Brain and Search-Engine Algorithms and the Fruit of Circular Reasoning

 

 

 

 

 

Brain and Search-Engine Algorithms and the Fruit of Circular Reasoning  

 

 

 

Our Brain has algorithms at work by which it comes to and draws conclusions. The driver behind our own personal algorithm is the search for what the soul pants after, longs for, aches with a hole to fill, and continually consciously and subconsciously researches where wholeness and a “good fit for him/her” (Maslow- “Belonging”) is found. That everlasting fount.

 

The first Google search brings up this definition of an Algorithm: “a process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer.” (2017)  

 

Ausubel is correct in my opinion when he states that we hang information on pegs of previous points of relevancy to us. Eventually- just lesser relevant things just drop out of our memory. So- when our mind inquires (my opinion) it goes on a word search for relevancy. When it is faced with a topic or theme and feels pressed to take-up the theme, it looks for collections of branches that have word relevancy that is almost branches of synonyms- but, really words that normally relate one to another.

 

 

 

Tonight I first recognized that in Google’s algorithm- it is quite immense in its knowledge banks it draws from- but, simple at the end of the day. It is much like the brain. How is that helpful? E.g. Terrorists are on the web and other ungodly nefarious characterless-characters. If one threw out honey-pots counting on their brain-process-algorithms to be “x” in a fairly finite string of words- it should be easier and easier to draw that person in and also profile them simply based on what Google does by the millions every day, “gives us appropriate word associations.” Outside of using the web like that- persons with appropriate algorithms then need to be scouted out and hired because of the way their brain uniquely works.

 

[If I were an architecture of Google and the likes- what I am saying here that sounds like philosophy/psychology to some- but it could prove to be scientifically-statistical via. some patience, honey-pots, and the right set of branches-branching-out from branches (relevant words).

 

 

Circular reasoning is when the same reference point is used to make the same point again and again having the reference-point at the center seeking validity and a soundness of thought. So- because the source of argument is a source unto itself or some half-baked thinking with a great zeal behind it- one has to first establish that the “source” is trustworthy or worth trusting (this is a sneaky one sometimes and is not infallible in the sense that- sometimes the absolute minority speaks the truth and the majority are wrong.)

Here are examples: Suppose a person was discredited by others because they believe their lens has the market-corner on truth and so say, “he writes this way when he is ________.” Should I contend- then the old adage becomes true- “There is strength in numbers” and so those numbers could easily be finding their sound-source and valid-source through the eyes of extreme bias And, then make a truth-claim again- “you write that way because you are afraid or mean or angry because you fail in meeting up to the standards of our norms in this micro-society.” To be frank- I write because I enjoy thinking through issues and using my imagination at this time.       

Advertisements

About Imagine

Right Now Brain-Dead
This entry was posted in World Focus- "Hey, World- what's goin on?". Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s