(September 29, 2014 at 9:57 pm)Rhythm Wrote: The notion isn't beyond the pale, left to itself. It's only the assumption made afterwards. Our brains really aren't that good at handling data beyond a certain point - or outside of a certain range. You could look at all the mechanical instrumentation we have as a way to shore that up when we recognize the shortcoming or wish to perceive something beyond our native abilities, "aftermarket modification" you might call it. Nevertheless, there is a point beyond which even those instruments fail, and It's difficult to conceive of any singular instrument (or even a collection of them) that would be capable of handling something so vast as "full knowledge". That's my opinion on the subject (but I'm using my meat processor to attempt to conceive of instrumentation...so perhaps even here this is a limit of that piece of equipment and not a limitation of any possible instrumentation. Perhaps a different sort of "consiousness" with a different range of processing parameters could design such instrumentation - even a translation standard so that we may use it (but here again...I don't know, it's beyond me to know - though there is at least -some- reason to entertain the notion).
All in all its a difficult idea to entertain because you're using the very instrument in question to understand things beyond that instrument!
It is quite the vicious cycle once you think about. Literally. Once you think about it, in some way, you're making an error. Although I agree, there is SOME reason to entertain the notion.
Also, thank you for this very enlightening discussion. I can always rely on people here in this forum to bring my feet back to the ground when thinking of such things
