Abstract
The benefit to the species of high definition maps allows for a seemingly
clear understanding of reality. However, the context in which these maps are generated acts to distort meanings
through an inability to process context sensitive, and so the more dynamic, categories; the high precision focus
is biased to the making of static, 1:1, definitions at the cost of impoverishing dynamics that in fact indicate
a more 1:many perspective is more precise in the context of the Universe. This distortion comes through in the
labels we use to categorise the general features of a set of meanings, for example, the types of personas categorised
in the MBTI®
The properties and methods of the human brain indicate that the success of the species in dominating the planet
reflects the success in the development of high definition differentiation skills that allow for very refined analysis
of data together with the very precise communicating of that data in the form of the spoken and/or written word.
This high level definition comes with a physiologically-sourced property, namely that the more precise you wish
to be so the more dependent one becomes on an increasingly universal context in that we need to recruit universal
constants to 'pin down' the category, to make it last 'forever'. This 'distortion' reflects the fact that the realm
of the 'everyday' is mostly unconscious to our species, a species 'driven' to seek clear, eternal, identifications
and so identifications free of context-sourced influences that affect expression. There is thus a focus on exaggerations,
on expending energy to identify difference, static forms, within the apparent sameness (as in an integrated whole)
of a dynamic 'everyday'.
The realm of the 'everyday' is one of dynamics and stimulus/response where 'good' habits/instincts allow us
to function smoothly in a local context in that the context PUSHES us (identified by recognising that the habits/instincts
of the species & individual are encoded in the dendrites, the input areas, of the neuron and so allow context
to push, reflecting a bias to conservation of energy; a bias strongly needed in a theromodynamic universe). This
push process means the local context can elicit nuances in behaviour of a lifeform and as such affect the expression
of identity of that lifeform.
The consequence of our species' development of, and 'need' for, high 'dot' precision, as shown in the above diagram,
is that in such contexts as that of personality typology, for example the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI®),
we distort our perceptions with a focus on expressing a universal identity - we are who we are regardless of context
- and as such attempt to assert our identity 'over' the local context. This replacement of context is a property
of high energy expressions such that we can categorise some people as "identity seeking" (correlates
with the MBTI temperament of "NF" - iNtuitive Feeling)
where the category suggests a lack of 'clear' identity and reflects the consequences of the demand in high precision
collectives for 'universal' categorisations that are free of context influences and as such the identity of the
individual is 'forever'.
This form of idealised, archetypal, categorisation is at odds with the 'everyday' nature of the species where
the emphasis is on allowing context to elicit 'nuances' in behaviour and so an ability to blend-in (integrate)
with the context rather than stick-out (differentiated) from the context. As such, due to nature as well as nurture,
many context-sensitive types develop that, being so sensitive, are deemed "identity seeking" when compared
to the demands of the typology to be 'universal' - to assert one's own context, to exaggerate, to dominate, to
be rigid, 'forever' rather than blend-in, be flexible, and so integrate locally. As such, the lower energy levels
identify persona types who achieve identity THROUGH someone/thing rather than direct expression through intense
use of energy. This is reflected in a higher degree of social integration.
The dimension of precision functioning in the brain reflects a dimension of an almost unary nature at one 'end'
and a more 'binary' nature (EITHER/OR) at the other end. At the unary end (or more so 'close to' in that the position
of absolute unary state is a position of total equilibrium and so no development - akin to the concept of 'heat
death' we find reflected in the concept of entropy) we find the realm of such patterns as the Fibonacci sequence,
and so the ratio of PHI (the golden ratio/mean etc, expressed numerically as 1.618), a pattern that reflects the
'best fit' of differentiation and integration processes where the slow development ensures minimising exaggerations
(and so conserving energy) and yet ensuring development. The Fibonacci patterns are reflected in such diverse areas
as neuron development (microtubules), flower petal development, and galaxy development (spiral formats), where
the intensity in the spirals, their 'tightness', is reflected in the presence of ratios made between higher numbers
in the sequence (e.g. in flowers a 'tight' spiral is reflects in 13 buds spriralling in one direction and 21 in
the other as compared to a 'looser' spiral of 8 buds spiralling in one direction and 13 in the other)
At the binary end of the precision dimension, the end of high energy input, of energy expending rather than conserving,
the focus is on exerting and maintaining identity 'forever', other than the 'sudden' change in identity that can
come as a result of the high energy input (see my pages re the concepts of the transcendence function and the transformation
function [in particular http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/idm001.html as well as http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/ideal.html]
- this 'transcendence' process reflects complexity/chaos influences on the brain)
The interactions of members of the species can allow for the development of collectives that have their roots in
the more binary perspectives and that means the development of 'precise' categorisation systems that will, in their
endevours to be 'dot' precise, gloss over the facts where the exaggeration abilities of the species means persona
types will develop a 'skew' in their descriptions such that the more balanced persona types, reflecting the 'best
fit' of integration and differentiation, are categorised as lacking in 'universal' identity and as such are categorised
"identity seekers" - a type commonly associated with attachements to various gurus, alternative perspectives,
and general flexibility etc etc over their lifetime due to the 'demand' for identity that comes with the nature
of the collective and its focus on high energy, high charisma, 'eternal' personalities.
The source of the "identity seeking" category in fact reflects the characteristics of the species in
that the encoding of habits/instincts in the neuron input areas allows for context to determine expression and
as such reflects the concept of 'shape shifting' (bringing out of aspects of the whole) where the core sense of
self adapts to context through differences in expression. In the MBTI these 'identity seeking' personas are categorised
as NF in general. What is of note is that the expontential processes behind the energy distributions as expressed
in Gaussian distributions as that shown above, reflects the presences of recursion such that WITHIN a general category
of the MBTI the same patterns in energy usage to assert identity are reflected, distributed across the specific
categories within the general. For the NF this shown in the below diagram:
At the general level, this "identity seeking" pole of the precision dimension is complemented by the
"sensation seeking" category (MBTI SP) given to the more binary end of the dimension where the focus
is on differentiations over integrations; single context (universal context) over multiple, local, context(s);
the 'dot' over the 'field'; the explicit over the implicit; exaggeration over balance; SELF over OTHERS.
What is noteworthy is that the dimension of precision we find 'in' the brain reflects different degrees of persona
expression such that any point on the dimension can serve as a point of departure to interpret reality, thus from
the 'horizontal' dimension can develop vertical dimensions, each reflecting different degrees of precision where
particular patterns of differences in differentiation/integration perspectives form the source of the recognition
of 'qualitative' expressions - thus the more fibonacci-favouring perspectives find values in those sorts of patterns
more so than the 'hard edge' patterns derived from the binary perspective.
Each perspective can achieve equivalent levels of precision but with varying degrees of complexity in expressing
that precision. Furthermore, it is possible that a too energy-conserving approach may limit 'transcendences' due
to their apparent need for high energy levels to achieve the transcendence; thus transcendences, if they occur
at all, would occur over generations or more rather than in one's own lifetime.
Note that, on the dimension of precision, in the space 'inbetween' the poles of identity seeking [curve 1] and
sensation seeking [curve 4] we can identify, at this general level of analysis, two other persona types - security
seeking (MBTI SJ) [curve 2] and solution seeking/problem solving (MBTI NT) [curve 3]. This precision dimension
in fact reflects a level in a process of recursion (http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/btree.gif)
where the recursion of the apparent base types of personas - the identity(NF)/sensation(SP) dichotomy - allows
for the identification of different persona types along the dimension where each step of recursion allows for finer
differentiations of types and so of different perspectives of reality - see details in the diagrams of http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/plate.html
as well as the more detailed text of http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/idm001.html.
In summary, as a consequence of our adaptations as a species, and in particular our refined differentiation skills,
we have developed maps that are at times TOO PRECISE in that they distort reality to a degree where the more 'balanced'
persona types, seen from the perspective of reality 'AS IS', are deemed to be lacking in the assertion of identity
when seen from the perspective of exaggerated reality, reality 'AS INTERPRETED'.
That said, the extreme states, the over-exaggerations, are also the realm of possible transcendences and will often
serve as a form of attraction to the more 'balanced' types where the latter recognise the charismatic expressions
of the former as a source of identity in the local context.
By understanding the properties and methods of our neurocognitive processes, an understanding now available due
to the research in the neurosciences and cognitive science, we can better understand, and so refine, our existing
maps of 'out there' as well as 'in here', and in particular be aware of the distortions in our perceptions derived
from our exaggerations as we try to 'identify' both ourselves and the Universe.
The expression of a negation is done so through an emphasis that is positive overall. Thus the assertion of
"NO" is done in a positive manner and reflects the single context, and so absolute, fundamentalist, perspective
of what we can call 'left brain' thinking aka binary thinking.
The recording of a negative assertion, its recruitment for statistical purposes, does not record the qualities
of negation but more so the positive qualities of the method of assertion. This skewing of qualitative differences
in positive vs negative means that the maps derived from a binary perspective are in fact exaggerations, IDEALS,
of reality, where the consequence is the belief in Platonic forms, in archetypes and stereotyping. (the Tetrahedron,
the 'base' form of Plato's forms *does* exist in a useful manner, but expressed *approximately* in our sensory
system of taste in the form of the categorisations derived needing to be distinct and so taking-up maximum displacement
from the others in the categories (ensuring maximum clarity in identifications) but still retaining overall structure,
integration, as a sensory system. The approximate tetrahedron form is thus not imposed but has emerged naturally
through development dynamics. Thus, exaggeration of this form of structure would lead to the imposition of straight
lines etc and out pops an 'ideal')
The precision in binary thinking is reflected in a focus on quantitative, discrete, representations, best expressed
in the form of a sequence of integers,
1,2,3,4,5,6,7....
Here there is no issue in the differences in precision for each integer, '1' is not representative of an 'inferior'
degree of precision, an approximation, when compared to the precision of '7'. The formal definition of the integers
was made by Peano through the recursion of the empty set and as such roots the integers in recursion.
We can identify the GENERAL method of deriving meaning by the brain as the recursion of dichotomies. BUT the assumption
is made that dichotomies represent a 50:50, 1:1, form of representation (a perspective that can be precise but
sterile). In fact, the brain processes information through the use of differentiation and integration such that
the 'raw', intuitively-derived, dichotomy is more 1:2 in representation in that there are sharp differences between
the precision of differentiation (focus on a unit of ONE) and that of integration (focus on a unit of no less than
TWO [or perhaps more so a ratio of some sort - e.g. phi]) and the manner in focusing attention means to exaggerate
'something' from the realm of the unconscious, everyday we live in as a species. Thus the 'ideal' form of a dichotomy
is of exaggerated-element/baselevel-element or exaggerated/balanced where the balanced form is representative of
the everyday, the baseline, the flatline out of which comes our exaggerations.
The realm of the flatline is the border of consciousness, the realm of 'nothing', of the unconscious, of the mindless
state of being driven by habits/instincts as a species of mammal on this planet. With the emergence of consciousness,
so that from which consciousness has emerged is deemed 'negative' when compared to the intensity of energy used
in the assertion of consciousness.
The degrees of exaggeration can be identified as reflecting recursion of general distinctions from which we derive
particulars. Thus the more the exaggeration so the more specific an identification, the more energy being used
to assert the 'ONE'.
In this process of going from general to particular there is a qualitative change where we move from a sense of
an *implied* 'wholeness', with a sense of integration dominating, to an ever increasing sense of the explicit and
differentiated; the 'one'.
This sense of an implicit 'wholeness' is encoded qualitatively in the notation of the quantitative in the form
of qualities associated with the numeral '1'; there is a qualitative social 'sense' that there is more to '1' than
just its unit value.
This sense is derived from the use of recursion in the generating of particulars in that each level of a recursion,
applied to the binary realm of A/NOT-A, reflects a row containing a set of qualities we can use to categorise reality
where, taken to an extreme this level is expressed in the form of a continuum and so is felt 'as if' infinite in
length but in fact is still bounded by the A/NOT-A distinctions (and so the bounds are identified as the terms
'positive' and 'negative' infinity!)
In fact each row reflects a qualitative pattern moving from the realm of the integrated to that of the increasingly
differentiated. Thus those numbers closer to the origin (if we read left-to-right then the origin is the left)
can be interpreted as representing more than just quantitative concepts, they will 'contain' meanings derived from
their proximity to the more integrating, the more 'implicit wholeness' that is present; the numbers of 2 and 3
and 4 etc will be given more properties than their basic expression as units of quantitative measure as compared
to some identifying some mystic, 'special' qualities of, say 1,993,345. (unless I START a sequence with 1993345
whereupon its position as 'first number' can give it an aire of 'something' due to its proximity unconsciously
to the border of integration and potentials with differentiation and actuals. The other 'mystic' path is to reduce
all numbers to single digits by summing all digits until only one is left and this single digit is deemed reflective
of the vauge sense of 'something more' in single digits than just their quantitative nature.)
The use of binary representations to derive meaning means that the root dichotomy recursed is that of BInary digiT,
bit, representation of 0/1, in the format of:
0 [0]
0/1 [0,1]
00,01/10,11 [0,1,2,3]
000,001,010,011/100,101,110,111 [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
etc etc
Converting each row to decimal format reflects the development of whole numbers from 0 onwards in each row, with
increased recursions taking us to a 'continuum' that is for all purposes 'infinite'. As such the realm of balance,
of the unconscious, faltline nature of the mindless everyday is a realm lacking in exaggeration and so of a feeling
of 'nothing', is rooted at the position of 000 aka '0' for a row where the 'number' of '0' is more representative
of a pool of POTENTIALS out of which we can extract ACTUALS. This is also present vertically in that each row is
also mappable to the integer sequence (as used by Peano using the empty set)
Peano derived the integers as reflections of the LEVEL of recursion, each ROW identifies an integer. A property
of the recursion is that the CONTENTS of each ROW gives us the order in full within the bounds set by the level
of recursion; we thus see the qualitative nature of the recursion applied vertically as well as horizontally with
the 'difference' being that the horizontal has the rows as obviously bounded, whereas the vertical has more of
a sense of the 'infinite' and so potentially unbounded. These qualities are derived from the methodology.
Our focus on 'high definition' reality comes with a degree of illusion and so delusions can emerge in the form
of perspectives used to determine the 'future'; we can get so wrapped-up in ourselves, so OVER precise, that we
can lose contact with 'as-is' reality, drowning it in our high definition interpretations in that development can
take place at a slower rate and still retain a qualitative sense that locally 'works' - as such there is no need
for high definition due to the unaffordable high demands for energy to maintain such precision.
This means that patterns of development can not be identified FULLY from a high definition perspective since that
perspective suffers from distortions where patterns essential for maintaining balance in a particular context are
ignored or dismissed as "inefficient"; this may be so from the perspective of high level precision but
not so locally in that adaption to the local context is 'optimum' to maintain that context; to maintain balance.
In analysis of the degrees of precision at work in development, the binary is the 'peak' stable level where going
beyond it moves us into the realm of complexity/chaos that can elicit 'revelations' but also 'errors'. If we move
'down' this dimension of precision we move towards the 'flatline' of the conscious species where the focus is more
on integrating with the context and so allowing a degree of context-derived PUSH, the focus is on survival within
the context as compared to what is possible at the binary level in the form of replacing the context with a 'better'
one - a focus that can be 'in error' at times.
The 'best fit' of differentiation and integration is in fact a touch 'above' the flatline, where this 'best fit'
is represented by patterns we see in nature sourced from the fibonacci sequence where development is ensured but
also a little slower, more energy conserving than energy expending. To learn 'good habits' that can allow us to
reduce energy expenditure and so 'slow down' means we need to expend energy in the short term to understand the
properties and methods of 'in here'. In particular we need to understand such differences identified in the expression
of negation as compared to its 'true' nature and how those expressions can distort our perceptions of ourselves
and the Universe.
(1) In our analysis of the Universe and our place in it we use a methodology determined by our physiology. This
method will take a sensation, be it a pinprick or an ontology, and exaggerate it to enable one to gain a 'high
definition' understanding of the sensation and so derive ways to categorise it and deal with it; to 'see' clearly
we need 'light'.
(2) The method of exaggeration is in the form of the isolation of the sensation and the pouring-in of energy (increased
metabolic rates etc) that 'lifts' the sensation out of the realm of the 'everyday' - a realm driven by stimulus/response,
'mindless' habits/instincts at work. With the increase in focus of energy etc comes a consequence in the form of
the distortion of subjective time experience in the form of time seeming to be able to slow-down, stop, and even
be considered as reversible. These delusions come from the reciprocal relationship of energy/subjective-time-experience
[search on such subjects as "chronobiology" etc - the time distortions come out at the level of 0.005
degree changes in temperatures and can lead to degrees of distortion where I can process 1 hours worth of information
in half the time (or less). People are BORN with various differences in metabolic rates etc and as such we see
the possible source for Spearman's "g" factor. BUT the emphasis here would be in reaction times and that
is not the only measure of efficient information processing]
(3) The energy/time distortion, reflecting time being converted from a thermodynamic concept to a mechanic concept,
has, since we did not know about it in the past, crept into our maps of reality in that with the distortion can
come a sense of, what we call, the 'eternal'.
(4) The sense of the eternal is useful in that, since we live in a dynamic universe, so we need to 'stop' the dynamics
to identify something 'clearly' - from this process comes the concept of an 'ideal' as well as our experience of
EITHER/OR thinking and our use of analytical, formal, logic etc. In other words the useful, local property of 'eternal'
has been generalised, abstracted to be used as if identifying something primary rather than derived.
(5) Our CONSCIOUS self is rooted in the exaggeration of energy which allows for personal expression etc (awareness
isnt free) and as such, lacking understanding about our information processing skills, the belief emerges that
our sense of SELF and so of SOMETHING, our awareness of things, is the initiating moment for all processing - it
isnt, there is a LOT of processing going on prior to something coming to our notice consciously - including the
exaggeration processes leading to the awareness.
(6) The assumption that 'awareness is the 'beginning'' has led to our focus on what is 'real', what is 'true' as
being at that level - thus we create a hybrid reality based on combining the elements of the Universe 'as is' with
OUR interpretation, our EXAGGERATED, and so IDEAL, intepretations, i.e. the Universe 'as interpreted'.
(7) This high energy perspective is, for our conscious selves, 'reality' and we use it as a baseline in our attempts
to identify 'reality' (gets very self-referencing! ;-)). This perspective forces our identifications to take-on
BINARY perspectives, our focus is on EITHER/OR thinking.
(8) The nature of our brain as an information processing system means that our EXPRESSION of things, the EITHER/OR
assertions, are performed by us in a very POSITIVE way - which includes the expression of negation -when I say
'no' I mean 'no' and that expression is positive and as such an EITHER/OR concept that is NOT treated that way
in the brain.
(9) UNCONSCIOUSLY our brain is operating by using the processes of differentiation and integration. These processes
are applied to any information and the lower the energy used the more balanced the relationship of differentiation/integration.
When we isolate and exaggerate so we create the initial distortion re time as mechanical but we also over-exaggerate,
over-differentiate. This forces a distortion in the perceptions of the brain where 'left' brain opposes 'right'
brain when we compare the skills of both brains BUT that is based on a distortion in that the 'left' brain, or
more so its properties and methods, EMERGED FROM the 'right' brain, or more so ITS properties and methods where
they are more GENERAL.
(10) This difference in degrees of energy makes the 'left' brain more discrete, more 'precise' in perspective but
also more single context and so biased to working from a focus on REPLACEMENT of 'something' by something 'better'.
This is a SHORT TERM function of our brains, not long term - long term focuses on keeping score of all sensations,
contexts etc and integrating - the drive is on balance and maintaining the existing rather than exaggerations and
replacing the existing.
(11) Since our consciousness, our awareness, dominates our being so we respond to the unconscious distortions identified
in above by having a binary focus - we seek to REPLACE the 'inefficient' i.e. the non-binary and that also includes
asserting that the binary perspective is 'THE' perspective and impose that perspective on our plans for the future.
(12) The problem is that the Universe 'as is' does not work that way - the focus is on CONSERVING energy rather
than EXPENDING energy, and as such the baseline is not of differentiations but on integrations - learning 'good
habits' that allow the context to PUSH us rather than pour-in energy to assert our own context (the notion of idealism
is to dominate, to tame, to take-over nature and that has been done in a single minded manner which comes with
properties such as failure to consider consequences of one's actions - as we are learning re pollution, ozone layer
holes etc etc)
(13) When we analyse the DEGREE of energy expending in development we find a guassian distribution (see http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/dimension.jpg
) reflecting the perceptions of 'precision' based on degrees of energy used to assert that precision.
(14) These perceptions seem to have their roots in the consideration of how much data from the past we need to
recruit to aid us in development - IOW feedback from memories aka past contexts. If I have no memory then I work
off instincts, genetics, and so each 'moment' of time is as such, a moment. We can symbolise this moment-to-moment
development as a sequence of 1s representing each moment:
baseline perspective : 1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,..... (you could also use a wave format reflecting an integrating perspective
but I am using differentation to make my point!)
If we move to being able to consider the immediate past in focusing on development then a little bit of energy
'lifts' us from the baseline and we end-up with a sense of 'time':
first degree of awareness: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,.....
The BENEFIT to a lifeform that can do this allows for evolution and that includes increasing of energy available
to 'lift'. IF I can consider the past TWO moments then I get this:
second degree of awareness: 1,2,3,5,8,13,21,.....
This is a fibonacci sequence and it is reflected in growth patterns from the scale of microtubules in the neuron
to spiral galaxies. A property of this sequence is that it is the 'best fit' for differentiation and integration
processes - it allows for a degree of development that is also conserving in energy usage and also elicits a sense
of 'meaning' in that the patterns act to elicit a sense of being 'pleasing' to our species.
(15) If you keep repeating this process of recruiting more and more context frames to aid in development you get
to the level of recruiting ALL frames back to the 'beginning'; your focus moves from a balance of integration/differentiation,
and so a more approximates perspective, to exaggerations and a more differentiating perspective. This process will
give you the following sequence:
nth degree of awareness: 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128....
This is a binary sequence (or approaching one in that further degrees just refine the sequence)
The numbers reflect precision as in bit representations of, for example, colours etc thus a 32-bit system is not
as precise as a 128-bit system. In the fibonacci patterns the numbers are reflected geometrically as a tightening
of the spiral and as such a pulling 'in' to the center and so the 'point'.
Thus not only is there precision in the increasing degree of awareness, but there is also precision WITHIN the
degree reflected in the zooming-in on the 'point' the 'fact', the 'bit'.
(16) Now comes the 'fun'. EACH of these degrees of awareness set the context for perceptions such that the patterns
associated with each degree are deemed the manifestations of 'truth', of deep 'meaning' and as such a lifeform
will be attracted to those patterns more so than all others.
(17) Genetic diversity can determine the degree of energy usage, of metabolic rates, optimum functions etc, in
a lifeform such that a lifeform can 'prefer' a level and with that determine what patterns in reality 'resonate'
the best.
(18) The benefit of high energy function has been our domination of this planet (note that going BEYOND the binary
is possible - it takes us into the realm of complexity/chaos, a realm of transcendence etc). The PRICE of this
precision is in not recognising that it comes with distortions and requires high maintenance.
(19) Thus our ignoring of lower precision levels reflects our being OVER precise in that there are development
patterns in the Universe that function at the fibonacci level (and for that matter lower reflected in the arrow
of time a la 1,2,3,4....) and are so ingrained, so adapted to the Universe that there is no other choice in development.
(20) Analysis of the methodology we use in general as a species identifies the differentiation process as the ability
to focus and 'lift' something out of the everyday for analysis and then RETURN that something to the everyday BUT
the return is more to a hybrid everyday, a combination of 'as is' reality and 'as interpreted' reality - a 'species
reality' which contains such properties as that of the 'eternal', a property that has certainly influenced our
development as a species since from that property stems the notion of the 'spiritual'.
(21) The precision possible through the use of differentiations is down to the level of the 'dot', the ONE. The
precision possible through the use of integrations is down to the level of no less than TWO OR some form of probability
list and so a focus on a *ratio*.
(22) The brain processes integrations differently than differentiations such that, when we deal with negation we
focus on an integration, to NOT something I must have something to NOT! IOW there is an integration required more
so than when I express the something. We can see these differences in PET/fMRI/rCBF scans of the brain as it processes
negation( and that includes the searching for a past context to be introduced to convert, to REPLACE, a negative
with a positive. This reflects the dynamics of 1:MANY processing that services the level of *expression* that is
1:1)
(23) An issue develops in the use of binary thinking in acquiring information in that the YES/NO format is interpreted
as 1:1 BUT in reality is more 1:2 (or 1:many). The representation of the negation element is distorted in that
we make note of the EXPRESSION in a context of binary thinking which is a POSITIVE, single context assertion of
"NO", rather than recognise the VARIABLE nature of negation, its qualitative differences that have a
RANGE when compared to the 'dot' precision represented in the expression of "YES".
(24) In fact the variable nature of negation is reflected in the degrees of awareness identified above, all values
LESS than the binary reflect sources of negation FOR the binary. The statistics graphs etc used to represent binary
thinking will encode negation in the same manner as it encodes the assertion of "YES" - the graphs reflect
1:1 thinking but that is NOT what reality deals with, it is more 1:many such that the information reflected in
binary perspectives idealise the 'many' into 'one'. (the solution to this seems to be in the use of log scales
and that takes us into fibonacci patterns, or more so questions such as "IF YES then tick, otherwise do this
little multiple choice covering the range of negations")
(25) The binary perspective is high energy and idealist and in being so rejects or distorts the dynamics of the
Universe. Since we live on a planet with limited resources we cannot afford to maintain our high energy expenditure
as a 'way of life' - we need to recognise the high energy as a TOOL rather than a LIFE; learn discernments, quality
over quantity, and so REDUCE our day-to-day living at the 'high' end and so ensure our continued development as
a species that includes integrating with our planet rather than over exploiting it. OTHERWISE we get so far into
self-referencing and so recursions of perceived 1:1 dichotomies that we can lose contact with the everyday of the
Universe as we create an everyday of the species, we create our own little world - (binary thinking is more associated
with psychosis, other thinking with depression etc)
In general, what is being covered here is the affects of a suggested brain process of:
(a) deriving through n steps of recursion a sequence of qualities (scalars) associated with a dichotomy, using
ordered bit patterns (patterns made-up of 0s and 1s ordered left-to-right) to represent each quality. [these can
represent neurons, or a network in that the synchronisation processes act to make the network function as if a
single neuron, exciting (1) or inhibiting (0) where the total of all of these is a sensation we associate with
a quality that is 'meaningful']
(b) zooming-in on each of these scalars and deriving their INTERNAL natures, their subtle differences in expression
and development, in the initial form of a sequence of bit patterns generated through 'bit flipping' (IOW recursion
of recursion - see below)
(c) swapping the last n/2 of the sequence derived in (b) with the first n/2 and out will pop an ordered list of
all of the POSSIBLE expressions of the general quality given a context but also, due to the ordering, a development
history of that quality from 'raw' expression to 'refined' expression.
Thus if '111' represents a quality of, say, 'pure yang'(or 'pure differentiation' or 'pure love' or 'pure hate'
etc etc) this is a GENERAL quality where given a context it will express itself in subtly different ways. the method
described here will LIST all of the possible different expressions derivable from the quality represented as '111'
simply because the moment we set a boundary we determine all possible meaning as being ONLY derivable by the meanings
WITHIN the range set by the boundary such that all differences WITHIN a general meaning are only describable by
ANALOGY with all of the other meanings in the set of possible meanings. (this is possible since in recursion the
process encodes the whole in all parts as we head towards a continuum)
This 'high precision' identification of different possible expressions of a particular quality reflects the processes
occuring in the brain of deriving VERY precise probabilites as we try to clearly, precisely, identify 'something'
within our dynamic Universe... this is all very 'dot' precise in that the probabilities are down to the level of
using margins of error of 0.0005 etc!
==================================
The Brain at Work: The Usual Suspects
--------------------------------------
the IDM model [http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/idm001.html]
applies recursion to the dichotomy of differentiate/integrate in particular but abstracts that to the recursion
of binary digits 1/0 as representatives of the elements of any dichotomy as processed by the brain. For demonstration
purposes I will limit the recursion to three levels:
After three steps in recursion we derive the following sequence:
level 0 : Universe of Discourse
level 1: 1, 0
level 2: 11, 10, 01, 00
level 3: 111, 011, 101, 001, 011, 010, 001, 000
These eight patterns of level 3, made-up of ordering binary digits, represent the differences that emerge when
we recurse a dichotomy. for example, if the dichotomy is of 'positive' vs 'negative' emotions then at level 3 we
have identified more refined distinctions of 'positive' and 'negative' emotions - we have taken the 'high energy'
differences at level 1 and spread the energy out over 8 expressions. From LOVE emerges 'Like', from HATE emerges
'dislike' etc.
If we changed our root dichotomy from positive/negative to differentiate/integrate or expand/contract, pull/push,
advance/retreat etc etc the bit patterns still reflect the range of possible differences within the range defined
by the original elements of the dichotomy where the elements of the dichotomy form the bounds of the recursion
in that the recursion acts to make finer distinctions given the original distinctions; we are in fact moving from
the general of level 1 to the increasingly particular of level 3+ but still within the bounds set at level 1.
When using recursion in computer programming we use a 'stop' point such as 'if X = 1 then stop, else recurse' the
control in IDM is determined more by our senses where we can no longer identify differences, our recursion has
led to the emergence of a continuum OR we choose to stop at a particular level and use the set of differences derived
at that level as a source for deriving meaning in the form of categorising reality using the set of differences
as a set of formal qualities such that 'something' reflects the quality represented as '000' or '011' etc.
A major distinction in the initial recursion of dichotomies is that no matter how many levels of recursion we apply,
we can still 'split' the level into qualities derived from the left element of the root dichotomy and qualities
derived from the right element of the root dichotomy. In our bit patterns, of n patterns, the first n/2 have the
first bit 0 or 1 and the second n/2 have the first bit 1 or 0, depending on the ordering in the original dichotomy.
This 'split' is a point of reflection where the bit patterns on the left side 'reflect' the opposites of the bit
patterns on the right side when we fold the sides onto each other.
This 'split' also identifies both sides as being 'variations on a theme' in that the only difference in the two
sequences read left-to-right or right-to-left is the base, the initial, bit ( we can slide the first n/2 'over'
the second n/2 with the only difference in each pair derived in this process being the first bit e.g.:
000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111 becomes:
000, 001, 010, 011
100, 101, 110, 111
)
The initial process of recursion generates a sequence of differences in expressions of the original elements of
the dichotomy. These differences are as such 'scalar' values - they represent MAGNITUDES, they are GENERAL, BUT
can be recruited to represent something like a temperature guage or other measurement system that describes expressions
in magnitudes with no restriction on direction of measurement - things are reversible.
the Brain at Work: The UN-usual
-------------------------------
The IDM model has, in its analysis of the properties and methods of applying recursion to dichotomies, identified
an unusual property that reflects the dependencies that emerge from the use of recursion on a dichotomy in that
the dichotomy acts to set the range of analysis, the extremes, and as such a dependence in that one extreme is
not possible without identifying the other (more so, one element of the dichotomy is more representative of a 'balanced'
state and the other is more representative of an 'exaggerated' state, so exaggerated as becoming interpretable
as an 'opposite' of the 'balanced' state)
Since we are using binary digits to represent qualities of the dichotomies, we can apply recursion in the form
of 'bit flipping' the digits within a particular scalar representation and in doing so derive a sequence of patterns
that reflect a sense of DIRECTION and so a VECTOR. (the process of bit flipping is to step through a pattern of
bits as if we were creating a number sequence from 1,2,3,... etc this process in fact reflects taking any bit pattern
and putting it through recursion, for example:
0 = 0
1 = 1
01 = 2
11 = 3
001 = 4
101 = 5
011 = 6
111 = 7
If we already have a scalar bit pattern of, for example, 111 [and so our limit is 3 bits] then we can derive a
sequence from it by flipping the bits in the same order as above to give us:
111 = equ to 0 above
011 = equ to 1 above
101 = equ to 2 above
001 = equ to 3 above
110 = equ to 4 above
010 = equ to 5 above
100 = equ to 6 above
000 = equ to 7 above
)
The 'unusual' emerges when an analysis on this derived vector, originally base on an intuition stemming from analysis
of cognitive associations to each bit pattern, shows that the 'variations on a theme' perspective described earlier
serves to identify qualitative differences through a particular bit pattern where the differences reflect the POSSIBLE
expressions of the GENERAL value represented by the particular bit pattern. Furthermore the ORDER of these possible
expressions (from 'raw' to 'refined') also reflect the development cycle of the quality represented by the bit
pattern.
Thus the pattern of qualities represented WITHIN the scalar quality of 111 is expressed as:
111, 011, 101, 001, 110, 010, 100, 000
In the concept of 'variations on a theme' the first four bit patterns are variations on the last four. When we
form a second vector by SWAPPING these variations we find the the qualities these variations represent reflect
ordered qualitative differences of the original scalar. Thus the sequence 110, 010, 100, 000, 111, 011, 101, 001
is a source of analogy for describing the different possible expressions of the quality represented by the bit
pattern 111 given a unique context. In other words this 'quality' vector is a list of the POSSIBLE expressions
and so, when combined with a context can elicit a list of PROBABILITIES in expression given that context. BUT this
ordering also indicates a development history for the quality - from 'raw' to 'refined', from static expression
to dynamic expression. Note that in this 'variations on a theme' it is the LAST bit that reflects the variation.
These processes seem to reflect the brain in 'high precision' mode of categorisation as covered in this paper dealing
with probability reasoning - http://cercor.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/11/10/954
SO, what we have covered here is:
(a) derive through recursion a sequence of qualities (scalars) associated with a dichotomy, using ordered bit patterns
to represent each quality.
(b) zoom-in on each of these scalars and derive their INTERNAL sequence through bit flipping.
(c) swap the last n/2 with the first n/2 and out pops an ordered list of all of the POSSIBLE expressions of the
general quality given a context but also, due to the ordering, a development history of that quality from 'raw'
expression to 'refined' expression.
Note that this process is identified in IDM as a process of the brain and it is a process we use in such areas
of extremely high precision as quantum mechanics where the ordered list of potential qualities described above
reflects the use of the wave equation in its form as representing a list of potentials, of probabilities, in the
'expression' of the electron/photon/atom etc etc given a context.
