The Map Thinker ™

TIME

The Great Contradiction

Agent of Change

Anchor of Continuity

A = AT <- PT

Once Time is added we have to conclude that A ≠ A.

That is Yesterday’s A is not Today’s A and Tomorrow’s A will be a different A still.

A₀ is the lawn that was planted. It was not yet a lawn.

A₁ is the lawn that I cut yesterday.

A_{2 is the lawn I have today.}

_{Before we move on lets look at A0.} 

_{Why start with 0 instead of using 1, the first example of A?}

_{Because 0 has a value. The value is the unrealized potential.} 

 _{Take one molecule of gold. It is gold. It has all the properties of gold.} 

_{But it has no use. Indeed a hundred are of no use. How many molecules does it take to be useful? A thousand? Ten thousand? A million?}

_{Let us say the smallest useful amount of gold that can be readily identified is one flake. That is a lot of molecules. That amount can be counted as one. The smallest useful amount of zero gold is the amount it is profitable to extract into useful amounts of one. Gold is in lots of places. There is gold in the oceans. But it would cost more to extract it than it would be worth.} 

_{Oil is the same. In California a capped well might have a million gallons of zero oil in it. Someday the situation will probably change.}

_{One fertile egg is one zero chicken or one-third of a zero omelette.} 

_{One chicken is 365.25 zero eggs a year.}

_{One grass seed is one zero grass.}

_{You might want to consider this type of zero a “special case zero” but somewhere in the future when I get into Complexity Theory and the Magic of Emergence (Novelty be thy name-o) the idea of Zero equaling a potential of unknown outcome may seem normal, and the concept of Zero having a value may seem a lot less special. In a way it isn’t that special now. Think of adding 0.2 and 0.4. We now have 0.6. All three have value, but none of the three is 1 yet. They are still all three 0.} 

_{In the mean time let us consider Zero to be potential rated from Zero potential to absolute potential when it becomes One.}

_{And believe it or not, to me that makes perfect sense.}

_{To get back to the subject:}

_{A = A0…A∞ For the life of A.}

_{Where each gradient from 0…∞ is a discreet change that is detectable in some way over time. It may only be detectable using technology, but it still counts.}

_{Yet we know that A is still A.} 

_{At the same time we know that A is not A yet, it is only potential A.}

_{We know a grass seed is both not grass and is grass at the same time.}

_{Once we factor in Time we must recognize the Difference in A from Time Zero through Time ∞ for each section of Time measured.} 

_But:

_{Once we factor in Time we must recognize the Continuity of A as the same A that experienced the Difference.} 

_{Yesterday’s Child could not walk.}

_{Today’s Child took its first step.}

_{Tomorrow’s Child will run.}

_{Thus A, and our knowledge of A, is in fact Anchored in Continuity.} 

_{We know nothing about anything until we know its past state, its present state, and are able to have expectations about its future state.}

_Thus: 

_{A = RD/T = I <- P}

_{Where the Difference in the Recipe of A over periods of Time becomes the Identity of A as understood by P.} 

_{In other words A is not only not A over time, but the changes undergone by A becomes the Identity of A as Perceived and Processed by the Perceiver.} 

_{Thus allowing Aristotle to believe that A = A in spite of so much evidence to the contrary.} 

_{Thus Aristotle is not an idiot.} 

_{He simply did not take Socrates advice to heart.} 

_{The unexamined A is not worth looking at.} 

_{It also explains why stories, anecdotes, and Maps, are so important to human thinking. Without Anchoring to something, Time, Place, Concept, there is no continuity, and therefore no real understanding.} 

_{It explains why people with complete maps that are well anchored, which compares to Deep Structure in linguistics, are more stable mentally and emotionally than people with Fragmented, disjointed, unanchored maps.} 

_{Noam Chomsky, and others, have tried to account for how the two sentences:}

_{Jack kissed Jill}

_And 

_{Jill was kissed by Jack}

_{Can both be interpreted by the human mind as roughly equivalent.} 

_{(They are not equivalent and do not mean the same thing, but that is a secret to be revealed later.)}

_{For the minute we will simple accept that both sentences describe the same event.} 

_{The question is “How does the Human Mind know this?”}

_{The answer depends on Anchors.}

_{If you do not know what a “kiss” is you have no anchors.} 

_{To have a kiss explained to you is to be able to attain some understanding of kiss-ness, but it is free floating knowledge, unanchored, forgettable, and unexperienced.}

_{To see people kissing is a visual anchor.}

_{To completely anchor the concept of kissing a person has to kiss and be kissed. Once it is anchored a map, a model, a physical, mental, emotional, reference has been developed and is retainable and recallable.}

_{If a person has only experienced one type of kissing, say that of parent to child, then the map / model is incomplete and the person’s kissing vocabulary is undeveloped. They may not fully understand what happened when Jack kissed, Jill was kissed.} 

_{When the words are heard, or seen, a map is recalled, a model is compared too, and experience replayed, a video clip is viewed — Any or all of these things happen as fast as the human mind can operate. So fast the Perceiver is probably not aware of it. It does not matter how it is said, this same — NON WORD reference is made.} 

_{It is important to realize that WORDS are not referenced.}

_{Once we get past this Aristotelean Block™ to reason, everything makes — Not just sense — But simple, easy to understand sense.}

_{The idea that Surface Structure Words refer to Deep Structure Words makes no sense.}

_{Words refer to events as experienced by the Perceiver.} 

_{A = AT/D <- P}

_{Words describe the Qualities that make up the Identity as understood by the Perceiver.} 

_{W -> A = Qn <- P}

_{Words describe A which are the Qualities received, understood, perceived, and processed by the Perceiver.}

_{When the situation is reversed:}

_{P -> Qn (A) <- W}

_{The Perceiver reports the (Noticed and Understood) Qualities of (A) using Words.} 

_{In all cases the physical, perceived, experience, of P is referred too.}

_{Deep Structure is the Experience of a thing or event by the Perceiver.} 

_Thus: 

_{Jack kissed Jill}

_{Jill was kissed by Jack}

_{Jack and Jill were kissing}

_{Are all experienced by the Perceiver as similar (but not exact) experiences.}

_{The fourth law of Identity can be expressed as:}

_{A = EE/T <- P}

_{Where A equals the (past) Experience and (future) Expectations of A over Time as Understood (Perceived and Processed) by P, the Perceiver.} 

_{When A ≠ EE/T <- P in some significant way, then P -> ≠ A.}

_{In English: When  A does not live up to future expectations in some significant way then the Person tends to deny that A is actually A even though A is still A in all other respects.} 

_{Thus a stunted rose may no longer be a rose to a prize-winning gardener. A homosexual child may no longer be a son, or a pregnant child a daughter, to a zealot father. Or a thousand other rejections both petty and traumatic for any number of reasoning “From Expectations”.}

_{I have stated before and no doubt will state again.}

_{There is no way to separate the study of Language or the study of Philosophy from either Science or Psychology.}

_{Experience is often not as remembered.} 

_{Expectations are often unreasonable and demanding.}

_{Reactions when Expectations are not met are often unreasonable.} 

_{There is a distinct proportion here:}

_{The more unreasonable the expectation the more unreasonable the reaction.} 

_{Oddly this often becomes a cycle. The same unreasonable expectations happen again and again and the same unreasonable reactions happen afterward.} 

_{I give Christmas as an example.} 

_{Post Christmas Depression.} 

_{You would think after one or two years of disappointment the Perceiver would change their Expectations.} 

_{But that does not happen.}

_{Back to A.}

_{Our expanded formula:}

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

_{Where A is the Recipe composed of Ingredients and Proportions  that change D with Time. This Recipe produces perceivable Qualities that also change D with Time. This is the Identity which includes Past Experiences and Future Expectations that is Perceived and Processed by P.} 

_{The Past Experiences and Future Expectations are so incorporated in the human mind that Aristotle, and future philosophers, were able to ignore them completely and insist that A = A rather than the what A really is.}

_{A, any given A, is a process.} 

_{The Qualities that process expresses produces an Identity.} 

_{The Perception itself is a process.} 

_{The Perceiver, in turn, processes the information.} 

_{Reality itself is a Process.}

_{Perception of Reality is a Process.}

_{A <- P}

_{A is not A.} 

_{A does not exist.}

_{A only exists when and how it is Perceived and Processed by P.}

(C) 2013, All Rights Reserved

Tags: science