I know this is a popular r*ddit topic, but I'm curious if rdrama bussy conniseurs overwhelmingly have an internal monologue. Despite being tards, the average user here is definitely less tarded than the average r*dditor. The vast majority of people I've seen online claiming they have no internal monologue are foids, which makes sense tbh.
Do you have an internal monologue? And have you accepted that you're a subhuman r-slur if you don't?
- 274
- 60
Top Poster of the Day:
antonio
Current Registered Users: 25,659
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Live commit: 8b334e1
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
why canโt you just do a hacking reflectorino without the words
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Why can't you reproduce without having DNA that can be copied and also used as an instruction? Why can't you make a hammer that can be disassembled and used to make another hammer, without a stronger hammer used to disassemble the hammer?
I'm not saying this shit is hard impossible my friend Horatio, but it's unlikely. So unlikely it could be a solution to the Fermi paradox btw.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
ehh so this is what I talk about Lacan's symbolic order for:
you've got two tribal societies in proximity whose feud is ended in a marriage ceremony where an art piece is created and divided into two parts, with both towns taking one part. This is a symbolic recording of a story in which the words are irrelevant, if they exist at all. (This example is based on the use of for instance totem poles in native American treaty-making.)
The chiefs might talk about peace and might talk about the joining of their families but that's all implicit.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
DNA isnโt super relevant! because it, and brains, existed for a billion years before homo sapien spoken words did.
you can actually make hammers that can disassemble and duplicate themselves without a stronger hammer. โflint arrowheadsโ and wood would like a word with you.
thinking is in words in the same way computers compute in their UI. it is not.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Did that sound good in your head? Because no shit bucko.
RNA was the first quine, DNA was a more robust approach, the important thing is that you have something that can be duplicated verbatim and that can also be used as a recipe for building things. So you don't get a "stronger hammer that disassembles this hammer to build a copy" issue.
Sure there are occasions when the laws of the world just so happen to allow you to break out a piece of obsidian with a blunt rock or something. This makes me believe that we are alone in the universe, probably.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
humans can duplicate actions and sensations without words anyway.
how is this fermi related? origin of life rare?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context