Hey

Francisco Gonzalez

Francisco Gonzalez

player of games
Messages
65
Reaction score
21
Points
8
Here to make a good friend (or two?) Seeking knowledge and interested in others' personalities. It turns out I'm really into sharing music and seeing what others listen to since its a good way to understand how someone thinks and feels. Music is one of the most important aspects of our life (Desert Island Disc's is a thing so humans like music a lot). Music is the voice of humanity, and there are a lot of voices.

Anyway...nice to meet you strangers
 
Welcome :)
 
Welcome! Thanks for the intro. Since this is an interfaith discussion forum, what is your world view?
 
@Francisco Gonzalez
That is not you in your avatar pic?
It appears to be the actor Simon Baker
Do you like him?
 
Cino said:
Welcome! Thanks for the intro. Since this is an interfaith discussion forum, what is your world view?
Click to expand...

Hi. I'm working with a lot of systems for nailing down reality. One of those is a theory of mind which leads to the perfection of the mind and transcendence. The goal is to then apply the knowledge to reality and mold it to create a just world that uplifts humanity. For this there's a theory on consciousness, language, and symbols. A result of this is the ability to read minds since minds are made up of values and can be thoroughly known and understood AND replicated (which is what's coming with AI). And that ties in with...

RJM said:
@Francisco Gonzalez
That is not you in your avatar pic?
It appears to be the actor Simon Baker
Do you like him?
Click to expand...

Simon Baker's role as Patrick Jane in The Mentalist. Most actors are cast for roles which embody their own personality, so he might be the same as the character he portrays. What I know for sure is Patrick Jane's mind is made up of the same values as mine so that we have the same personality (so you can predict that in a similar situation I would act the same way as him and you would have about 98% accuracy if done right.) So everyone has a character in fiction which is just like them because there's only so many types of minds that can exist. The implications are enormous too...I'll get more into it later if you like.
 
Francisco Gonzalez said:
Hi. I'm working with a lot of systems for nailing down reality. One of those is a theory of mind which leads to the perfection of the mind and transcendence. The goal is to then apply the knowledge to reality and mold it to create a just world that uplifts humanity. For this there's a theory on consciousness, language, and symbols. A result of this is the ability to read minds since minds are made up of values and can be thoroughly known and understood AND replicated (which is what's coming with AI). And that ties in with...



Simon Baker's role as Patrick Jane in The Mentalist. Most actors are cast for roles which embody their own personality, so he might be the same as the character he portrays. What I know for sure is Patrick Jane's mind is made up of the same values as mine so that we have the same personality (so you can predict that in a similar situation I would act the same way as him and you would have about 98% accuracy if done right.) So everyone has a character in fiction which is just like them because there's only so many types of minds that can exist. The implications are enormous too...I'll get more into it later if you like.
Click to expand...


I have 5 years continuing education in computer science and electrical engineering. I wish I had used that time in robotics. I have had so many ideas regarding AI over the years it will be interesting to hear some of your thoughts.

Powessy
 
The two songs that I relate the most to are "You're So Far Away" by Clem Leek and "Transient" by Marconi Union, both of which are ambient instrumentals.

I mostly listen to goth rock, emo, and shoegaze.
 
powessy said:
I have 5 years continuing education in computer science and electrical engineering. I wish I had used that time in robotics. I have had so many ideas regarding AI over the years it will be interesting to hear some of your thoughts.

Powessy
Click to expand...

Interesting. It seems a lot of the regulars here have knowledge in computer science. I've always tended more towards systems administration and data science.
 
Ella S. said:
Interesting. It seems a lot of the regulars here have knowledge in computer science. I've always tended more towards systems administration and data science.
Click to expand...

I took several classes in data structures, how data is stored and accessed. I love trying to solve problems, it allows my mind to be free.

powessy
 
Ella S. said:
The two songs that I relate the most to are "You're So Far Away" by Clem Leek and "Transient" by Marconi Union, both of which are ambient instrumentals.

I mostly listen to goth rock, emo, and shoegaze.
Click to expand...

Just based on those songs there's 90% that your result in an MB type-indicator test is INFx, maybe ENFx. If I knew what kind of shows you liked it could be ascertained further.
 
Francisco Gonzalez said:
Just based on those songs there's 90% that your result in an MB type-indicator test is INFx, maybe ENFx. If I knew what kind of shows you liked it could be ascertained further.
Click to expand...

I am an INTP. People say that the MBTI is unreliable because people get different results depending on when they take it but I have taken the MBTI several times over the course of a little over a decade and I'm always INTP by a wide margin.
 
Ella S. said:
I am an INTP. People say that the MBTI is unreliable because people get different results depending on when they take it but I have taken the MBTI several times over the course of a little over a decade and I'm always INTP by a wide margin.
Click to expand...

I see, thanks for the feedback. It takes more questions to predict thoughts with acuracy, like the website Akinator where a genie can guess which person or character you are thinking of in 20 questions.

The MBTI is unreliable cause it's a simple minded system. I'm using it here because it serves as a metric and a marker for something deeper like the tip of an iceberg.

Anyway, that explains the Utilitarian Logician in your custom title. There's also the case where INTP's listen to INF music. So do you like Sherlock Holmes?
 
Francisco Gonzalez said:
Anyway, that explains the Utilitarian Logician in your custom title. There's also the case where INTP's listen to INF music. So do you like Sherlock Holmes?
Click to expand...

No, I don't. Here's my running issue with Sherlock Holmes:

Sherlock is constantly using ablative reasoning (which he mislabels "deduction") to find the most probable causes of observed phenomenon. Aside from the fact that ablative reasoning is technically fallacious, the way Sherlock uses it (which is more similar to induction) is more-or-less acceptable for the most part. He essentially just uses casual statistical analysis to figure out explanations that are the most likely.

I don't have an issue with that. In fact, I think that's why most people enjoy Sherlock Holmes so much. He teaches people to think. He has a lot of great quotes along those lines. My favorite is the oft-recited, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" from "The Sign of Four."

The issue is that Sherlock Holmes should not be right as frequently as he is. Even if we assume that his statistics are perfect (which they aren't; they are mostly anecdotal and derived from his perceptive observations throughout his life) then we should still expect to see him be wrong after making a few chained inferences at least half the time.

If we assume that each of his inferences is 90% likely to be true, which I think is probably a high and generous estimate, then after 6 "deductions" his sixth one is only about 1/2 likely to be true. Except so many Sherlock Holmes stories is nothing but inference layered on top of inference, yet Sir Arthur Conan Doyle sneaks in a rather clever writing trick; he just makes all of Sherlock's guesses right.

Essentially, Sherlock Holmes is unrealistically nigh-omniscient and he just pretends that it's because he's highly perceptive and intelligent. In reality, he's a great example of what's called "pseudorationality" which is when you have too much faith that the most likely explanation is the correct one. We don't see him make nearly as many incorrect guesses as he ought to make and I've seen those stories encourage people to adopt pseudo-rational mindsets, which I can't forgive the books for.

To be fair, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was well aware of how rudimentary this trick is and it's a part of why he hated writing Sherlock Holmes and tried to kill the character off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Ella S. said:
The issue is that Sherlock Holmes should not be right as frequently as he is. Even if we assume that his statistics are perfect (which they aren't; they are mostly anecdotal and derived from his perceptive observations throughout his life) then we should still expect to see him be wrong after making a few chained inferences at least half the time.
Click to expand...

You know a good amount of Holmes, seems like you had interest in him at some point. Anyway, this reminded me of Einstein...we expect him to have gotten some things wrong in general/special relativity. But he discovered how relativity works! Sherlock Holmes solves mysterious crimes by hearing the non-bark of a dog, and Albert Einstein revolutionizes theoretical physics and kicks off the age of nuclear energy all by 'just' observing the passing of a train (Though that specifically is time dilation which kicked off modern GPS systems) Which one seems more unlikely/baffeling because of its width and scope?

Characters can get flanderized but also its the case that The unrealistic thing is reality ("You can't make this shit up!") So that Conan the Barbarian can't exist, but Schwarzenegger sure looks like him...and played the role in the movie! And became governor of California?! So that he embodies the same qualities a Conan the Barbarian (grandeur comes to mind).

And since this is interfaith, how much of Jesus' powers were exagerated to try to convey his effect on people? He multiplied bread could mean just that, or that he multiplied everyone's food/resources through other means (I found a way to make more tables with less wood/more bread with less wheat!) It would be of the same effect, but an allegory and not exactly how it happened.
 
Last edited:
Francisco Gonzalez said:
You know a good amount of Holmes, seems like you had interest in him at some point. Anyway, this reminded me of Einstein...we expect him to have gotten some things wrong in general/special relativity. But he discovered how relativity works! Sherlock Holmes solves mysterious crimes by hearing the non-bark of a dog, and Albert Einstein revolutionizes theoretical physics and kicks off the age of nuclear energy all by 'just' observing the passing of a train (Though that specifically is time dilation which kicked off modern GPS systems) Which one seems more unlikely/baffeling because of its width and scope?

Characters can get flanderized but also its the case that The unrealistic thing is reality ("You can't make this shit up!") So that Conan the Barbarian can't exist, but Schwarzenegger sure looks like him...and played the role in the movie! And became governor of California?! So that he embodies the same qualities a Conan the Barbarian (grandeur comes to mind).

And since this is interfaith, how much of Jesus' powers were exagerated to try to convey his effect on people? He multiplied bread could mean just that, or that he multiplied everyone's food/resources through other means (I found a way to make more tables with less wood/more bread with less wheat!) It would be of the same effect, but an allegory and not exactly how it happened.
Click to expand...

There definitely is a lot of truth to Sherlock Holmes. He affected many real-world investigation methods, for instance.

Also, fake psychics who have been practicing cold reading long enough begin to unconsciously pick up on enough subtle patterns that they begin to suddenly "know" things intuitively about their clients without being able to express how they know them. Something similar does happen to real detectives, too. A generous reading of Sherlock Holmes could have one suspending their disbelief on his many leaps in logic by assuming that they are also informed by his intuition from solving (and studying) so many difficult cases for so long.

I just think that the way Holmes is usually depicted tends to give some unrealistic implications.
 
Ella S. said:
Also, fake psychics who have been practicing cold reading long enough begin to unconsciously pick up on enough subtle patterns that they begin to suddenly "know" things intuitively about their clients without being able to express how they know them. Something similar does happen to real detectives, too.
Click to expand...

This character used to be a fake psychic who's family was murdered by a serial killer so he goes into the police to look for him.


As you see Archetypes are universal and have immutable characteristics. Patrick Jane is empathazing and sympathizing with the victim and he's touching her because his mind works inside closed systems; he's literally the same archetype as the healer who has healing hands (Anton Checkhov).

Sherlock Holmes is a different archetype, an opposite because his mind works outside the boundaries of his system, he doesn't like to be touched because his mind isn't playing the game, it's analyzing space and the universe. He's the cold logician, majestic, he's the type of person who builds bridges.
 
Francisco Gonzalez said:
Sherlock Holmes is a different archetype, an opposite because his mind works outside the boundaries of his system, he doesn't like to be touched because his mind isn't playing the game, it's analyzing space and the universe. He's the cold logician, majestic, he's the type of person who builds bridges.
Click to expand...

I used to see Sherlock Holmes as a sort of role model when I was younger, precisely due to the qualities you are ascribing to him here. I became frustrated with how difficult it was to mirror his processes in real life to the same degree of efficiency. It took me awhile to figure out what the problem was.

While I could certainly stand to be more perceptive and I definitely don't have the same level of insight into human nature as Sherlock Holmes, the main issues that I came across were the ones I described above. It is an accurate inference that I was interested in him given my level of knowledge about the character.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top