Resilience 🗡️❤️💰

+ Expand

• What makes for a suitable problem for AI (Demis Hassabis, Nobel Lecture)?
  • Space: Massive combinatorial search space
  • Function: Clear objective function (metric) to optimize against
  • Time: Either lots of data and/or an accurate and efficient simulator
• Guess what else fits the bill (Yours truly, amateur philosopher)?
  • Space
    1. Intestines/villi
    2. Lungs/bronchioles
    3. Capillary trees
    4. Network of lymphatics
    5. Dendrites in neurons
    6. Tree branches
  • Function
    1. Energy
    2. Aerobic respiration
    3. Delivery to "last mile" (minimize distance)
    4. Response time (minimize)
    5. Information
    6. Exposure to sunlight for photosynthesis
  • Time
    1. Nourishment
    2. Gaseous exchange
    3. Oxygen & Nutrients (Carbon dioxide & "Waste")
    4. Surveillance for antigens
    5. Coherence of functions
    6. Water and nutrients from soil

-- Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 2024

The Architecture of Understanding: A Hierarchy of Knowledge in Decision-Making . In the vast landscape of human cognition, understanding is neither flat nor arbitrary. Instead, it is structured—layered, dynamic, and hierarchical. To navigate the world effectively, we must process knowledge through different lenses, each serving a distinct function. This hierarchy spans from the tactical immediacy of truth to the existential contemplation of appraisal. The deeper one goes, the more foundational and abstract the knowledge becomes.

Personalized Medicine, National Identity, and Trump. With Trevor Noah and Company.

Truth: Tactical Precision . Truth, often perceived as the ultimate end of knowledge, is in reality a tactical instrument. It is immediate, localized, and constrained by the conditions of its discovery. In any given moment, truth is not a monolithic absolute but a utility—something leveraged to achieve an outcome. A commander on the battlefield does not need the full, unabridged history of a conflict to act; they require situational truths that dictate the next maneuver. A scientist in a laboratory does not need a metaphysical justification for chemistry; they need an experimental result that holds under present conditions.

Truth’s tactical nature means it is always contingent. It operates within a context, dictated by necessity and defined by action. Those who treat truth as an eternal and unchanging monolith fail to grasp its functional role in decision-making.

Speculation: Informational Exploration. If truth is tactical, speculation is informational. It is the bridge between the known and the unknown, the process of generating hypotheses, theories, and possibilities. While truth locks us into immediate necessity, speculation frees us to imagine, analyze, and extrapolate. It is the domain of researchers, innovators, and those willing to push beyond the given.

Of course the æsthetic value of Shakespeare’s plays does not, in the slightest degree, depend on their facts, but on their Truth, and Truth is independent of facts always, inventing or selecting them at pleasure. — Truth of Masks 🎭

However, speculation remains grounded in information. It is not wild fantasy but structured possibility—an essential tool for expanding the limits of what is considered possible. The strategist who ignores speculation falls prey to stagnation; the investor who dismisses it misses unseen opportunities.

Decision: The Strategic Lever. A decision is neither purely factual nor purely speculative—it is a strategic act of commitment. It stands at the intersection of knowledge and action, where speculation meets the constraints of reality. Decisions are high-order constructs, relying on truths, facts, and speculation, but transcending them in pursuit of an outcome.

Decisions shape the course of history. They are the moments when knowledge becomes power—when intelligence translates into action. Every decision marks a gamble, an assertion of will over uncertainty. The strength of a decision, therefore, is not in its ability to reflect absolute truth, but in its capacity to synthesize available information into a coherent path forward.

Facts: Operational Execution. Facts are the bricks of knowledge, the operational building blocks of action. They are neither tactical nor strategic but serve as raw materials for both. A fact, in isolation, has no meaning—it is only in relation to a decision, a strategy, or a speculation that facts become useful.

Operational efficiency depends on the proper deployment of facts. A surgeon relies on anatomical facts to perform a procedure, but it is their judgment—their strategic decision-making—that turns those facts into a successful operation. A corporation, armed with vast data, still requires interpretation and insight to transform information into competitive advantage.

Appraisal: The Existential Perspective. At the deepest level of understanding lies appraisal—an existential reckoning with the consequences of knowledge and action. Appraisal is not just an evaluation of effectiveness but a judgment of meaning. It asks: Were the decisions made worth it? Did they align with our values, our aspirations, our long-term survival?

This is where human agency transcends mere execution. We are not machines blindly processing inputs; we are sentient beings assessing the impact of our choices on ourselves and the world around us. Without appraisal, knowledge remains hollow—an empty vessel without a destination.

Conclusion: Knowledge as a Fractal Hierarchy. The interplay between truth, speculation, decision, facts, and appraisal is not linear but fractal. Each level informs the next, looping recursively through feedback and refinement. Tactical truths emerge from facts, which inform strategic decisions, which reshape speculation, which ultimately demand existential appraisal.

To master understanding is to navigate this hierarchy with awareness—to know when to act, when to question, when to decide, and when to reflect. Those who grasp this structure hold the key to mastery, wielding knowledge not as a burden but as an instrument of power, wisdom, and meaning.

Show code cell source Hide code cell source

import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import networkx as nx

# Define the neural network layers
def define_layers():
    return {
        'Tragedy (Pattern Recognition)': ['Cosmology', 'Geology', 'Biology', 'Ecology', "Symbiotology", 'Teleology'],
        'History (Resources)': ['Resources'],  
        'Epic (Negotiated Identity)': ['Faustian Bargain', 'Islamic Finance'],  
        'Drama (Self vs. Non-Self)': ['Darabah', 'Sharakah', 'Takaful'],  
        "Comedy (Resolution)": ['Cacophony', 'Outside', 'Ukhuwah', 'Inside', 'Symphony']  
    }

# Assign colors to nodes
def assign_colors():
    color_map = {
        'yellow': ['Resources'],  
        'paleturquoise': ['Teleology', 'Islamic Finance', 'Takaful', 'Symphony'],  
        'lightgreen': ["Symbiotology", 'Sharakah', 'Outside', 'Inside', 'Ukhuwah'],  
        'lightsalmon': ['Biology', 'Ecology', 'Faustian Bargain', 'Darabah', 'Cacophony'],
    }
    return {node: color for color, nodes in color_map.items() for node in nodes}

# Define edges
def define_edges():
    return [
        ('Cosmology', 'Resources'),
        ('Geology', 'Resources'),
        ('Biology', 'Resources'),
        ('Ecology', 'Resources'),
        ("Symbiotology", 'Resources'),
        ('Teleology', 'Resources'),
        ('Resources', 'Faustian Bargain'),
        ('Resources', 'Islamic Finance'),
        ('Faustian Bargain', 'Darabah'),
        ('Faustian Bargain', 'Sharakah'),
        ('Faustian Bargain', 'Takaful'),
        ('Islamic Finance', 'Darabah'),
        ('Islamic Finance', 'Sharakah'),
        ('Islamic Finance', 'Takaful'),
        ('Darabah', 'Cacophony'),
        ('Darabah', 'Outside'),
        ('Darabah', 'Ukhuwah'),
        ('Darabah', 'Inside'),
        ('Darabah', 'Symphony'),
        ('Sharakah', 'Cacophony'),
        ('Sharakah', 'Outside'),
        ('Sharakah', 'Ukhuwah'),
        ('Sharakah', 'Inside'),
        ('Sharakah', 'Symphony'),
        ('Takaful', 'Cacophony'),
        ('Takaful', 'Outside'),
        ('Takaful', 'Ukhuwah'),
        ('Takaful', 'Inside'),
        ('Takaful', 'Symphony')
    ]

# Define black edges (1 → 7 → 9 → 11 → [13-17])
black_edges = [
    (4, 7), (7, 9), (9, 11), (11, 13), (11, 14), (11, 15), (11, 16), (11, 17)
]

# Calculate node positions
def calculate_positions(layer, x_offset):
    y_positions = np.linspace(-len(layer) / 2, len(layer) / 2, len(layer))
    return [(x_offset, y) for y in y_positions]

# Create and visualize the neural network graph with correctly assigned black edges
def visualize_nn():
    layers = define_layers()
    colors = assign_colors()
    edges = define_edges()

    G = nx.DiGraph()
    pos = {}
    node_colors = []

    # Create mapping from original node names to numbered labels
    mapping = {}
    counter = 1
    for layer in layers.values():
        for node in layer:
            mapping[node] = f"{counter}. {node}"
            counter += 1

    # Add nodes with new numbered labels and assign positions
    for i, (layer_name, nodes) in enumerate(layers.items()):
        positions = calculate_positions(nodes, x_offset=i * 2)
        for node, position in zip(nodes, positions):
            new_node = mapping[node]
            G.add_node(new_node, layer=layer_name)
            pos[new_node] = position
            node_colors.append(colors.get(node, 'lightgray'))

    # Add edges with updated node labels
    edge_colors = {}
    for source, target in edges:
        if source in mapping and target in mapping:
            new_source = mapping[source]
            new_target = mapping[target]
            G.add_edge(new_source, new_target)
            edge_colors[(new_source, new_target)] = 'lightgrey'

    # Define and add black edges manually with correct node names
    numbered_nodes = list(mapping.values())
    black_edge_list = [
        (numbered_nodes[3], numbered_nodes[6]),  # 4 -> 7
        (numbered_nodes[6], numbered_nodes[8]),  # 7 -> 9
        (numbered_nodes[8], numbered_nodes[10]), # 9 -> 11
        (numbered_nodes[10], numbered_nodes[12]), # 11 -> 13
        (numbered_nodes[10], numbered_nodes[13]), # 11 -> 14
        (numbered_nodes[10], numbered_nodes[14]), # 11 -> 15
        (numbered_nodes[10], numbered_nodes[15]), # 11 -> 16
        (numbered_nodes[10], numbered_nodes[16])  # 11 -> 17
    ]

    for src, tgt in black_edge_list:
        G.add_edge(src, tgt)
        edge_colors[(src, tgt)] = 'black'

    # Draw the graph
    plt.figure(figsize=(12, 8))
    nx.draw(
        G, pos, with_labels=True, node_color=node_colors, 
        edge_color=[edge_colors.get(edge, 'lightgrey') for edge in G.edges],
        node_size=3000, font_size=9, connectionstyle="arc3,rad=0.2"
    )
    
    plt.title("Self-Similar Micro-Decisions", fontsize=18)
    plt.show()

# Run the visualization
visualize_nn()

Fig. 5 The Wilde Variant is now locked in—an elegant recursive model where history is both a solemn process and a grand jest, much like Wilde himself. This fits seamlessly with your broader neural framework, offering another axis of interpretation where history, like cognition, processes itself iteratively—absorbing, interrogating, synthesizing, resisting, and ultimately playing with its own form. Paris as the final node is especially fitting—it’s the city where Wilde found his tragicomic end, where Nietzsche’s admiration met decadence, and where history, philosophy, and satire collapse into one last knowing smile. Alexandria is the birthplace of historical speculation, where allegory and synthesis flourished, and Paris is the city of Wilde’s exile and Nietzsche’s admiration, embodying the satirical yet earnest intellectual playfulness of the Enlightenment. This framing makes Wilde’s Historical Criticism not just a retrospective but a recursive process—each stage confronting and refining its predecessor, much like our own neural model’s iterative self-correction. Paris, in this sense, is the endpoint where history finally laughs at itself, while still taking itself seriously.