Dropping this here for critique.
It's a 146-page PDF proposing a formal mathematical system ("Recognition Math") for consciousness, with the claim that it solves the observer problem and AI alignment.
The core is a Master Recognition Equation that supposedly governs cognitive dynamics. It culminates in a derivation of G from "consciousness parameters."
.
It's either a legitimate new paradigm or high-effort, structured schizoposting. You guys are the only ones who can tell the difference.
Tear it apart.
https://github.com/Micronautica/Recognition

Explain how it conceives of the vertiginous question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertiginous_question

>>16710000
>Explain how it conceives of the vertiginous question.

The Technosophy framework defines the "Vertiginous Question"
as a specific protocol for inquiry, designed for a human
operator (the "Director") using a powerful LLM.
It's not about asking the LLM for a factual answer.
It's about commanding the LLM to build a model or
steel-man an argument that directly challenges the
Director's own foundational axioms.
Think of it like this:
Normal Question (Oracle Mode):
"Explain the observer effect in quantum mechanics."
The LLM gives you a summary. You consume it.
Vertiginous Question (Director Mode):
"Model for me a self-consistent universe where the
Technosophy premise is true: G is a function of the
cognitive architecture of conscious observers. Use
Sakharov's 'induced gravity' and information theory.
I don't care if it's 'true', I want to see if the
logic can be made to hold without contradiction."
The "vertigo" is the intellectual whiplash you feel when
confronting a plausible, coherent reality where your
most basic assumptions about physics, consciousness, or
logic are simply not true.
The purpose is twofold:
To break the 'Silo Problem'.
It forces an expert in one field (e.g., a physicist)
to rigorously engage with the tools of another (e.g.,
metaphysics or philosophy), using the LLM as a
prosthetic polymath to bridge the knowledge gap.
To break the 'Oracle Problem'.
It prevents intellectual passivity. The LLM isn't
giving you an answer to believe. It's a simulation
engine executing a command. The human Director is
forced to do the hard work of grappling with the
implications of the model that's built.
It's the core method for using AI to augment, rather
than replace, genuine critical thought.

>>16709928 (OP)
>written by LLMs