Process and insight
byMieke Mosmuller
29-10-2014
4 comments
On a seminar last Saturday in Antwerp I spoke about the 'thinking' of the computer compared to the human thinking. To be able to do so of course one has to study this kind of computer thinking deeply. It is a very interesting and instructive theme. Everyone - also me myself - works with the computer, so actually we should know more about it than the practical user manual.
Like DNA is to us what we learn about it through science, without knowing exactly how this information is obtained and what it exactly means, the computer, the iPad and the Smartphone have become our 'knowledge-extension', without knowing exactly how they work. And our knowledge of DNA also relies on computer technology. Human thinking leads to insight, to understanding. This is in fact what thinking exists for: to obtain comprehension of the riddles of life and nature - and ourselves. Insight is much more than only the observation of facts or the result of complicated calculations. When one sees an ellipse and knows that such a shape is called 'ellipse', one can say 'This is an ellipse' every time one sees such a shape. That is not an insight yet. The definition in words doesn't have to be based on insight, neither on understanding: An ellipse is a geometrical shape of points, in which the sum of distances to two fixed points, the foci, is constant.
A definition like this one can be learned by heart, one can know exactly how to proceed to construct it - and still lack the concept, the insight. From the moment one knows through self-observation what insight actually is, one knows for sure also when it is not there.
Having the true insight in the being of the ellipse, one can think out an instrument - like a pair of compasses to draw a circle - with which one can draw an ellipse. We can use a little piece of wood, put two needles in it in a certain distance and fix a thread at both ends of the needles. One takes a pencil, draw the thread tight and one can draw a line with the pencil with it - that always becomes an ellipse. Of course one can also imitate this without knowing at all what the thought behind it really is. But it is not possible to think the instrument out, without understanding the rule of the ellipse.
One can feel really desperate by the fact that there are people who don't (want) to see that one can make a program for the computer to draw perfect ellipses - that the concept, the understanding, the insight in the being of the ellipse however can only exist in a human being who can think. Of course it is possible that the programmer follows rules himself, without understanding the concept of the ellipse. But at the origin of the program, there has to be a human being that has the insight. One cannot program a computer to have insight. There are many people who acknowledge this fact immediately, but there are also many people who deny it violently.
Important is from true insight man could also decide about this fact: A human being has the capacity to have insight, understanding. A computer however has not, and will never have, how advanced the technology will be. It can be brought to huge, inhuman intellectual performance - true insight it will never have. Not even with 'biochips', or whatever in the future may be discovered and produced. Why not?
Agrippa von Nettesheim (1486 - 1535)Process and insight by Mieke Mosmuller
Like DNA is to us what we learn about it through science, without knowing exactly how this information is obtained and what it exactly means, the computer, the iPad and the Smartphone have become our 'knowledge-extension', without knowing exactly how they work. And our knowledge of DNA also relies on computer technology. Human thinking leads to insight, to understanding. This is in fact what thinking exists for: to obtain comprehension of the riddles of life and nature - and ourselves. Insight is much more than only the observation of facts or the result of complicated calculations. When one sees an ellipse and knows that such a shape is called 'ellipse', one can say 'This is an ellipse' every time one sees such a shape. That is not an insight yet. The definition in words doesn't have to be based on insight, neither on understanding: An ellipse is a geometrical shape of points, in which the sum of distances to two fixed points, the foci, is constant.
A definition like this one can be learned by heart, one can know exactly how to proceed to construct it - and still lack the concept, the insight. From the moment one knows through self-observation what insight actually is, one knows for sure also when it is not there.
Having the true insight in the being of the ellipse, one can think out an instrument - like a pair of compasses to draw a circle - with which one can draw an ellipse. We can use a little piece of wood, put two needles in it in a certain distance and fix a thread at both ends of the needles. One takes a pencil, draw the thread tight and one can draw a line with the pencil with it - that always becomes an ellipse. Of course one can also imitate this without knowing at all what the thought behind it really is. But it is not possible to think the instrument out, without understanding the rule of the ellipse.
One can feel really desperate by the fact that there are people who don't (want) to see that one can make a program for the computer to draw perfect ellipses - that the concept, the understanding, the insight in the being of the ellipse however can only exist in a human being who can think. Of course it is possible that the programmer follows rules himself, without understanding the concept of the ellipse. But at the origin of the program, there has to be a human being that has the insight. One cannot program a computer to have insight. There are many people who acknowledge this fact immediately, but there are also many people who deny it violently.
Important is from true insight man could also decide about this fact: A human being has the capacity to have insight, understanding. A computer however has not, and will never have, how advanced the technology will be. It can be brought to huge, inhuman intellectual performance - true insight it will never have. Not even with 'biochips', or whatever in the future may be discovered and produced. Why not?
Insight is not a process that can be programmed, it is a merciful being opened to the spirit, it is an 'epiphany'. Every insight with true understanding, how simple it may be, outrages a process, a procedure - although it rises from it. Insight is intuition of the spirit. The instrument of the spirit is ... the true 'I'.
Agrippa von Nettesheim (1486 - 1535)Process and insight by Mieke Mosmuller
Comments
-
From pieter ha witvliet @Interessant hoe u via DNA bij het Ik uitkomt. Uw laatste 2 zinnen onderschrijf ik helemaal.
De basis daarvoor vond ik in Steiners 'Theosofie'. Het Ik als poort waardoor 'geest' 'materie' kan worden.
(Ik kan hier geen link plaatsen, merk ik. Maar wie zoekt op -antroposofie een inspiratie-vindt meer
-
From Margareta Bannmann @Es ist einfach immer wieder wunderbar, liebe Mieke, wie Du uns mit Deiner Genauigkeit zur Unterscheidung führst. Zwar hatte ich noch nie in meinem 67 Lebensjahren die Epiphanie für so eine Einsicht in die Ellipse. Jetzt kann ich sie wenigstens nach-denken und bin entzückt über die Möglichkeit mit den Nägeln und dem Faden, die mich unweigerlich zur Gesetzmäßigkeit führen. Hoffentlich finden diese Anregungen zur Genauigkeit sehr weite Verbreitung, denn nur so kann - wie mir scheint - Rudolf Steiners Hinweis, dass die Geister der Technik erkannt werden müssen, auch zu einer lebendigen Wirklichkeit kommen. Wiederum herzlichen Dank! Margareta
-
From Kees Weurman @Alhoewel een inzicht geen begrip is maar een begrip uiteraard moet worden worden ingezien, anders is het geen begrip, maar een woord, is het dan toch mogelijk te zeggen: door het denken ontstaat inzicht. Wat een inzicht is kan niet met woorden worden uitgedrukt?
-
From Mieke Mosmuller @Ja, zo kun je de eerste zinnen van het vierde hoofdstuk van de Filosofie der Vrijheid ook uitdrukken...