Weltanschauung - who am I - prologue:

Top

Popper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper


who am I - prologue: At 25, I finished my Computer Science PhD.D thesis defense, and stood outside math science tall building with knowledge that the next strong memorial convocation happens with the degree roll for me. I had completed the mercy-less program and I was an employee at Boston doing software for the US army, best I could do, and worst according to my guide, who had become my father and hence took the position as me a misguided young man! His scornful look zeroed my pleasure and I was agitated. The program took me 3.5 years of toil and ended successfully. "What next?" I asked myself, worried by yet another Father I had upset. That fateful afternoon, I decided I will spend the next 4 years of my life (as long as I spent on PhD.) or less, and answer it well to answer my doubts - who am I.

deepest? A life went by. I am 65 about 40 years later and have finally been able to answer it to my satisfaction. How was I to know that this question is deepest in philosophy and touches all aspects of my life. You, my dear reader should read it once to answer it for your own self. Many times to begin to know me. It is unique in how much the question is covered.

writing style: It is written in a particular style, similar to how every intelligent scientist I encountered in the last 40 years whose style I could parse, think, and so do all top professors. I call it Socrates/style. Throughout, phrases with a slash, are mine with detailed semantics as per me and grossly, but not in fine details, without ever being surprising coarsely. In it, a question is asked, constraints on solution are imposed, and then one researches the answer, which might be simple or deepest like what I asked, depth not known. It has no relations to events in my life, most events are much better understood now. Its epistemology, like all science, is falsifiability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability. That here can even be the answer to "Who am I" is a 2020 miracle, never before in human existence [I prove it]!

Plethora of sub-questions: The question resolves into many more. For each there is a falsifiable (scientific) answer here. All religions are equally stupid, they are all equal so [I prove it. What is the universe around me - society, people, stars. What is life I have and how valuable - my own, family, friends and soldiers who fight for me. What is death, is there an afterlife, can I influence it? What is ageing, how can I minimize its harmful impact on self and loved once? What is medicine and sickness. How does one minimize its harmful impact? How does one distinguish money-drive salesmen and genuine value adders. How does one escape advertising and use it profitably! How does one escape politics and use it profitably. What is history, baloney and use if well? How to escape those who understand this. What is law and semantics? What is consciousness? Can one make Artificial Intelligence AI to understand and do what lawyers, doctors, teachers, maintain robots, white-collar jobs. How will post-industrial world function? Can robots be conscious? Who, what, how to believe? What makes society around me function. Who am I?

40 years later:  I will answer in subsequent pages. Just the width of sub queries is frightening to all but religious. I consider those beliefs to be uncivilized and support measures to drive them underground. The basis of all questions asked above is science, and lack of any belief in Any book or tome except as detailed by active rational skeptics whose words are treasured as representative of me. Even then, unless old enough to withstand active scientific investigation, else the statements are not a theory but a hypothesis. My great belief in Talib and Sinclair are such that their statements are hypotheses. There are All religions whose every contradictory statement means the converse is likely a hypothesis (Mal/hypothesis)!

what is science: pointless to talk about scientific without knowing what it is. Every religious moron will use the word unscientifically, in fact a collusion between his beliefs and science, not even knowing it is impossible. By Popper definition, generally accepted, science is a collection of falsifiable theories! Not one religious idiot considers religious facts as falsifiable! That is a negative constraint on what science can not be. On the positive side, science is rational skepticism, you only accept testable empiric, never believe unless it meets your logic! If accepted science fails, then your logic is faulty. It never happens with ordinary things. Extremes of size and speed in science force you into quantum mechanics and linear logic. Except quantum phenomena, ordinary propositional logic and predicate calculus suffices. There is nothing more laughable and scornful more than a stupid religious joker applying quantum mechanics to anything.

Who fails the Popper test? Not only do all religions fail, so do many phenomena considered scientific - like multiverse, what happens in a black hole, why is vacuum energy what it is etc. There is an element of rigorous deduction, inviolable known science axioms - limiting to new axioms not tested to today. Even then, it is not science. Science has no claims to be known all ever, it is that ALL religions fail unfalsifiability! ALL sub animal politicians have to become proficient in the art of attractive meaninglessness which can not fail! Said my favorite emfubar Sir - Modi failed Corona, not because he copied west like the US and UK, and failed to follow east like Japan and Sweden (sic) ; but because he failed to follow the Indian way! Not a word about the superior Indian  way! The explanation of Modi errors - so many of them - is simple, he is afraid of Sir. Sir Trump is a failure because he is not properly patriotic enough! Why do you think the intelligent Americans never argue with an Indian brahmin saint ever again?

outline of answers? This text was not possible before 2020 before I read Dr. Sinclair (Harvard) aging theory of information I applied to self as derived digilog theory two weeks after I read and saw some benefit. I tested positively once on  self, will again test on the month mark then life long on the annual mark. I suggest this digilog schedule and its understanding. Best I can suggest is to read and intern his book published in 2019. It is a scientific theory (falsifiable) and not dependent on any authority but sequence of experiments that all can try. I myself have formulated some empirical tests to try the digilog theory. Will be budgeted and done. Unless I could apply myself successfully, writing the rest of the questions is a waste of my time.