Saturday, July 20, 2013

Thoughts: A Failed Idea

It seems ideas keep getting longer and harder to explain as time goes. Today, as I was conjecturing on the nature of evil, I actually stumbled upon another interesting idea, although I'm fairly certain someone else has thought of the likeness of it. If not a new realization, it would add to the evidence suggesting that  knowledge is a substance, but moreover, my conclusion is that enlightenment, or heightened states of consciousness that occur when we 'learn' something new, can be induced via a (the only way I could call it) lineup of pockets of 'representational objects' or 'images' being assimilated or entering through one or more of our five senses and evoking each separate meaning, or "feeling", sequentially that, together, add up to a new 'feeling', or insight. What I am getting at here is that the pockets can be assembled via formula that is unique to what we want to learn and in a fashion that is relatively faster than what we have to go through today to achieve enlightenment or 'learning'. Get it...? Ultimately, I think I failed on this one but you can read through the rest if you want.

At the start, I wanted to find out what evil was. Based on my own philosophy and several other philosophers, for the sake of this idea alone, I chose to expand on the idea that evil was the lack of the 'substance' called Truth, or Knowledge which allows men to do 'good' things. What is this substance...? Perhaps it is a 'conscious' or the 'one-conscious' that is freely out there pervading the air. We don't know what it is yet, but we know that in order to become more enlightened, we have to 'uptake' the substance. I'll just call it substance K from now on. If substance K is a substance, how is it taken in...?

How do we normally 'learn' or gain insight...? The answer is, indirectly, through our 5 (6,7...) senses. But it is in a way that is minutely convoluted. When a person reads a book they look at the surface quality of the information first. The surface quality or property covers the meaning that hides underneath it, similar to how our bodies are the surface representation, but our 'minds' are out of view. Right now, the surface properties, or image, only have an underlying meaning if we have been conditioned to be alerted by them. Hence, the word 'Art' in English will have a different meaning to someone who doesn't read English. That being said, every time we read a word, or look at some symbol, or take in stimuli through any of our 5 (6) senses, if we are conditioned to it, our minds are evoked from the connection that is made and responds accordingly. I think that each of a human's 5 senses operate on their own at any given time. Come to think of it, words are weird. Words are just like numbers, in that when we think of the number "11", the Alphanumeric representation pops into mind. When, the 'image' representation of "dog" could be the word, dog, or an image of a dog or both.... (hmmm, although this idea failed, I think I have another one.) Strictly for this idea, now knowing that certain words can evoke a 'feeling' in us, and that learning something new requires evoking all of the feelings connected to the surface properties of the words, it can be assumed that we can 'push' the learning process, or 'insight', through the systematic placing of words in a formula so that the resulting playback of the feelings correlating with those words lead to the desired result.

So basically, the problem is we need to uptake substance K. This process allows us to do it faster, I think. Consequently, I'm pretty sure it has already been thought of. But my argument is, it's not about the surface properties of the image it is about the "feeling" that comes from it: it's about the "feeling" of enlightenment. Before there was logic, there was "feeling". That being said, images that do not have a strong underlying "feeling" or 'meaning' component to them would not be good candidates to evoke the "feeling" in the participant.

And basically this just explains what is already out there. Nothing new here. I guess this idea is a failure. But the trick here is to NOT force people to become conditioned to an 'image' so that they WILL 100% respond, but to find out what people are conditioned to already, and work from there.


No comments:

Post a Comment