Secret Chief
Vetted Member
His post count certainly suggests so.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do ideas exist?
- Thread starter Quintessence
- Start date
McBell
Unbound
So it is your opinion that an idea ceases to exist, when exactly?
Based upon your claim in the above post, it was as soon as the idea began?
How does that work, since you are still talking about said idea long after it was "begun"?
Ideas exist, but they don't have independent existence of the mind.
Tambourine
Well-Known Member
We can record them and pass them on to a potentially uncountable number of other minds.
I suppose so, but they seem to require a medium of some sort, which they can't exist independently of
Perhaps it might be easiest to say that ideas only exist in the human realm, and mind, but if we observe animal behaviour then it might also seem obvious that they too have ideas - about how to solve problems, for example - especially when such is passed on to others, which often is the case within social groups. We will probably have issues if we don't see other animals solving, what to most of us would appear to be problems, as being essentially any different from what humans do in this regard.
Ideas might be about real things - when appertaining to physical things (like designing and making a lock) or non-physical (like designing a system of representation for government), or might just be imaginary (as per Harry Potter or ghosts or an afterlife
), and often ideas will have short or long lives. How long might be down to the numbers in which such ideas exist or upon anything material that tends to keep them alive doing this. And one could make the point, as many no doubt have suggested, that ideas exist awaiting to be discovered, like mathematical laws and proofs or similar - which do seem as such. Basic things like gravity seem to have existed ever since the universe formed, and even though any description of such might change over time, gravity itself was always there. So for me at least, ideas must exist, often outside of human existence even though their duration is not certain and where any particular idea might flash in and out of existence, often depending upon its value. And ideas tend come in many forms, some useful and some not so.
But presumably it does take some level of intelligence to recognise any idea.
Well, waves need some sort of medium to exist within. I don't think anyone is going to argue that there is no difference between calm seas and a tsunami, or that tsunamis don't exist because they require a liquid medium. Ideas have more independence than tsunamis in this respect, as they can travel outside of their active medium. One might argue that "mind" will wander outside of its usual domain when pulled around by ideas, just as water will be pulled out of its normal domain by tsunamis. (Some ideas do suggest that people are being pulled out of their minds at times!)
Heyo
Veteran Member
I do. But unlike Plato I don't count ideals as real. They exist in their own plane.
5 Planes of Existence
Mr Spinkles
Mr
Okay I apologize in advance for the long post but I wanted to share some more thoughts ...
I think once we accept that ideas are tied to the physical world - not human brains necessarily, but the physical world - it unlocks so many interesting questions.
If ideas exist, and they are tied to the physical world, how could we recognize an alien idea, if we encountered one? E.g., an alien signal from space? What does this tell us about the kinds of ideas that are possible, and what characteristics differentiate an "idea" expressed by some information-processing machine, vs. a curious pattern found in nature?
How quickly, and with what accuracy, can ideas travel and be disseminated? E.g., at what point does technological or social progress become hindered by the fact that we are stuck with finite, hominid brains, which can only deal with so much information? What does this tell us about job specialization, education, and the technologies we use to store and share information? Is the ideal education a liberal arts + science, broad education - or do we need people to specialize in order to master what has been done before, and actually make progress?
Are social systems like capitalism, and democracy, the best ways to collect, and act upon, the information in millions of human minds, to achieve the least-bad outcome? Does capitalism work if information is not flowing properly among market participants? Does democracy? Are there areas where we can "de-bottleneck" the flow of information? Are there areas like privacy where we need to "re-bottleneck" that flow?
What will happen as technologies like IBM's Watson increasingly automate the information-processing labor of humans? Historically, harnessing the power of animals and engines freed up human labor in the production of food (we harnessed energy to produce a surplus of energy). Then, automation freed up human labor in the complex manipulation of parts to make machines and chemicals (we harnessed complex machines to create a surplus of machines at our disposal). Now, AI seems to be on a path to free up human labor in the collection, processing and even decision-making on the basis of information. How will this impact our descendants?
Think about weapons in war. We put energy into a weapon so that it becomes very efficient at acting with deadly force on other humans. And yet, even while the arc of human history is that our weapons have become far more deadly ... actual conflict, in many ways, has diminished. An exchange of fire between two nations can occur that kills a dozen soldiers, say, and it immediately makes international news headlines and countries call for calm and de-escalation between the two sides.
How does improvement in the flow and processing of information by humans play a role in this arc? Is it possible that the "spiral of violence" that occurs in history can get short-circuited by a fast, modern communication system between and among nations?
Think about a Bronze-age battle where the only command and control is by horseback, or drums, or trumpets. Think about the chaos of a triumphant army entering a besieged city. Now think about how that changed with the advent of professional, uniformed armies with more advanced command and control and the development of written (if not totally obeyed) rules of war. Now think about today: diplomats can instantly talk to each other wherever they are in the world, to possibly defuse a conflict and create understanding. Moreover, whereas people in history used to die within a few miles of where they were born, today more people in every country are getting to know each other via internet discussions, watching each others' movies, travel (notwithstanding the recent events of COVID 19), etc.
To take a recent topic of interest: how does the physical flow of information exacerbate racial inequality? How could we harness information in a different way, to improve racial equality? I think most of us assume that our minds are independent of our bodies, and if we can imagine what it's like to be another person, then we can understand that person and treat them fairly. But, one of the things I think we are learning is that may not be the case. My ape-brain may not have enough horsepower to make objective judgments about people of other races, and my imagination may not allow me to understand their experience, without living it. If so, perhaps the dominant racial group needs to be aware of their own physical limitations in processing this kind of information, and take active steps to address it (instead of passively just saying "I don't see race"). Food for thought.
To me, an important development in the progress of our humanity will be realizing that ideas, like energy, are not "magic". Like energy, ideas are tied to the physical world and must thereby be harnessed to our advantage - not simply willed to do so. Harnessing them requires work - work we have to do in the physical world, through science, technology, and education. It does not just happen through magic or prayer.
Perhaps the most interesting question, to me: is there something about the laws of physics that tends to favor an increase, or proliferation, of information / ideas in the universe over time? Or do physical laws only make this possible, and we will see ebbs and flows of "ideas" in the universe as intelligent civilizations are born, and then die? Why do we live in the kind of universe, with the kind of physical laws, that allows things like ideas to come into existence?
/rant ... sorry ... so many interesting questions!
I think once we accept that ideas are tied to the physical world - not human brains necessarily, but the physical world - it unlocks so many interesting questions.
If ideas exist, and they are tied to the physical world, how could we recognize an alien idea, if we encountered one? E.g., an alien signal from space? What does this tell us about the kinds of ideas that are possible, and what characteristics differentiate an "idea" expressed by some information-processing machine, vs. a curious pattern found in nature?
How quickly, and with what accuracy, can ideas travel and be disseminated? E.g., at what point does technological or social progress become hindered by the fact that we are stuck with finite, hominid brains, which can only deal with so much information? What does this tell us about job specialization, education, and the technologies we use to store and share information? Is the ideal education a liberal arts + science, broad education - or do we need people to specialize in order to master what has been done before, and actually make progress?
Are social systems like capitalism, and democracy, the best ways to collect, and act upon, the information in millions of human minds, to achieve the least-bad outcome? Does capitalism work if information is not flowing properly among market participants? Does democracy? Are there areas where we can "de-bottleneck" the flow of information? Are there areas like privacy where we need to "re-bottleneck" that flow?
What will happen as technologies like IBM's Watson increasingly automate the information-processing labor of humans? Historically, harnessing the power of animals and engines freed up human labor in the production of food (we harnessed energy to produce a surplus of energy). Then, automation freed up human labor in the complex manipulation of parts to make machines and chemicals (we harnessed complex machines to create a surplus of machines at our disposal). Now, AI seems to be on a path to free up human labor in the collection, processing and even decision-making on the basis of information. How will this impact our descendants?
Think about weapons in war. We put energy into a weapon so that it becomes very efficient at acting with deadly force on other humans. And yet, even while the arc of human history is that our weapons have become far more deadly ... actual conflict, in many ways, has diminished. An exchange of fire between two nations can occur that kills a dozen soldiers, say, and it immediately makes international news headlines and countries call for calm and de-escalation between the two sides.
How does improvement in the flow and processing of information by humans play a role in this arc? Is it possible that the "spiral of violence" that occurs in history can get short-circuited by a fast, modern communication system between and among nations?
Think about a Bronze-age battle where the only command and control is by horseback, or drums, or trumpets. Think about the chaos of a triumphant army entering a besieged city. Now think about how that changed with the advent of professional, uniformed armies with more advanced command and control and the development of written (if not totally obeyed) rules of war. Now think about today: diplomats can instantly talk to each other wherever they are in the world, to possibly defuse a conflict and create understanding. Moreover, whereas people in history used to die within a few miles of where they were born, today more people in every country are getting to know each other via internet discussions, watching each others' movies, travel (notwithstanding the recent events of COVID 19), etc.
To take a recent topic of interest: how does the physical flow of information exacerbate racial inequality? How could we harness information in a different way, to improve racial equality? I think most of us assume that our minds are independent of our bodies, and if we can imagine what it's like to be another person, then we can understand that person and treat them fairly. But, one of the things I think we are learning is that may not be the case. My ape-brain may not have enough horsepower to make objective judgments about people of other races, and my imagination may not allow me to understand their experience, without living it. If so, perhaps the dominant racial group needs to be aware of their own physical limitations in processing this kind of information, and take active steps to address it (instead of passively just saying "I don't see race"). Food for thought.
To me, an important development in the progress of our humanity will be realizing that ideas, like energy, are not "magic". Like energy, ideas are tied to the physical world and must thereby be harnessed to our advantage - not simply willed to do so. Harnessing them requires work - work we have to do in the physical world, through science, technology, and education. It does not just happen through magic or prayer.
Perhaps the most interesting question, to me: is there something about the laws of physics that tends to favor an increase, or proliferation, of information / ideas in the universe over time? Or do physical laws only make this possible, and we will see ebbs and flows of "ideas" in the universe as intelligent civilizations are born, and then die? Why do we live in the kind of universe, with the kind of physical laws, that allows things like ideas to come into existence?
/rant ... sorry ... so many interesting questions!
We Never Know
No Slack
Perhaps it might be easiest to say that ideas only exist in the human realm, and mind, but if we observe animal behaviour then it might also seem obvious that they too have ideas - about how to solve problems, for example - especially when such is passed on to others, which often is the case within social groups. We will probably have issues if we don't see other animals solving, what to most of us would appear to be problems, as being essentially any different from what humans do in this regard.
Ideas might be about real things - when appertaining to physical things (like designing and making a lock) or non-physical (like designing a system of representation for government), or might just be imaginary (as per Harry Potter or ghosts or an afterlife
So for me at least, ideas must exist, often outside of human existence even though their duration is not certain and where any particular idea might flash in and out of existence, often depending upon its value. And ideas tend come in many forms, some useful and some not so.
But presumably it does take some level of intelligence to recognise any idea.
How does anything recognise an idea?
If a lizard sees an ant trail and decided laying by the ant trail is an easy way to get food, is that an idea? Is it a recognised idea?
McBell
Unbound
I was not sure.
Thus the questions.
No idea.
And until we get to understand the languages that various animals use to pass on information, or to grasp such, we will have have to wait. Some ideas, even in humans, hardly need words to express - much humour relies on such - but it's undoubted that such occurs. We would have a hard job explaining how various animals are successful in solving problems without them having some kind of similarity with humans, even if it is mostly based in imagery. Since, once they learn to do various tasks, they can then do such easily it surely must be that some 'idea' of what they understand is established rather than a new instinct being formed.Ideas are real but do not exist yet.