[ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 265, Issue 62

[Ben Zaiboc]

On 31/10/2025 00:38, bill w wrote:
> I have read several times in these chats the assumption that one 
> cannot understand something as complicated as themselves.
> Why not?  It sounds reasonable but what's the basis for it?   bill w

This is a red herring. The main problem with it is that we have no 
agreed common meaning for the word 'understand', so different people can 
interpret it differently.

Jason has gone into some details of an information-theory view, which is 
fine, but hardly applies to real-world scenarios. I think the main issue 
is not what is theoretically possible, but what do we need?

Individually, we hardly understand anything at all. How many car drivers 
actually have much of an understanding of the car they drive? But they 
all have an understanding of what they need to know in order to drive.

I think I understand how my computer works. Which is laughable if you 
take into account all the things that make up a computer, both hardware 
and software. I hardly understand a tiny fraction of it all. But I can 
still build one from parts I can buy, install an operating system and 
application software and do useful things with it. I understand enough. 
Computers are enormously complicated, but people, collectively, have 
created them. No single person could do it. No single person understands 
everyting about a computer. But we have them.

So I think the important thing is not "understand" something, but 
"Understand x about" something, to some practical end involving x. The 
question is: What do you want to do? Then you can decide what you need 
to understand.

-- 
Ben

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20251031/5a0fd0d3/attachment.htm>