By James Wadman

There exists a fragile balance between science and art, treaded only by the bravest innovators in modern society. The common thread in our society between analytical objectivity and ingenuity is embedded in computation. It seems ironic that I should suggest that the most objective, logical sequences of our technological language should be the one and only force that will launch both the artist and scientist well into the future, but I do so with certainty.

And why? I believe that with computation comes the knowledge of a library interwoven by the subjective analysis of one thousand human minds. What makes code so dazzling, so brilliant– dare I say even so transcending?—is that it incorporates the interactive thought process of the writer of the code over an extended period of time and then relinquishes all the hours of coding into one single computational output. This library is built from the code and all of its data, and the weave is the human mind in the form of functions, classes, and comprehensive data sets.

With modern computation our knowledge will increase exponentially. We can suggest correlations with greater precision based on massive cross-analysis with stored experimental data, leading to greater efficiency in what we choose as our variables in the next experiments. We will create computation-derived variables that were never before considered or bring light to mathematical variables previously existent only in theory. We can continue to improve automation, and we can allow the automatic to experience, to reflect, and ultimate exist among the sentient, conscious minds.

Are we gods? Maybe not, but certainly we can create them.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

4 thoughts on “Conscious Talks: On Computation

  1. thorsaurus

    Thought inspiring post. Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems to me that science attempts to narrow our view of reality, aiming to eventually land it on the head of a pin. (Think unifying theory). But with nearly every attempt, science actually spreads the jaws of the universe a little wider open. Rather than a convergence, I see a blossom, an explosion even. But whether we are headed to an ever expanding cloud of knowledge that obscures the lines between art and science, or the sharp point of a cat’s tooth where the two are so close, only the most courageous will dare to see the difference, there will still be separation. Just my own humble synaptic code.

  2. James Wadman Post author

    I couldn’t agree more. Thanks for your post.

    Science is strange in that it is a study of what can be known and how that knowledge associates with our awareness of what isn’t and what can never be known. I will add on to what you said that those who are courageous enough to see the difference also must be courageous enough to pursue disciplines outside their respective expertise. Progressive science, in my opinion, requires a broad knowledge encompassing STEM fields, philosophy, and literacy of the arts.

Comments are closed.