U should calm down

4y

· edited

Thoughts on free will and intuition

External will is the material world that confides us. The relationship between external and internal will is that where there is a degree of determinism, it is not a linear entity.

As nanoparticles do not exist in a "set" progression based on human perception neither does human will, the quantum nature of human existence is or can naively be reduced down to the capacity for the individual to exert internal will, which I believe to changes the whole (external will).

The alternative being that there is no free-will and all beliefs are deterministic. Happy-sad are not a choice. This case would reduce everything down to external will. To some end this may be the case as it can be argued there is no true "free-will".

There must be some correlation between will, intuition, and lucidity.

Higher levels of "lucidity" lead to higher levels of "intuition", leading to higher levels of "will", leading an individual to have a the propensity to have a larger effect on the external whole, deterministic or not.

Lucidity -> intuition -> will -> impact

Lucidity: the ability to "control" or have some form of agency over thoughts. The ability to ascribe "purpose" to thoughts.

Intuition: the thoughts that arise when in a lucid state

Will: the ability to act on intuition

The highest earthly "possession" is not of the material. It is the ability to be lucid. Clear headed understanding of ones thoughts enable an individual to have access to more pieces of the "external whole", with a higher fidelity. To see things "as they are" rather than what they are.

No mind is more valuable than the next.

The thought that an individual is owed some sort of stipend for being is flawed.

"Worth" is earned in a world where functional tasks need to be carried out.

Putting a price on the thoughts of an individual is flawed.

Monetary value on art is flawed.

The individual does not need to be their functioning role.

At the same time what is the purpose of a functioning roll rather than to function as a whole? Is the question just the implicit question of life itself.

How do you contribute value? Can you contribute value being yourself? To what degree does that impact the self? Is it cyclic? Is it self fueling, in the way that the world forms art, and consequently art starts to form the world.

Impressions of a moment, a perspective within life, has the human has become the art form?

Are you for sale?

I am interloping through the fractals of human consciousness

The individual doesn't determine what it is to the world, the world does, in that way we can be something without knowing we are it.

So the question "what am I?" Has no real answer, as it would also ask to what? And to what? Would need there to be a "what", and as the self cannot describe itself the whole cannot either.

Does the whole definite the whole? Or does the observer of the whole definite the whole? Can anyone observe the whole? Or is it all just an impression of the whole from the self? It's just all flawed "logic"

Logic is flawed by logic

There is no ideal time period, just have to learn to live in the one you are in. It's all give and take, value systems are antiquated by a changing world. Nothing stays the same. Evolution of think is continuous and dependent on the needs of the species wide scale at any given moment in time.

Perspective is not determined by the individual

Do not stray from a value system to pursue ephemeral pleasure.

Does an infinitely long line re join with itself?

Is adaption always cognisant? Generational adaptive cognizance?

Deconstruct the model of the mind and re built it with the ethos of the whole.

The most dangerous part of ai would be the human part.

Duality of consciousness as a circumstance of withstanding natural phenomenon

The more you consume of a certain form of media the more normalized it becomes to you.

Almost like a threshold to which you need to overcome in order to experience again.

So the complexity of the art form would then evolve with the complexity of the species which is also the technological innovations of the species.

Which lead to forms of media that enable more sensory input to be given to the consumer.

I think there may be a balance tho, or at least there is some theoretical balance at which it becomes "uncanny".

Does art have any definition other than a representation of the world? Does art become full circle when it becomes so immersive that it becomes the world.

Does art necessitate a deviation from standard sensory perception. If so then art will always be outside of what is "real".

Freedom is an illusion

To seek it is futile, agency within the limits of the natural world is determined how autonomous a being can be.

To be autonomous creates layers of representatation from the natural world. In a way "freedom" or the pursuit of it is not a endeavor rooted in natural coexistence, but rather in attempts to control the bounds in which we live in.

In a way an attempt to impart external will onto the world.

The pursuit of Freedom in my head in many ways is futile, as it almost necessitates negotiation with the natural world.

That negotiating only sevres as a detriment to a species long term.

True freedom perhaps is the ability to coexist within an environment, and true freedom of consciousness may be that the "freedom of consciousness" , or "freedom of bounds to our relationship with the natural world"
is not a pursuit of consciousness

Decay can bring destructive Melancholy - avoidance in the form of hedonism or regression.

Both sects lack of rather they promote non-care. In the case of hard times, language can be used as uplifting or the inverse. Humor is complex and indicative of the the individual. Rhetorical tools tell you an individual's "individual" value system. The impact of the world may be in ways "clean", where the internal monologue may be "dirty". The divider I suppose is more interpersonal than empirical. Which in the case of large scale society, functionality is dependent more so on an individual's external impact. This I believe causes more cases of "dirty" or self defeating thought (can be seen in self defeating groupthink) which plays back into itself as it serves as an outlier for those who love to "serve" the external rather than to be a part of it in a mutual way.

In essence the overall "moral" of an institution js of higher importance the smaller the organization or the degree to which limited structure is present in the niche the organization occupies. This relates back to the states occupied by "dirty/clouded" thought, the more hopeless the mind is for change, or the more dissonance the mind experiences in terms of perceived value. The above contribute to paths that feed into hopeless demeanor, as that is the precipice for entry within the decay state.

Do objects have one time? I suppose time is not a eternal attribute of an object but rather a prescribed one.

Real is not a question with an answer, because real is just a concept. An answer to the question what am I? Has answers that are equally as insipid. To attribute value to oneself is a characteristic of the self.

There is a degree of determinism that exist within the neural network we use to navigate both with conscious and the subconscious. I believe their are groupings of "phrases or signals" that operate similarly to a state machine, which determine how our brain makes decisions. The more pathways to a state the more "weight" it carries. Linguistics and consciousness are intertwined and I would not be surprised to find out down the line that the quantum property of particles and superposition has something to do with "free will" / deviation from determinism.

So language is a set of mental frameworks, which to a large degree dictates the methods we are able to think about the world. A lexicon enables us to form our conscious mind. There are languages that are more expressive more "romantic". This changes the way the individual experiences the world as thoughts, when attempting to discrete and discern them take the shape of "language". It simultaneous what we use to think, communicate, and thereby exist. Therefore if an individual's lexicon is stagnant, the individual will be stagnated. Create languages, experience without words, what exist is a framework to operate within, create your own syntax to free free yourself from the bounds of it. Create new meaning, new forms of existing. Life and language as an art form.

Objectivity relies on the population of individuals to reduce bias, it implicitly will diminish outliers. Objectivity centralizes in this way, an issue then becomes "is centralizing as an objective archetype necessary the most advantageous for withstanding social good?".

It may have just been a tool to get us where we are today in the evolution of species but as quantum nature of the world unravels before us the cause and effect relationships we take for granted may disintegrate.

The future is not as binary. Not as black and white. Technology reflects this. We are evolving. Science and objectivity are the modern version of what it meant to be "virtuous" in the era of Aristotle.

It's not only about balancing biological imperatives with spiritual enlightenment, but to also know what things to be stubborn about. Just because you know the individual mind is fortuitous than the crowd, doesn't mean that the answer is to exist in habitual contention with the world.

Pick the arenas in which to content, and do it internally. Your interactions with the world in turn will be a reflection of your character. Impart external will in this way.

A lot of it really is about knowing what things to be or to "hold on to". It's not necessarily accepting, but rather accepting and navigating, as free will is scalable. All biologic agents are made to operate in whatever conditions they are given, this is what makes them agents. It is the presence of a strata that can be considered determined. Agency is the navigation of that strata. All things spiritual have to have mechanisms under which they operate, "material" instances of spiritual entities doesn't make them any less spiritual.

To think so will always lead to neihlism

U should calm down

4y

Terminally pensive

bitch mob

4y

just keep swimming.

U should calm down

4y

I guess what I'm thinking is that the more you consume of a certain form of media the more normalized it becomes to you.

Almost like a threshold to which you need to overcome in order to experience again.

So the complexity of the art form would then evolve with the complexity of the species which is also the technological innovations of the species.

Which lead to forms of media that enable more sensory input to be given to the consumer.

I think there may be a balance tho, or at least there is some theoretical balance at which it becomes "uncanny".

Does art have any definition other than a representation of the world? Does art become full circle when it becomes so immersive that it becomes the world.

Does art necessste a deviation from standard sensory perception. If so then art will always be outside of what is "real".

Ooogabooga

U should calm down

4y

@Zebs

Art is strange.

Why do we consume it in the first place?

zees

4y

Thanks for tag. You bring up interesting points.

My mind immediately went to compare how someone might feel about video games:

• Having the ability to experience life outside the norm.
• Being able to live through a character doing things you'll never experience physically.

In this case, will video games be seen as the next innovation of art? I guess this would make sense why the game industry is billions ahead of the movie, music, and sports industry.

I can see the debate where is the line of "Art" in the future as it gets easier to create through technology, but then hopefully we have more resurgence of a***og having it's place along digital (and less elitism).

I would think that Art//Entertainment consumption stemmed from a few things:

• used as the highest form of leisure
• first commissioned by the wealthy and religious orgs
• story telling to pass down generational knowledge
• messages told through song repetition
• cave paintings as a form of communication
• (more recently) used as social class awareness

U should calm down

4y

I can't conceptualize what the world will look like 20 years from now.

U should calm down

4y

With the evolution of technology, we add more perceptual information to make it more "emersive".

Which, I believe shifts our relationship and almost obfuscates what the "natural world" is.
I believe that to be dangerous because then people really do have the ability to exist within forms of representation in new ways.

Non perceptual art already does this and may do it to much higher degrees as non perceptual information is theoretical and therefore on all fronts representation. Religion for instance.

Which a lot of early art was for religious purposes.

Art in general to some degree is acts of the human consciousness trying to understand itself and it's relationship with the natural world and others or it can be ways for us to experience higher or different feelings than can be accessed through the natural world. In many ways the art is not just the object but the relationship with the object, and the act in itself.

Hmm

In a way consciousness in itself is art, non discreet ephemeral art. A world away from the world.

Not sure

zees

4y

I like the idea you brought up that art is consciousness trying to express itself.

Feel like it creates rabbit hole when you try to thinking about the psychology of imagination. Where does pure imagination come from? People say there's no more original ideas in the world.

A common practice for idea generation is to source inspiration from existing work. Now we're at the beginning stages of AI image generation that does the same thing, but at quicker speeds and with larger samples. How does that evolve in relation to Art when technology is able to source all human creative work?

"reality is a mirror of thoughts" is really real when we continue to design the human experience we all live. We build based off pushing the limits on what we know by a***yzing our own behaviors. Then we mimic and apply our learnings onto technology. A digital landscape created by humans.

UX is 100% a push and pull dynamic of digital sociology. I really wish we applied the same practices for the betterment of quality of life instead of for sake of maximizing or maintaining capitalism

When you think about it, both the natural and digital landscape is a spectrum and reflection of our need to contribute and control

U should calm down

4y

I like u

zees

4y

thanks for the thought exercises. Got good takeaways from you that I'll think about when applying it to my own work

zees

4y

I like the idea you brought up that art is consciousness trying to express itself.

Feel like it creates rabbit hole when you try to thinking about the psychology of imagination. Where does pure imagination come from? People say there's no more original ideas in the world.

A common practice for idea generation is to source inspiration from existing work. Now we're at the beginning stages of AI image generation that does the same thing, but at quicker speeds and with larger samples. How does that evolve in relation to Art when technology is able to source all human creative work?

"reality is a mirror of thoughts" is really real when we continue to design the human experience we all live. We build based off pushing the limits on what we know by a***yzing our own behaviors. Then we mimic and apply our learnings onto technology. A digital landscape created by humans.

UX is 100% a push and pull dynamic of digital sociology. I really wish we applied the same practices for the betterment of quality of life instead of for sake of maximizing or maintaining capitalism

When you think about it, both the natural and digital landscape is a spectrum and reflection of our need to contribute and control

U should calm down

4y

What is your work?

zees

4y

My work lately has been managing workflows for website experiences between business direction and a development agency. I'll have my own landing page campaigns I'll design here and there

But I was referring to my own creative work I'm working on. Currently taking my time putting together different IP series and I'll eventually put together a pitch deck after I get the full details down. The goal is either to sell it or develop it.

U should calm down

4y

"both the natural and digital landscape is a spectrum and reflection of our need to contribute and control"

Yeah, it's just the more control you have the more you have to sustain that control. At some point we are going to get to a point where our negotiation with the ex-natural world is exhausted and we have to be both the resource and the consumer. Can we be both? And will that be a divide in humanity?

Technology is innately biological, and is just the evolution of life, I'm not of the belief that it would have reason to exist outside of biological imperative. In many ways all organized technology, down to language comes down to the need to contribute and control.

Co-existence with tech is already here, I feel as if it's not up to the individual to determine what that looks like long term but rather the demands of life itself.

"That's a double edge, 'issa knife'"

U should calm down

4y

Sounds fun, don't really know what you mean by IP series, but whatever it's is I'm sure it will be interesting.