-Playing the part of a common man, isn’t as simple as it is often claimed to be-

We all think differently and that’s what makes us different and be an individual. Consider the fact the inanimate objects do not have life but must have some sort of thinking as it does things it’s supposed to in exactly the same way as its supposed to do, rather efficient I won’t disagree to that.

May be the compete workings of a mind t is it i understand one single task completely. Consider the machines we created for the very reason perfume tasks in a much difficult way. And sometimes aren’t as efficient. Let’s say we compare the function of potato to your iPhone would be lunacy. But in all the tests it can be understood that the functioning of the potato was much better as it devotes its complete energy to being a potato not like a matching which is a composition of many things which do not work properly.

Say you overhear a conversation and you do not like it. However the bits and pieces of it you did, wouldn’t it be interesting to consider the possibility of how that person has reached to a point of argument that it is currently in and not worry about something that’s not even out concern in the first place?

So I say a simple fact of life cannot be defined by the arguments of some smart people and you would always need to speculate your versions of the argument and then find the conclusion as the very result was correct because we hold a tremendous affection for our own intelligence. But an object doing simple task with no conscience or intelligence, by the classical definition of it, performs better than complex machine. So altogether, a thing doesn’t think your way doesn’t mean it doesn’t think. It thinks differently, possible even just in an atomic manner.

It must be safe to assume that intelligence is doing one single task with perfect dedication over a very long period of time, by that corollary machines are smarter and are evolving faster and we are being more organise, leaving very little place for us to feel.

Now consider this…

We’re nothing more than the sum total of the things that affected us in the past and will be nothing to the world if we couldn’t add anything to the world. Your actions are all that matter. To the people. To your environment. People are nothing more than a set of minimum actions which led them to a decorous state or otherwise. An action needs to be performed doesn’t matter if it’s logical or otherwise. It’s pure entropy. Like, religion is a set of good and bad actions of people who think differently from people who do not believe in it.

Just because an entity thinks differently it doesn’t mean that its cognition is in question.

Quite similarly those of you interested in machine learning can understand the basic concept of G(L) = { V, T, S, P}. If say a particular set of actions aren’t to your liking you will contradict that set with another action or inaction. The nature of the action however is entirely at the mercy of the environments, the entities involved and other certain objects which might not even be part of the system. So who ever said that the controlling the actions are indeed the only thing in our control was probably right, but there are places where one action meshes with the other. Perhaps if framed correctly a commonality of actions. A mere part of a “common” man if well played could turn out to be the nexus of a set of actions that might lead to something decorous or indecorous.

Merely playing the part of a common man, isn’t as simple as it is often claimed to be.

– Priest


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s