Okay, you’ve surfed thus far, and were enticed by either the name or simple curiosity. The question remains: What is Joshism?

It’s what I believe.

I suppose you could call it a philosophy, maybe a religion, but I’m not much for religion and not haughty enough to say I’ve thought up a new philosophy. I’m just going to say it’s how I try to live my life. Joshism is something Josh figured out one day.

Stick around. This might become interesting. I hope so, because I have to write it.

Consider for a moment what we humans are. At the most basic level, according to science, we’re very complicated biological engines. To some religions, we have immortals souls. For right now, let’s ignore that part about souls. Let us say right now that we’re a complicated computer. I don’t think anybody would disagree with this, if some amendments are made to what sort of a computer we are. First, we’re self-aware. This is obvious. A lot of people argue that we aren’t, and that sentience is an illusion. To this I respond with a resounding raspberry. If it is an illusion, it’s a damned good one; I seem to be aware of everything I say and do, as well as my thoughts. I recognize myself as me.

Moving on, the next change I’ll make to the definition is that our type of computer can change its hardware and software. This is also obvious. The hardware is the nervous system and sensory organs, and the software is the mind and sensory perception. It is here that most people also object, and understandably so. How can the mind simply be software, they ask? Consider software running on a normal desktop computer. A normal person can’t just look at the hardware and say, “Oh, here’s the icon at which the mouse is pointing.” We need special output devices for that, such as speakers and monitors. The same situation exists for the brain. Right now it’s impossible for science to explain what a person is thinking by analyzing the brain’s actions. We don’t have a technology subtle and precise enough to do that. But the brain is obviously doing something that creates the sentience to which we are all accustomed. I think that the mind is software that the brain is running. We all know that the brain is a whole bunch of neural networks, transmitting information via neurotransmitters in the synaptic gaps between individual neurons. This is pretty much the same thing as modern computer hardware; electrical charges which communicate information. The mind, then, is a program of sorts.

The word “computer” has too many connotations for me to continue using it in describing us. From now on, I’ll just call us progressive entities, a la J. S. Mill. A progressive entity is something which is capable of making decisions about how its life will go, develops values through the process of trial-and-error, and progresses toward the goals those values create by means of its natural liberties such as thought and expression. That’s a pretty good description of what humans are. This description also allows for polymorphic hardware and software; that is to say, components that have the ability to change and upgrade themselves.

Thus, we have a description of humans as really powerful computers. Like most descriptions, though, this is obviously not completely accurate. I myself wish I had a better way to describe what I’m thinking, but can only use the vocabulary and concepts I’ve amassed through my life.

There are a few things about we progressive beings that must be made clear in order for me to continue with my explanation of Joshism. First, we think at a certain speed. That speed is the speed of synaptic transmission, or how long it takes neurotransmitters to get from the axon of one neuron to the dendrite of another. I believe it’s a value close to one hundred feet per second. Second, we only have so many resources available for use in processing. This is the number of neural connections that exist in our brains; we only have so many of them. Third, we have limited access to the outside world; by this I mean our sensory hardware is limited. We have eyes that see only a small portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, ears that pick up air vibrations only at certain frequencies, and other senses that are similarly limited in sensitivity and scope. We can also get only a certain amount of information from our senses at a certain rate. By this I mean there is a maximum amount and rate of information we can get from our senses. Considering the nature of progressive beings, this is necessary because having access to infinite information at an infinite rate, and being able to process this information at an infinite speed, would mean instantaneous realization of every possible goal. The progressive being would not desire this state of being because it wants to experiment and live its life out. Being omniscient would be counterproductive to a progressive being because instantly having everything requires no experimentation or adventure, as well as no truly valuable decisions or choices because the consequences happen instantly as well.

Thus, progressive beings are finite, with access to finite amounts of information and possessing a finite information-processing ability.

Because we are finite beings, with access to only so much information and intelligence, we can only make estimations as to what things are like outside of our minds. A good analogy of this is resolution. If you take a picture and make prints many, many times the size of the original film, the print is fuzzy because of the resolution limit of the original film. Another example is the digital camera; one can only zoom in so far before images are unreadable. Without every point of information only estimates made from sparse data are possible. We don’t have access to every little bit of information, so all we can ever do is make more and more accurate approximations of what the universe is like. This, I believe, is the noble quest of Science and Philosophy.

From all of this, a few conclusions can be reached.

The first is that everything we sense and think is faulty. I do not mean right-out wrong, not in any sense. But everything we think is the result of our brain processing information at a speed slower than needed to understand everything as it happens, and using input from limited sensory organs. Luckily we're very well programmed, as it were, but our sensory perception cannot be completely trusted because it is by definition not quite real. The same problem exists with our thoughts. We must, though, trust our thoughts, for we are progressive beings and it is paramount to our nature that we explore ourselves and learn.

Secondly, the inside and outside of our minds are two very different places. We get a glimpse of the outside, but we really don't know what it's truly like out there. We can only make guesses. We have very, very accurate guesses, yes, but approximations nonetheless. The wording I most prefer is "metaphor for reality".

The third conclusion is that, because nobody is perfect in software or hardware, his or her thoughts and feelings cannot be perfect. This means two things. The first is that nobody has a right to govern over anybody else, because as far as we can tell nobody's really much better than anyone else. Secondly, no philosophy or scientific theory can be totally and utterly correct because we don't have access to every bit of data. I reiterate, very good approximations are possible. They get very, very close, but science is still searching. Science and philosophy will always search for answers, for the Truth. Humans, as progressive beings, will always do this. I know I will.

This is the simplest answer I can give as to what Joshism is. Have mercy upon a poor bored college student!

More later. Peace out.