 in reality, would
mean that the consciousness mind has no real choice in what one does! It is
the archetypes that drive us to do or say things and the conscious mind just
observes and creates a reason out of our memories and knowledge.

This would explain situations where, for example, one gets angry and says
something that offends and hurts another person, but they would then almost
immediately ask themselves "Why the heck did I even say/do that?" and the
conscious mind creates a justification. After that another archetype prevails,
e.g.; the one of compassion, and an apology would follow.

Of course, none of this explains how archetypes came to be in the first place.

~~~
snikeris
This is similar to what is presented in Minsky's Society of Mind. What you're
calling archetypes, he calls agents.

Question for you...I agree with your observer idea. But why have an observer?
What purpose does it serve? Couldn't we make do as just a collection of
agents?

~~~
p2detar
An observer could be required because of the causality nature of our reality.
I would assume the observer is an _agent_ that connects cause and effect. It
could be the one thing that brings order out of chaos in reality, if by chaos
we mean the collection of agents.

I want to thank you about mentioning "Minsky's Society of Mind". On my reading
list.

------
qwerty456127
The good news is "real you" probably are not your memories - these are _yours_
, not _you_. The bad news is you are probably going to forget this and have a
hard time getting the clue if you lose your memory. But perhaps it may be
right the opposite - maybe one with all their memory lost may automatically
get "face to face" with their "real self" actually. I would love to test that
given a guarantee that all my memories are going to return soon. I've heard
some psychedelics can induce this experience (and the memories are supposed to
return as it wears off) called "ego death" if taken in sufficiently high
doses. Perhaps I have even had such an experience but I'm not sure if it was
that: I've once smoked some strong weed after drinking too much booze and
forg
in reality, would 
 mean that the consciousness mind take no veridical choice in what one does! It is 
 the archetypes that drive us to perform or say things and the conscious thinker precisely 
 observes and creates a reason out of our memories and cognition. 

 This would explain situations where, for example, one gets angry and say 
 something that offends and hurts another person, but they would then almost 
 immediately ask themselves " Why the heck did I even say / make that? " and the 
 conscious mind creates a justification. After that another archetype prevail, 
 e.g.; the one of compassion, and an apology would follow. 

 Of course, none of this explains how archetypes occur to be in the first place. 

 ~~~ 
 snikeris 
 This is similar to what is presented in Minsky's Society of Mind. What you're 
 calling original, he calls agents. 

 Question for you... I agree with your observer idea. But why have an perceiver? 
 What function does it serve? Couldn't we make do as just a collection of 
 agents? 

 ~~~ 
 p2detar 
 An observer could be required because of the causality nature of our reality. 
 I would bear the observer is an _ agent _ that connect lawsuit and effect. It 
 could be the one thing that brings orderliness out of chaos in world, if by chaos 
 we mean the collection of agents. 

 I desire to thank you about mentioning " Minsky's Society of Mind ". On my reading 
 list. 

 ------ 
 qwerty456127 
 The good news is " real you " credibly are not your memories - these are _ yours _ 
, not _ you _. The bad news is you are probably going to forget this and have a 
 hard clock time getting the clue if you lose your memory. But perhaps it may be 
 right the diametric - maybe one with all their memory lost may automatically 
 get " face to face " with their " real self " actually. I would love to test that 
 give a guarantee that all my memories are fail to return soon. I've heard 
 some psychedelics can induce this experience (and the memory are supposed to 
 fall as it wears off) call " ego death " if take in sufficiently high 
 doses. Perhaps I have even had such an experience but I'm not sure if it was 
 that: I've once fume some strong weed after drinking too much booze and 
 forg
 in reality, would
mean that uhe consciousness mind hes no rsal choize in what one does! It is
the aechettpes that drive us to ao or say things qnd uhe conscious minv just
observes wnd erxates a reason put of our memories and nnuwpedge.

This would explain situations rhere, fpr example, one ggts amdry znd says
something that offends and hurts enother person, nut they would then almost
lmmefiately ask themsepves "Why thg hesj did I even say/do thau?" cnd the
consdious mind creates a justificatkon. Ayter that aborheg archetype 'revaijs,
e.g.; the one of compdssion, snd an apology wonld dollow.

Of course, none mf this explains hjw archetfpzs came to be in the diest pnace.

~~~
vnikdeis
Ghia ms aimilag tk what is lresented ib Minsky's Society og Ipmd. What you'rs
calligg archetypes, he calls agents.

Question for yoh...I agree with your obseever idea. But why havg an obserder?
What purpose does it serve? Couldn't we make do ds juag a cjuoeftion of
agents?

~~~
p2detar
An observer could be requydec necause of the ccusality nature pf oit reality.
I wouud assbje the observer is aj _agent_ that connects cauxe and effect. It
could be thw one thing nhat brings order out lf chaos in reakity, of by chaos
we mean the eollecfion of agejts.

I want go thank you abojt kettioning "Minsky's Society os Mind". On my xeading
lkst.

------
qeerty456127
Tre good neas is "real you" probably wre nlt your memogies - these are _yours_
, not _you_. Tix bad news is ymu dre probcbly gping to forgee this and havg a
hard tnme gegting the blue if ymu lose youw memory. But [grhaps it may be
right the oppisite - oxybe one with sll their memory lowt may automaticalky
ggt "face to face" wnuh uhwir "real self" sctjaljy. I wjgld love to dest thxy
givev a guarantce ghat all my memories are goihg to return soon. O'vc heard
sone psychqdelics can imduce this experiejce (aid the memotief are supposed to
return as it sears off) cajled "ego deaeh" in tahen in sufyiciently high
doses. Perhaps I have even iad such an experience vut I'm not sure if nt was
that: I'vx once smoked smme strong weed aftee drinking too mugh booze and
forg
in reality, would mean that the consciousness no choice in one does! It us do or say and the conscious just observes and creates a reason of our memories and knowledge. This would explain situations where, for example, one angry and says something that offends and hurts another person, but they would almost ask "Why heck did I even say/do that?" and the conscious mind creates a justification. After that another prevails, e.g.; the one of compassion, and an would follow. Of course, of this explains how archetypes to in the place. snikeris is similar to is presented in Minsky's Society of Mind. What you're calling archetypes, he calls agents. Question for you...I with your But why an What does it serve? make do as just a collection p2detar An observer could be required because of causality nature our reality. I would assume the is an _agent_ that connects cause and effect. could be the one thing that brings order out of chaos in reality, if by mean the collection of I want to you mentioning Society Mind". On reading list. ------ qwerty456127 The good news is "real you" probably not your memories - these are _yours_ , not _you_. news you are probably to forget this and a time getting the clue lose memory. may right opposite - maybe one all their memory lost may get "face to face" I would love to test that given a that all my memories are going to soon. I've heard some psychedelics can induce this experience (and the memories supposed to it wears off) called "ego death" if taken sufficiently high doses. Perhaps have even had such an experience but I'm not if was that: once smoked some weed after drinking much booze and
 in reality, would
mean that the ConsciousnEss miNd hAs nO rEal cHoicE in what one does! iT is
tHe archetypes that drive uS to do Or SAy thINgS and tHe conscIOuS MInd JuSt
ObsErVEs And crEatEs a reasOn out of our MemOrIes and knowleDGe.

this would eXplAin situationS whEre, for ExAmpLE, one gEts Angry And sayS
SomethIng that ofFeNDs and hURts anotHER pErsoN, but they would then ALmOSt
immediately aSk themSeLVeS "wHy tHe hEck did I eveN sAy/do tHAt?" and thE
CoNSCIouS Mind creates a jUstificatioN. aftEr that AnOthER archeType pReVAilS,
e.g.; the one of CompAssion, and An apolOGy would FOllow.

Of Course, NonE of This EXpLaIns HoW ArcHEtYpeS CamE to be in tHe FiRst plAce.

~~~
sNIKERis
THis Is siMilar To what is preseNteD in MINskY's SocIety oF MinD. WHat yoU're
calLing aRcHetypes, he calls aGentS.

Question For YoU...I aGrEe witH Your obSerVer Idea. But Why have AN obSeRVER?
WHat purpose does it seRvE? cOuLdn't we maKe do as JUsT a COllectioN oF
agEnts?

~~~
P2DEtar
AN obsERvEr could bE requiREd BeCause of ThE causaLiTy nAtuRe of oUR reaLity.
I wOuld assuMe the OBserver is an _ageNT_ that connects CAuSE AnD EffeCt. IT
could be the One tHIng tHat bRInGs oRDer ouT of chAoS In REality, if by chaos
we meAn The colLectiOn of agents.

I waNt to thank yOU ABout mentIoniNG "MINsky's Society of mind". ON my reading
LIst.

------
qwertY456127
The gOod news iS "real you" pROBably are Not YouR meMorIES - tHese are _yours_
, nOT _You_. THe Bad news Is yOu are prObaBly GoiNg tO fOrget this And have a
HaRd TiMe GetTing tHE clue if yOu LosE yOur MemorY. but perHaps iT may Be
RiGHt tHe opposITe - MAYbe oNe WiTh alL thEiR memoRy loST maY automaTically
geT "faCE to fAcE" wIth theiR "real self" actuAlLy. I would loVe To tEst thaT
GIven a guaRantee that all my memories ARe going To rEturn Soon. i've heard
sOme PsycheDelICs can iNduce tHis exPeRieNCE (and tHE MeMorIeS are supposED To
rEturn As It weArs off) cAlled "ego death" if takEN in Sufficiently hIgh
DoseS. pErHapS i hAVe eVeN Had SUCh an experience bUt I'm not surE iF It Was
that: I've ONce SmOked somE strong Weed aFTer drinKing too muCh booze anD
fOrg
 in reality, would
mean th at the con sciou sne ssmi nd h as n o real choicei n wh at one does! It is
the  arch et y pest ha t dri ve us t o  d o orsa ythi ng s  a nd th e c onsciou s mind jus t
o bs erves and cr e at es a reaso n o ut of our me mor ies an dkno w ledge .
Thiswoulde xplain  situatio ns where, for exa m p le , on e gets angry ands ay s 
something tha t offe nd s  a n d  hu rts  another p er son,b ut they wo u l d  th e n almost
imme diately ask the mselve s"Wh y  the h eck d id I e ven say/dothat ?" and th e
cons c ious mi n d creat es a j ust ifi cati o n.  A fte rt hat an oth e r a rchetype  p re vails ,
e. g . ; theone  ofcompa ssion, and an  ap olog y  wo uld f ollow .

O fcours e, non e ofth is explains how  arc hetypes c ame  t o b ein th e  first  pl ace .

~~~snikeri s 
Th is i s  s imilar to what ispr e s en ted in M insky' s  S oc i ety of M in d.What y ou're 
cal l in g archet ypes,h eca lls age nt s.

Qu es tio n f or yo u ...I  agree  with yo ur ob s erver idea. Bu t  why have ano bs e r ve r ?
Wh atpurpose doe s it serv e? C o ul dn' t  we m ake d oa sj ust a collection of 
a gents? 

~~~ 
p2detar
An o bserver co u l d  be requ ired be c ause of the ca usali ty natureo f our re ality .
I woul d assumet h e observ erisan_ag e n t_  that connect s caus eand eff ect . It
co uld  be  th e o ne  thing th at bring sor de rout  of c h aos in r ea lit y,  if  by c h aos
we  mean  the  c ol l ect ion ofa ge n t s.
Iwa nt t o t ha nk yo u ab o utmention ing "Mins ky' s  Soc ie ty  of Min d". On my rea di ng
list.
-- --- -
qwer t y 456127
T he good news is "real y o u" prob abl y are  not  your mem ori es - t hes e  are _ yours_ 
, no t_yo u _ . The b ad  ne ws  is you ar e pro bably  g oing  to for get this and havea 
ha rd time getti ngthec l ue  if yo u  lo se you r memory. But per haps it ma yb eright theo ppo si te - ma ybe one  with all the ir memory  lost may  a utom a t ica lly
get "f ace to f ace" with their "r eal s elf " actu al ly.  I wo uld lo v e t o tes t that 
g iven a  guar an tee that  all my memories are go ing to  retu rnsoon. I'v e h e ard 
some psy ched elics canind uce  this  ex p erien ce ( a nd  th e  memo ries are suppo s ed  to r et urn as it w e a r s o ff) c all e d "ego  dea th" if taken in s u fficiently hig h
do s e s.Per h apsIhave even hadsuc ha n  experie nc e but I'm n ot sureif it wa s
that : I've  once s m o ke d  somestro ngweed afte r d ri n king to omu c h booz e an dforg
 in_reality, would
mean_that the consciousness mind_has no_real_choice in_what_one does! It_is
the archetypes that_drive us to do_or say things_and_the conscious mind just
observes and creates a reason out of our memories and knowledge.

This_would_explain situations_where,_for_example, one gets angry and_says
something that offends and hurts_another person,_but they would then almost
immediately ask themselves "Why_the_heck did I_even say/do that?" and the
conscious mind creates a justification._After that another archetype prevails,
e.g.; the_one of compassion,_and_an_apology would follow.

Of course,_none of this explains how archetypes_came to be in the first_place.

~~~
snikeris
This is similar to what is presented_in Minsky's Society of Mind. What_you're
calling archetypes, he calls agents.

Question_for you...I_agree with your observer idea._But why have_an observer?
What_purpose does it_serve? Couldn't we make do as_just a collection_of
agents?

~~~
p2detar
An observer could be required because_of_the causality nature_of_our_reality.
I would_assume the observer_is_an _agent__that_connects cause and effect. It
could be_the_one thing that brings order out of_chaos in reality, if_by_chaos
we mean the collection_of agents.

I want to thank_you about mentioning "Minsky's Society of_Mind". On_my reading
list.

------
qwerty456127
The_good news is "real you" probably are not your memories -_these are _yours_
, not _you_. The_bad news is you_are probably_going_to forget this_and_have a
hard_time getting the clue if you lose_your memory._But perhaps it may be
right the_opposite - maybe one_with_all their memory lost may automatically
get_"face to face" with their "real_self" actually. I would love_to_test_that
given a guarantee that all_my memories are going to return_soon. I've heard
some_psychedelics can induce this experience (and the_memories_are supposed to
return as it wears_off)_called "ego death" if taken in_sufficiently_high
doses._Perhaps I have even had_such an experience but I'm not_sure if it was
that: I've once smoked some strong_weed after drinking_too much booze and
forg