I would not just say unethical. You have to consider multiple facets and situations. While yes it may not be best. Sometimes they have to feed children or otherwise. To put it simply most things aren’t black and white.
I would not just say unethical. You have to consider multiple facets and situations. While yes it may not be best. Sometimes they have to feed children or otherwise. To put it simply most things aren’t black and white.
Just wanted to add something. Lying for Financial gain isn’t illegal it’s how you do it. Like people lie for Financial gain all the time.
I appreciate your concern, but I’m confident in my perception and experiences. I understand that my situation might seem unusual, but my observations are consistent and real to me. If there’s a discrepancy in perception, it might be related to unique sensory or physiological aspects rather than hallucination. If needed, I can seek professional evaluation to ensure everything is aligned with my overall health.
And I have been.
Could you possibly explain how I’d be seeing that without seeing it. Without using things like psychosis and schizophrenia as that’s already been checked and disproven. Many times… 😂
Well that’s the issue I see colour on trees and stuff around but the sky is grey and clouds white.
I am doing a systemic experimentation since day one lol I’m between step 3&4&5
Then once they finish I can fully create step 6&7
But ykkk most ppl won’t even engage
An inherit bias because I can describe my own body? Otherwise I’m just going with whatever comes.
I mean you do realize the moon reflects some light? Though I’m not; I can see how that may break your idea of reality. Also there’s different light spectrums? You sure I’m not seeing a different spectrum.
Uhhhh science, any system of knowledge that is concerned with the physical world and its phenomena and that entails unbiased observations and systematic experimentation. In general, a science involves a pursuit of knowledge covering general truths or the operations of fundamental laws.
Yeah I was almost certain that wasn’t the definition but here!
That’s the thing I for sure am… Yesterday when I took this video that’s published here. I could clearly see the colour on the wall and even see and say how many tapestries are in storage or me describing the colour and pattern on blanket. Wait you should already know this because it was in the video. Though I will 100% bet you. You are unwilling to even hear.
I understand your perspective on night vision being related to psychology. However, night vision involves both biological and psychological aspects. Biologically, night vision relies on the function of the eyes, specifically the rod cells in the retina that detect low light levels. This physiological process is a key part of biology. On the other hand, how we perceive and interpret what we see in low light conditions involves cognitive processes, which is where psychology comes in. So, while the biological mechanisms are crucial for night vision, the way we experience and understand it also involves psychological factors.
I appreciate your input. To clarify, my perception of the night sky is light grey. I’m open to discussing the science behind these observations, but let’s keep the conversation respectful and focused. If there’s a specific point you’d like to discuss, I’m happy to engage with that.
Also I’m not gonna lie I have a hard time understanding things with biology and sometimes I wish I had some help because think of the things we could achieve. The scientific community helping me build ideas beyond our imagination.
Ohhh I never really thought of that. Though can I ask why? Isn’t human biology science? Is light waves science? I can understand the basic of what I am using crosses beyond what’s not science. Though what it is activating is.
I appreciate your feedback and understand where you’re coming from. However, I believe my manuscript does indeed engage with science and philosophy, though it might not be immediately apparent. Here’s how:
I strive to integrate scientific analysis with philosophical exploration throughout the manuscript, aiming to provide a comprehensive view of human evolution and its implications. If you have specific areas where you feel this integration is lacking, I’d be open to discussing those in more detail.
Science and Philosophy in Cognitive and Emotional Evolution:
Philosophical Considerations of Intelligence:
Ethical Implications of Technological Advancement:
The Impact of Trauma on the Human Psyche:
Ethical Guidelines and Global Collaboration:
Societal and Cultural Influences on Evolution:
deleted by creator
My words?
Haha, did my mention of consulting medical professionals make your comment seem irrelevant? Is that why you downvoted and remained silent? It looks like you’re just sticking to the status quo out of sheer ignorance.
We must consider the benefits of AI as such and how they can contribute to our life. I can assure you prices of such while AI may seem like a game or useless thing for others. It’s actually a useful tool able to help others understand complex concepts that most people have a hard time explaining or won’t. Many more things too.