these people though their meditation have been attuned to recognize micro-changes in facial expressions of others. How meditation achieves fine degrees of visual acuity and recognition of others faces is not explained … in fact private meditation one would think would make one less, not more, attentive to others expressions. How internal reflection and meditation (and not observations of others) leads one to have hypersensitive and accurate perceptions of micro-expression changes is not explained.
  • In the contemporary Russian novelist Boris Akunin, in his book Sister Pelagia and the Black Monk (which though I have not finished seems to be an entertaining Scooby Doo sort of story set in late 19th century rural Russia), via Sister Pelagia corrects in conversation the number of senses that humans posses (the count is the number of senses besides sight): “No your Grace, five. Not everything that exists in the world can be detected by sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste. There is another sense that has no name, which is given to us so that we might feel God’s world not only with our bodies but with our souls.” [… continuing after the Bishop offers this is a fairy mirage … ] “Then let it be a fairy mirage,” the nun said with a stubborn shake of her head. “Around and within our world there is another one, invisible, and perhaps even more than one. We women feel this more clearly than men, because we are not afraid to feel it. Surely, Your Grace, you would not deny that there are some places that cheer and illuminate the soul (God’s churches are usually built there) and there are some that set it shuddering? There is no reason for it; you simply start walking more quickly and cross yourself. I always used to run past the Black Ravine like that, with a chill shiver. And then what happened? That was the spot where there found … “ (and the story continues to recount a tragedy occurring at that spot). The point of this tale is that this notion is prevalent throughout peoples and history.

These sorts of things (and as well of course the semiotic scaffold itself) can be explained by the ansatze that the noetic realm is both real and what our inner eye views as it searches for answers and insights in the creative process.

I have some ideas of what might make of structure and interaction and so in this noetic realm itself and how in part it interacts with us … but I’ll leave that for another post.

Related posts:

  1. A Break for the Political … Some Thoughts on Thought
  2. (non) Archimedean Dreams
  3. Reconsidering Emergent Angelic (and Demonic) Hosts
  4. On Virtual Church
  5. Words and Mind: Tax Cuts as Costs for Government

Filed under: Mark O. • Uncategorized

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!