The Sandorian Grove: Regurgitated: Being consistent    
 Regurgitated: Being consistent8 comments
picture14 Apr 2007 @ 13:01, by Max Sandor

The recent BLOG entry of Ming (and likewise the comments written in response to it), made me think, rethink, mentally regurgitate how we, as a species and as individuals, are cementing our own insanity, freezing it in time, defending ferociously any attack, reasonable or not, maintaining an artificial Ego without tangible core, insisting that our own dreams are reality and any others being mere hallucinations.

Perhaps, so I was dreaming, this urge to "be consistent" is even more at the root of the human condition than Gotamo Siddharto's (the "Buddha's") postulate that it might be the tendency in assuming a "single cause for a given effect". (See an entire series on articles about this here on this BLOG.)

Perhaps Gotamo's (very correct) observations depend on this very urge to "be consistent": the "cause/effect" determination serving merely as a justification of a deeper seated insanity of assuming a "stable datum" at the expense of excluding all other truth(s)?

How the Being, the presumed master of it all, manages the fusion of an arbitrary idea into the mind&body-sphere in order to create a fixed idea, is a very interesting observation, seemingly impossible to communicate, an intimate process everyone needs to detect, analyze, and duplicate for him-/herself.

A very basic process of Ego-creation of modern man is looking in the mirror. Ironically, what wo/man sees in the mirror is NOT its exact picture: left and right are swapped.

More recently even, for the tiny minority of hi-tech-endowed people on Earth, that's us, bros, the mirror is replaced by TV monitors. The theoretical blessing of the electronic monitor is that it doesn't have the above-mentioned shortcoming of the classical optical mirror. PLUS, it can show the past and is not limited to the closed-loop "resonance/feedback" effect of the always-live mirror.

Therefore, interestingly, seeing oneself on (past) videos is breaking part of the identification with one's own mirror picture. The effect is sobering the first time(s), but then a new sort of identification sets in. This latter effect can be observed only with the tiny fraction of the tiny fraction of hi-tech people known as "TV-celebs".

The other day, in Santos, Brazil, I was watching a super-interesting approach of painting: "quasi-realism" (not the official name I think): Deladier Almeida, an artist living since many years in Sacramento, California, painter to the superstars, whether politics, arts, or sports arena.

Modern surrealism produces an abstract notion of energies inherent in the model being depicted. This provides new, extra viewpoints, OK, but it generally doesn't invite a self-reflection about the identification of the person with the image of his body.

Likewise, the artform of "cartoons" which is overemphasizing defects of the model, doesn't generally invite self-reflection either. The truth in it is just too grossly exaggerated.

On the other hand, Deladier's artworks are QUASI photos, but just QUASI, inviting a reflection about WHO is really behind the mask of those facial muscles in front of us.

The superposition of two vibrations with frequencies sufficiently close to each other, but not identical, are producing the phenomenon of a new sound with a sweeping amplitude. (witness an audio demo here)

The fascination of this new vibration for me is part of Deladier's work, and, perhaps, revealing more about the "real" person that one would suspect at first.

In terms of a process: viewing a quasi-duplicate at the same time with the original "pseudo"-reality and witness the "sweeping" effect until the presumed reality breaks into pieces.

OK, OK, Before breaking up here, let me vanish....



[< Back] [The Sandorian Grove]

Category:  

8 comments

14 Apr 2007 @ 15:51 by Dario - awo babatunde @82.48.80.94 : I see it
the all sciences are going toward to a conception of the reality to 3 dimensionses and rather than 2d (you see in TV or monitor in general) that it is a projection simplified of the reality (Cartesian x,y). In my observation of the evolution of the human science (last step: informatic science and A.I.) there is in action a process that has as last (next) finishing step, the evolution of the image in to third dimension. The logical conseguence is a 3d vision of life and our dreams(evolution of our way to look everything).

It is a process...  



14 Apr 2007 @ 18:13 by mx @201.1.48.92 : more dimensions...
the principle holds true in whatever dimension you would look at the "thing".. which is never completely described in words or images. Painting is an abstraction reducing a 3-d thingie into 2 (flat view) or 2 1/2 dimensions (architect's view)..  


14 Apr 2007 @ 23:12 by Dario @82.48.80.94 : n-dimension
at school we spoke about n-dimension (mathematical Analisys 2 - course of informatic engineering). each variables is considered a dimension. for example the space, the speed, the heavy, the temperature and so on...

I think each of 256 Basic odu in the universe has/is a dimension.

so we have infinite point of view and infinite way to "smell" the life.

but

do you know something references about the 2 1/2 dimensions?(I mean information on internet)  



16 Apr 2007 @ 05:18 by Merlin Silk @76.168.91.24 : MultiDemensional Being
Staying consistent and the number of dimensions is an interesting thing to ponder. It appears that being consistent restricts me to one dimension of being, while being inconsistent created more degrees of freedom - or dimensions.
An interesting experiment can be conducted with the family and especially with little kids - they EXPECT you to be consistent (but you said yesterday!!!)
Not necessarily born out of my scientific mind but more out of the dimming capacity to remember things I am now apparently more often inconsistent. It requires some effort to maintain this inconsistency because the environment (in the case represented by the family) tries to force me to remain within the dimensions they knew me before. But it is rather deliberating once they are trained that you have to the freedom to day "And.....???"  



16 Apr 2007 @ 12:39 by mx @201.1.54.148 : Yesterday was Yesterday - Today is Today
Dario, yes, one could see our hologram consisting out of n-dimensions and the CHOICE WHERE TO MOVE NEXT within this hologram as the way we choose (not create! in this context)our destiny.

Merlin, remember the above saying (in German??). It creates a Korzybiskian separation of time/events while using an ANTI-Korzybskian syntax (using the verb "to be").

For me the question arises: "is the kid (human being) born with this impulse to be consistent, is it a learned behavior (TV, school, etc), or is it sheer opportunism which in turn becomes an aberration (insisting on consistency when there is an advantage)? For myself, I remember the last alternative, hehe...

Ed, how do you see the influence of the basic archetypal goals (also in term of usage of the triune brain) in this context?  



16 Apr 2007 @ 16:24 by Ed Dawson @66.245.206.11 : Being consistent
The problem with being consistent, is that the universe is itself not consistent. The universe is a compiled together series of smaller universes. This is itself the main trauma or engram of the "fall of home universe" -- everyone's personal universes became linked into one "superuniverse" and the individual's own home universe became invalidated. This superuniverse is the one we find ourselves perceiving part of today.

Each smaller universe has its own a priori assumptions. Therefore when finding out truths, there will be some truths which will work with one frame of reference, and others that only are true using another frame of reference based on their (different) original smaller universe.

Ultimate truth is all minor truths everywhere and everywhen. But people have difficulty perceiving ultimate truth, so they settle for conditional or limited truths. Each limited truth has its own basic assumptions, its own "anchor points" if you will, So when looking at a large number of truths it is necessary to shift viewpoint (assumptions, mental anchors, stable data) constantly. One cannot do this if one is "being consistent".
cheers
Ed  



16 Apr 2007 @ 18:56 by a-d : This is
what I commented on Ming's "Being Consistent" Essay: 11 Apr 2007 @ 21:02 by a-d : Defintion for Creativity
is to do old things in new ways -as with a new twist, so to speak. To be consistent (with the old ways) does NOT promote creativity and hence is thee most styffling of our human traits. THAT is most likely thee trait that makes us and keeps us HUMAN -instead of letting our Spirit/creativity soar and make us -again- Cosmic Beings! [Edit]

I think Ed Dawson here above touches somehow the same "Cosmic Nerve"
as I did.
I have to the conclusion that people don't want to see/acknowledge Ultimate truths, because it is ALL INCLUDING and IMPERSONAL in Nature, giving NOBODY Special Favors, making NO Exceptions for ANYbody and on top of it all: REQUIRES PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY, not to mention that It demands personal response-ability to work within that Ultimate Truth!.... HOW GOORY of Universe to make up such "poopy' Game Rules!

....STICKING to own -man-made Game Rules....Convention, Tradition, Formality, Norm, Bureaucracy --all helps us to be consistent!.... A muuuch better way to handle Things!....Or is it?...after all...  



29 Apr 2016 @ 07:51 by Bandar Togel @103.12.162.4 : brilliant! I would like to share this ar
Togel Online Singapore
Togel Online Hongkong
Bandar Togel Singapore
Bandar Togel
Togel Online Terpercaya
Bandar Togel Online Terpercaya
Togel Online
Agen Togel Online Terpercaya
Agen Togel Online  



Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
Subject:       
Comment:
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:


Other articles in
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:18: A summary of the summaries of Max Sandor's projects
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:04: Project Summary 6. Game Theory - why and how do we manifest?
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:02: Project Summary 5: Polar Dynamics - theory and praxis of polarities
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:01: Project Summary 4: Quantum Fá - a practical guide to this Universe
23 Sep 2016 @ 16:45: Project Summary 3: The Book of Numbers
22 Sep 2016 @ 16:12: Project Summary 2: UrTon - the basis of spoken languages
18 Sep 2016 @ 00:32: Project Summary 1: The ConCur Paradigm - the structure of Reality
9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Robot Psychologist (by Awaz)
9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Project Summary 7: Archetypology of the Human Being
1 Aug 2016 @ 00:40: Victory, submission or what else? Sign and symbol of the Rio 2016 Kickoff



[< Back] [The Sandorian Grove] [PermaLink]?  [TrackBack]?