Cognitive Architecures :: Remember, remember, the velvet November


node:	Cognitive Architecures
template:	4
parent:	\| Synoptícium \|
owner:	chory nos
viewed by:
created:	12.02.2026 - 20:56:53

cwbe coordinatez:
101
792011
1969674
9294978

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA

permissions
you:	r,
system:	public
net:	yes

Noda bez obsahu sa pridat neda. Prosto neda. A ja chcem.

0000010100792011019696740929497809294979

The human language subsystem is its own world, without a direct relationship to external reality outside what is already embedded in the language structure itself. Similar to LLMs. And that is the source of fascism and other human cruelty and gross misunderstanding. It just generates what's plausible within the system and tries to maintain consistency as much as possible. In a sense, it is a supreme sophist.

However, the structure itself might become constructively creative if prompted (pun intended) interestingly.

Experiments with patients with severed Corpus Callosum show (The Matter with Things, McGillchrist) that their left hemisphere (where normally the language resides) is able to completely fabricate a reason for what it said, even if it does not have any information that what it said is valid. The only concern is self consistency.

Fun Fact: In healthy persons, most of the communication between the right hemisphere and the left is inhibitive. (McGillchrist)

Fun fact: Yes. Schizophrenics don't lie - there are many of us. What unity even means?

Fun hypothesis: What if a sense of the self is quite recent? It is quite plausible to relate to our thoughts as "Athena speaking, or Juice:) speaking". Not as me deliberating with me about something out there.

Fun fact: What I'm doing right now is exactly that :)

000001010079201101969674092949780929497909295026

Does it mean that banality is just an auto regressive reaction of an isolated language model? Is it the source of banality of Arend's banality of evil?

What about an auto regressive reaction of, let's say visual cortex? Is there any banality?