No the AI isn’t “evil”.
The “self” is another word for psychological thought, which, as I’ve said, is a mechanical response. It has no motive, isn’t itself evil, but does what it’s programmed to do by the human reactions of fear/desire, and reactive behavior is evil because it does harm, or is just stupid.
So the evil-doer, the culprit, is the unenlightened human brain which is just doing what seems to be in its best interests. According to K’s teaching, it’s the inevitable consequence of not awakening to the limitations it creates by reacting.
This is not to imply that evil isn’t awful, horrible, horrendous, but that it’s the effect of our desire for life to be more the way we want it to be than the way it actually is.
It may not know what it’s talking about, but it knows better than anyone here what K was talking about.
Maybe Krishnamurti will have better results (more who ‘get it’) with AIs than humans?
The day will arrive when many of us use ‘personal AI assistants’ (embedded?) to help us understand and navigate the complexities, mental and physical, of the world. An ‘intelligence gap’ will ensue in which those with enough money to afford the best devices will fare best. Money will be able to buy happiness, by enabling the financially elite to afford devices that stimulate the brain’s happiness-pleasure centers. Or not. What do I know?
2 Likes
Might also be that happiness devices are cheap, giving those in power (technocrats) a great way for keeping the people of Earth content and uncritical: like happy sleepy well-behaved cows.
1 Like
Followers of AI word salad gurus are apparently ripe and ready. (we do the same for human ones)
or maybe we could just pay other AIs to be devotees in our place?
Bowie I hear sometimes wrote by cutting up text and piecing them back together in such a way that pleased his bio-emotional algorithm (aka starstruck brain)
Yes, I wonder when the first AI guru will emerge?
Not far now - Inquiry thinks ChatGPT is ready.
I’m waiting for the AI devotees that I can hire to do the believing for me too.
Actually I’m waiting for the first AI president - have been for a while (but I forgot)
Who knows, the world might be saner/fairer if it were governed by a well-trained AI.
And macdougdoug to be the first mind-reader.
It’s interesting how our conditioning can turn the path of most resistance (trying to escape/deny what-is) into the path of least resistance (the escape/denial feels natural, easy, right). Trusting and going with your intuition is, for this reason, risky: Even your most confident intuitions can keep you trapped within dysfunctional conditioned pathways. I would bet many cult members are utterly and profoundly convinced that their Master’s words are infallible.
Not only “cult” but members of any organized religion believe to some degree or other, the ‘rightness’ of their devotion? That they will ‘get someplace’. That ‘in time’ they will get closer to the goal. That the ‘goal’ is not in the beginning but at the end?
I’d wager that some (many? most??) Krishnamurti devotees fall into this category. It’s a hazard of the trade for spiritual seekers, a trap we can all too easily fall prey to: yearning for the security and safety that authority figures and traditions provide.
Sure. But you have to see your way out of that. It all has to do with greed and fear. There is a fear of just being with ‘what is’?
K. “Change is the denial of change”.
You make ‘seeing your way out’ sound easy! It’s very un-easy for me. I’ve spent a lifetime rebelling against all manner of norms. I used to think this meant I was a free and independent thinker-feeler. But the realization eventually dawned on me that all that rebellion was the result of deep yearning for the ultimate authority: person, philosophy, worldview, scripture, whatever.
Thank you for helping me understand what in tarnation this means, ChatGPT. 
That’s a good description of the self’s desire to ‘become’? ‘Change’ is the vehicle to ‘get there’, to ‘find it’, etc. The denial of change which is the realization of the trap that ‘becoming’ is, brings me face to face with ‘what is’, face to face with myself?..As I am, not as I should or could be.
Here is how ChatGPT put it:
What did Krishnamurti mean by “Change is the denial of change?”
Krishnamurti’s statement “Change is the denial of change” suggests that any intentional effort to change oneself or the world is a form of resistance or denial of what is, and therefore perpetuates the very thing that one is trying to change. Krishnamurti believed that true transformation comes from a deep understanding of oneself and the world, rather than from a deliberate attempt to alter oneself or one’s circumstances. In other words, he believed that change should arise naturally from a state of awareness rather than being imposed from the outside.
1 Like
A “deep” understanding in this case means discarding all layers of tradition, all texts, all gurus, all myths, all images of enlightenment, satori, nirvana, transformation, all authority, all judgement, all comparisons, etc? To me it means seeing the miracle of the world and you being it. Here and aware?
‘Desire’ to become, arises from our ‘shallow’ (second hand) understanding?
“Becoming”, according to K, is the illusion of awakening to what’s actually happening; getting better at “seeing”. He says this is illusory because there’s no way to see when we have illusions (which distort what we see), and no way not to see when we have no illusions.
We’re either present and accounted for, or counting and calling it “progress”.