Model

A model of any aspect of a human being, in all of its complexity, will definitely miss many important things about us. However, a partial model, despite its obvious deficiencies, may tell us many interesting things about us and maybe enable formation of other models that will leave out less than this one does.

When an expectation of ours is not fulfilled, we are obviously surprised and we may act (if we do not decide that it is better to turn a blind eye). We may act in two ways to eliminate a surprise depending on the energy required:

Acting outwards is a temporary action with a limited scope. It makes sense to tidy up a room but we cannot move planets or galaxies around until they start behaving, as we would like them to behave. (It does seem, however, that some are trying precisely this.)

Acting inwards yields better results but poses a problem as to how to adjust "our description of the world and ourselves within it".

We all probably watched once on TV endless rows of domino pieces, tirelessly placed in chains for weeks or months, only to see them falling in a matter of a minute or two. As one piece falls and triggers the fall of another, or another two or three, whole chains of domino pieces gradually fall until the whole landscape of chains lays down - motionless.

I imagine tireless work of our thought, continuously trying to resolve contradictions within "our description of the world and ourselves within it, in a similar way...

Chains of our cultural sketches (habitual patterns of our thought developed as we grew up into a culture) are constantly risen, depending on situation we are in, seeking confirmations (experiences, feelings). Other sketchy images, like those used in communication between our brain and our eyes, try and usually bring in confirmations and chains of cultural sketches fall with very few (unnoticed) contradictions (oddities or exceptions) within, that could be imagined as "domino pieces" of a chain that did not "fall", but rather stayed upright, in an unresolved state.

However, contradictions sometimes cannot pass unnoticed - like in this ambiguous drawing on the left. Is it a transparent pyramid viewed from above or from below? Two similar, but contradicting cultural sketches, as I imagine them on the right, may seek confirmation - surprisingly finding that both of them can be confirmed as we mentally "push lines into background". Note, however, that we cannot see both pyramids at the same time because we can intent or expect to see only one at the time.

The drawing itself does not have a meaning - but it does give a meaning (confirmation) to one of the two cultural sketches at the time.

Contradictions, like in this example, are hard to resolve without radical changes in our cultural imprint since they involve our basic concept of space. But there are others that can be resolved much easier.- and the resolution is found in chains of cultural sketches falling differently than before.

Our "reconstructed" memories, based upon what we usually do or upon kept records, have a very weak, if any, emotional charge. However, they should also be considered, especially when keeping records itself is highly emotionally charged.

When a challenging "piece" is inserted into a cultural chain it triggers an iterative "process" of constant rising of the chains (unlearning) and letting them fall along different paths (exploring, learning). A "success" of a path of falling within each iteration can be measured by combined emotional charge of "domino pieces" forced to stay "upright" - in an unresolved state. (No "piece" is dropped easily since each of them has an emotional charge gained by numerous falling "true" in the past or by reflecting an important event in our past. This emotional charge, however, may be weakened under the onslaught of challenging contradiction and eventually the "piece" falls "false" and it is simply "dropped" - forgotten. Note also that a challenging "piece", if not sufficiently emotionally charged, can also be weakened and ultimately dropped - forgotten.) An outcome of an iteration may, therefore, result in:

A "method" that shows a higher success of letting "pieces" fall along a particular path, may gradually evolve in a cultural chain that replaces or simplifies a number of other cultural chains - simplifying even more "our description of the world and ourselves within it". Highly abstract chains, like our sense of space and time, are almost constantly active - even in our dreams. However, their distortion and diminished activity could be followed as we "sink" from visual (REM) phase into verbal and non-verbal phases.

How "domino pieces" fall within a chain of cultural sketches and paths of falling are not random and they follow certain rules that could be best described by a three-value variant of nonmonotonic logic. This would be a significant simplification compared to neural networks. However, the combined emotional charge of "domino pieces" forced to stay "upright" should provide weighted input to fuzzy logic to decide which other chains of cultural sketches are impacted by "inserted" contradiction, exception or oddity.

An inserted "piece" though, does not necessarily pose a challenge within an active chain of cultural sketches. It does not necessarily challenge other active chains either. We do not always "connect all of the dots". And yet, one day, active chains may "clash" exposing a contradiction, exception or oddity and triggering a re-evaluation that might lead to an "aha" in which things click together in a new and beautiful way.

Whenever an "aha" connects two dots a cultural chain is simplified. And with this, "our description of the world and ourselves within it" becomes simpler (shorter). Altered cultural chains will invoke different sketchy images and we will start to see differently and notice phenomena we did not notice before. And, chances are, that with them new contradictions, exceptions or oddities will seek a resolution. And maybe, one day, we will be able to look at the drawing and see both transparent pyramids at once.