Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

Activity is Acuity; note towards a definition of consciousness.

Activity is Acuity, by this I mean to take as an hypothesis that the two terms refer
to the same thing, that the one equals the other.
This of course implies its inverse, Acuity equals Activity. I wish to explain a way
in which this statement may be looked at as a comment about consciousness. I
wish to say that consciousness may be measured in systems by measuring their
activity and as a consequence I want to explore the relationship between
consciousness and the Turing test, and the location of consciousness/location of
information problem
No psychosis without neurosis (james) but also no neurosis without psychosis!

<A spell is a thing that becomes more true when it is spoken it may be related
to paradox>

Activity is Information. Movement is information, the simplest movement is the

binary movement. Similarity and difference, same not same, on, off.
<refer bell/ shannon>

Information is consciousness. Loci of information are loci of consciousness. if we

widen or framework we widen the location of consciousness and intelligence, one
person is consciousness, a space with two people is pervaded with consciousness
that only focuses on the two people, they are consciousness foci, not merely two
containers of consciousness.

meaning is painted in layers onto experience in the direction of the arrow of time,
meaning is accruing. this means that in a sense there is a teleology to existence.

<so in a sense it is possible to travel, navigating through alternate worlds by

taking your move>

Speech is rich in activity, it sets up complicated air currents for example, this is
why language as spoken is both so rich in meaning and intelligence, and also so
ephemeral and transitory.
chess is similar to speech and language in this way, whilst the game is played, a
kind of consciousness dwells within the board and pieces

information - computation - activity - acuity - experience - information

life is sensorial one can think of all biological matter as being sensorial matter in
some way. not simply eyes and ears are sense organs, even cells, dna, viruses
are sensorial, they interact with there environment, exchanging or transacting or
sharing information, and are therefore not only sensorial in that sense but also
conscious in that sense.

activity is awareness via sensory perception as and information exchange


I would like to mention at this point that there is no bias in my use of the word
system. A system is never in any way really contained, except in as much as it is
marked out by a decision. it is arbitrary, consciousness is a quality of any space,
regardless of how you bisect or reduce it.

<refer to the frame problem of ai possibly looking at centers of activity within

environmental systems containing machines>

<liebnitiz the monadology, william james reality as sculpture in principles physics

as language>

the painting layers analogy, the lego men into the lego box analogy.

<similarity and difference are related to activity similar patterns of similarity

and difference in systems reflect their similarity as entities, this explains why
mathematics an physics as artifacts of language are similar to reality because
they share a pattern of activity>

ideas are alive, and live in our environment.

our mathematic of pure experience must utilize the principles above if it is to

have any relevance to immediate felt experience and therefore be truly

drugs are pathways to new activity via the information exchange between what
where two separate systems; the substance and the subject, the environment and
the individual.

the shamen is one who learns to make his move using the whole board.

<terrence mkenna, see also robert graves, and robert nagel>

you can declare, reality only contradicts you if it can catch you in a lie 20
questions anyone? see Popper, Dewey, Philip k dick for the schizoid, social
<also game theory>

molecular biology is psychology, especially socialpsycology. chance and order,

activity and time.

<all experianceable things are similar in some way to all other experianceable
things, they all share a binary base, all things are dissimilar from all other things
in some way, to be definable as a thing in relation to the other it must have
uniqueness in some way.

only things that are in some way similar to all other things and also in some way
different to all other things may exist. why? because a thing must be uniquely
identifiable to constitute a thing at all, and must be able to transact with the
other in order to be an experience???>

things are only true in as much as they are similar to other things and false in as
much as they are dissimilar from other things (the other)

I would like also in this paper to explore the nature of memory and imagination

<these things are also an activity and therefore real they are different to
external experiences like bricks or dreams. they may be a complicated bodily
movement that mimics the movement of external things>

<a thing; (designated frame of activity) capable of designating a subset of activity

as a frame can think??? recursive definitions, computer memory designation of a
self frame dummet searle chalmers holfstader? godel ecsher bach et all>

youngs two slit experiment as a proof and creator of consciousness

emergent phenomena.

consciousness inheres in activity like water-ice-steam

the emergent quality of consciousness is not any different to the other emergent
qualities we see elsewhere in nature, such as the turning of liquid water into ice.

<science is often divided up into an exploratory phase, a documenting phase, an

analysis stage, then a theorizing stage I propose to begin the exploratory phase
of a science of pure experience>

james glieck, complexity, laws of the game

I am also interested in the way godel and the puzzle guide to godel relate to truth
viewed in my system can we pull truth and falsehood out of our fundamental

I am also interested in art, art is the complex artifact of manipulation in search of

or at play with, truth

<I wonder to myself right now whether I have had an insight as systemic and
synthesizing as hegels Wittgensteins or hiedeggers?? Will I try to formalize this
paper only to discover through careful study that my idea is rubbish? or if not
rubbish then a fairly mundane idea?? I hope not, I hope that this idea is as
interesting to others as it is to me, and I hope further that it turns out to be a
genuinely useful idea in the world It would be a very nice feeling indeed to be
one of the genuine pioneers in a great science and new phase in human
thought. heres hoping I am not mistaken.>

So another question that occurs to me is; what should I study? psychology, that is
where I suppose the crux of my thought is, logic/mathes/fundemental physics,
that is what I am hoping to derive organic chemistry hmmmmm

<henry Munn; the mushroom of language 1977>

I definitaly need to explore the mushroom I need to think about what

enviroment I would most feel comfortable in I need someone to talk to and at
and with, I think tony is the obvious candidate, I need to be somewhere
comfortable but not constricting mabye in the bush, but with a nice tent, light,
writing materials and guitars and a fire not too far from hospital thoug, could
use geoff, but would also be good to have a control person, or handeler who
would not take the drug mabye kaino also bring recording device, mabye a
video but definitely at least audio

<robert graves: food for centaurs>