It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Maslow's Needs - The WestWorld Pyramid

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   


Introduction

I like many others have begun watching the first season of the Sci-fi series WestWorld[1], an intriguing story about robots and human interaction that makes one question;" What is consciousness? ".

René Descartes (1607–1614)[2] was convinced that the body and conscious mind are two different substances: the first is made of matter, the latter is immaterial and his ideas influenced neuroscience until a few decades ago.
--


David Chalmers

How do you explain consciousness? | David Chalmers


In 1994 David Chalmers[3] published a Paper [ free - PDF ] explaining why consciousness is such a challenging phenomenon to understand. Although he wasn’t the first to discuss these challenges, he was the first to categorize them into two types of problems: “easy” problems and the “hard” problem.

The Easy problems involve the explanation of how the mind integrates information, focuses attention and allows us to report on mental states. Though not a piece of cake, such problems are easy because solving them only requires that we determine the mechanisms that explain these behaviors. Easy problems are physical by nature, falling within the empirical domains of psychology, cognitive science and neuroscience. Given the current trend in science of the mind, we’re confident that one day we will solve these problems.

The hard problem, by contrast, may never be solved. Specifically, the hard problem is determining why or how consciousness occurs given the right arrangement of brain matter. What makes it hard is that we cannot just point to some physical mechanism to solve it, for that would be the solution to the easy problem. Instead, our goal is to explain why certain physical mechanism gives rise to consciousness instead of something else or nothing at all.
--


Maslow's hierarchy of needs

Maslow's hierarchy of needs[4]
is a theory in psychology proposed in his 1943 paper "A Theory of Human Motivation"[5] in Psychological Review. Maslow subsequently extended the idea to include his observations of humans' innate curiosity. His theories parallel many other theories of human developmental psychology, some of which focus on describing the stages of growth in humans.

Maslow used the terms "physiological", "safety", "belongingness" and "love", "esteem", "self-actualization", and "self-transcendence" to describe the pattern that human motivations generally move through.

Maslow studied what he called exemplary people such as Albert Einstein, Jane Addams, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Frederick Douglass rather than mentally ill or neurotic people, writing that "the study of crippled, stunted, immature, and unhealthy specimens can yield only a cripple psychology and a cripple philosophy." Maslow studied the healthiest 1% of the college student population.

Maslow's theory was fully expressed in his 1954 book "Motivation and Personality"[6].

"Up" and the Hierarchy of Needs



Source

[1]Westworld
[2]René Descartes
[3]David Chalmers
[4]Maslow's hierarchy of needs

[5]A Theory of Human Motivation - Free PDF
[6]Motivation and Personality - Free PDF


Some Other Stuff - S.O.S

Consciousness
New Scientist
David Chalmers - Free PDF
A Theory of Human Motivation - Free PDF
edit on 20161116 by tikbalang because: image

edit on 18/11/16 by masqua because: fixed video link




posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: tikbalang

Watch the original westworld with Yule Brenner, it was pretty damn good and will give you an idea about where the TV series originated. I watch the TV series as well, it's pretty good.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

You missed the Yul Brenner cowboy in one scene?



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: tikbalang

Watch the original westworld with Yule Brenner, it was pretty damn good and will give you an idea about where the TV series originated. I watch the TV series as well, it's pretty good.

Cheers - Dave


I personally didn't think the original WW was all that good. It might just be through my modern eye though. So far I have gotten more insight into the TV series from Future World than WW. Along with the foreshadowing I knew for sure what we just found out about Bernard. Not that it took a genius, but my friends hadn't made the same assumption.

Overall though, absolutely love the series.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Cool, I'm watching it too, but I had never even heard of the Westworld movie before the series was announced. I like the philosophical aspect, as I have been questioning if there really is free will or are we mostly following self and cultural programming based on past experiences or trauma.
I'm curious to where the Man in Black and the maze plotline will lead and who is / what happened to Arnold.



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 05:41 AM
link   
a reply to: tikbalang

Not trying to be a d head but that looks wrong.

I think it should instead be:
Physical needs or desires / Body
Psychological needs or desires / Soul
Spiritual needs or desires / Spirit

And not in a pyramid shape but a circular shape leading within.

Like so:
(Physical (Psychological (Spiritual) Psychological) Physical)


I think he was thinking pyramid because he had the mindset of starting from the bottom and working upwards (towards enlightenment or towards the heavens or something) when he should have saw that he was working inwardly.

Just saying.

And did your pyramid mean to leave of the "cap stone" just for bots?:



Self-transcendence

In his later years, Maslow explored a further dimension of needs, while criticizing his own vision on self-actualization.[8] The self only finds its actualization in giving itself to some higher goal outside oneself, in altruism and spirituality.[9]



p.s. The TED video was nice. It's nice to see people venturing into my kind of thinking. (+5 belonging points.)



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 05:55 AM
link   
a reply to: tikbalang

Excellent OP! SnF!

Regarding the "hard" problem, it is my belief based on both study and experience, that once we understand the quantum nature of the mind (not the physical nature of the brain - that's separate), we can begin to understand how that ties into the quantum nature of consciousness, and how consciousness ties into the quantum nature of the universe(s).

There are people working on this, but as you say - it's hard.



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 07:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: tikbalang
The hard problem, by contrast, may never be solved. Specifically, the hard problem is determining why or how consciousness occurs given the right arrangement of brain matter. What makes it hard is that we cannot just point to some physical mechanism to solve it, for that would be the solution to the easy problem. Instead, our goal is to explain why certain physical mechanism gives rise to consciousness instead of something else or nothing at all.


In the book Godel, Escher, Bach Hofstrader makes an interesting point about you can have a mathematical representation of how a record player works. You can have a complete mathematical description of a every groove and scratch on the record. But even with all that you still can't hear the music.

I think you can't talk about the nature of consciousness without taking into account the nature and limitations of human language. It is too easy and too alluring to think our minds and the universe is just like a computer with discrete states. And how our minds and the universe work can be reduced to some firm understanding represented by simple equations or commentary. I do not think this is the case.

We are made of the very stuff we are experiencing. We are the universe's way of experiencing itself. We are not discrete from reality. We are connected to reality without any separation. We exist and are bathed in endless wave forms of energy from every possible direction imaginable. If you accept the idea that our minds are not separate from reality then our consciousness may be part of a much larger fabric than we are capable of holding in our imaginations.

We may have self-aware conscious computers but I imagine the CPU will be part yogurt and the rise of consciousness will probably happen by accident where we have absolutely no idea what is happening or how it works in terms of what the yogurt is doing or it is a necessary part to have.


edit on 18-11-2016 by dfnj2015 because: typos

edit on 18-11-2016 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Bleeeeep

i do believe it is different from person to person, a curious persona might not be working inwardly but instead chases true knowledge, another person might be looking at it in a more spiritual way..

I do believe an A.I. will question;" What is a soul? " But i dont think it will look any further on it than a logical conclusion..

you might be looking inwards spiritual, an AI might go another way..



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

the majority is not self-aware



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

Here is a topic for you,

SAlmon run
Natal homing



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

I just think architects are a giant thorn in the *****



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: tikbalang
a reply to: Riffrafter

Here is a topic for you,

SAlmon run
Natal homing


Why are these topics for me?

Salmon traveling to spawn and animals going back to their birthplace to reproduce?




posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: tikbalang
a reply to: dfnj2015

the majority is not self-aware


All humans are self-aware.



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: SignalMal

you are correct my dear watson



posted on Nov, 18 2016 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: tikbalang

True knowledge is inward, as it originates from the spirit.

Just as words are the body of conception, conception is the knowledge of the spirit - conception is the conceptualization of the spirit.

When you wrote your post, you conceived your spirit (your will to post) as the post - as the words of that post.

Think about that pyramid like a volcano. You reach the peak and you gain your height of awareness, your enlightenment, never realizing that what formed the volcano was the lava within.

The need to inhale and exhale is coming from within.

etc.

I'm not just talking about what needs you think you need, whatever way you conceptualize it, I'm talking about need itself -- that is what Maslow was trying to understand, isn't it? Not just needs but need itself?



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Bleeeeep

Of course, you forgot to add, "in my belief" before all of your assumptive statements.... some people find the way you word things rather off putting.

I mean we're not dealing with any kind of mere knowledge here... we're dealing with TRUE knowledge... and we know this because it's coming from within... from your spirit... WTH does that even mean? It's all so very circular.
edit on 19-11-2016 by SignalMal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: SignalMal

Where are your words coming from?

Same place theirs are coming from:


They imaged a secure entrance to above / below ground in the same way. (Convergent evolution is to converge upon the same will, while divergent evolution is to diverge from the same will. Evolution is merely a combination of both converging and diverging to or from the same will.)

So, the reason we all behave the same way is because we all have the same spirit of life in us.

The spirit, or will, that is in us, we conceive as our bodies or mental images. The will you conceive is what programs instincts -- such as in the way a mouse's offspring inherits better adaptability to mazes, or in the way that our ancestors' culture molded our abilities. Life is conception.



The word for soul means psyche, your psyche is made up of your concepts of reality like a running algorithm or measure. The thing it is measuring is your spirit or will. The solutions it produces are your mental images / body.

Everything follows that same pattern: spirit > soul > body

It is everywhere and everything.

Your words are the image of your awareness of your will.

It was your will to post that reply to me, the way you saw your will, the way you conceived it as the words of that post.

Again, everything is following that same pattern.

(Physical (Psychological (Spiritual) Psychological) Physical)

The fact that so many things conceive the same images, is testament of the truth within our will.

In mathematics we see:
(Solutions (Measurements of (Functions) Measurements of) Solutions)

So a mathematical equation is to create a measure (1+1) of a function (function is add) and by measuring, we come up with a solution (1+1=2)

And again, the pattern repeats itself everywhere:
Philosophy:
(Concepts (Conception of (Infinity) Conception of) Concepts)

In Engineering you learn:
Form follows function.

But its actually form follows conceptualization of function:
(Form follows (Conceptualization of (Function / Will) Conceptualization of) Form follows)

In spirituality we have:
(Son (Father (Holy Ghost) Father) Son)

And in physical reality we have:
(Quanta (Quantizations of (SpaceTime) Quantizations of) Quanta)


The reason this might seem alien to you is because you look at reality from an "outside" in perspective (you start with form and work inward). Though, even today's scientific knowledge will tell you that your perspective (materialism) is wrong -- instead of thinking of matter as being objects that control things, you should see that it is the forces or will within them that control things. (Matter is, at most, a force carrier, and not the forces themselves.) E.g. It is not about the image of two sticks being rubbed together that makes fire, but the energy being quantized which produces the image of fire.

Now can you understand what I meant?



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Bleeeeep

I believe its a subjective narrative you are using, everything you say comes from a subjective experience.. There are universal tales that doesnt change, your words might mean something to you, but thats the problem with a subjective view.. Its yours..

I believe that those who believe they walked the path of enlightenment all to often dig themselves in a hole they see as reality.. And it makes no sense to anyone else..

A person once quoted; "if you cant explain it simple, it means you dont understand it" I could use a single sentence, and the answer would be;" ooooh, wow im stupid, its so simple, damn "

The most enjoyable thing about learning something, is that you understand that humans have a unique imagination, but the reality is simple..

Start with this question instead;" What is a human? "



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:38 PM
link   
If you like Westworld then you will love a similar uk show about robotic AI called HUMANS ON CHANNEL 4

en.wikipedia.org...(TV_series)




top topics



 
7

log in

join