The Map Thinker ™

So far we have considered many things. Until now we have considered only one Perceiver and attributed only one Point of View to that Perceiver.

Humans are the only intelligent species we know about that is able to actively consider Points of View of Others, either other humans or other intelligences. This is a valuable ability that should be tended and cultivated. It increases one’s ability to solve problems, achieve greater understanding, and increases creativity.

But here we get into a real tangle.

How many Points of View do we have and do we pick it or does it pick us?

Logically A = A and there is only one Point of View.

Mapologically  A_n /T-> I_n /T <- P_n.

We need the T (Time) in our formula because Timing is often important to P.

Farmer George waits for the fruit to be ripe enough to pick.

Courting George must wait until the girl is old enough to marry.

Fisherman George throws back all that are too small.

Historian George wants to save the tree because it is so old it is a part of history.

Thus Time plays a part in our Point of View.

A/T =  A  A becomes A when A is ripe enough to be A.

A/T ≠  A   A ceases to be A when A is overripe, old, and rotten.

But…

Not everyone sees a banana as being ripe at the same stage.

Some people like their bananas firm and almost green: Others like them soft with brown spots on them.

Cooks who only eat firm bananas will wait until they are soft to make banana bread with them.

Therefore a Cooks perspective changes with whether they are going to eat the banana or cook the banana.

Thus

A = DA/T -> I^u/T^0-n <- P

A is A.

DA/T is the difference in A over Time.

I is the Identity of A as Perceived and Processed by P.

^{Iu is the usefulness of that Identity as Perceived by P.}

^{/T0-n is the length of Time A is Perceived as being useful for a specific purpose by P.}

In English:

A is only A over the length of Time George Perceives of A as being useful.

At all other times A ≠ A.

But if we are going to discuss the fifth law of Identity, then we also have to discuss a phenomena called Pareidolia.

What is Pareidolia?

It is that wonderfully creative process that allows you to lay on the grass, look up at the sky, and see all kinds of pictures, creatures, things, etc. Or the stars. Those pictures aren’t really there. Our minds are able to recognize patterns in random events. This is an advantage for us. We can take the night sky, look at the random array of stars there, and create constellations in our minds. Cassiopeia and Orion do not exist until we look at them and identify them. Once done we can organize, study, and use the night sky to guide us home.

It doesn’t just happen with things that we see. In Lady Chaterley’s Lover, D. H. Lawrence has her attempting to understand what the windshield wipers are saying. I believe this apparently “non-episode” episode is more important to the story than is generally supposed.

Pareidolia enhances our lives with art and creativity of all kinds.

But:

Pareidolia has a negative side.

While it grants us creativity and gives us superior problem solving skills, it also allows us to delude ourselves and allows others to delude us when we are not self aware enough to realize what mental tools we are using when.

When we convince ourselves, or allow others to convince us, that random static on the radio or TV is in fact spirits of the dead trying to contact us — We have carried our wonderful gift of Pareidolia a bit too far.

Pareidolia is creative.

Pareidolia is NOT proof.

Add Confirmation Bias and you have Delusion.

I’m not going to go into a lot of detail here, there should be no need to. This is the day and age of computers. Even if you are not reading the blogged version you should have one handy.

Use it.

Research anything that interests or confuses you.

A/T -> I/T <- P/T

A over Time produces an Identity over Time that is Perceived and Processed by P over time even though A is a random series of events that have no innate meaning.

So. The Fifth Law of Identity explores the POV, or Point of View of P.

In order to apply this law we must first be aware there are always more POV’s than we are aware of. (Don’t bother to point out I just split an infinitive. I am a native speaker of English — Not Latin.) Or more specifically, I have a different POV of Grammar.

Which points out the First POV we have to be aware of is our own.

My POV regarding Grammar is that the subject needs to be revised until all rules, not just some, make sense and serve a worthwhile purpose.

We have to be aware of the POV’s of others.

I am aware there are people whose POV will discount everything I ever say based on my use of Grammar. After all how can anyone who refuses to dedicate himself to observing all the rules of Grammar, even the most idiotic, have anything worth while to say about reason?

And I have to be aware that my POV could be wrong.

And I have to be aware their POV could be right.

And I need to be aware that BOTH could be either wrong or right.

Now toss in the factor that whether either of us is either right or wrong may depend on factors neither one of us have any control over, and that the correctness or incorrectness may be fleeting, and you have something to wrap your mind around.

The Map Is Not the Territory.

A better set of questions might be:

When and where:

am I right?

am I wrong?

are they right?

are they wrong?

are we both right?

are we both wrong?

The best answer might be:

Depends on the audience.

And now we have to add:

Belief.

A <- P

Where P perceives and processes.

To Perceive an Apple and to Process all the data at hand to define it as a “ripe” apple, that is one ready to eat, is one thing. This is a conclusion. Conclusions are to be tested.

We may call a Conclusion a provisional belief. A conclusion is subject to substantiation, and when proven incorrect, can be changed.

A belief, on the other hand, is an investment of one’s own identity in a conclusion.

So now we must extend our poor little A = A equation further.

_{A = DR}ip_{/T ->DQn/T  = I (EE) <- P -> B -> FAR}

_{Let’s simple it down:}

A -> I <- P -> B -> FAR

Where A produces an Identity that P not only perceives and processes but forms Conclusions and Beliefs about. These Beliefs dictate FAR = Future Actions and Reactions.

Let’s continue.

B can be an Idea, a Theory, a Conclusion, a Belief, even a Delusion, or in its most extreme case, a Trigger.

What is a Trigger?

A Trigger is a reaction that has become so ingrained emotionally that it bypasses all intellectual contexts.

It is often induced by severe emotional trauma. I met a girl who had nearly been strangled to death. A man could not put his arm around her neck for a hug or a kiss, as is commonly done, without evoking an extreme fight reflex from her.

I met a man who as a child had been constantly yelled at and punished by his parents for slamming the door shut. One day he slammed his way out of the house — Just as a severe earthquake struck collapsing the house and burying his parents inside. To this day he has a hard time closing a door, let alone slamming it.

But a Trigger can be induced with less trauma over longer time.

I knew a man whose father taught him to spit every time he passed a Synagogue. Even though he disowned the teachings of his father toward all things Jewish — His mouth still watered every time he passed a Synagogue.

My late wife was a diabetic. She took insulin. A friend, who was an ex-addict, could not watch her take insulin because of the overwhelming desire it caused in her to go back to her old ways.

I’ve known several women whose mother’s potty trained them using running water. These women could not be around running water without wanting to go to the bathroom.

During the cold war the word “Communist” evoked a Mass Trigger Effect.

What is a Trigger?

Any emotional reaction that bypasses all critical thinking. Especially if it is disadvantageous in the current situation.

Not all triggers are simple.

Rituals, both simple and complex, are often used by individuals and societies as triggers to certain types of action.

Not all triggers are erroneous.

A boxer enters a frame of mind when he puts on gloves and enters a ring. This triggers a certain type of behavior. When the opponent raises his hand the boxer will likely strike.

The same person would not be likely to strike someone at a party who raises their hand to their chin.

The trigger was not present.

Thus:

A -> I <- P -> B -> FAR

Means that we must always question each step along the way.

The Identity we Perceive is not A, it is the amalgamation thereof. We tend to treat this Identity as though it were the Territory itself, even though it is not. Our Perceptions are limited, our ability to Process the information is limited, yet we develop beliefs and belief systems based on them. These in turn produce Future Actions and Reactions that are often so instantaneous there is not perceptible time lag.

Thus Time is a factor in FAR:

A -> I <- P -> B -> FAR/T

Knowing this a Map Thinker must ask questions at all five stages of A.

But first: The /T is not quite complete.

We need a superscript ^t for “trigger”.

A trigger is something that triggers a reaction. We can never be quite sure what that trigger might be or when it will go off. We can give pretty good guesses based on probabilities of large populations or on intimate knowledge of an individual or culture.

I knew a lot about triggers before I ever heard of one.

I read a Science Fiction story once about ( I think ) an alien who could read minds. Some very very intelligent people tried to outsmart him, but alas he always knew what they were thinking so nothing they tried worked.

Then the Mind Reader gave an order to a man who was not all that smart.

The man hit the mind reader, knocked him cold. Everyone was then able to jump in and hog tie the Mind Reader.

The reason the man won was because he did NOT think. He reacted instantly. What the Mind Reader said to him caused a Trigger to react. The Trigger was to hit, hit now, and hit fast. Without thought, without plan.

I dated a girl who would not allow anyone to put their hand or arm around her neck because someone had tried to strangle her. This had so traumatized her that putting an arm around her neck sent her into a violent panic reaction.

On the other extreme when I was a bartender I came across a woman. People who had known her for years had no clue she had ever been pregnant.

Until one day she saw some women putting their children on the school bus for the first time. And she realized that had her baby lived it would now be six years old and would attend kindergarten.

She had a complete breakdown at the bar.

Six years before she had had an abortion. She had not mentioned it. She had not thought about it. She had had no emotional reaction to it.

Until that day, when it hit her.

She had killed her baby.

And if she had not she would be putting it on the school bus for the first time today.

A trigger does not have to be complex or dramatic.

It can be as simple as suddenly realizing what your mother meant when she said “Don’t be Walter Mitty.” too you.

So now we have:

A -> I <- P -> B -> FAR/T^t.

Tags: Apple, D. H. Lawrence, Law of Identity, Narrative mode, Pareidolia, Perceiver, Perception, point of view