Bounded Rationality

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Bounded Rationality

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Jun 19, 2017 3:23 am

I have to say this because it's super-ironic.

The Jewish people have a messianic prophesy that when the whole world is either holy or in sin, the messiah will come. What's ironic about this is that the messiah is supposed to restore the temple...

This is what's ironic!!

(Sorry I veer sometimes). Temples, shrines, mosques, churches, ashrams, synagogues, marriage, rites of passage (baptisms etc..), markings of rank, like a salute or bow or something like flashing a peace sign, categories of encoding universals to free symbols (it's oppressive)... this basic list goes on and on... are all very serious sin!!

This world has always been in deep sin.

And if there is to be anything resembling an actual messiah... it is a vast cosmic group effort!!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6750
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Bounded Rationality

Postby encode_decode » Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:57 pm

Ecmandu

Ecmandu wrote:vast cosmic group effort


I like the idea of a group effort.

When one member of the said group makes no effort to express themselves(offer something of substance) there is a possible corruption in the group. When a person is too embarrassed to offer their view they are corrupt. When others take the time to work on that person and that person is able to start feeling comfortable again the corrupted individual is able to be a part of the group again - the group can be self healing.

What about when one member taints the group with lies, deception, delusions of grandeur et cetera? I say the same self healing process as previously mentioned is needed.

The truth is not yet perfect but we have many things that point at it - I am not sure how healthy it is for the said group to divert from the obvious approximation of truth by following the individual who is making claims that are against the groups approximation.
- Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
User avatar
encode_decode
Thinker
 
Posts: 915
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Metaspace

Re: Bounded Rationality

Postby Ecmandu » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:44 am

encode_decode wrote:Ecmandu

Ecmandu wrote:vast cosmic group effort


I like the idea of a group effort.

When one member of the said group makes no effort to express themselves(offer something of substance) there is a possible corruption in the group. When a person is too embarrassed to offer their view they are corrupt. When others take the time to work on that person and that person is able to start feeling comfortable again the corrupted individual is able to be a part of the group again - the group can be self healing.

What about when one member taints the group with lies, deception, delusions of grandeur et cetera? I say the same self healing process as previously mentioned is needed.

The truth is not yet perfect but we have many things that point at it - I am not sure how healthy it is for the said group to divert from the obvious approximation of truth by following the individual who is making claims that are against the groups approximation.


Truth and goodness are the maze of non hypocrisy.
The challenging part is that hypocrisy gives short term gains - people effectively become non cognitive about words that they on some level understand will make those short term gains challenging.

Perfection is a margin of error most of the time.

I always say that when I order coffee, I always ask for "spill room" or "walking room" (usually about 3/4ths full) --- never have I had the same exact pour, but all of them are perfect.... which is to say, perfection has infinite diversity!!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6750
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Bounded Rationality

Postby Shepherdess » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:46 pm

encode_decode wrote:Shepherdess

Shepherdess wrote:
James S Saint wrote:Wisdom is higher than reasoning. Philosophy is first and foremost about wisdom. Reasoning is the philosophical approach to achieving that goal.


Why? Couldn't both achieve the same result if used for good intentions?

There is at least one charlatan getting around on this forum at the moment with no concept of proof - James S Saint is not one of them.

James at the very least offers his own proofs to back up what he says.

Personally I agree with what James says in the above quote.


Yes, this is true. James does at least offer his own proofs to back up what he says.

If philosophy is first and foremost about wisdom ~ a love of wisdom ~ why is it that so many philosophers do not go the way of wisdom?
Why do they not practice what they think and believe?
Why is it more about the intellect and the academics rather than the living what one has learned?
I'm not here saying that no philosopher does that but it appears to me to be more about the intellect and less about the "living wisdom" of it all.
Isn't it a sign of intelligence to gather information and utilize it rather than simply storing it somewhere in time?

Wisdom is higher than reasoning


That cannot actually be set in stone. It's one's own point of view, one's own experience but it can't be absolute, now can it?

At the very least, yes, they swim in the same waters ~ for me at least. Actually, one can have ~ let's qualify that ~ one can have the capacity for right reason or reasoning and wisdom and yet not adhere or tend toward them or put into practice what they have learned.
Am I wrong, insofar as you are concerned?
"It is by going down into the abyss that we recover the treasures of life. Where you stumble, there lies your treasure."
Joseph Campbell

"In the woods, we return to reason and faith. There I feel nothing can befall me in life, - no disgrace, no calamity, (leaving me my eyes,) which nature cannot repair. Standing on the bare ground, - my head bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space, - all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eye-ball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God."
Ralph Waldo Emerson

"No way of thinking or doing, however ancient, can be trusted without proof. What everybody echoes or in silence passes by as true today may turn out to be falsehood tomorrow, mere smoke of opinion, which some had trusted for a cloud that would sprinkle fertilizing rain on their fields."
Thoreau
User avatar
Shepherdess
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:24 pm
Location: On a hilltop watching my flock

Re: Bounded Rationality

Postby Arcturus Descending » Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:41 pm

encode_decode


Anyhow I do not believe I own any words in any of the worlds languages.


I sometimes feel that I own the stars. Is there a way to experience that one *own's* something yet at the same time does not feel possessive of it? Perhaps it is the stars which *own* and *possess* me. We have an Ich & Du relationship.

Can someone not feel that way about certain words or all words? Valuing them beyond compare but particularly certain words which speak to them, as in holding a relationship with them?


How do you know I am not a bot instead of a guy?

Could a bot's language flow like the river?
Could a bot's language give one a sense of harmony and balance? Well maybe.

How fascinating it might be to converse with a bot.
SAPERE AUDE!


If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

Thomas Nagel


I learn as I write!
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 14851
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Ecstasy on Earth.

Re: Bounded Rationality

Postby James S Saint » Sat Jul 08, 2017 7:11 am

Shepherdess wrote:If philosophy is first and foremost about wisdom ~ a love of wisdom ~ why is it that so many philosophers do not go the way of wisdom?

Until you know the "way of wisdom" yourself, how would you know that they haven't? Certainly you are aware that you can only hear what propagates and thus what is propagated. What is propagated is a matter of what some wish others to believe, not at all necessarily that which is wise. To some, that which is called wisdom is, in reality, foolishness and vsvrsa. Those being philosophical in their searching and preaching are attempting to discern one from the other and/or attempting to promote one over the other irrespective of which is wisdom.

On the Planets of the Apes, in the Land of Lies, how would one know what wise men have done and what wisdom may rise? How would one even learn if not by pursuing wisdom to its pentacle. How would one know when it was found? Who would tell? More-over, who would listen?

Shepherdess wrote:Why do they not practice what they think and believe?
Why is it more about the intellect and the academics rather than the living what one has learned?
I'm not here saying that no philosopher does that but it appears to me to be more about the intellect and less about the "living wisdom" of it all.

Why doesn't the professional basketball player simply shoot the basket every time he gets the ball? Why doesn't the coach, obviously knowing more than the players, play and make the highest scores for his team?

Not everyone is as ideal as what they idealize. To try is all that can be asked or expected.

Shepherdess wrote:Isn't it a sign of intelligence to gather information and utilize it rather than simply storing it somewhere in time?

Try not to confuse a philosopher with one who studies or teaches philosophy.

Shepherdess wrote:
Wisdom is higher than reasoning


That cannot actually be set in stone. It's one's own point of view, one's own experience but it can't be absolute, now can it?

Since the subject was "which is more important to philosophers", by definition, wisdom is the highest goal. Wisdom is that which is best to believe, not necessarily that which is true. To always believe only the truth, is but one philosophy. Where would we be if every flower and plant attempting life pursued only what it knew to be truth?

Four thousand year old trees have never and will never know truth, yet who competes with their wisdom? Such trees inherently know to simply keep trying. Nothing can die until it fails to try. What "reasoning" would have made them wiser? How old are you going to be when you give up trying?

Shepherdess wrote:At the very least, yes, they swim in the same waters ~ for me at least. Actually, one can have ~ let's qualify that ~ one can have the capacity for right reason or reasoning and wisdom and yet not adhere or tend toward them or put into practice what they have learned.
Am I wrong, insofar as you are concerned?

The trees did not try to be wise, knowing, or reasoning. They "accidentally" did what worked for them at the time. What could have been wiser for them to have done? You swim the waters that you "accidentally" began swimming. Perhaps they are the waters that flow to the ocean of wisdom. Perhaps they are the waters that merely temporarily moisten the desert or gradually sink deeper and deeper under ground. Water cannot choose its destiny nor its fate. It must merely act in accord with its nature and do whatever it does in the environment it is in.

There are only two factors in determining the destination of all efforts; the natural lean of the effort and the environment in which it flows. If one has the capacity to learn great wisdom and is also within the environment that leads to such acquisition, that one's destiny is wisdom. He could not escape it. The great trees became great not by themselves, but by where they were when they tried. No man has ever, nor can ever, achieve anything greater than the destiny of his nature guided by his situation ("Man following God" .. for those very few with understanding). And no one is guilty of anything less. Given where they are and how they started, they "adhere to" what they must and nothing else.

You might say that all people are "bound to" their own form of "rationality". If that is what you intended to say, then no, insofar as I am concerned, you were not wrong.
Last edited by James S Saint on Sat Jul 08, 2017 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25427
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Bounded Rationality

Postby encode_decode » Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:11 am

    Arcturus Descending

    Arcturus Descending wrote:I sometimes feel that I own the stars. Is there a way to experience that one *own's* something yet at the same time does not feel possessive of it? Perhaps it is the stars which *own* and *possess* me. We have an Ich & Du relationship.

    Yes . . . it depends somewhat on the context you are using here. You might be saying that you have a relation to the stars - spiritual in nature I would guess.

    Arcturus Descending wrote:Can someone not feel that way about certain words or all words? Valuing them beyond compare but particularly certain words which speak to them, as in holding a relationship with them?

    Yes and Yes. Again we would be discussing the relation here and it would go down to the core of ones own being for that matter.

    Arcturus Descending wrote:Could a bot's language flow like the river?
    Could a bot's language give one a sense of harmony and balance? Well maybe.

    How fascinating it might be to converse with a bot.

    I am guessing this is a compliment of sorts. A compliment to the human being - the sense of balance however is rare in people - if you are referring to an emotional balance that is. The same would apply for a rational balance as well as social balance. Reality itself it seems is never balanced.

    Our mental balance is in constant adjustment to the adjustments taking place in existence. The bots outcome changes with the input.

    :-k
    - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

    But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
    User avatar
    encode_decode
    Thinker
     
    Posts: 915
    Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
    Location: Metaspace

    Re: Bounded Rationality

    Postby Arcturus Descending » Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:39 pm

    encode_decode wrote:

    Arcturus Descending

    Arcturus Descending

    I sometimes feel that I own the stars. Is there a way to experience that one *own's* something yet at the same time does not feel possessive of it? Perhaps it is the stars which *own* and *possess* me. We have an Ich & Du relationship.

    Yes . . . it depends somewhat on the context you are using here. You might be saying that you have a relation to the stars - spiritual in nature I would guess.


    Yes, everything is about relationship or relating. I come close to worshipping the stars and I am not ashamed to admit it.
    But again, is that a feeling of possession toward them?

    One of my favorite passages from the bible...


    34 the stars shine joyfully at their posts;

    35 when he calls them, they answer, 'Here we are'; they shine to delight their Creator.

    36 It is he who is our God, no other can compare with him.


    I'm not a believer but I can almost intuit the stars [thinking and feeling] in that way.
    It is such a profound poetic thought and sensation to me.


    Arcturus Descending wrote:

    Could a bot's language flow like the river?
    Could a bot's language give one a sense of harmony and balance? Well maybe.

    How fascinating it might be to converse with a bot.

    I am guessing this is a compliment of sorts.



    If the creator's handiwork reflects the creator, then yes, it is a compliment to the human being.


    A compliment to the human being - the sense of balance however is rare in people - if you are referring to an emotional balance that is.


    Both emotional and mental. I intuit that there is a distinction between the two. Perhaps rare in most people but not all.
    But I suppose that in actuality the creator's handiwork MAY reflect the creator but being human the creator has other aspects to him/her -self which don't reflect an ongoing perfection.


    When I wrote this~~~

    Could a bot's language give one a sense of harmony and balance? Well maybe.

    What I was asking was if a bot's language could instill within one a sense of harmony and balance just as, for instance, a beautiful snowfall could do the same for a person?


    The same would apply for a rational balance as well as social balance. Reality itself it seems is never balanced.


    Maybe, maybe not. Could it be that it is simply our PERCEPTION of it which is not balanced? We do not have the right lens with which to look? It's not a statement. It is a question, my musing.


    Our mental balance is in constant adjustment to the adjustments taking place in existence. The bots outcome changes with the input.


    As for the former, we can only hope. :evilfun: As for the latter, doesn't that make them almost human?
    :-k
    SAPERE AUDE!


    If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


    What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

    Thomas Nagel


    I learn as I write!
    User avatar
    Arcturus Descending
    Consciousness Seeker
     
    Posts: 14851
    Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
    Location: Ecstasy on Earth.

    Re: Bounded Rationality

    Postby encode_decode » Tue Jul 11, 2017 6:38 pm

      Arcturus Descending

      I maintain: I do not believe I own any words in any of the worlds languages.

      Arcturus Descending wrote:But again, is that a feeling of possession toward them?

      I am sorry Arcturus Descending but I do not understand the question.

      Arcturus Descending wrote:I'm not a believer but I can almost intuit the stars [thinking and feeling] in that way.
      It is such a profound poetic thought and sensation to me.

      Interesting . . . I intuit the mind and its connection to everything.

      Arcturus Descending wrote:If the creator's handiwork reflects the creator, then yes, it is a compliment to the human being.

      What do you mean by creator?

      Arcturus Descending wrote:Both emotional and mental. I intuit that there is a distinction between the two. Perhaps rare in most people but not all.
      But I suppose that in actuality the creator's handiwork MAY reflect the creator but being human the creator has other aspects to him/her -self which don't reflect an ongoing perfection.

      Really - emotional and mental are distinct from each other? I am guessing you are talking about emotional versus rational. I don't believe in perfection just precision and I believe we are a long way from precision - speaking as an engineer we deal in tolerances. The imperfection in a bot would would be a tolerance and it would certainly be multiplied by the engineers tolerances - so if the engineer is out by plus or minus 10 then the bot could be out by plus or minus 1000.

      Arcturus Descending wrote:What I was asking was if a bot's language could instill within one a sense of harmony and balance just as, for instance, a beautiful snowfall could do the same for a person?

      I would say not - a beautiful snowfall is a very complex scenario whereas a bot's language is course grained or low resolution.

      Arcturus Descending wrote:Maybe, maybe not. Could it be that it is simply our PERCEPTION of it which is not balanced? We do not have the right lens with which to look? It's not a statement. It is a question, my musing.

      OK but the same question could be asked in reverse. I still say reality is not in balance.

      Arcturus Descending wrote:As for the latter, doesn't that make them almost human?

      No because humankind is a construct that never stays consistent - therefore the same can be said about a human - Logical Independence . . . To know yourself, you'll find that almost all of the knowing was invention, you have a silent mind, a ghost town of the present wherein no world exists at all. Something inside tells us to seek independence. Logic dictates you ought to reason with complete independence, not relying on communication you've ever heard or read, meditating and contemplating, becoming familiar with the silent mind.
      - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

      But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
      User avatar
      encode_decode
      Thinker
       
      Posts: 915
      Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
      Location: Metaspace

      Re: Bounded Rationality

      Postby Arcturus Descending » Wed Jul 12, 2017 5:27 pm

      encode_decode

      I maintain: I do not believe I own any words in any of the worlds languages.


      I know that I can say the same, rationally speaking. I've never coined a word or phrase.

      But do you have words for which there is a much deeper experience for you, that is not shared by others?


      Arcturus Descending
      But again, is that a feeling of possession toward them?

      I am sorry Arcturus Descending but I do not understand the question.


      Don't be sorry. What I meant within this context is a sense of *ownership*, not actual of course. Perhaps my question doesn't make any sense. lol Many of them don't.

      Do you have a special physical place which you go to? You know it doesn't belong to you, you didn't pay for it, it isn't in your name yet you feel that you *own* it, that it is yours, encode_decode?


      Arcturus Descending
      I'm not a believer but I can almost intuit the stars [thinking and feeling] in that way.
      It is such a profound poetic thought and sensation to me.

      Interesting . . . I intuit the mind and its connection to everything.


      Define what you mean here by *interesting*. :P

      Is that your way of saying that you have an experience of consciousness towards everything?
      Consciousness has to be different for everyone I think ~ I mean how we experience it, I intuit.

      But perhaps I am not quite getting your meaning. What do you mean by I intuit the mind and its connection to everything Can you expound on that a bit if you would care to?



      If the creator's handiwork reflects the creator, then yes, it is a compliment to the human being.

      What do you mean by creator?


      Michelangelo and his David; John Keats and his Endymion, Nietzsche and his Zarathustra, Caravaggio and his Narcisse, Debussy's and his Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun, Eli Whitney and his cotton gin, encode_decode and his little bots, ad continuum.

      Is it true that the actual meaning of create is to cause into existence through nothingness?
      I wonder how anything could possibly come into existence by way of the use of absolutely nothing?
      There always has to be something, in my book, in order to *create*.
      Michelangelo has his undefined marble, his exquisite imagination to see possibilities and his creativity in order to bring that awesome David into existence.

      I somehow think also of the Phoenix even though that is about a rebirth. The Phoenix within the flames in order to become again. The Phoenix had his/her :evilfun: flames, willpower, endurance, vulnerability, insightfulness, et cetera to create or re-create itself Ok I'm rambling.
      But that is basically for me a good definition of create or creator - going through the fire and the struggle and the agony and hard work to bring something into existence - but never without some kind of material or immaterial something. I write poetry. I know this. :x


      Arcturus Descending"]Both emotional and mental. I intuit that there is a distinction between the two. Perhaps rare in most people but not all.

      Really - emotional and mental are distinct from each other? I am guessing you are talking about emotional versus rational.


      Hmmm, I'm not sure now. They do of course reside within the same brain. Perhaps I am speaking of emotional vs. rational, but I'm not sure at this time if that is what I meant. I'll have to think about it. You may be right but I'll give it more thought.


      I don't believe in perfection just precision and I believe we are a long way from precision - speaking as an engineer we deal in tolerances. The imperfection in a bot would would be a tolerance and it would certainly be multiplied by the engineers tolerances -


      I get what you are saying here. What you say about tolerance can also go a long way in dealing with human imperfection.

      so if the engineer is out by plus or minus 10 then the bot could be out by plus or minus 1000.

      I don't grasp your meaning here. Are we speaking emotional or technological here? lol


      Arcturus Descending

      Maybe, maybe not. Could it be that it is simply our PERCEPTION of it which is not balanced? We do not have the right lens with which to look? It's not a statement. It is a question, my musing.

      OK but the same question could be asked in reverse. I still say reality is not in balance.


      That begs the question at least to me: Reality defined as WHAT?
      Perception really is everything I have found. As for nature, the elements, human evolution, physics, other sciences, et cetera, what if it is all as it is or supposed to be? That doesn't mean that everything is pre-determined to me. Who knows? Maybe i was just coming from a Buddhist mindset for a moment. Who knows. Maybe I didn't quite express that the way in which I wanted to.
      Doesn't it stand to reason, encode_decode that in order to make such an absolutist statement (if that was your intention) wouldn't we have to know EVERYTHING as it is in actuality? Did that make sense to you?


      As for the latter, doesn't that make them almost human?

      No because humankind is a construct that never stays consistent - therefore the same can be said about a human - Logical Independence . . . Something inside tells us to seek independence. Logic dictates you ought to reason with complete independence, not relying on communication you've ever heard or read, meditating and contemplating, becoming familiar with the silent mind.


      I enjoy dealing with personification. Perhaps I have a weird way of relating to many things.

      No because humankind is a construct that never stays consistent


      True. Probably the most consistent thing about us is our inconsistencies. Not a bad thing though. We are also FLOW, a wonderful things.

      To know yourself, you'll find that almost all of the knowing was invention, you have a silent mind, a ghost town of the present wherein no world exists at all.

      Can we also say that some of that knowing is education - a drawing out of ourselves of what we were meant to know, of what is waiting within to find out? I don't think that I said that correctly.
      As for the second part, I liked that. But how about a pristine landscape?

      Something inside tells us to seek independence.

      Oh, yes. But perhaps a better word would be *interdependence, encode_decode. But I intuit you are right too because without our independent mind and action, we can't serve others or ourselves in an inter-dependent way.

      meditating and contemplating, becoming familiar with the silent mind


      Especially when you have the aide of a *place* like my avatar, my Location. But one doesn't actually need that physical place in order to put one's self in that place. Just close your eyes and you can be there, building it all around you, down to the very last snowflake, the very last flicker of light.
      Okay I'm rambling. :oops:
      SAPERE AUDE!


      If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


      What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

      Thomas Nagel


      I learn as I write!
      User avatar
      Arcturus Descending
      Consciousness Seeker
       
      Posts: 14851
      Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
      Location: Ecstasy on Earth.

      Re: Bounded Rationality

      Postby encode_decode » Wed Jul 12, 2017 5:43 pm

        Arcturus Descending

        OK . . . That is some pretty cool stuff you have written there . . . Let me get back to you on that.

        =D>
          - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

          But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
          User avatar
          encode_decode
          Thinker
           
          Posts: 915
          Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
          Location: Metaspace

          Re: Bounded Rationality

          Postby encode_decode » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:02 pm

            Arcturus Descending

            It seems I myself have been experiencing some unacceptable(to me) Rational Confinement aka Bounded Rationality in recent times.

            Subsection #TBD: Logical deduction, when answering a question, is limited by:

              1. cognitive limitations
              2. time available to answer the question
              3. openness to influence from the social norm
              4. availability of accurate information
            I choose for my recent times: Number one because I have been covering a lot of new ground. Number two because that ground has been vast. Hopefully not too much of number three. Number four is always a problem for all of us. I hope that makes sense.

            So I will do my best to answer you in a way that is hopefully rational and at the same time emotive.

            Along with the new ground I have been covering has come differing levels of Emotional Confinement in different emotional ranges covering different emotions. I know the Emotional Confinement to be true because the other day I broke down into tears for reasons I wont go into here - I shed tears and surplus energy for around ten minutes. Not good too confine ones emotions for too long - they are nasty little beasts when locked up.

            For a few days there I also experienced Social Confinement - an occupational hazard of what I do unfortunately.

            I hope that my written expression is sufficient to shed light on my thoughts.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:But do you have words for which there is a much deeper experience for you, that is not shared by others?

            Generally speaking no - I have coined some words that help me to see reality more clearly. Generally however I find that a combination of words that form one of the sentence types give a deeper experience for example one of the following:

              Declarative sentence.
              Imperative sentence.
              Interrogative sentence.
              Exclamatory sentence.
            It is in the combination that I find deeper meaning - each word certainly has meaning - it is likely I apply different weights to the meanings of each word than other people but I perceive deeper meaning from the content of the sentence itself - that is how I feel anyway.

            It seems I don't have a sense of ownership regarding words with the exception of terms that I come up with for programming languages - a lot of which use context free grammars. My sense in this case is also shallow as I find deeper meaning in the finished programs - the script that is to be compiled or interpreted.

            I think we all sense things in different ways because each of us has different programming. Each of us has a different script that is being written/re-written throughout our lives. In some ways the artist and the engineer are complementary. To see this - just look at "life".

            It is when I take no offense to what I have written that I find deeper meaning but I find no real ownership because those things are only temporary.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:Do you have a special physical place which you go to? You know it doesn't belong to you, you didn't pay for it, it isn't in your name yet you feel that you *own* it, that it is yours, encode_decode?

            I have many special physical places that I go that provide meaning to me. I don't feel that I own any of them but at times I feel connected to the meaning of the place - this meaning comes from within. I guess that inside it feels like mine.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:Define what you mean here by *interesting*. :P

            Is that your way of saying that you have an experience of consciousness towards everything?
            Consciousness has to be different for everyone I think ~ I mean how we experience it, I intuit.

            But perhaps I am not quite getting your meaning. What do you mean by I intuit the mind and its connection to everything Can you expound on that a bit if you would care to?

            Interesting in a connected sense - I was saying that I found some synergy with what you were saying - just on a different level. It is indeed my way of saying that I have an experience of consciousness towards everything. Consciousness is different for everyone.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:Is it true that the actual meaning of create is to cause into existence through nothingness?
            I wonder how anything could possibly come into existence by way of the use of absolutely nothing?

            Maybe that is the meaning of create - I feel that I am only a medium to organize the part of reality that I am connected to. I don't believe anything could possibly come into existence by way of the use of absolutely nothing.

            Like you say: There always has to be something, in my book, in order to *create*. Michelangelo has his undefined marble, his exquisite imagination to see possibilities and his creativity in order to bring that awesome David into existence.

            In order to create one must first see the substance of their creation. Lightly speaking and without completion for me everything is a combination of being self-referential, recursive and iterative. The substance is in at least two forms.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:I don't grasp your meaning here. Are we speaking emotional or technological here? lol

            Both.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:That begs the question at least to me: Reality defined as WHAT?
            Perception really is everything I have found. As for nature, the elements, human evolution, physics, other sciences, et cetera, what if it is all as it is or supposed to be? That doesn't mean that everything is pre-determined to me. Who knows? Maybe i was just coming from a Buddhist mindset for a moment. Who knows. Maybe I didn't quite express that the way in which I wanted to.
            Doesn't it stand to reason, encode_decode that in order to make such an absolutist statement (if that was your intention) wouldn't we have to know EVERYTHING as it is in actuality? Did that make sense to you?

            You can define reality however you want to. What if? I have no intuition of physical pre-determination only conceptual. In a way we do kind of know everything but it is simpler than you can imagine. It made perfect sense to me however I don't believe my response will make much sense to you.

            :D

            This is where the artist and engineer differ. Education is invention/re-invention. It takes place in the pristine landscape of our mind. Our creative abilities are learned whether we feel that or not. Again though I express this as the medium to organize the part of reality that we are connected to.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:Especially when you have the aide of a *place* like my avatar, my Location. But one doesn't actually need that physical place in order to put one's self in that place. Just close your eyes and you can be there, building it all around you, down to the very last snowflake, the very last flicker of light.

            Agreed. Agreed. Agreed.

            Arcturus Descending wrote:Okay I'm rambling. :oops:

            We are all rambling all of the time . . . lol

            :lol:
            - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

            But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
            User avatar
            encode_decode
            Thinker
             
            Posts: 915
            Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
            Location: Metaspace

            Re: Bounded Rationality

            Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:05 am

              Rationality and Responsibility

              Shepherdess wrote:
              James S Saint wrote:Wisdom is higher than reasoning. Philosophy is first and foremost about wisdom. Reasoning is the philosophical approach to achieving that goal.


              Why? Couldn't both achieve the same result if used for good intentions?

              Is not wisdom also about good judgement? Being able to judge your own actions before those of others . . . I would say having an intention to contemplate your own thoughts and actions would be good judgement and in turn wise . . .

              Is it not rational to be responsible?
              - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

              But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
              User avatar
              encode_decode
              Thinker
               
              Posts: 915
              Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
              Location: Metaspace

              Re: Bounded Rationality

              Postby 1mpious » Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:45 am

              encode_decode wrote:Reasoning when answering a question is limited by:

                1. cognitive limitations
                2. time available to answer the question
                3. openness to influence from the social norm
                4. availability of accurate information

              Yes, like... feeling in a tube right now?
              User avatar
              1mpious
              decent guy
               
              Posts: 358
              Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:58 am
              Location: Sydney

              Re: Bounded Rationality

              Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 3:01 pm

                Hello 1mpious

                1mpious wrote:
                encode_decode wrote:Reasoning when answering a question is limited by:

                  1. cognitive limitations
                  2. time available to answer the question
                  3. openness to influence from the social norm
                  4. availability of accurate information

                Yes, like... feeling in a tube right now?

                I am not exactly sure how to answer your question so I will just take a guess and go for it.

                :D

                I am taking the assumption you are referring to the idea of feeling confined. Funnily you would think that we humans would have gotten used to that by now but it seems we have not. For the time being our physical bodies are confined to our solar system and most of us are confined to the planet. Some of us are confined to the country we are in and there are a fewer who have never left the city they are in. Rarely we hear of reports of people who have confined themselves to the house they are in for x amount of time. I have seen two reports of people confined to a bed for x amount of time. The last two sentences speak of time and the preceding do not but obviously time is involved.

                It seems as though we are confined in some way or other. Every now and then I need to be at the beach because I feel confined by my current country location.

                I am happy to have an imagination however - it makes me feel less confined.

                :D
                - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                User avatar
                encode_decode
                Thinker
                 
                Posts: 915
                Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                Location: Metaspace

                Re: Bounded Rationality

                Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 3:22 pm

                Here is another idea I have:

                When judging others our rationality in judgement is bound by:

                  1. A pattern of imaginings we have created in our mind associated with that person
                  2. Emotional feedback associated with that person based on initial impressions
                  3. Emotional feedback associated with that person based on current impressions
                  4. Differentiation of 1, 2 and 3

                I need to put more thought into this but it is a seed of an idea.
                - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                User avatar
                encode_decode
                Thinker
                 
                Posts: 915
                Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                Location: Metaspace

                Re: Bounded Rationality

                Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 3:35 pm

                Another idea:

                Rationality associated with a subjective degree of belief is bound by:

                  1. The level of emotional attachment to existing beliefs
                  2. The level of objectivity associated with internal and external information sources
                  3. The level of willingness to accept or test new objective information
                  4. The differentiation of 1, 2 and 3

                Again just another seed of thought . . .

                :-k
                - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                User avatar
                encode_decode
                Thinker
                 
                Posts: 915
                Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                Location: Metaspace

                Re: Bounded Rationality

                Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:39 pm

                  Some thoughts on the possibilities - on Bounded Rationality

                  Being: human - person - individual - brain - mind - subjectivity
                  Traits: rationality - reason - logic - sense - emotion - ability - capacity
                  Misc: time - information - mismatch - social - beliefs - objectivity

                  Abstract:
                  Rationality is a quality of the human mind based on or in accordance with reason or logic. Being rational is affected by emotion and emotion relative to rationality is just a rational mismatch from information that does not make sense and a rational match for information that does make sense. To make sense information must match the ability of the individual to think sensibly or logically. Initially a person must be endowed with the capacity to reason. For the individual to be endowed with the capacity to reason is something that is built up over time. Basic logic is included before birth to allow for basic functioning. Sometime after birth the mind becomes aware of internal logic.

                  "we call rationality the distinction of man, when compared with other animals"
                  Google

                  Thoughts:
                  I would have to say that rationality is the ability to calculate information based on communicative methods between the individual and the environment in which they exist. An attachment to a particular place can be determined by way of logic and emotion. It might make sense to the individual that their place in the environment is a good one based on a number of factors calculated from the manifestation of information in the mind - the person may also have an emotional attachment to their place - but it is based on what determines the type of rational mismatch that takes place. If it makes less sense in a new environment but the person had no choice but to leave their old environment they would experience a rational mismatch - whether or not a strong emotion is expressed is based on the level of Bounded Rationality the individual has. Conversely if an individual's loved one died in the environment then sometimes it makes sense to leave the environment because of the strong expression of an emotion but this is Bounded Rationality in action - a narrowing of the bandwidth of rationality, so to speak.

                  I suggest that this can happen without a native spoken language . . . that language is not necessary for logical deduction.

                  I say that rationality is built into us as a seed from birth and grows with experience - rationality is just the calculation of information and does not require language. Self reflection is possible without language. Patterns from our environment "are language" and can be differentiated and integrated into the mind as useful information. Pattern recognition and processing is where language starts. This includes body language and other such external expression. The clouds can unintentionally communicate rain to a person based on the individuals experience. Language is just an expression of information and a means to consciously calculate and pass information on.

                  Some say that language was manifested by a desire or emotion to express ourselves
                  - I say that language is also bound to rationality . . . language happened because of rational mismatch . . .
                  . . . associated with an inherent discomfort that we carry with us to this day.

                  Logic is the brain . . .
                  - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                  But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                  User avatar
                  encode_decode
                  Thinker
                   
                  Posts: 915
                  Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                  Location: Metaspace

                  Re: Bounded Rationality

                  Postby James S Saint » Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:10 pm

                  encode_decode wrote:Another idea:

                  Rationality associated with a subjective degree of belief is bound by:

                    1. The level of emotional attachment to existing beliefs
                    2. The level of objectivity associated with internal and external information sources
                    3. The level of willingness to accept or test new objective information
                    4. The differentiation of 1, 2 and 3

                  Again just another seed of thought . . .

                  :-k

                  I define "rationality" as taking a rationed-out, step by step route to a chosen goal. Without a goal, there can be no rationality. When the path from where a person is to where they chose to go is willingly interrupted (due to divergent emoting), "irrationality" is formed and the chosen goal is lost (trying to accomplish too many things at once - lack of concentration and focus).
                  Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
                  Else
                  From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

                  The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

                  You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
                  The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
                  It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
                  As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

                  Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
                  Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

                  The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
                  .
                  James S Saint
                  ILP Legend
                   
                  Posts: 25427
                  Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

                  Re: Bounded Rationality

                  Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:18 pm

                    surreptitious57

                    I have been thinking about this for quite some time.

                    surreptitious57 wrote:1. ability to fully understand the question
                    2. time available to answer the question
                    3. availability of complete information
                    4. ability to just give objective answer
                    5. ability to just give relevant answer

                    I wonder whether 1, 4 and 5 might come under the category of cognitive limitations. I also wonder whether relevancy is bound by time and complete information.

                    What are your thoughts?

                    I will spend more time thinking about this.
                    - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                    But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                    User avatar
                    encode_decode
                    Thinker
                     
                    Posts: 915
                    Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                    Location: Metaspace

                    Re: Bounded Rationality

                    Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:45 pm

                      James

                      It makes sense what you are saying, certainly. I find affinity with most of it.

                      James S Saint wrote:
                      encode_decode wrote:Another idea:

                      Rationality associated with a subjective degree of belief is bound by:

                        1. The level of emotional attachment to existing beliefs
                        2. The level of objectivity associated with internal and external information sources
                        3. The level of willingness to accept or test new objective information
                        4. The differentiation of 1, 2 and 3

                      Again just another seed of thought . . .

                      :-k

                      I define "rationality" as taking a rationed-out, step by step route to a chosen goal. Without a goal, there can be no rationality. When the path from where a person is to where they chose to go is willingly interrupted (due to divergent emoting), "irrationality" is formed and the chosen goal is lost (trying to accomplish too many things at once - lack of concentration and focus).

                      Don't you think it is possible to achieve more than one goal? I imagine that is what we were talking about in another thread - the highest priority goal. I understand what you said about all other goals being subservient to the highest priority goal which tells me that an individual sets one goal as the highest and then all other goals are subservient to that. Some goals however may be unrelated, such is the case for many people these days in modern living - some goals are forced upon us.

                      I do hear you when you say:

                        Without a goal, there can be no rationality.
                      This to me spells time management which is related to your concept of rationality and is quite logical.

                      Would you say that communication has to make sense too? Communication that makes sense would be rational - I suggest it is also related to openness. There would have to be a common language and set expectations for that to take place. That would be clear, verified, instilled and reinforced - everybody is on the same page.

                      Only to be limited by:

                        1. cognitive limitations
                        2. time available
                        3. openness
                        4. availability of clear information

                      As I understand it, you have time constraints too, like us all. I would really appreciate your thoughts here . . .
                        - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                        But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                        User avatar
                        encode_decode
                        Thinker
                         
                        Posts: 915
                        Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                        Location: Metaspace

                        Re: Bounded Rationality

                        Postby James S Saint » Sun Aug 13, 2017 9:50 pm

                        encode_decode wrote:Don't you think it is possible to achieve more than one goal?

                        A person cannot reliably serve two distinct masters. At some point in time, to serve one will be to betray the other. If and when both individual masters make the exact same demands, they are not distinct, but identical.

                        encode_decode wrote:Some goals however may be unrelated, such is the case for many people these days in modern living - some goals are forced upon us.

                        ALL goal, forced upon you or not, either serve your highest purpose/goal, or they are "harlots".

                        encode_decode wrote:Would you say that communication has to make sense too? Communication that makes sense would be rational - I suggest it is also related to openness. There would have to be a common language and set expectations for that to take place. That would be clear, verified, instilled and reinforced - everybody is on the same page.

                        Communication has purpose, the effort to cast influence. In that sense, communication must be rationally assembled. If the influence is one of the transfer of information, obviously the "form" must be transmitted such that it can be retrieved (aka "same language"). But on the other hand, it is unwise/irrational to have all people throughout the world speaking the same one language.

                        encode_decode wrote:Only to be limited by:

                          1. cognitive limitations
                          2. time available
                          3. openness
                          4. availability of clear information

                        As I understand it, you have time constraints too, like us all. I would really appreciate your thoughts here . . .

                          You regularly speak of limitations. I have yet to discern your higher intent (rationale) concerning such.
                          Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
                          Else
                          From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

                          The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

                          You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
                          The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
                          It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
                          As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

                          Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
                          Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

                          The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
                          .
                          James S Saint
                          ILP Legend
                           
                          Posts: 25427
                          Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

                          Re: Bounded Rationality

                          Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 9:57 pm

                            James

                            Thank you for your thoughts . . .

                            James S Saint wrote:You regularly speak of limitations. I have yet to discern your higher intent (rationale) concerning such.

                            Are limitations not part of the truth of reality? And rationality?

                            People seem to think there are no limits in life.

                            If I am to develop a theory of mind then these limits are necessary to understand - I am not really that impressed by the existing theories.
                            - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                            But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                            User avatar
                            encode_decode
                            Thinker
                             
                            Posts: 915
                            Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                            Location: Metaspace

                            Re: Bounded Rationality

                            Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:10 pm

                              James

                              I can only wish to serve the right master.

                              James S Saint wrote:A person cannot reliably serve two distinct masters. At some point in time, to serve one will be to betray the other. If and when both individual masters make the exact same demands, they are not distinct, but identical.

                              I am fully aware of this . . . fully . . . however, we are all serving at least two masters. The government that presides over us and ourselves.
                              - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                              But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                              User avatar
                              encode_decode
                              Thinker
                               
                              Posts: 915
                              Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                              Location: Metaspace

                              Re: Bounded Rationality

                              Postby encode_decode » Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:13 pm

                                James

                                Most definitely.

                                James S Saint wrote:ALL goal, forced upon you or not, either serve your highest purpose/goal, or they are "harlots".

                                I say a lot of the goals the government force upon me are harlots.
                                - Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion. (2017) -

                                But the point remains that you can't get at that meaning before grasping the surface meaning, which is to say there is always meaning.(gib - 2017)
                                User avatar
                                encode_decode
                                Thinker
                                 
                                Posts: 915
                                Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
                                Location: Metaspace

                                PreviousNext

                                Return to Philosophy



                                Who is online

                                Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]