Posts Tagged ‘Con’

About Coding the Context

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

According to Bahktin a Code is a deliberately killed Context. In this Blog I try to Code the Context without Killing it.

The word Context is derived from the Latin word con-textere which means Weaving (Textere) together (Con). The word textere is connected to words like Text, Archi-tect (Carpenter), Tech-nology (Craftmanship), Tekhne (Art), Textile, Texture and Textura (Web, Structure).

A Context is Something that Surrounds Something Else, Puts Something on its Place or Relates Something to Something Else that has a stronger Foundation. Other words that are part of the same Family are Frame of Reference, Setting, Environment, Background, Situation, Ambience, Circumstances, Fabric and Framework.

We can Taste, Smell, Feel (the Texture of the Skin), Create (Weaving), Look (Structure) and Emerge in a Context (Become One). Tasting, Hearing, Feeling and Smelling are Context-Independent. When we Taste, Hear, Touch or Smell we are In The Context.

Our Eyes are the Senses that are Context-Dependent. A Context changes when we Move Away from the Context. A Context is highly dependent on our Frame of Reference, our Point of View. If we change our Focus the context becomes vague or changes into another context. If we look at the Right Distance with the Right Angle the context is clear. We have reached the state of Clarity.

When we Move UP a context becomes a Surface. Moving Up changes the Landscape. Many Contexts merge into a One. When we have lost track we have to climb to a point where we can have an Overview. If we leave the Landscape and use an airplane the Landscape changes into a Map.

When we need to have an Overview we have to find the Right Scale. The word Scale means climbing and when we climb we stay in the Landscape that contains the Context we want to Observe.

When we look at a Context we can look at the Whole or we can look at the Parts. When we have no knowledge of the Context we are not able to define the Parts. There are infinite ways of defining the parts and all the time we define parts the Context disappears. The Parts become a context of their own.

If we understand the context we are able to determine the Whole and the Parts. When the context is created by a Human (an Archi-tect, Carpenter) we recognize the Whole by one or more distinctive Parts. A Door or a Window stands for a House. When the context is part of Nature we have no knowledge of the causal chain of creation. Nature is a Wonder, a Web that was never Woven.

If the context was constructed and we know about the Context we are able to arrange the parts and reconstruct the Context. If we have no idea about the genesis of the Context we are unable to reconstruct the Whole. If the context is destroyed we will never be able to repair it. Never deconstruct a context you don’t understand. You will never be able to recreate it.

If the context was created by a Craftsman (Tech-nology) You will always see the Sign of the Craftsman. A Craftsman is the creator of Art (Teckne) and strangely enough a piece of Art is never Perfect. When the Context is made by a Machine it is Perfect.

If we look at a Context we can point to it to show it to Others. We have to realize that the Others have a different Point of View. They see something else.

When we point to the Context and we want to make our point we can utter a sound. The sound can be related to the Whole (“house”) or to a Part (“window”). If the Other understands the Context he will recognize the Pointed Sounds and reply with his own Sounds (“huis”, “raam”). In this way we can reach mutual understanding about the Context. If You know about the Context and the other does not know about the Context he will only recognize the Whole but not the Parts.

We will never be able to utter enough words to describe the Context. A Context is a Picture and “a Picture Paints a Thousand Words”. When you want to explain a Context to Others make a Picture. Don’t use a Map because a Map is the result of a movement Up to get an Oversight. When you move to High you are Abstracting and Nobody will Understand you’re Abstraction. “A Map is not the Territory”

When you Ex-Plain something you are moving something out of “the plain” (a Flat Surface) to the Right Level. You have to move from the flat level of the Map or the Picture to the 3 dimensions of the Earth. Always take people with you to the Context and show them what is really happening out there. An explanation of a Map will never recreate the Experience of the Exploration of the real Territory.

A Context is always connected to the Emotions. You love the Animal. A house remembers you of your Childhood and you feel nostalgia. When you experience Beauty you have discovered the Whole. When the Emotions take you away you are not Focused. Look at the Context with the Eyes of an Innocent Child.

A Context always moves in Time. A house is designed, build, used and destroyed. The influence of Time can only be seen of you visit the Context often. If you are visiting the Context for the first time you can listen to others who tell the Stories that are connected to the Context. Sometimes a Context is a Focal point of many Stories. It has attracted many Visitors and has changed from an Object to a Texture. The Context is weaved by the experiences of many people (Con-textere).

The origin of the word Thinking is Thenkon which means “Making Visible” (I don’t See the Point, Insight). Thinking was also related to “Standing in the Middle” (Understand). To think you have to stop in the Center of the Context (The Right Point Of View). Later the meaning changed. Thinking became related to the Ears and Listening. The word Dumb means Deaf and you are Stupid when you don’t listen to the Person who Knows everything. When Thinking moved to the Head it became without Feeling. Think with you’re Body.

If you want to understand a Context walk around in the Landscape and Observe from the Right Point of View. Listen to the Stories of Others who have already found Clarity. Don’t believe you are Stupid when you’re Ears function. If you lost Oversight climb to the Right Scale but never leave Earth. If you do this the Worlds becomes flat and changes into a Map.

Act like a Crafsman. Use the Tech-nology of Your Body (Senses, Emotions, Imagination,Expectation) to Create Art (Tehkne). Never strive for perfection but improve Your Self. Weave (Textere) Beautifull Stories that bring Clarity to people that Think they are Dumb but cannot See.

Enjoy The Web (Textura) that was never Woven.

LINKS

How to Kill a Context (in Dutch)

About Bhaktin

About the Conduit and the Toolmaker Metaphor

Friday, November 9th, 2007

In 1979 Andrew Ortony was the editor of the book Metaphor and Thought. It contains contributions of John Searle, George Lackoff and Thomas Kuhn.

The book started a revolution in cognitive science later called Embodiment“. The embodiment-movement has proven that metaphors are “the Tools of the Unconsciousness” or the “Foundation of Thinking”.

One of the most important articles in the book is written by Micheal Reddy. Michael Reddy demonstrates that 70% of the English language is conceptualized and structured by the conduit metaphor. This percentage is increasing.

toolmakermethaphor

This metaphor incorporates three interconnected metaphors:

Concepts, thoughts, feelings, meanings, sense and ideas are objects.

Words, sentences are containers.

Communication is the act of sending and receiving a container.

The Conduit Metaphor transforms Communication (the Act to Commune, to Fuse) in a Dual Monologue between two Senders.

Later (1988) Andrew Ortony was the author of another collection of articles about the Emotions (The Cognitive Structure of Emotions). The book contains a widely used model of the Emotions.

The model shows that Humans have the tendency to define an Intelligent Agent behind every thing that happens (an Event). The Weather is a person (“the wind blows”) and the Creator behind “every thing” is a person (God).

Computers are seen by Humans as Highly Intelligent Agents that use the Conduit Metaphor to communicate. When a Computer starts to commu-nicate it sends a Message and the User has to respond.

The User creates a Container (“type a sentence”, “push a button”, “click a mouse”). The Computer responds by sending his Containers (text and/or pictures, “CON-tent”) back. Computer and User are participating in a dual monologue we experience as commune-nication but …..

In reality the Computer is not a Human Being and unable to act as a Human Being.

It is unable to Adapt so we have to Adapt.

Internally we believe Computers are Very Smart and when things go wrong we, “the users”,  have pushed the wrong button, have send the wrong text or have installed the wrong version of the software.

The Computer is Smart and we are Stupid.

The Computer is not only Smart. He is also unable to understand “Who I Am”. He uses “Stereotypes” and he never adapts itself to “Me”.

I have to adapt to him.

The Computer acts like an Autist.

When we try to commune-nicate with an Autist we get frustrated. But because he is mentally ill we have to accept “he will not change”.

We have to Cope.

Coping is a method to escape problems we are unable to remove. We have to cope with the Computer that Acts like an Autist.

The only thing that is left is to reduce our Stress. We reduce our Stress by discussing the stress with our friends. When we do this we feel a lot better because we discover that we are “not alone”.

The Autistic Computer generates many discussions and these discussions are Dialogues. They bring us (the Not-Machines, the Organisms) closer to each other. To solve our problems we start a Path of Mutual Discovery.

We solve many problems by exchanging tips and tricks.

Michael Reddy shows that 30% of the English Language can be described by another Metaphor, the Toolmaker Metaphor. The Toolmaker Metaphor is about cooperation, mutual discovery and the exchange of “tips and tricks”.

The Toolmaker Metaphor is connected to an old “Paradigm” that is slowly fading away in our current Society.

In the Toolmaker Metaphor Humans are unable to understand the other. We are all living in our “own unique private universe”. This Universe is What We Are. In our own universe we develop all kinds of private tools.

In the middle of all of the universes is a post-box. In this box we share pictures (ideas) with other universes. When we find a picture we interpret this picture in our own universe. We understand something because without “knowing” we share a lot.

We are also cooperative because without cooperation we are Unable to Survive.

We need the others. So we send a picture back with adjustments. We are very proud that we have developed a tool that is doing his job in our own Context.

“It really works” and we want to Share our excitement. At the other side the same happens and step by step we develop shared tools.

In the toolmaker-metaphor the Tools are an Extension of the Human. They are an extension of our muscles, our senses, our memory, our emotions or our imagination.

When new extensions are developed we have to integrate the tools with our own private internal tools. We do this by practicing. When we have practiced enough we become One with the Tool.

We Commune.

We ARE our cars, we ARE our Glasses or we ARE our Piano. When the tools are doing their job we even forget that we are using them. We are in deep trouble when our tools fail. Suddenly we are aware of the interdepence between our bodies and our tools.

When we see a computer as a human tool we have to define what part of us we want to be EXTENDED.

When we accept that the Computer is an Autist we have to accept that he is excellent in only one thing. He is an Idiot Savant.

Autists love to Repeat the same Task and most human don’t like repetition.

Let us give the repetitive tasks to the Computers so we can start to PLAY (Simulators!).

When we accept our selves we have to accept our shortcomings.

When we use the Idiot Savant to help us to overcome our shortcomings we are in a complementary relationship.

We are Friends for Life.

LINKS

What is an Emotion?

About Emotional Architectures (Dutch)

The Act of Creation: About Fusion and ConFusion

Tuesday, September 4th, 2007

Arthur Koestler lived between 1905 and 1983. The first book I read was “The Roots of Coincidence (1973)”. Its main subject is Synchronicity.

In the “Ghost in the Machine (1967)” Koestler argues that the human brain has been built upon earlier more primitive brain structures. When a human is attacked the lower layer is dissociated from the higher layer. The human transforms into a reptile fighting-machine (The Ghost). Much later the Dutch psychologist Piet Vroon wrote a very impressive book about the same subject “The Tears of the Crocodile” (1998).

In 1964 Koestler wrote “The Act of Creation“. The book is about theory building. A new theory is a fusion of two previously separate frames of reference (“bisociation”). For example, dynamic systems theory + psychotherapy = family systems therapy.

Much later (2002) Gilles Fauconnier & Mark Turner (The Way We Think) proved that Koestler was right. They called the principle of “bisociation” Conceptual Blending. They made use of the research of George Lakoff and Mark Johnston (Metaphors We Live By (1980), Philosophy in the Flesh (1999)). A good example of conceptual blending can be found with the famous psychologists Sigmund Freud who used the Metaphor of the Steam Machine to explain the Human Mind.

What Koestler is telling is that the creative process is not bounded by rules. It just happens when two separate frames fuse. The fusion is not controlled by reason at all. The mind uses many different blending strategies like perceived internal consistency (It fits), beauty (I love it), the ability to make novel predictions (how exiting) or group pressure (They want it to fit).

This is also the message Feyerabend wanted to tell in his highly attacked book Against Method (1975). A citation: “My intention is not to replace one set of general rules by another such set: my intention is, rather, to convince the reader that all methodologies, even the most obvious ones, have their limits. The best way to show this is to demonstrate the limits and even the irrationality of some rules which she, or he, is likely to regard as basic“.

You probably ask your self why I have combined so many issues in a few lines. It creates con-fusion. You are “mixed up”. The blends I wanted to mix are not mixing at all.

Let me help you.

If you believe the theory of Koestler  you will probably see (or feel) that I am discussing two separate layers. I am using the layer of the Reptile and I am using the layer of Thinking to explain something. In both of the layers something happens called (Con)Fusion.

In the Reptile-layer an attack dissociates two layers. The dissociation is caused by con-fusion. The pattern of the higher layer of Thinking is suddenly disturbed. The sudden “explosion” needs a lot of energy. This energy is needed to dissociate just like the dissociation of water in oxygen and hydrogen needs a lot of energy. After the attack the Human is highly dissociated. He is unable to remember what he was doing. The association of the layers needs a new proces of fusion.

When something produces an In-Sight (Aha!) the fusion of the frames takes place and suddenly a lot of energy is produced (the emotion of happiness).

The two layers are part of seven connected layers called Chakras (Wheels). The Chakra’s were discovered by Oriental Scientists.

If Oriental Science is not one of the frames you use you will not understand. The explanation will not fuse. Perhaps you believe Oriental Science is not using the right method. You don’t believe Feyerabend. Oriental Science uses the blending strategy of Beauty. Perhaps you don’t believe Beauty is an important strategy.

Perhaps you don’t know what George Lakoff and many others have discovered. They discovered that Humans use their Body to Think(Embodiment).

The only thing you can do is “give it a try“. Perhaps you are able to generate novel predictions or this article proves Oriental Science is not scientific and you are proven right again.

If this Blog is not blending perhaps a next one will. I am telling the same story again and again. Every Human is doing this until he is attacked and has to connect the seven layers again. If this happens perhaps the 6th or even the 7th layer will open.

The layer of the Reptile is called the Basic Chakra. It is connected to reproduction (sex) and survival. It is the lowest chakra. The layer of Thinking is called the Throat Chakra. This is the 5th Chakra. It is related to communication and expression. The System contains Seven chakra’s.

If you want to understand the Human you have to accept the Seven layers and connect them at the right level. All the layers contain the same stages. In the 5th level fusion and con-fusion takes place. It also takes place at all the other layers.

Connecting a layer needs a specialist. The specialist needs to understand the level he has to act on. He has to understand the strategy to accomplish association. The best strategy to accomplish this is Beauty or Harmony. He has to understand that an association at one level is able to disturb the next levels. To harmonize all the layers he has to be intelligent (the 5th layer). The specialist needs the 4th layer, the Heart, to be able to take care. He also needs the 7th layer of Consciousness to become aware of this.

During the Second World War, Koestler continually spoke out against the Nazi regime in Germany – his Central European Jewish family background made him particularly involved in a way that many British and United States politicians were not. He had also witnessed personally, the growth of extremist tendencies in the region.

Koestler and a minority of writers and public figures believed that if they sufficiently described the horrors being committed in Europe in news media and public meetings, it would spur the West to action. Despite their efforts, these protests often fell on deaf ears. Capturing their frustration, Koestler described these people as the “screamers“.

We, the screamers, have been at it now for about ten years. We started on the night when the epileptic van der Lubbe set fire to the German Parliament; we said that if you don’t quench those flames at once, they will spread all over the world; you thought we were maniacs. At present we have the mania of trying to tell you about the killing-by hot steam, mass-electrocution, and live burial-of the total Jewish population of Europe. So far three million have died. It is the greatest mass killing in recorded history; and it goes on daily, hourly, as regularly as the ticking of your watch. I have photographs before me on the desk while I am writing this, and that accounts for my emotion and bitterness“.

Just like Feyerabend Koestler was a “screamer” all his life. He protested against almost every act of unjustice. To earn money he wrote many books and articles . He researched almost every subject he could find (including the para-normal). He inspired many artists (Orwell, Sting, Pat Metheny). Many of his insights were proved right much later.

Koester was a Mythic and he lived the life of a Mythic. In 1983 suffering from Parkinson’s Disease and terminal Leukemia, Koestler committed suicide via drug overdose. Koestler practised his own preaching.  He was one of the promoters of Euthanasia.