this is similar to the familiar suggestion that the future loads the dice of the present to make itself inevitable.That's one of the more potent lessons I've learned here, how much I've been relying on bigger words instead of trying to extract from them a more intuitive way of conveying things.
That said, every once in a while, a crutch may be necessary to get to the next step. Even if its just hastening a process that would otherwise get there.
But here is another point, regarding how these larger cosmic processes accelerate. There seems to be a pattern, from what I can tell, in which higher-order mechanisms hasten their own production. To wander into hostile scientific territory: enzymes hasten chemical reactions that would otherwise take 100x, 1000x, 1,000,000x as long if they were left to "chance".
Similarly, human consciousness, namely its knack for technology, hastens the organization of matter, which would otherwise take billions of years to achieve a formation with a complexity equivalent to, say, a laptop. Even much cruder than that.
And from the start of chapter 2, "Hardware & Software: The Brain and its Programs" (where I am now)In the long run, we are hopefully approximating closer and closer to "objective Truth" over the centuries.
In the short run, Orr's law always holds: Whatever the Thinker thinks, the Prover will prove.'
And if the Thinker thinks passionately enough, the Prover will prove the thought so conclusively that you will never talk a person out of such a belief, even if it is something as remarkable as the notion that there is a gaseous vertebrate of astronomical heft ("GOD") who will spend all eternity torturing people who do not believe in his religion.
We will, throughout this book, consider the human brain a kind of bio-computer—an electro-colloidal computer, as distinct from the electronic or solid-state computers which exist outside our heads.
Please note carefully and long remember that we have not said that the human brain is a computer. The Aristotelian idea that to understand something you must know what it is has been abandoned in one science after another, for the pragmatic reason that the simple word "is" introduces so many metaphysical assumptions that we can argue forever about them. In the most advanced sciences, such as mathematical physics, nobody talks about what anything is anymore. They talk about what model (or map) can best be used to understand whatever we are investigating