"Joe E. Dees" wrote:
> > Damien Broderick wrote:
> >
> > > Consider this idiocy, cited from the above RAW extract:
> > >
> > > < To understand neurological space, Dr. Leary assumes that the nervous
> > > system consists of eight potential circuits, or "gears," or mini-brains.
> > > Four of these brains are in the usually active left lobe and are concerned
> > > with our terrestrial survival; four are extraterrestrial, reside in the
> > > "silent" or inactive right lobe, and are for use in our future evolution.
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > This explains why the right lobe is usually inactive at this stage of our
> > > development, >
> > >
> > I think the operative gibberish phrase is "for use in our further > evolution." Since evolution is in response to preexisting actual > environments, not in anticipation of future possible surroundings > (and indeed can only be this way if its mechanism is indeed natural > selection), the above phrase is so full of fuzzyminded b.s. that no > respectable bovine would defecate it.
Although this is a complete diversion from my intended line of thought, I'd have to agree with you on this one! Besides, I'm not here to debate RAW's outdated, yet remarkably suggestive prose from 1977. I am however using Tim Leary's 8-circuit model as a launching pad for thinking about what higher intelligence could be. I think now is as good a time as any to take Tim Leary's 8-circuit model and give it a more updated precise scientific re-working. In fact, Tim Leary was quite eager to see such a scientific revision done by those knowledgeable enough to take on the task.
Getting back to my original point, I think that being a so-called slave to an immensely higher intelligence might ironically be more free than being a slave now to our inherited genetic, neurological and sociological constraints. Any thoughts in that regard?
Paul Hughes