The Human Dilemma : Life Between Illusion and Reality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human mind struggles to grasp reality, but in practical terms can only generate various concepts and theories that have their limitations. Identifying their boundaries of applicability is essential. If these boundaries and limits are not well defined, concepts and theories may turn into dogmas and one is left with illusions of understanding. Concepts and theories cannot fully describe the ultimate reality due to the inaccessibility to all the elements of emergent reality, and due to the inherent unknowability of all that remains to be discovered and understood. Thus, some disconnect from reality is inevitable and humans are caught between illusion and reality. The fundamental problem of illusions seizing the individual’s awareness is the resulting reluctance to see things as they are and to be seen without illusions. Illusion and Reality Human beings are caught between illusion and reality, as the mind dwells in the subjective world of ideas and concepts, but physically one exists in the world of objective reality that cannot be directly experienced or fully understood. This is further complicated by the use of reason and logic to guide the mind to truth, as they rely on language that is inadequate for describing reality and often leads to paradoxes. There is no definitive answer to the question of what reality is. In broadest terms, one can define reality as all that exists, irrespective of whether or not it can be observed or understood. One can distinguish between apparent reality and ultimate reality, as well as between physical or human-independent reality and mental or human-constructed reality. Physical reality is defined as extended in space, having physical properties such as mass, and existing independently of the observer. Mental reality has no extension in space and exists only in the minds of individuals, with its existence depending on the observer. But whether * B.G. Yacobi has a PhD in physics. He held research positions at Imperial College London and Harvard University, as well as teaching positions in universities in the United States and Canada. Email: b.yacobi[a]utoronto.ca.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it