nah, i like bodies
nah, i like bodies
explain to me what is so good about it?Originally Posted by Reficulris
(i'm bored and tired)
they cuddle, they laugh, they eat, they dance, they hurt sometimes but other times they feel awesome, they move me around...there's a few more, but i'm also (relatively) bored and tired.
Yeah bodies are pretty cool, I want one. Besides, you can't think of creative things to say about bodies without first having a body. Bodies rock.
Fuck bodies drive the world
imma upload my mind to an indestructible supercomputer first chance i get. then put the supercomputer inside a spaceship with a faster-than-light drive and launch myself to the edge of the universe. i can live in a virtual reality till i get there. who needs a frail, fleshy body anyway?
I was recently talking to a random oldish guy who kept trying to hit on me using slightly racist asian jokes who said that we would soon upload our brains into supercomputers and explore space with them leaving our bodies behind. when I mentioned that this seemed "sad" he said that "not sad, just eerie I guess" and I wanted to make an argument for why this was more sad than eerie and why our bodies and senses are a huge part of the richness of our experience. but he talked right over me and never gave me a chance.
Without belaboring the obvious, it's easier for intuitive types to make the leap, esp. Ni types because of the introversion multiplier.
But with the level of medical technology we'll have, we could tweak our bodies to be immortal without needing to leave them: using nanoprobes to fight infections, cloning of organs, preservation of telomere length, etc.
And we could always just plug ourselves in temporarily to experience whichever virtual reality we wanted. Even if we did upload ourselves permanently, we may still be able to replace real sensations with virtual facsimiles.
For exclusively emulated sex at absolute firthest corner of the "party"?
Dat intuitive leap.
strange alien babes are calling
1) I actually read the other comment you wrote right before falling asleep lol. (i think virtual sex would be easier for him b/c there would be no barriers to full immersion)
2) I think that "easiness of the leap" would prove to be impoverishing for the experience of Ni people, who seem to enjoy it when people force them to climb giant mountains or whatever.
3) The idea of immortality feels similar to artificially bringing yourself to an afterlife- for whatever reason it feels like crossing the barrier to another "phase" and not like a "life."
4) As long as the people designing these things are intuitives, I don't trust the quality of the virtual sensations lol. I will just pitch my mind into space and write space poetry- it's basically the same thing anyway.
"Enjoying giant mountains" - snickers ^^
I now understand what OP means by SEI's flirting excessively; Those sexual innuendo's, @lemontrees, you're scaring all the gamma's!!! ;-)
it's definitely my nyphomaniac tendencies causing all the problems
Last edited by lemontrees; 06-27-2014 at 01:19 PM.
I'm curious. Would you feel it's sad although we had authentically seeming environment? I think I would stay there, especially if it's means that my body could be kept more in a cheap stasis while my mind resides in a paradise of abundance.
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
I figure this will be understood through many empirical tests on the regions of the brain dealing with sensation. You only really need to activate the inherent sensations already present.4) As long as the people designing these things are intuitives,
To create virtual sensations, just artificially stimulate the region of the brain responsible for them, and these can be custom fit for each individual depending on his normal reactions. If done right, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
It would be funny watching eggheads trying to design an orgasm from scratch though, given their lack of experience.I don't trust the quality of the virtual sensations lol
Last edited by xerx; 06-27-2014 at 02:46 PM.
I don't think everything can be achieved or encountered through the mind and that to think so is both a temptation and illusion. I also automatically resist the idea of "paradise of abundance" because it seems like nothing that abundant is really a paradise- limitations and groundings keep things interesting and worthwhile.
But that's just a sort of my immediate emotional reaction. In terms of actual pragmatics of authentic seeming environment- I'm not sure if something like that could be achieved but if it is my fear is that some other kind of relationship to reality is being lost. But I wouldn't actually know about this- maybe it will just be a different kind of sensing.
Basically it's not the actual idea of a stimulated environment that makes me not fully agree but rather the psychology behind people who seem drawn to these things.
I wonder where those virtual sensations would be coming from- if you would collect sensations that were known on earth, simulate sensations that we "might" feel on different planets if we were there in reality, or explore the kinds of "sensations" that we don't even have a reference point for right now. that could be extremely interesting. but also i'm not sure if it would still be "living" or just an endless hallucinatory thing
I think everyone has experienced orgasm. People masturbate lol
My late, contrived but already written way of saying that argument-
Loss of carnality is a loss because while form certain somewhat intentionally naive solipsistic perspective it subjectively doesn't matter how your perception is created, people want things to matter and what makes things to matter is matter and/or being deterministically tied to consequences, limitations and indeed scarcity of mortal, ticking body, sharing space and leaving consequences for other such people.
I think you've touched on something important. If we ever wanted to experience something from a totally different point of view, like having sex as an elephant, or being a member of the opposite sex, it's not as simple as stimulating the brain we have now; we'd have to fundamentally change the way our brain operates, to bring it closer in line to our target's brain.
I share your skepticism about living life in a manufactured reality, btw, and I'm not particularly enthusiastic about exploring a world where everything is known in advance. But.. I wouldn't write off its potential appeal to the masses just yet. We substitute authentic, face-to-face communication everyday when we use our phone or log on to this forum, and we've deluded ourselves into substituting real life for a world devoid of any physical intimacy.
Escapism does appeal to people, or how, for example, we use the Internet for certain types of intellectual stimulation, or to relay our private feelings in anonymity.
I think everyone has experienced orgasm. People masturbate lol
Last edited by xerx; 06-28-2014 at 01:55 AM.
@xerx
1) I don't know lol.
2) I don't think internet communication is less real. the immediacy of real-life interaction and intimacy isn't there but at the same time it's a genuine kind of exchange of esoteric ideas and relating on the level of understanding. that's a different aspect of existence. obviously a major problem is that things get blurred from there.
The answer is always to just *live.* But sometimes it's easier said than done. Everyone just has to find their own way into it.
Yeah, it´s basically Thomas Nagle´s `what is it like to be a bat`, you kinda have to BE the bat to know what it´s like to be a bat, you can´t just plug in its sensory information.I think you've touched on something important. If we ever wanted to experience something from a totally different point of view, like having sex as an elephant, or being a member of the opposite sex, it's not as simple as stimulating the brain we have now; we'd have to fundamentally change the way our brain operates, to bring it closer in line to our target's brain.
I share your skepticism about living life in a manufactured reality, btw, and I'm not particularly enthusiastic about exploring a world where everything is known in advance. But.. I wouldn't write off its potential appeal to the masses just yet. We substitute authentic, face-to-face communication everyday when we use our phone or log on to this forum, and we've deluded ourselves into substituting real life for a world devoid of any physical intimacy.
Escapism does appeal to people, or how, for example, we use the Internet for certain types of intellectual stimulation, or to relay our private feelings in anonymity.
Ofc that applies to all things, which leads to extreme subjectivity....... also, the counter example ofc is `brains in a vat`.
That is, could you distinguish this from a virtual world if you already ARE in the virtual world?
Also, philosophising about orgasms never is pathetic!!
(oh, and i'd be enthusiastic about such a world, as long as it was something you can step in and out of, more variety and such)
Around the idea of wireheading is the distinction between "liking" and "wanting". These are, at least on chemical levels, different parts of the brain. A huge dopamine kick is subjectively different from a huge mu-opioid kick. @lemontrees lack of interest and lack of liking and contentment are different things. You don't really need variety, you would just need fairly well-quantified tweaks to your brain's structure and function, imo.
Here's what I want to know:
In the real world, we have a sense that visual and auditory information is real or hallucinatory because we know these exist outside of us. Colors represent the wave spectrum, sound represents vibrations in a medium such as air, etc.
But sexual pleasure... this exists only as a qualia generated by the brain, inside the virtual reality created by the mind.
If you had sex inside another virtual reality, and it was an exact duplicate of what you felt before, does that make the feeling "inauthentic?"
Actually, if you administer someone antimuscarinics (Belladonna is the most notorious example) in sufficient quantities, they lose the ability to distinguish dreamed stimuli from "real" stimuli. Similarly, SSRIs (maybe due to action at the sigma receptors) cause vivid dreams that are only filtered from being real memories upon awakening. Experiencing these dreams is a totally convincing hallucination.
Dextromethorphan (10/10, would recommend to aspiring psychonauts), which is a combined sensory dissociative, serotonin reuptake inhibitor, sigma agonist, and very weak m/d/k-opioid agonist, produces dream-like hallucinations that would be totally indistinguishible from reality but for the fact that our highly reinforced heuristics about what is real vs what is fantastic tell us that they're "just dreams".
This doesn't really change your question much, though.
Depends on your value system and if you're inclined to split hairs about what is "real" and "authentic". Despite what I said above, I actually can't answer this totally positively, because it's quite possible that the brain is just the antenna for a radar process of consciousness where it's projected out into the world and returns ~80ms later with information to be processed by the brain's circuitry.But sexual pleasure... this exists only as a qualia generated by the brain, inside the virtual reality created by the mind.
If you had sex inside another virtual reality, and it was an exact duplicate of what you felt before, does that make the feeling "inauthentic?"
If a VR could simulate this projective system by feeding information in directly to the brain, I suppose it could be, for all intents and purposes, "authentic"; certainly totally indistinguishable for it. Unless the brain has some kind of internal checksumming mechanism to make sure it's not being memory-edited
That proves my point though: we know something is a fake sensation or a hallucination in so far as we can compare it to an external frame of reference, which we can in the case of the five senses. Pleasure OTOH doesn't have an external frame of reference.
p.s. I'm assuming that we can flip back and forth between two realities so that at least one of them must be false ( it doesn't have to be our starting reality ).
Experiences and joys of sex do exist to reflect real things like primal survival, sexual reproduction,social position and belonging, love, intimacy and so on and so forth. Many of those things are contingent on or at least made more significant by the mortal paradigm.
Mortal and not sterile(both meanings) is combination of factors that cannot be faked or improved on. Like it is pointless to virtualise game of russian roulette. You would have to make it effectively the same.
PS.Not that i wouldn't like something like a super convincing wet dream to mitigate deprivation damage.
Last edited by Esaman; 06-28-2014 at 08:06 PM.
Those are abstract concepts though. They also only exist inside the brain.
No, they also have factual and physical existence or lack of there of.
How are you defining "external frame of reference"? For example, on some level sexual pleasure is the result of a complex system of electrochemical signalling with one of its ends in an alteration of consciousness.
--
Probably irrelevant to the discussion, but I spent 30 minutes writing this and I don't want to delete it:
Is the flipping between real and virtual realities, or is the flipping the case in my examples where there's one reality and another, more transient one? In the latter case, antimuscarinics are described by people who've taken them as causing complex hallucinations they honest to god do not know aren't real. If that's not enough, there's a rare condition called (if I remember right) peduncular hallucinosis with similar effects of complex hallucinations intruding into consciousness.
I don't think reality or externality is the discriminant here, I think it's "transience", in the sense that no matter how vivid a dream is, you'll tend to wake up where you fell asleep (one hopes
How?
Having an "external frame of reference" means being able to run an empirical test to check if a given qualia maps to an empirical phenomenon, or whether it only exists inside your brain.
For example: Both real and virtual pleasure can be caused by stimulating the same areas of the nervous system. It's impossible to make any meaningful distinction between them since both only exist as [identical] feelings inside of you.
Now, consider perceiving a flower due to light hitting your eyes vs. due to visual nerve stimulation. These are not the same; in one case, the flower exists as an external entity; in the other case, it exists purely as an image created in your mind.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that losing your virginity inside a virtual world is as acceptable as losing it in the real world.
That's an unrelated case altogether. This is more like the brain in a vat experiment where someone is fed stimuli that he can't distinguish the truth value thereof. I was alluding to a case where someone can flip a switch and has a keen sense of when he enters or exits a different reality. Like... today I decided to play Grand Theft Auto XII: Virtual Reality Edition; I put my virtual reality helmet on and robbed a bank; then I took my helmet off, got back to reality and had dinner.--
Probably irrelevant to the discussion, but I spent 30 minutes writing this and I don't want to delete it:
Is the flipping between real and virtual realities, or is the flipping the case in my examples where there's one reality and another, more transient one? In the latter case, antimuscarinics are described by people who've taken them as causing complex hallucinations they honest to god do not know aren't real. If that's not enough, there's a rare condition called (if I remember right) peduncular hallucinosis with similar effects of complex hallucinations intruding into consciousness.
I don't think reality or externality is the discriminant here, I think it's "transience", in the sense that no matter how vivid a dream is, you'll tend to wake up where you fell asleep (one hopes
am I the only person messed up enough to dwell on the possible negative fucked up things that could be done with full reality simulation? keeping prisoners, or anyone unlucky enough to be caught off guard, trapped in a hell simulation. torture will take on such new vistas when we can be kept in a vat of boiling shit simulation for what seems like eternity (example chosen to be cute and do a pharasies/jesus thing, but you get the point).
our worst fears could be read, then amplified and fed back to us, in a reality that is inescapable.
(fwiw though, I've always wanted to go wirehead)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u2ZsoYWwJA&t=9m18s
I'm an SEI and I find that I don't usually flirt in a sexual way because I don't really know how. I wouldn't describe myself as a sensual person or anything. I tend to be very playful though and I don't like playing the weird games other people do. If i like someone i like to see if it is mutual and then i try to make them laugh,feel good about themselves, light hearted teasing and banter etc. I dont know if what you are describing is specific to SEI? Your sister sounds like she has some issues with self esteem which I think are higher than typology
I found goldI'm an SEI and I find that I don't usually flirt in a sexual way because I don't really know how. I wouldn't describe myself as a sensual person or anything. I tend to be very playful though and I don't like playing the weird games other people do. If i like someone i like to see if it is mutual and then i try to make them laugh,feel good about themselves, light hearted teasing and banter etc. I dont know if what you are describing is specific to SEI? Your sister sounds like she has some issues with self esteem which I think are higher than typology
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Not all that glitters is gold.I found gold
As we reach for the stars, we must put away childish things; gods, spirits and other phantasms of the brain. Reality is cruel and unforgiving, yet we must steel ourselves and secure the survival of our race through the unflinching pursuit of science and technology.
- Stellaris
She is so good in telling how people feel. She wants to make people feel comfortable and accepted....so sweet of her.Not all that glitters is gold.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I think also the SEI in the OP might not even realize she's coming across that flirty.I'm an SEI and I find that I don't usually flirt in a sexual way because I don't really know how. I wouldn't describe myself as a sensual person or anything. I tend to be very playful though and I don't like playing the weird games other people do. If i like someone i like to see if it is mutual and then i try to make them laugh,feel good about themselves, light hearted teasing and banter etc. I dont know if what you are describing is specific to SEI? Your sister sounds like she has some issues with self esteem which I think are higher than typology
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
