Thought DJ - Mixing my Thoughts

Creative Forums Creative Writing
1

Bounded Rationality.

When providing an answer, logical deduction is constrained by a number of factors, including cognitive constraints, the amount of time that is available to provide an answer, receptivity to the impact of the social norm, and the availability of accurate information. Modern people are not comfortable with the idea of constraints, nevertheless, our limitations do exist and exist for each one of us, and they do.

There are bounds to what our minds are capable of accomplishing, and even if we were able to make a conscientious decision to reduce the amount of time we spent using technology, this would still leave us with a small pool of viable options for enhancing our mental talents. I have a desire to act morally, in particular, to carry out any task or duty in an effective and careful manner. I carefully utilize the assistance of my complete intelligence matrix which has many different segments that drive my thinking.

The main segment that is critical to my daily life is the imagination, and this segment is highly valued in the long run. Intelligence artificial is designed to act as a sort of benchmark for human creativity and logical reasoning, and while it may not always be optimal, it is a well-balanced blend of both.

The paradox of Vu.

The term paradox of déjà vu is a literary license. Underlying/Overlying themes: Déjà vu, Jamais vu and Presque vu and Déjà entendu and Déjà vécu. I am profoundly worried by the majority of explanations I’ve heard concerning déjà vu, especially when I consider concepts like intuition. I will not identify the infringing fields because I am more interested in a reasonable but broad conversation about déjà vu. Despite the above sentence, the primary issue is the “Paradox of the felt;” nonetheless, I am also interested in learning everyone’s views on the subconscious and conscious. Some people deny the existence of the subconscious.

I don’t mind if we don’t get to discuss the “Paradox of the felt” because it may not make sense to some people; nevertheless, I’m sure most of us have heard of Déjà vu, conscious and subconscious. I would argue that déjà vu is a paradoxical phenomenon. Déjà vu gives us insight into the mind-body problem, and I believe it is connected to consciousness in some way. Perhaps déjà vu is a paradox between the mind and the brain. Despite the fact that the various fields present what they claim to be rock-solid explanations for déjà vu, the human brain and mind continue to be fascinating mysteries.

Expansion.

I will often contemplate my limits before expanding my cycle and sometimes, I have to wind back many processes to be smaller than what they are. It is important to either summarise information effectively or have part of it in one cycle and then another part of it in another cycle. This way I do not become overloaded with anything that I do. I treat intuition and predicting the future as two different things and I am still troubled by the many logical explanations that I read or hear. If I am, to be honest, I do not believe anyone actually understands how existence works. I still willingly explore many things to gain answers.

I am not sure how useful all of my answers are but I do understand that each one has some value, at least in life. So in my expansion of thinking, I seek to include the things of the highest value but manage to find many hidden elements that allow for more understanding. Now that I have a working reflection system, it seems that I have a connection to the predictive realm that when felt augments many things including déjà vu. I often experience the feeling of already seeing certain things, remembering where I am from, and seeing the future easier as each day passes. I am not worried about how others feel about any of this as it all appears more important to me than to them.

[b]Also… a form of creative writing not placed within the philosophy category… so my usual rules apply!

I am not interested in rude or parroted responses…
I am not interested in personal agendas!
And no matter what, my mind will be what I want it to be…
… not what others want… I am not sorry to disappoint.[/b]

Have a nice sleep!

2

ED: Do you understand this picture? Do you understand the phrase “The rest of my life flashing before my eyes”? If so… I will understand you if you want to discuss particulars.
4E8770DC-E3E0-44FA-A7D4-1E1F43846176.jpeg

3

There are no particulars in expansion. Expansions include infringements unexpected not necessarily in order to specifically confuse, but go plant seeds of doubt to enable a regress to an acceptable pattern of understanding.

That is, the reasonable doubt to avoid or at least postpone judgement.

4
5

You’re talking about the harmonic triads in different words.

6

Yes, if interjections like plants are included. So as far as planting is concerned, as similar to planning, then,

“Yes if one assimilates a déjà vu experience with a plant. A plant that could have been introduced to an expanded affordability, to risk or gamble on the threshold of understanding loss
Loss is more affordable and tolerable within an expansive spacial configuration. The opposite, a compression can produce signs of acute distress of conflating elements , where there are only exit signs that mistakes did other compressed entry points
Freedom is inflated on purpose. One dies not to venture into less then an acceptable rate of exchange.
Uncertainty of plant leads to devaluation.
Maybe that’s ok . and a relief.
But then a conspiracy grows from a seed of uncertainty and that too may become bothersome.
But on most levels it justifies more than it refrains from dwelling on reasons for planting ( seeds of doubt) in the first place.”

I get a huge sense if loss , and this liss it any two relations are usually patterned as inversely related
Not to imply any sense if compensation going on at least consciously, but let’s face it sorrow coined misery requires kinship.

Admittedly this is cruelly a firm of appearent negation , but in fact they are construant to some other thing I can not place.

7

. Yes

The above is mostly internal dialogue, withn a hermetic source.

8

Okiedokie.

9

Of course, there are not particulars… words are units and never precise as much as man wants to believe such. These tags are applied at our convenience and comfort and are generally applicable to what works but never 100% specific. Even a standard appears to have a huge error ratio between two interlocutors or the writer and reader… and so on…

Doubt is the choice of the receiver… as you say, “not necessarily in order to confuse.”

And in my case, merely to share!

I have stated it before… the reservation of judgment has an important function… this does not mean we should not act.

However, we only act as best we can… I hope it makes some sense!

10

I think I understand two-thirds of the picture. I can not be certain. I have not come across the saying before… only in the form, “my life flashed before my eyes” - Indicating instead, that of past events, whereas “the rest” would be future events. You seem to have already provided particulars in the two-thirds I understand.

11

Well if words/particulars are ruled out, should we just call it, then?

12

It is hard to decode you, but if this is an allusion to the parable of the sower… then it has a beat I can dance to.

13

Plants.

In order to live as loved (an invaluable phrase I learned from Pastor Jim—thank you for tilling the soil and planting good seeds), you have to know you’re loved despite your relational death-bringing crap, which requires getting rid of the crap that makes you feel like you’re not loved, which is what the cross did. It communicated (still does) that he loves us despite our crap. But it’s not enough because the cross is a bummer that you get through on the way to joy, once all that death is out of the way. So yes, loving each other despite our crap is the first step. But then we need to enter in to actual enjoyment of each other in relationship (& not get stuck in the room before the bridal suite - also from Jim). We need to celebrate the good stuff and not dwell on the death. Yes we need to come back to it and remember it (communion), and always be taking up our cross in loving self/others despite our crap. But there is more than crap to focus on. It’s just the fertilizer. Focus on the flowers.

14

I will explain hoping not to exasperate You as i did to Decode, by expansive time stretch to image a( nation)

A lot to think about

To give credit where it’s due , must defer to when an appropriate, well , close to it response could be had, but until then, must beg Your. leave ; for if I was not a near has been without said portfolio, I’d use a similar excuse of needing to do paperwork.

But , hardly.

15

Besides the plant has me in a sort of bind not unlike in a little shop of horrors.

So until later not exceeding
reasonable time.

16

Enjoying and cultivating flowers is the meaning of life that you can’t really appreciate until you’ve been sufficiently pruned back of all the dead stuff. Cultivating and pruning is not a one-off thing…it’s life.

I am close to completing my box/Venn thingy. It has taken me on many tangents to complete the thought, interweaving gleanings from many gardeners (teachers).

17

I do not completely understand what either mission here is… for the pair of you. The patterns of words both offer are intriguing, nonetheless, in that these patterns arouse my curiosity or interest.

It has only just cooled enough to sleep and at the same time, I have just enough energy to think about this. First of all, assuming you are mentioning this to me, I am not ruling anything out. To do this, I would not be able to communicate. I have to set my own levels of comfort and convenience, which we all do. I am comfortable with many of Wittgenstein’s suggestions… as they relate, of course. I am not sure what you want to call, then! I assume you mean something like; should we quit? Should we give up? Furthermore, I am not sure why this would be “on the cards.” Hopefully, I make some sense. And Meno, I am not exasperated by your words.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IidMkZAI44[/youtube]

I do not know how familiar anyone interested is… this seems reasonable to me. Language itself is always changing… mixing the colloquial is a problem especially if those you speak with do not live in the same country, state, city/town and in some cases, neighborhood… yet people take the idea that we are using the same language for granted without first thinking… this so-called language, English is not a unified language when we mix the colloquial with an attempt at logic. I would go further and state that formal and/or literary language is never truly unified across its own domain since each person adds to the problem with their own understanding(grasp) and usage(execution) of any given language. Personally, I try not to take myself seriously in an excessive way… furthermore, I pay no attention to the words of no value that others offer. It must be obvious first that an interlocutor is serious about engaging in discourse. These things are not difficult to identify… furthermore, identifying psychological states through another’s language usage is not always a very precise identification.

Now to sleep… and God bless!

18

ED, thanks for the vid. I have yet to study Wittgenstein. I am very interested.

19

Very briefly. For now present in ‘real’ or reasonable time

Wittgenstein was probably very much in debt to a reductive method to singularly try to overcome that rapidly increasing bubble that a total erasure of intent would cause betweein disposing factors such as hereditary signs , which showed tendencies of automatic expansiveness in the very bubbly redundant ( almost) matrix, that he had to navigate around to make sense.

After all, two of his brothers passed by singular choice that the reduced signals to some kind of obvious no exit situation implied.

Beneath the words, ultimately are the intentional use of a framework of logical sin taxes whereby, fir far lesser equlibriae many have forsook said ‘reality’.

That circularity of fed back messaged signals may not have appeared as anything but a figurative ying-yang domain, with the no exit sign glaringly obvious to all but the very faithful.
That circularity , though is the cut off version of a perfect sphere, before thermodynamics exposed the uncertain leaks, for which no compensation was yet available
?

Therefore common language needed to work like childish color filled outlines, always something missing, always needing retouch, as fading could only be attributed to change in the colloquial versus the original intended use.

Lives mattered about such subtle changes, and nin sense used as interlocution seem to matter less then the attempts at modifying the complexity of what feeling about them may imply.

20

First I have one question, Meno… do you believe any word exactly represents any thing? I remember you asking once, what is a thing?