> That makes it really difficult to take you seriously. Agreed - this does indeed seem to be the nature of the default mind, as it has been trained (mainly in

> That makes it really difficult to take you seriously. Agreed - this does indeed seem to be the nature of the default mind, as it has been trained (mainly in the AI sense of the word, but also in the ~propaganda/culture sense). But to your credit, you are exerting substantially higher than average effort to discuss and understand - credit where credit is due and all that (gosh....have I committed a cultural faux pas here? If so, sincere apologies, but limited). > I can't (and wouldn't try to) speak for anyone else, but in this particular case, I'm not doing any of the things you list here. Not at all? If you had, would you necessarily know? > As such, I have to ask why this is relevant, unless you're describing your own actions. Roughly: https://www.vedanet.com/the-meaning-of-maya-the-illusion-of-the-world/ https://www.vedanet.com/the-meaning-of-maya-the-illusion-of-... > I don't insist that you "think better." I don't know what "group" (well, other than human -- and so am I. I guess we're in the same group huh?) to which you might belong, so I have no basis to class you (other than I noted parenthetically above) in any in/out group. A basis to (subconsciously) classify someone is not necessary, much of that is performed for us automatically (thanks evolution!). > And I haven't engaged in any of the other things you mention. So I ask again: Why is that relevant here? In return I ask: what is it you are talking about here? Reality? > Or are you making the (unfounded) assumption that I understand you and what's in your mind (impossible, as we've already discussed) and am just baiting you. I assure you (the best I can do in this forum) that I am not. Very approximately, I would say what you are doing here is "humaning". > Rather, whether it's due to ignorance/stupidity on my part or poor communication on yours, you have not made yourself clear here at all. See "theory of relativity" above. > That's what I'm asking for. Communicate clearly and provide detail as to what supports the ideas you're presenting. You have done neither. That's not intended to be an insult or reprobation, rather it's the minimum that's required to have a reasoned, fruitful discussion. Which portion of the infinitely large, logically inconsistent/paradoxical/illusory/ virtual idea space would you like to discuss? And in what way? With English text on a forum? Houston, we have a problem. > You go on at some length after this, but the low information density of your comments makes it difficult to discuss this stuff. You've layered vague ideas about governance on top of assertions that those ideas don't support. You're not wrong! You know what? I am starting to get the feeling that you may not have a proper understanding of the complexity of the problem space you are working in, it's composition and behavior, and so forth and so on. Nor do I, of course, but then understanding is not a binary. > I'm happy to continue this conversation with you, but I'm having a difficult time understanding what the hell you're talking about. Perhaps the complexity is beyond the capability of our tools. It seems to me that science has similar problems in a wide variety of ways...I wonder what they did to deal with this problem such that they could advance their field. > I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and chalk that up to me being a native English speaker. As am I, although I am "on the spectrum" (to put it nicely and imprecisely), so I think a common language is only a small slice of the problems we are experiencing. > Should you choose to provide specific, relevant and supportable ideas, I will happily continue to engage. 99% of the general population is focused on object level details, or some bastardized illusion of that, my interest is in where that comes from. > I hope you have a good day. Thanks, you as well. I realize that the way I write is hard to understand (and not only because of the subject matter), but be that as it may, I propose to you that despite this, "something" does indeed exist here, and that it is worth understanding (or at least trying to understand), assuming that you ~truly care about the things you seem to care about (generally: the well being of the people within overall humanity - now, and in the future). PS: for some extra fun: what do you think I am "up to" "here" (and elsewhere)? I will give you a hint: I propose to you that there is a "level" of sorts that ~exists, that this level can be ~seen, and that you currently do not have the means to see it. How's that for provocative (and hyper-confident, plausibly bordering on sheer delusion) rhetoric!!?? But then at the same time: what if it's ~true? Or maybe even more interesting: what if it scales? https://genius.com/Dr-seuss-oh-the-places-youll-go-excerpt-annotated https://genius.com/Dr-seuss-oh-the-places-youll-go-excerpt-a... (It's an interesting site, this genius.com - I wonder if there may be some unrealized and unharvested value there. I sometimes wonder if the same is true of the one we are on.)