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

How to View a Sunset

One of my fondest meditation memories is an ocean-view sunset gently flowing over into a starry nightscape. A friend and I sat in formal meditation for several hours, watching the sun sink below the horizon. Sublime! Science now reveals that sunset is more than just a beautiful sight; it’s actually an ideal setting for meditation, Read the full article…

The Big Mistake: Mere-Ego vs. Total Self

To me, this is the biggest possible mistake. Unfortunately, it is made ubiquitously and runs culturally deep. Please also read about Inner Dissociation – Ego – Total Self. I think, therefore, I am. [Dixit René Descartes, °1596] But who is the I who thinks, therefore, is? If this isn’t clear, the rest follows in obscurity. Read the full article…

Apollonian – Dionysian – Odyssean

In therapy/coaching and in everyday life, one may be more Apollonian oriented or more Dionysian, or see it all as an adventurous journey. Nietzschean dichotomy Nietzsche used ancient Greek mythology to characterize two different mindsets in culture, art, and individual: Apollonian: more orderly, yet illusory and socially constructed Dionysian: more passionate, at the same time Read the full article…

Translate »