Saradina-Info-Blog
+++ Saradina-Info-Blog! +++
(c)saradinatechnik.de.tl
Orpheus and Euridike - #Underworld in #sleep #paralysis?
saradina-info-blog on 13.11.2023 um 12:57 (UTC) |
| | The story of Orpheus and Euridike is world-famous and one of the most interesting love stories in world literature.
After Euridike's death, Orpheus goes to the underworld to find his deceased lover.
His experiences in the underworld are partly reminiscent of experiences reported by people who have experienced sleep paralysis.
During his visit to the underworld, Orpheus experiences a kind of colorless shadow world in which there seems to be no landscape or buildings of its own.
It is a colorless and somehow insubstantial place, but where the souls of the deceased reside.
The deceased fit into this environment; they are pale shadow beings.
This idea of the underworld, where the colorless shadows of the deceased reside in an equally colorless and geographically devoid environment, is partly similar to the experiences of sleep paralysis, where those who experience it in their sleep suddenly find themselves in a very strange, insubstantial, colorless and yet very concrete and find an effective environment.
There is a certain horror.
More recently, sleep paralysis has been discovered as a specific form of sleep disorder.
But in the culture of the ancient Greeks, this phenomenon was not yet rationally described.
On the other hand, the ancient Greeks had a rich repertoire of various mental techniques in the context of oracles, divinations and necromancy. According to the story, Orpheus also used these meditative aids in his search for his deceased friend Euridice.
The question now arises as to whether the Greeks possibly had meditative or drug-like means to artificially and deliberately induce the state of sleep paralysis for the purposes of spiritual enlightenment or for the purpose of establishing contact with the deceased?
(C) saradinatechnik.de.tl | | | |
|
Bringing #dead creatures back to life authentically via #genetic engineering?
saradina-info-blog on 03.10.2023 um 08:56 (UTC) |
| | It's not just religions that deal with forms of resurrection and rebirth.
Nowadays, modern science is increasingly interested in bringing extinct creatures back to our time.
Others interested in the concrete resuscitation of deceased living beings using scientific technology are wealthy private individuals who would like to have their beloved pets and family, but also themselves, resurrected after death.
DNA is a blueprint for a type of biological template. The template is specific, for example in terms of formal and functional aspects, but empty in terms of content. This template - like web templates - must be filled with content. Only then does something like personality emerge, something unique.
In biological life, the content is influenced, in addition to the "template", by the influence of the environment, time sequence and events, risks and opportunities. The template is interpreted slightly differently depending on external conditions and the individual's reaction. Certain options are more prominent, others are more likely to be neglected.
The sequence of events. the reaction to it, the experience and behavior form the basis for the unique personality in the form of a biography.
It is questionable whether pure DNA replication can really restore original, faded individual life. DNA replication will use the same template to produce a new, unique, but different entity based on different circumstances and environmental conditions.
There will be no copy of the past, only a similar image, and the quasi-machine reproduction of a past biological existence turns out to be an illusion.
(c) saradinatechnik.de.tl | | | |
|
#Animal #documentaries - #neutral #observers? #Responsibility
saradina-info-blog on 20.09.2023 um 09:17 (UTC) |
| | Documentation serves educational and informational purposes. Neutrality is a quality criterion.
But what if not just facts but situations with living beings are filmed? What if tragic events occur?
When people observe animals in documentaries "neutrally", they reduce the animals to objects and their actions to practical textbook examples.
Humans have a responsibility towards living nature, especially when it comes to endangered animal and plant species.
Nature documentaries often show that wild animals whose populations are dwindling are threatened by natural forces such as drought or flooding.
Due to a lack of food, animal mothers are too weak to provide their young animals with milk or to protect them.
There are valuable and rare young animals such as young elephants or young lions that are in danger of drowning in a great flood.
How neutrally observational can animal documentation be if at the same time one acknowledges the responsibility of humans to preserve and protect endangered nature?
Natural disasters and animal suffering as entertainment and education as part of an animal documentary?
What should be the lesson from animal documentaries in which the helplessness and abandonment of already endangered wild animal species is portrayed as a “natural process”?
It is not without saccharine that it is pointed out that humans as actors have something to do with these "natural" problems, but that's just the way it is and the animals filmed are unnecessarily presented as further animal sacrifices.
The perfidious thing about these animal sacrifices in animal documentaries is that the animals filmed there serve as an instructive example of the consequences of the destruction of nature and thus encourage viewers to become more environmentally aware.
But this double standard does not promote environmental awareness but rather implements the consequences of the destruction of nature as inevitable, and the animals affected and filmed simply have to die.
But unlike the sad animals who are helpless at the mercy of the forces of nature, humans have the necessary intelligence and resources to help.
Film crews for animal documentaries could be better equipped, for example, to get drowning baby animals out of the water or to bring some food to starving mother animals.
It would be better to give at least some of the filmed animals a worthy happy ending.
One could point out that although these affected animals would be doomed to certain death "according to the rules of nature", the well-equipped film crew could at least support some of these poor animals.
Certainly the animals saved by such documentary film crews would not be numerically many. But you have to remember that every life counts, especially when it comes to endangered species.
In addition, the quantitative consideration of animal protection is inadmissible because pure statistics do not do justice to the fact that animals are independent personalities with their own little biographies.
It's not about statistics, it's about helping animals in precarious situations.
The interactive and helpful animal documentation would certainly be a break with the classic "purely observational" documentation.
But traditions must always be critically reconsidered and, if necessary, sensibly adapted.
Recent research has made it clear that higher mammals, for example, have their own experiences and behavior and perceive fear and pain.
Therefore, responsible, active, interventional animal documentation is the only sensible alternative for the future.
(c)saradinatechnik.de.tl | | | |
|
Is there a #life after #death?
saradina-info-blog on 23.08.2023 um 15:03 (UTC) |
| | At periodic intervals, the question of whether there is life after death appears on all sorts of platforms.
Opinions on the subject vary:
Some believe that there is no life after death, others are deeply convinced of life after death.
Regardless of a worldview, one can look at the question like this:
Since our knowledge of physics and biology is not perfect and all-encompassing, one cannot categorically rule out life after death of any kind.
On the other hand, life after death has not yet been convincingly proven.
Therefore, one can say that the chance between life after death and the final end of life is about 50 percent. If you look at the version that assumes a final end of life after death, then everything is clear with this version and nothing needs to be added.
In the case of a possible survival after death, one can assume that this survival will be perceived as either pleasant or unpleasant.
Both options are equally likely, which means that the probability of each of these options is 25 percent of the total possibilities.
The riddle on the topic "Is there life after death" has not yet been solved, but overall one can assume that the time after death will at least not be bad.
Because if one assumes that non-existence at least does not involve any negative experiences and is 50 percent ikely and on the other hand a pleasant life after death is 25 percent ikely, one can assume that 75 percent of the Options that await you after death are at least unproblematic to a certain extent even pleasant.
(c)saradinatechnik.de.tl | | | |
|
Artificial intelligence - really free and independent? #AI
saradina-info-blog on 10.07.2023 um 08:32 (UTC) |
| | When asked about the creativity of artificial intelligence, one could take the view that it is independent of certain social prejudices or social opinions.
This circumstance could give the AI a head start through a larger interpretation radius.
But on closer inspection, an AI also applies to other machines, which are a product of human activity.
This means that the skills and equipment of the AI depend on the programmer and that in turn the programmer depends on the instructions of the funder.
This means that if an ideologically biased financier commissions a programmer to produce and program an AI, the paid programmer will orient the content of the AI to the intentions of the paying client - even if the paying client is not ideologically neutral.
In conclusion, it is a mistake to worship programmed machines like AI as a kind of superordinate deity and to expect salvation for the world rescue.
An AI is not a deity or a supernatural being.
The most reasonable way to see the world is to think for yourself.
Just thinking makes you smart.
(c)saradinatechnik.de.tl | | | |
|
#AI and #creativity
saradina-info-blog on 10.07.2023 um 07:15 (UTC) |
| | According to a new study, artificial intelligence such as ChatGPT performs far better in the field of creativity than human comparators.
Is this already an indication of mental superiority of future machines?
Not necessarily.
Human creativity has performed excellently in the past millennia, including the creation of artificial intelligence.
However, human creativity is limited by a major social factor:
The social norms.
These norms strongly narrow the mental horizon, so there are questions that are taboo and unwanted speculations and ideas. For example, for a long time it was frowned upon to ask whether and what there was or could have been before the great bang. In ancient times it was also forbidden to doubt the model of the earth as the center of the universe.
Social norms provide a narrow framework for what is imaginable and what one may ask and question. Social norms condition people’s thinking and narrow the imagination horizon and thus creativity.
Since artificial intelligence is not subject to social norms and does not have to be afraid of social discrimination, the creativity of artificial intelligence can unfold unhindered in contrast to human intelligence.
(c)saradinatechnik.de.tl | | | |
|
