Wikipedia and the interconnectedness of all knowledge

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Holiday20310401
 
Reply Tue 22 Jul, 2008 12:23 pm
@Aedes,
Aedes wrote:
All it takes to get to, say, Alaric I of the Visigoths, is either Rome or Italy -- sufficiently broad subjects that it's easy to get there.


The ability to remember Alaric I of the Visigoths through Rome of Italy because of a connection between the two could be linked through axons from nerve to nerve, and recalling the memory sets of an output fired along to the synapse?

The two memories are connected in actuality, so what if every neuron was connected to every other neuron? What kind of perception or cognition could that trigger? 4D perception?, because that is essentially 3 sides to an equation; being that perception is not just in opposites connected so as to have a hollow cube(imagine the vertices as opposites). But that the superpositions of perception are connected to each other,any point in the middle of the line, representing connections between neurons, making the cube fill completely, like a cramped brain, lol.

But I think that how knowledge works is through cognating relations between instances and there are rules to help, otherwise our processing speed couldn't process every connection.

There must be limits, like opposites causing the connection. But is it knowledge in nature that is in itself just opposites or the way we perceive and process it that limits our perception against superpositions.
 
boagie
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 05:54 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Smile


Wikipedia: a social innovation ?
 
socrato
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 09:40 pm
@boagie,
Wikipedia uses too many big words, its boring to read.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 09:45 pm
@socrato,
socrato wrote:
Wikipedia uses too many big words, its boring to read.
It's a large encyclopedia. So if it uses too many big words and you find it boring to read, what do you use to look things up that lacks these two flaws?
 
socrato
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 09:51 pm
@Aedes,
A dictionary, its to the point. Readings for losers waste of time. Why don't people do what is more enjoyable like games.
 
Theaetetus
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 10:14 pm
@socrato,
socrato wrote:
Wikipedia uses too many big words, its boring to read.


If you think due to the fact the Wikipedia uses too many big words; so therefore, it is boring to read there is no hope for you. Sorry. Game over.
 
socrato
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 10:16 pm
@Theaetetus,
Game over for u, man. Reading isn't a life, nobody to talk to, no fun, why live to read.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 10:18 pm
@socrato,
Socrato, this is a philosophy forum. You're hanging out in a community of people who like to read -- and you're reading our words. If you want to play games, go ahead, you don't need to hang out here if you don't like it.
 
Theaetetus
 
Reply Sun 27 Jul, 2008 10:39 pm
@socrato,
socrato wrote:
Game over for u, man. Reading isn't a life, nobody to talk to, no fun, why live to read.


Reading gives me content to talk to others about. What fun is living when you have no content to express because life was wasted bullsh*ting it away?
 
 

 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/08/2020 at 09:30:02