Shree,
Typically a
simple task of taking a medicine and returning some item back ought to be
obvious.
But it was
broken down into several steps from coupon number, waiting, desk clearance,
payment, receipt, whisked off to another return counter, coupon (again),
waiting, return, receipt (revised), whisked off to the first counter for asking
replacement, coupon (third time), waiting, clearance, payment, new receipt
(third time).
Each of these
steps is a likely point of departure to generate other possible options and
output. I remember the permutations and combinations maths behaviour and it
therefore follows that if a simple task of imagination gets broken or expressed
as an algorithm of sequences, then the probable outputs depend on the number
of variables...which essentially means higher unpredictability of a certain
feeling of being anchored.
Further, every
person with whom you interact is a variable in the sequence defined. His/her memory
is “only limited or responding" to only one variable and NOT the
synthesized result. So synthesis is what you are expecting to happen but what
the resource person is reading is performance based only on a variable!...both
of you are speaking different languages! The conflict occurs there!
Now consider
this getting projected for all sorts of experiences - even architecture - and
the essential difference then comes to if you are conceiving as a variable or
conceiving from the point of synthesis?!
The essential
difference as I see it between synthesis done by consciousness and AI, is the
process of thinking...is it synthetic or variable prone thinking?...and if it
becomes variable prone, then synthesis is like a dream... doubtful to be
attained and always dissatisfied....
A simple fact
of Truth is required to be simple and “direct” – but in the process somewhere “we”
become (mind) and that then complicates the direct message! We then “invent or
create” numerous variables to feel satisfied but like the above example, there are
so many dependent variables in this equation of satisfaction, that we never
really achieve bliss! If God or consciousness is synthesis, then “we” are the
variables in that synthesized existence. Since we are variables, then we move
(or generate thoughts, perception, memory, desire, expectation, action and so
on) and this “cycle of variables” continues since it is always changing and
unsteady and temporary and impermanent
and fleeting – this generating an insecured feeling from inside.
Just as the
resource person feels responsible for maintaining the sanctity or the identity
of the variable and keeps on harping at whoever seems to threaten the variable’s
existence, he/ she mistakes the variable for himself/herself, not acknowledging
that variable cannot define him/her. Similar fate befalls those who harp about
themselves or their doings or character or identity or tendency etc. This
tendency has been assigned several names or values such as ego, self
absorbtion, binary, polar attitude, tunnel vision, stress, anxiety, blinded,
stickiness, defense, justification, anger and so on. Admit that as humans we
only know something of a spec of truth. So obviously there are going to be
thoughts and emotions- those of anger and pain. The moment there is anger, it
is a sure sign of shortsightedness and an indication to expand the mind.
Now there is a
relation between shared feelings (affirmative connections) and minimal
variables in thoughts. As more and more we become individualized, we tend to
create more variables and endanger shared mindscapes or even shared spaces or
shared times. We remove ourselves from the Truth of being and appear very
eccentric in our thoughts and actions. So the habitation, cityscape makes the
shared spaces redundant and what happens is a cocoon of spaces - each one
specific for the individual.
The same
space of existence either becomes individualized or universal. The choice
is ours. We loose a lot by making things individualized even if the alternative
may entail a lot of negotioations and struggle.
Hari Om.