Slow communication capacity. I can write at 110 wpm with
slightly faster bursts but rarely. I probably talk around
200-400 wpm if I remember right and I think the speed of thought
is around 800wpm - I have the figures somewhere. Of course this
is the phonological loop and not the entirety of the brain.
there's other outputs available than words as well. But I think
its internal speeds and inability to express fully outwardly
that creates the inner experience. There's barriers to full
communication all around: Not just mechanical but social for
example. Lots of constraints to inhibit full communication. So,
it's trapped. We create other social people internally to talk
with at a faster rate of speed than we can do externally and
these multiple selves are our thoughts. In short, we internalize
society. == But I have to present that with a big caveat: it's
not limited to language. It's just that we've studied language
more. I believe the internal experience of "self" is community
based even down to bacteria, who seem to have a behavioral sense
of "us" vs "them", which might mean a self-v-other-self and
self-v-other as well, considering they don't all behavior in
coordination or entirely mathematically - just mostly. So, a
component of life perhaps - but maybe that's taking it too deep
smile emoticon = I believe the impetus is ultimately internal
first, but fed in a kind of "upward spirals" via the external -
and each influences the other. But I think the internal is
primary - otherwise, the external would have nothing to work
with - but the internal cannot survive without the external, at
least in developmental stages. == I found that quite validating
when I heard of that. I think there was a TED talk a few years
ago. Well done - well, they all are because they follow the same
winning formula smile emoticon [I read a book on "how to give a
TED talk" - and it's a solid formula] == It really has to be
HARD to be a baby. Consider: You have all of your possibilities
open to you. Every language. Every movement. You do it all. You
try it all. But you start narrowing it down to patterns based
upon processing the world around you. Absolutely mindblowing
stuff to me. == (I try to learn the 'gist' of a computer
language about once a month. I want to eventually be able to
read any computer language, at least in part. Brainfuck wasn't
actually *too* bad because it functions a LOT like using
Microsoft Excel) == Becoming fluent in DCL (DEC Control
Language? I forget now) was nearly a total waste of time
although I've found since then, no computer scripting or
compilable language is a waste of time... but I remember being
REALLY REALLY irritated when the VAX/VMS thing died out as a
viable species. Thankfully, I learned Unix too... but I liked
the OS of the VAX better smile emoticon == What may be Boolean
but How is algorithmic. == I bow down to you sir. I remember
punch cards when I was a kid and they were having to transfer
the information into a newer system and they were
"de-computerizing" the IBM typewriters so that they became
typewriters again at my mother's work. I was an annoying prick
kid who loaded BASICA on my mother's brand new office computer
and ran: 10 FOR X = 1 TO 20000 20 SOUND X, 100 30 NEXT X RUN and
turned off the monitor. and looked on innocently as people came
FLYING into the room, thinking a bomb was going off somewhere as
the pitch rose higher and higher. ==
