[No1]

What does it mean to be a human ?
Biologically speaking it refers to members of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, but it also could refer 
But what if
…someone is 95% Human, but have only a quarter of average IQ is he a human ?
or
…someone is 77% Human, but have a higher IQ of average human, can he be considered a human ?
and what about someone who is 42% Human, but have IQ twice of average human ?
The word humane have derived from word human.
So should humanity be measured by Intelligence, Mercy or Compassion ? Maybe all of those ?
Well, I personally think not.
Measurement of Humanity is wrong in all senses except biological.
I think that based on IQ and Behaviour we should determine if given human is a person.
A cyborg can be considered as a person. Same with robots, cats and some canines. [ yes, I’m a lil bit speciest sometimes, but I’m working on it ]
And many many others.
Also, I do believe that some humans shouldn’t be considered as a Person ( and I’m not speaking about mad peoples, since I’m quite insane myself )
Being a Good Person is what matter. You can be a Bad Human ( by given social standards inside of the species ) and a Good Person. 
—————————————————————————-
What do you think ?

[atreestump]

Interesting question for a thread. I don’t know if you are familiar with post-humanism, but this is one of the questions that arises as we enter an epoch where ‘human’ appears to be radically different from previous generations.

I will have to look into this a bit more before replying properly, but I recall looking into the Turing test and it wasn’t really sufficient enough in a broader context, what makes anything anything at all, is recognition from the other.

There is a kind of ‘psychiatric computer’ that was invented in the 70s that seemed to pass the Turing test, but whenever you ask it something of itself, like ‘how are you doing?’, the only response is to ask ‘let’s keep this about you’.

[Socrates]

To be human and what that means first requires understanding what ‘to be’, ‘being’ is all about.

Biology certainly can define a human, but we are certainly more than just our genes. I don’t think we can find one isolated object to define what ‘being human’ is, culture and language are just as significant and we can include a beyond good and evil perspective for sure.

[kFoyauextlH]

I don’t generally think in this way, but it seems to be associated with “what sort of shape one is born in” and the supposed heritage of that person. That seems to be about it now, since even extremely deformed people who can’t use language or communicate are still considered human due to their heritage and genetic lineage.

I think the term has little value overall and I recognize all things as “people”, in various shapes, doing whatever they can do based on their shapes and tolerances. Rather like balloons or bags filled with air or water, they fill the spaces they can and whatever their shape is they use it how they are able.

I believe in 6 forms of generation or manifestation, and what we are now is an experience, and what is behind us is one essential Truth and Power. So behind it all, is that power which generates and views what we are, which is a frame or “body”, like a still photo, of experience, inclusive of impressions such as having a past or being particularly caused by a series of events which can not really be verified ultimately as being anything other than a deception or illusion.
[hr]
So in my world, cats are people, and people are cats.

[Intellectus]

What does it mean to be a human ?
Biologically speaking it refers to members of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, but it also could refer 
But what if
…someone is 95% Human, but have only a quarter of average IQ is he a human ?
or
…someone is 77% Human, but have a higher IQ of average human, can he be considered a human ?
and what about someone who is 42% Human, but have IQ twice of average human ?
The word humane have derived from word human.
So should humanity be measured by Intelligence, Mercy or Compassion ? Maybe all of those ?
Well, I personally think not.
Measurement of Humanity is wrong in all senses except biological.
I think that based on IQ and Behaviour we should determine if given human is a person.
A cyborg can be considered as a person. Same with robots, cats and some canines. [ yes, I’m a lil bit speciest sometimes, but I’m working on it ]
And many many others.
Also, I do believe that some humans shouldn’t be considered as a Person ( and I’m not speaking about mad peoples, since I’m quite insane myself )
Being a Good Person is what matter. You can be a Bad Human ( by given social standards inside of the species ) and a Good Person. 
—————————————————————————-
What do you think ?

Great question. “To be or not to be, that is the question.” – Shakespeare , “Be like water” – Bruce Lee , many famous people have tried to express what they genuinely mean what it is to be human. However, that is the problem…If you can only see what you can see then how can you genuinely see what others see? The answer is that you can’t, its impossible. The point I’m trying to make is that you can keep asking the same question to anyone over and over and you will get a “different” answer because it is not “YOUR” answer. It is simply the person you ask perspective of the answer that they see. However, that doesn’t mean that people should stop asking the question because that would not be Human. To question what is it to be Human is to be Human. 

Another perspective:

Logos is the “word”

Rhema is the interpretation of the “word”

Mix the words Logos and Rhema letters and it spells “Holograms”

Holograms are 3d representations of information. Our minds create these holograms based on one’s experiences (good and bad) within your consciousness/subconscious.

In other words…our minds are built to make our interpretation of the words that we believe are the “words” which is simply a perspective in that “Time”, like a still image that you can study but in 3D. And the mind does what it is built to do, that is try to understand the hologram it creates. Most people look at one “perspective” and then that’s the whole story…but it is not….people start to use different systems to construct the full image with memory, bias, models, preferences, Ego, etc. Which can lead to creativity or something “anew” …and the process starts all over again…like clockwork…like a artificial intelligence (when it is created). However, people can go another way with it and simply destroy the “perspective” and again, creates a new hologram to work with to try and understand the information that is given to work with.

I realized that holograms have many different perspectives and change perspectives as you “move”, “change direction”, or “keep thinking. Also, new information is added or taken away through the 5 senses (6 senses if you believe thinking is the missing sense that people forgot about, this is why people take thinking for granted). To ask what is it to be human is to constantly question your self and or surroundings. Gathering all information that you can and trying to go through all the bullshit. 

The only person who can truly see what is it to be Human is YOU. However, learning other perspectives gives you more information to go through all the bullshit and to finally find it. What that is, is your purpose, or your reason for being.

The best thing anyone can do for you is to fully genuinely explain themselves…but that is truly impossible because if someone could that then there would be nothing to talk about and you would be the same…through and through. To be human is to be an individual because we can not, not be an individual…our minds are ours alone and we evolved to such “imperfection” in order to survive…to keep going to the next frontier…what ever or when ever that is….

If you ever find it…you will feel like a complete hologram…shown from the millennium simulation’s perspective (ever changing views in motion) ; like the primordial spiral (the rabbit hole) of self-assembly (self-making, infinite, unique)  based on geological time (the beginning, the big bang).

If this makes any sense then your on the right path. Does this mean that I found it? I’m I a complete hologram? Maybe. Time will be the judge of me not man. But I love to hear what you think so I can gather another’s perspective to add to my self-hologram.

[atreestump]

@”No1″ Empathy is the best possible form of seeing from a point of view that is other to our own, the imaginary leap into the other, which to me is an important trait of a progressive human. It is possible to feel pain that is not our own, compassion (suffer-with) and so from my own experience, I know it is possible to see what others see, how my actions affect others.

[Intellectus]

@”No1″ Empathy is the best possible form of seeing from a point of view that is other to our own, the imaginary leap into the other, which to me is an important trait of a progressive human. It is possible to feel pain that is not our own, compassion (suffer-with) and so from my own experience, I know it is possible to see what others see, how my actions affect others.

I agree, empathy shows you how your actions affect others but its not the “true” reflection that they see. Your mind makes up the rest of the hologram by memories, bias, preferences, etc. If you are successful in “getting what they see, like in the ball park” then they should reveal that “affect” to you and therefore you both create something of a new collective hologram, a understanding. This collective hologram that you both created by your conversation is the essences of communication. The original hologram is destroyed in his mind, you then created a new one for him to create by simply communicating.

[Socrates]

The view that you are describing is Mental Representationalism which is one of the most dominant views within Cognitive Science, it is part of Cognitivism.

Check out emergence and connectionism and the critique of sumbolic representation as a foundation of cognition within cognitive science.

[Intellectus]

The view that you are describing is Mental Representationalism which is one of the most dominant views within Cognitive Science, it is part of Cognitivism.

Check out emergence and connectionism and the critique of sumbolic representation as a foundation of cognition within cognitive science.

This makes total sense to me and I believe is the key to teach others to simply understand themselves. However, the key is to relate or have the person who is learning recognize what the teacher is presenting and keep deliberate focus on the holograms that they create collectively. It simply means that both minds are resonating on the same level, a balance of vibrations. This is the description of a “good” conversation or “intellectual” positive communication. I keep trying to research if anyone has ever combined the words “logos” and “rhema” and rearranged them to create “holograms.” I think this is very significant as you can metaphorically relate it to a creation of information in 3D space. Out of thin air, which is imagination or creativity 

I also made a significate connection between the 7 deadly sins in Christianity and the 6 perfections from the teaching of Buddha .

First, the number 6 is a perfect number according to math experts. And there are only 6 perfect numbers to ever exist, which are 6, 28, 8128, 33550336, 8589869056 . They are extremely rare. So I wondered; why is the number 6 considered “bad” or “666” a sign of the devil. Coincidentally, the ending number of my drivers licence is “666”

The 6 perfections are giving, moral discipline, patience, effort, concentration, and wisdom. And Buddha teaches that if one follows this path of these 6 aspects then enlightenment is obtained.

The flip side:

Second, the number 7 is a prime number and is considered a prominent number in the bible and in other views. Jesus created the World in 7 days, (really 6 because he slept on the 7th) Its a prophecy number, ( seventh son of the seventh son) It is considered “good”

The connection:

To further the connection, I found the Theorem connecting prime and perfect numbers. 

If, 2^k (2 to the power of k) – 1 = prime number

Then, 2^k (2 to the power of k) -1 (2^k – 1) = perfect number

So if k = 3

2^3 – 1 = 7 (prime number)

2^3 -1 (2^3 -1) = 2^2(7) = 28 (Perfect number)

Coincidentally my ex wife’s birthday is 7/28/86

Prime is 7 connected to the perfect number 28 and I just simply did some math for 86

2+6 =8

8 – 2 = 6

So why the mix up? I can only speculate that this was intentionally, as there are countless conspiracy theories about how people want to control others by lying to them. Or maybe the connection were just forgotten in time. Either way, I continue to make these connections as a research each main view point that is in this World. And I keep coming with the same conclusion….That everyone is just missing that one “piece.”

Let me know what you think…I made a significant connection to power and control that I am working on now that I will share later…

[Socrates]

I just want to point out that Rhema and Logos do not mean the same thing. Logos has always had more to do with the faculty of reason, whereas Rhema is more akin to the utterance of a word, speech.

Check out Ferdinand De Saussures’ structuralist view of language, he was a Swiss linguist, he made a distinction between ‘langue’, which are like ‘images’ or ‘concepts’ of words within a language, which are dependent on their relations (differentiation) and ‘parole’ which is the actual utterance of the words. What he does is separate language from human subjective ideas.

Logos/Rhema would have much the same differences.

[Intellectus]

I just want to point out that Rhema and Logos do not mean the same thing. Logos has always had more to do with the faculty of reason, whereas Rhema is more akin to the utterance of a word, speech.

Check out Ferdinand De Saussures’ structuralist view of language, he was a Swiss linguist, he made a distinction between ‘langue’, which are like ‘images’ or ‘concepts’ of words within a language, which are dependent on their relations (differentiation) and ‘parole’ which is the actual utterance of the words. What he does is separate language from human subjective ideas.

Logos/Rhema would have much the same differences.

I understand that Logos and Rhema are not the same thing. And it seems that Ferdinand De Saussures’ is saying the same thing but in a different way.

I have this crazy notion that people who try to “think” separate ideas into more “thinking” which separates into more “thinking”. Its a never ending spiral. I believe this is why no one can ever get to the “right” way of doing anything. And can’t fully accept any idea that isn’t their own, so they create new ideas based on the old ones. A rehash if you will, this is why everything seems to be “already said, or thought.” But this isn’t true. Everyone has a unique perspective given to us by the fibonacci sequence by fractal design by evolution. The same notion that no snowflake is the same.

I heard that “Thinking has been what keeps us in the illusion of separateness within our own identities” Also, “the more we align with thought, the more removed we become from the source”

So what can we do if all we can do is think? And think – separate. And think – separate. I guess that’s a higher question than “What it is it to be Human?” But then I argue that to Question or “think” is to be Human. What we can do is find our being, or enlightenment, or our purpose, or ourselves. Become fully self-aware. It has been thought to be unobtainable because someone labeled it as such. And also no one can “see” it.

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete” – Buckiminster Fuller

[Socrates]

Philosophy is always a work in progress, when a problem is solved, it opens up many new problems and becomes increasingly complex. I’m not advocating relativism, or that there is sn absolute ‘right’ answer as you mentioned, just that nothing is fixed and that all is a dependent origination, therefore there are no innate ideas, or things in themselves. I don’t know if it’s possible to have an idea we can call ‘our own’ either, all is inherited, embodied and incorporated.

[atreestump]

Everyone has a unique perspective given to us by the fibonacci sequence by fractal design by evolution. The same notion that no snowflake is the same.

Can you elaborate on this in another thread please?

[Intellectus]

Everyone has a unique perspective given to us by the fibonacci sequence by fractal design by evolution. The same notion that no snowflake is the same.

Can you elaborate on this in another thread please?

sure thing.
[hr]

Philosophy is always a work in progress, when a problem is solved, it opens up many new problems and becomes increasingly complex. I’m not advocating relativism, or that there is sn absolute ‘right’ answer as you mentioned, just that nothing is fixed and that all is a dependent origination, therefore there are no innate ideas, or things in themselves. I don’t know if it’s possible to have an idea we can call ‘our own’ either, all is inherited, embodied and incorporated.

The “right” answer is just that, a answer in that time, a decision based on the information at that point in time, at the speed of sensation. And then it changes just as fast because we create something new to replace the old. In other words, it is constantly changing and there isn’t absolute answer for anything, just a absolute way to understand how we get to a answer.

[atreestump]

Foucault’s epistemes and Hans Gadamers’ Fusion of Horizons say a similar thing, that each ‘epoch’ that had certain meanings and practices throughout its duration, seems to be forgotten by the following episteme/horizon.

https://ontic-philosophy.com/Thread-Fusion-of-Horizons-vs-Epistemes

[Author]

Posts