4 ms·
Arguably, there are already many concepts that we as a society understand deeply but any individual human is completely incapable of grasping. Certainly, no sin
by aalleavitch 9y ago
Arguably, there are already many concepts that we as a society understand deeply but any individual human is completely incapable of grasping. Certainly, no single human could possibly hope to understand the whole sum of modern human knowledge; collectively we already constitute an intelligence billions of times more complex than a single human. In fact, there's a good argument to be made that the scientific process can't even work on the scale of a single human because it would be destroyed by bias; it's entirely in the notion of how you communicate and provide evidence for your theories to other people that the objectivity in science arises.
When it comes to whether any intelligent system could understand the entire universe, I think at some point we start reaching the level where the terms of the question start to break down. What if we required an intelligence that spanned the entire universe in order to understand the universe? Is there maybe a sense in which we can say that the universe taken as a unit necessarily understands itself already? We start to rub up against very fundamental epistemological concepts that might not hold when we're considering a system vastly different from a human being.
- PoachedSausage 9y agoIn some ways the universe is aware of itself in the form of consciousness, if you believe its real of course.
- aalleavitch 9y agoI mean, consciousness is obviously real. As conscious beings it is fundamentally the only thing we actually know is real. The confusion there comes from the fact that we can't prove our own consciousness to each other and we poorly understand what actually constitutes it.
- PoachedSausage 9y agoI should have clarified, I personally believe consciousness to be real and possibly even an inherent property of the universe. However there is a school of thought that believes consciousness to be an illusion.
- nnd 9y agoThe fundamental question here is what this understanding would actually entail? Surely describing how things work will always be an approximation, a model in a way.