What seems ‘Easy’ and is Not

April 27, 2024 Cognitive Insights No Comments

The subconceptual domain may seem ‘easy’ mainly for those who operate predominantly within a conceptual framework. On the other side, what comes out of this domain may seem magical, almost impossible, for the same people.

This is highly relevant as subconceptual influences, often underestimated, can have profound effects on our understanding and interactions in various fields. This leads to specific challenges — firstly, to convince primarily conceptual thinkers of the possibilities; secondly, to mitigate anxiety when they see actually (being bound to) happen ‘what cannot be.’

In art

This may lead some to incredulously see others appreciate art as of prime importance. Of course, something isn’t art by virtue of being called so. This makes it even more challenging since some may call anything ‘art’ and try to get by for reasons of standing and money.

When is ‘art’ art? Difficult to say. In any case, it’s about more than what is superficially observed.

In coaching

Excellent coaching has an aspect of ‘as by itself’ — very different from ‘by itself’ (being magic) but this may equally be challenging to appreciate.

Thus, one may look at the printout of a coaching session without appreciating anything that is really happening in that session.

It may happen invisibly — even to the coachee.

In developing A.I.

Concocting something that appears somehow ‘intelligent’ is enough for some to deem themselves ‘A.I. developers.’

This is crazy stuff – yet frequently encountered – and uncannily dangerous on top of that!

In combination

Unfortunately, many (most) A.I. developers have no clue about the human subconceptual domain. Thus, they think that, for instance, human-A.I. alignment is a simple question of the right decisions (‘easily’ made by philosophers or themselves) and developing some software to enact these.

Sorry, but that would be hilarious if it wouldn’t be an existential threat to humanity.

Into what seems to be ‘easy’ and is not.

Doing this, one quickly enters a highly complex field full of mines and booby traps — no problem if you know more or less what you’re doing, but… precisely. And sadly, this may lead, in many cases, to the wrong experts leading the conversations even at decision-making levels.

This deeply resonates with AURELIS’ philosophy of integrating rationality and human depth, emphasizing the necessity of a balanced approach that respects both the conceptual and subconceptual realms, ensuring a holistic view that avoids oversimplification and acknowledges the inherent complexity of human cognition and emotion.

We need to know first who we are, then what A.I. can be.

Nothing is ‘easy’ just by itself.

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

The Illusion of Thinking

Apple’s recent paper ‘The Illusion of Thinking’ reveals surprising weaknesses in present-day A.I. models that appear to reason. Yet humans, too, live under illusions about their own thinking. This blog explores the double illusion we share with machines, why real thinking requires depth as well as clarity, and how to move beyond illusion into a Read the full article…

Practicalities of Free Will

Free will is a term that stands for many concepts, and within each concept for a cloud of meaningfulness. That doesn’t make it practically less important. Terms and concepts Also, this doesn’t mean there are many free will’s. That would mean one can fight about what is the correct free will. Such fighting is done Read the full article…

Generosity ‘from the Inside Out’

What if true generosity isn’t about the act of giving but about what flows naturally from within? When generosity emerges from a place of inner abundance, it feels like an expression of who we are. The paradox is this: those who give from fullness never feel diminished. The more they give, the more their abundance Read the full article…

Translate »