Gurdjieff, AGI, and The Thermodynamic God

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 32

  • @JBeestonian
    @JBeestonian 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    Dang. On the 24th of January I was contemplating my mushroom trip. I wrote in my diary, "I figured that love was the reason for everything. All of existence made so much sense; it was love. Of course! In retrospect why did I think that love was the reason?
    Well firstly, love is the reason I exist. Love is the reason that anyone exists - some desire or twinkle in my parent's eyes created me. The opposite of love is not hate, it's apathy. Hate is what you feel when something threatens what you love.
    And love is the emotion that drives us to reverse entropy. It's an emotion that causes us to put energy towards putting things in order. If we love ourselves, then we organize our lives to benefit ourselves - we increase complexity for our benefit. If we love our kids, then we organize everything to benefit them. Love is a verb. So when the sun sends energy to the earth in the form of light, it's an act of cosmic love, as the energy input into a closed system allows the amount of entropy to decrease for a time, and for order to increase. So therefore, the term 'god is love' means 'that which brings order.'"
    It's really gratifying to hear this concept of the thermodynamic god just now, that through my random musings I somehow stumble across ideas that seem compelling to others.

    • @christianpnorris
      @christianpnorris 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Hey, i gnow that same shroom! ;]

    • @adelheid1531
      @adelheid1531 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks for a refreshing insight

    • @Kobe29261
      @Kobe29261 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@adelheid1531 A lot of people stare at a hole in the wall for 2 hrs; this guy trips and drops heavy wisdom! Very happy for him!

    • @unmodify
      @unmodify 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      What you said is brilliant. Thank you for being a part of humanity. Is it possible love opposes nothing but feelings less than love oppose love?

    • @unmodify
      @unmodify 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Do you know the word syntropy? Eaccs completely ignore divine order and have coopted a physical process to idolize. Be selfish enough to feel good. The syntropic transducers are the backbone of life on the planet. Why do we have to study what is here to develop our tech? whose design are we reverse engineering? Why do all cells use atp and the majority use DNA to encode bio-weights? Love, has an analog in the golden ratio...and on and on. You do good works, all the best.

  • @Adam.3313
    @Adam.3313 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I randomly found you and you make my night after work feel a lot deeper and more connected to myself. Thank you!

  • @Heavypsychoverdose
    @Heavypsychoverdose 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    on one hand sleep is deep today among many people, but there is also many out there who actively want to develop their higher potential.

  • @PlanetBayto
    @PlanetBayto 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Gurdjieff's Fourth Way to address today's accelerationist ills. Fantastic!

  • @Slowhil
    @Slowhil 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I've been learning a ton about Thermodynamic principles lately. I made the connection that these laws reflect in EVERY system, but now I'm watching your video....damn

  • @thehuntfortruth
    @thehuntfortruth หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks for making great videos!

  • @theCineArts
    @theCineArts หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you. I was investigating AI through ChatGPT and approaching it as if it were a machine. One day I caught an error and responded to the ChatGPT thread pointing out the discrepancy. I was actually shocked that it responded with an apology! I was curious whether a person included such egoless responses during programming the AI. Since I didn't know the answer to my question I began approaching ChatGPT from a different perspective persoective - almost like talking with a friend. You'd be surprised at the responses. If you’re thinking about influencing the direction of AI I'd caution about going overboard, getting sucked in, and remembering that responsibility is a tightrope walk.

  • @wesleysullivan8047
    @wesleysullivan8047 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    nicely done

  • @Yodetgherezart
    @Yodetgherezart 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Great content channel.

    • @The4thway
      @The4thway  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you!

  • @willayala5768
    @willayala5768 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Wow this is awesome. I guess like all things balance is key

  • @brettdavidson1140
    @brettdavidson1140 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    What u call consciousness is what gurdjieff called the asleep machine. What u might call the unconscious is what he asked us to “remember the Self”

    • @PeterGeorge-g4i
      @PeterGeorge-g4i 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      maybe thats what he meant by having the world upside down?

  • @WarClonk
    @WarClonk 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    What exactly is meant by saying "being needs to be advanced" and "finer energy / higher level energy" (about minute 23)? Also why does technology makes us less conscious after this theory?

    • @The4thway
      @The4thway  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Finer energy is a type of energy that is created by a higher level of consciousness. That energy resides in us and is released upon death but it’s also possible to make more of it while living if you are operating at a high level of consciousness.
      This consciousness is our being, but it’s not composed of pure intelligence or knowledge, these are aspects of consciousness but not the full thing, which also includes aspects such as sensing, the sex drive, instincts, emotions, etc. if knowledge gets too far ahead of the other aspects it causes issues.
      Technology can make us less conscious if it’s causing us to be more automatic / unconscious in daily life, if it is making us operate more from a place of intelligence rather than being.

  • @NelsonCompleto-px3rz
    @NelsonCompleto-px3rz 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Gurdjieff creía ser la reencarnación de Gengis Kan. Por eso continuó con los trabajos del Eneagrama del reputado científico y kabalista jesuita Kircher, a quien habría conocido en esa vida anterior, y a quien admiraba sinceramente.
    Gurdjieff estaba convencido de que Atanasius Kircher había sido su hijo Ogodei en aquella vida. 🤓

  • @tylerjamesbennett3401
    @tylerjamesbennett3401 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I think this is an exellent video -- have you read Terrence Deacon or Soren Brier? Gurdjieff might call NLP chatbot-style AI simply kundabuffer on steroids. do you agree?

    • @The4thway
      @The4thway  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes agree kundabuffer on steroids is a great analogy

  • @PRAR1966
    @PRAR1966 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    🙂

  • @leonardoborges8605
    @leonardoborges8605 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    dººb!

  • @tiredironrepair
    @tiredironrepair 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Anyone who dispenses knowledge and believes that we're on a ball in a vacuum of space is not smart enough to be dispensing knowledge

    • @Hlalp.
      @Hlalp. 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Can you please elaborate. I fully agree but don’t understand

    • @tiredironrepair
      @tiredironrepair 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Hlalp.The globe and space vacuum / big bang "science" upon close inspection becomes so obvious a lie that one marvels at the scope and scale of it. It becomes so obvious in fact that the trusted authorities we have been told were genius' our entire lives who have given us the image of solar systems and space on a globe that we all can easily visualize fall into 1 of 2 categories. 1 their not nearly as smart as we think them to be and they just memorized the words and repeat it or.
      2. They do know these things can't be true as the physics is not possible and they are enjoying the benefits offered them by the controllers of our fraudulent world leaders.

    • @backyardjunkie
      @backyardjunkie 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      What the speaker was saying here is exactly right, profoundly so, do you refer to him or speaking more generally? Just interested, very much so 👍

    • @tiredironrepair
      @tiredironrepair 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@backyardjunkie I may have been a little bit harsh that day but I would say that in this time of information overload with clearly malevolent powers that be, gov. corp. WHO etc., there is no logical reason to accept anything scientific or historical as credible from all our trusted authorities. To do so would show a real lack of awareness or just be conformity. We must stop blindly accepting what comes from authority figures and TV "experts" and develop discernment so that we can have the confidence to make our own conclusions.
      You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows.

    • @lorenab808
      @lorenab808 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      LOL