PSYCHOSPIRITOLOGY AND AUTODIDACTICS

Philosophy
Connections
Selflearning
Miscellaneous
 

Two words about myself:
 
I am author of the book "Autodidactic"(ritten and published in Russian in Moscow in
1994) and many others (novels, poetry, philosophy). When invited to, I can to play on violin during a single performance all 24 capriccios by N.Paganini, because I have graduated from the conservatory in Kiev (Ukraine).
Also I compose music with help of "Cakewalk" (more than 200symfony are already saved) and draw with help of "Picture-publisher","Adobe" etc.
Valery A.Kourinsky,
member of:
International Pedagogic Academy;
National  Intellectual and Social Technologies Academy (Russia);
Russian People Academy of Sciences;
International Informatization Academy;
Ukrainian National Progress Academy of Sciences;
and president
of International Autodidactic Academy.



To begin with, some ironic stuff about...
 
        SOME PREFERENCES FOR COMPUTERIZATION

Path we have had chosen once upon a time for computerization is too
self-sufficiently intuitive. If we breed a new descendant of mankind would
be not bad to have a bit more care about our mission.
It is not late to correct some features in this chaotic area. And the first
and most important item in the correction-program has to be humanization of
the whole our electronic enterprise' essence.
In one word the selection of computers is a kind of work giving out a lot
of countless additive and abruptly appearing tasks, or, more precisely,
their silhouettes discovered in future.
Now we have the problem of would-be-parents. Using another words, we are
living through the prenatal period of our AI-"child". And his life (and
lives) is (are) predestined by our today's behavior. If so, we must clearer
define the space of the best-for-our breed.
And  this is a teacher's question, that of pedagogy and education.
Who has any doubts about   "importance to earnest" as much before the
appearing of a kid as after that?
Too much intuition is the charlatanry.
And too much sureness laid upon the arithmetic is the dangerous daydream.
Because of that I assume that AI-sciences must be more human &humanitarian.

Naturally, it is a merry thing to maintain the condition for life-long
abstract reverie, but our consciousness has a strictness of the GENERAL LAW
OF BEING of which It is a private part if not all then of most people. It
is not Id. It is evidently a chief part
of Self .And we say leaving apart all old and even not too much old
definitions that such a Self is not instrumental. It is commanding
everything we must do in non-biological life (i.e.in mental one, that is
may be teleologically predestined by just mentioned Law), soundlessly
whispering always as if aside but yet from the very center of our entity.
And how are the things with future AI generation of...us?

It could not bother to allow intruding of simple modesty in the day and
works of AI demiurges! We shall, then, create a list of preferences for the
computerization itself, not being afraid of the our own common but still
scientific sense deafness.
Thus, we must construct not the optional machine but mental system of the
ever optimal choice between evil and boon. And which has to exist (live?)
in the space of mankind's feeling-thought evolution. Especially if its
biological one, as we admit, will be successfully finished.
So we may else for a half of a century quote the wise passages from
classics as well as from each other and not to use the notion of the
beautiful, confusing mistakenly civilization with culture, IQ with morals,
and life with death.
A single way to solve not for everyone attainable and achievable problem is
creation of an electronic filter to eliminate the senses that are not the
analogies of human experiences of Beauty (=Love).  And that is the first
preference at level of a commandment.
 Now we have the case when similarity between creator (computerizing
humans) and created (hand-and-brain-made heir  of them). It is, naturally,
going about internal resemblance. And here the "creator" has opportunity
with help of his "kid" to meliorate his (man?)-Kind. In any case he may to
keep trying that as much as possible.
And this is second preference.
AI-"parent" is "collective personality" that has the deep feeling of
conditionally eternal cultural space as a work apparatus of first-rate
importance.
So is the preference number three.
Psychic over-tension and often mental exhausting, psychosthenic and
neurotic states, neurosis and psychosis all are contra-indications for
further activity in creation of a new "post-human" generation. A man with
anorexia to the life may be only the author of a monster-misanthrope.
AI-"dad-and-mom" must be a wights with a stormy spirit and (therefore?)
calm soul.
And that all is the forth preference.
Otherwise the lady Computerization is a priori a great philosopher.
Everyone without acute and constant sensations of unite of opposites is an
intellectually poor ancestor for such a strikingly brilliant child as we
imagine him in romantic clouds of virtual space.
Such is the fifth preference.
Vanity in general is a bad girl-friend, but being a too long while side by
side with the computerizing people it becomes a kind of poison, which that
people unfortunately are ready transmit into blood and thought of future.
The beauty of compu-landscape does not abolish the charm of all former and
still living views belonging to our common thesaurus forever.
We count further: on queue the sixth item...
But moreover there is such a stuff as individuality. We remember-"die
Persoenlichkeit". That means that everyone of our AI-progeny must be
unique. Otherwise our job will be much worse than that of God. And it will
be better to return to Him his evolutionary care...
Thus appears else one preference, the temporarily last.
 
                        NEW PHILOSOPHY? I DON’T KNOW...
                                            Almost Scherzo diabolico
 
Everyday we are getting some internal task to solve by very intimate internal means.
Everyday we are born as a live bulk of questions that we too often hide from
ourselves. That is not connected with so called Knowledge, it is wholly consecrated to
the all-penetrating our tiny knowledge.
The our problem  is workoholism.
And else— that of not having acknowledged  it.
 We even do not dream to rebel and overthrow the now only seemingly good tradition.
Now we do not feel so much respect using the word “to work” as it did our ancestors.
They more loved the work as such and we love (from time to time) in the best case a
”good  job”, a “fine job” or in general “our job”. Or may be the money that we receive
for it.
The community of humans is wishing to repose.
The rest is idée fixe of modernity.
It is not bad and not good as well. It simply ’is’.
The  (X) of regard or esteem to  today is imaginative. We compose this little
problem of evaluation of the evil and the boon. And all we need is to answer
requirements of deep wishes. They are indispensable only when are answered.

And my vague dream about AI-wishes is at the level of co-feeling with them which are
penetrated by senseless tiredness.

I would like AI were transfusingly joined with the NS (Natural Soul). With the same
NS that we as it seems to me have. Namely NS I need to have in my descendant
made
from another than I am material.
The formula NS (I repeat decoding of the abbreviation: Natural Soul), neverthe-more,
still remains unknown. And formula of pleasure. Or, for instance, that of the "dolce far
niente", which often confuse with actual relaxation. And the latter is
A (Activity) that one chose between MOA (many others activities) using  his E
(essence) and {......}(something). Thus we have:
A = MOA - [(MOA - E){......}].

But if very seriously, I sympathize with super-sciencelikefullness of my
trans-scholar-sheeped and over-electronized hyper-colleagues.
With very much regards
Valery Kourinsky

 
 
 
                          PLANNING A COMPUTER-PHILISTINE?
The difference between two chief types of people is evident. The unconditionally bigger portion of humans inclines towards existence in its own “horizontal” history. But that least prefers to live having in its heart the  history of mankind. And it takes part in actually human evolution, which exists physically as our second evolution. Notwithstanding with the traditional view at this side of being we have two paths of AI development.
If we participate in creating of our heir in evolutionary process, that participation must be more carefully weighed and thought over.
The Turing machine can’t to be responsible for our future.  And we are, when transplanting our ideals into iron mother-womb. In a leapfrog state of mind, which is provoked by the philosophical blunders and even by the physical blindness. Out of our formally clever but in the depth bosh-like traditionalistic and cold pseudo-thinking.
Today’s AI professionals risk to make “J.R.Oppenheimer
lapse” that is inevitable in the space of total rationalism. Too
self-confident intellectualism is nowadays obsolete. But it is
not something neutral and passive. In the contrary, its
influence is harmful for us in the same grade as absence of
finest mental and uniquely human experiences. Without them
we’ll construct defective chop- logic-reasoning-monster
instead of a creature that is may-be-higher than
contemporaneous  human.
                                                “ Now the mass of mankind are evidently quite slavish in their tastes, preferring a life suitable to beasts, but they get some ground for their view from the fact that many of those in high places share the tastes of Sardanapallus.”
                                                    Aristotle “Nicomachean Ethics”,Chapter 5.
And now is the difference so great?.. Characteristics of the
culture of “Santa-Barbara”-like serials isn’t opposite to just
quoted.   And in “high places” are not only politicians but also
scholars. As much as they generate, they say, the AI-phase of
our development.
 
AND now else more seriously...
 
                             IQ AND NATURAL CLEVERNESS
The humans are prisoners of pseudo-clearness. They assume the priority of the well-known  intelligence.
And it is received apodictically. So dictates the common  sense. So thinks everybody.
And only the microscopic part of us realizes the degree of mental conformism that is present in that case.
The so-called INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITY is as a rule only the way to obtain the known answer. Are supposed the solutions in the end of a book of problems. And the stream of fallacies begins.
The lie is situated in those places of our discourse  where we don’t remember of principal unrepeatedness of perception phenomena.
Modern common logic is Euclid geometry of mentality. The existence of space-curves is for it a kind of myth. The curves are for it somewhere, not here and now, not in me, not always.  Everything happens on the straight line.   That is on the line of lie.

The mental conformism prohibits creativeness automatically and unobservably. Instead of creativeness we have IQ. The executioner in chamois gloves of commendations...
 On the wall of our being are hung the pollsters, whose text is: “Wanted thinking naturally!”
But what does it mean: to think naturally?..

First of all it means not to know answer every time someone is going to think. Not to know there and especially there, where there is “I know this” (W.  Shakespeare “King Henry Fifth”).
Then it means to be beautifully suspicious about the near discovery. And revelations in form of scientific insights.

The natural cleverness equals to liberation. In first turn from paralysis of own intellect.  And from fear to be clever. And from  poisoned sureness. And from many IQ-specters.
The real thought are nearest relatives of sensations. The nearer the more thoughts they are...
The uncommonly and at first sight barbaric turns to be precious. But the community appreciates at once a depth that it morphologically knows about. And a genuine depth is always another namely as a landscape, never seen before. The genuine depth is unprofessable  *timescape* where you feel happiness.

The natural cleverness gains opposite  side of sense. Dialectic really rules it.
Today the possibilities to construct non-specious mind become gradually broader. Step by step humans will understand that their minds are truly artificial. Man therefore demiurgically creates  after his similarity
whatsoever he’d like to. Among his last great successes we observe AI, which is, naturally, more artificial than our  artificialness is artificial...

Our main problem to solve is:
 how to become drunk in the moral and legal and non-alcoholic and non-external way?
Only then,  that is when we are awfully sober without constant touch to a string of creative  awareness, we are completely and awfully normal = empty = dehumanized = decreativized.
And what can I in this state? Only passionately want to narcotize me as soon as possible. And if I don’t *rook* the endogene opiates, I have to swallow something  from a bottle. And everything’s great! And I am in own eyes “a good sport” (F. S. Fitzgerald “The Great Gatsby”)...
 
We, whose convictions are poetological, can answer the  question emerged. And namely: where can I take the above string from?
In the area of natural cleverness. Only there one looks at ever changing world, only there he can be always drunk in the better meaning of word, i.e. by means of self-produced  with help of new philosophy of life awarding material particles of vitality,  different peptides, endorphins fir example etc.

Socrates said:
“Wonder is the feeling of a philosopher, and philosophy begins in wonder”. Thus in wonder begins and our thought that is impossible to imagine without  philosophy.
But today’s philosophy inevitably moves forward to more humanity and high psychic experience.

How to make real what is said about? That’s enough to become acquainted with psychopoetology, autodidactics that is basically different from all existing old and modern pedagogical systems. Future belongs to them who enforces himself with realities of natural clevereness.
 
               PRINCIPLE OF UNSTRAIGHTFORWARDNESS

 
 
 
 
 
©1997Valery Kourinsky