It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The double inverse

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Here is an interesting idea:

User 0) I like mice.

Ok, take that phrase, into a form, for example.

We can use a computer algorithm to change the words depending on the user.

For example:

User 1) I like mice
User 2) I hate mice

This would be what appears on each users screen. Then, assume the following replies:

User 1) What? You like mice!
User 2) Why do you hate mice?

When user 0 reads his messages, he sees:

User 1) What, you like mice!
User 2) Why do you like mice?

Now, this seems strange, how can we say one thing, have it translated as the opposite, however, when relayed, made to appear as it sounded as it was initially meant to be?

The idea is, is that it causes a kind of confusion in peoples minds.

Now, take this principle to LIFE - what if everything we said had the same effect, we could be living in worlds where what other people see us as is the polar opposite of what we think ourselves to be.

That, I call "free will" - changing how reality is fed-back to us, so our responses becomes asynchronous.




posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SystemResistor
 


In addition to this, we can call the above the "self-contained" state, if the "gates were to be opened" then, if we had a program called the "ego" that stored a persons "personality" and "self image" - what if the "truth" were to suddenly rush into thier subconsciousness.... So all the times that thought that people liked them would be revealed as the opposite, and this would become the same for all individuals - that is, a complete turn-around of the ego-program. Only those that resist the false-self would survive.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Do I understand correctly that in your first post, User 2's message is reversed through an act of free will by User 0? Or is User 2's message changed by a force outside of User 0 and User 2?



Originally posted by SystemResistor
reply to post by SystemResistor
 


In addition to this, we can call the above the "self-contained" state, if the "gates were to be opened" then, if we had a program called the "ego" that stored a persons "personality" and "self image" - what if the "truth" were to suddenly rush into thier subconsciousness.... So all the times that thought that people liked them would be revealed as the opposite, and this would become the same for all individuals - that is, a complete turn-around of the ego-program. Only those that resist the false-self would survive.


Is the "ego" always the inverse of the "truth?" Or is the "personality" and "self-image" always the inverse of "truth" And is the false-self equivalent to the "truth?"



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
is this for a bot progame to make bots seemly more human like? not being clear of the theroy involved as to why ego and freewill are being represented in this fashion?



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
Do I understand correctly that in your first post, User 2's message is reversed through an act of free will by User 0? Or is User 2's message changed by a force outside of User 0 and User 2?



Originally posted by SystemResistor
reply to post by SystemResistor
 


In addition to this, we can call the above the "self-contained" state, if the "gates were to be opened" then, if we had a program called the "ego" that stored a persons "personality" and "self image" - what if the "truth" were to suddenly rush into thier subconsciousness.... So all the times that thought that people liked them would be revealed as the opposite, and this would become the same for all individuals - that is, a complete turn-around of the ego-program. Only those that resist the false-self would survive.


Is the "ego" always the inverse of the "truth?" Or is the "personality" and "self-image" always the inverse of "truth" And is the false-self equivalent to the "truth?"


Basically, the "program" translates pairs of opposites and flips them, and then flips them a second time when they are fed back. Thus, the message that you send will be the opposite of what you intended, however, when people reply, thier replies are also the opposite of what they intended. If the response creates a double positive or a double negative, then the message is unchanged, however, when in opposition, the positive and negative are swapped around. In comparison to the ego, what we think of ourselves in terms of our ego is similar to the program, in that, the messages that we send are firstly switched around and when they are fed back to us, they are switched around a second time, in this way, we do not realise that the people around us have a different image of ourselves than the image of ourselves that we have in our own minds. It causes frustration as we never feel happy with our ego, and feel that we need to compete with our ego, because when the ego is perceived by others, it is always heard the opposite way around to that we perceive within ourselves.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by CIGGSofWAR
is this for a bot progame to make bots seemly more human like? not being clear of the theroy involved as to why ego and freewill are being represented in this fashion?


Basically, its an idea about a bot that changes the words of the users, for example, in a forum, or on a message board, what a user types and sees on thier computer, is different to what other users see on thier computers, however, when they respond, since thier messages are also changed, the initial user has no way of telling that thier message was as it was intended to be. In terms of ego and freewill, if we consider the ego as a program, it could be the case that the ego is a kind of protocol of human perception/human emotion that "flips" or "inverts" the messages. In terms of free-will, when we translate the ego of another person, basically, we are simply getting our ego fed back to us, and are not perceiving the true intentions of the individuals that we communicate with, thus it seems like the ego of other individuals are the same as our own, because we do not realise that we are talking to ourselves in a mirror, with the person on the other end seeing the opposite side of our words. The theory is, is that the disharmony, or the artificial asynchronicity, is what gives us the ability to make decisions without knowing the effect that our actions have on others, in turn, we have "free will" because we are free from being restricted by the thoughts of others.

There could also be an attempt to subvert the ego by intentionally stating a "lie", and then, upon hearing a "lie" translate the lie into its opposite in order to find the "truth", thus people will speak in a series of lies in order to communicate the "truth" - however the problem being that lies will generally transmit negative emotions among people, resulting in a system of "sarcasms". The other means would be to speak according to logical precepts, communicating a series of statements designed to deduce a literal meaning. However, the problem with this, is that these individuals will come into conflict with those who are using the double-negative system, and will not be able to understand how "lies tell the truth".
edit on 2-3-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by SystemResistor
 


In reflection are you proposing that the ego always conflicts with the super-ego, thus gives rise to confusion of messages sent and received. For example
when A. interacts with B.
then B. results in a EITHER/OR response to A.
A. depending on the original interaction can either mirror B. or reverse the response and create C.

?Is my understanding correct

Please provide us with further examples.

Star and Flag for this thread.
edit on 2-3-2011 by Tindalos2013 because: Added text.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Tindalos2013
 


I can also explain the principle in the opposite sense:

Basically, Imagine two individuals whom are facing each other, each have special mirrors that are both reflective and transparent through the opposite side. When the first person speaks, the second holds up a mirror and the first person sees his words reflected back to him, and the second person sees the first persons words as they were meant to be. However, as we know, mirrors reflect an image in reverse, so, when the first person communicates a positive message, he perceives a negative reaction. However, the individual holding the mirror, being behind the mirror, will receive the true message if the words also pass through the mirror. Thus, the initial individual will get a false idea that his statement was received negativley by the second individual, when in actual fact, it was received positivley as intended.

Since the phenomenon happens to both individuals, when both individuals communicate, there is an effective "blind spot". The asynchronous information received as a reflection is stored in the "ego" - thus, an individual that constantly communicates positive words will have an ego that is negative, and yet the true state of his nature is positive. An individual that constantly communicates negative words will have an ego that is positive, and yet the true state of his nature is negative. Thus, those with a "negative" balance in thier ego will experience confusion and distress, and must rely on thier faith that thier positive actions will be rewarded. Those with a "positive" balance will experience a strong ego and will be under the dellusion that they are rewarded for negative actions.

The ego, itself, is the idea that each individual is identified by the mirror that they hold, and paradoxically, the mirror that they hold reflects their individuality in an opposite light, promoting the idea that the people around them are paradoxically the same because they all have the same mirror. If we take another step, then all the mirrors could be connected to each other across many individuals, giving us the idea that everone else is the same person that we are, only that when we look at them we see an opposite version of ourselves, or different "slices" of ourselves. As you can see, it would cause a lot of conflict. In effect, the ego is a false self that prevents us from being able to express our true selves.

Lastly, if the ego stores the information, like a computer, within the mind of each individual, if the system were to "invert", then individuals with a negative balance will be reimbursed with positive energy from the negative individuals who have positive egos. The individuals with a positive balance will be deducted and will receive negative energy from the true consequences of their negative actions.

There could be an attempt to "reverse the polarity" of the mirror, thus a mirror that reflects an opposite, and then flips the message so that positive and negative line up - the only problem with this, is that there will be an additional conflict between users who have the old system, perhaps being made to "sell out" to the new system, or remain stuck in the old system. The weakness is, however, that when the system inverts itself, the old system will invert and the new system will not, creating a net effect that is still the same, with perhaps individuals with a positive balance and a positive mentality (positive ego individuals who have sold out) receiving negative energy (double crossed) and individuals with a negative balance and a negative mentality (negative ego individuals who have "crossed over") receiving positive energy from negative individuals, however, upon reaching the otherside will be "crossed out" as the positive energy will be translated into their negative side.

Thus, the only way around it is to be a positive individual with an ego deficit, that does not "sell out" and does not "cross over" (remains true), reaching the otherside and being reimbursed with all the positive energy accumulated from thier positive actions.

As a final final note, individuals could reverse-perceptualise thier interactions, that is, perceive positive as negative and negative as positive, and reflect positivity as negativity and negativity as positivity. They would also have to maintain a "balance of accounts" by altering their positive and negative responses - such individuals will remain in a stable state irregardless of changes to the system.
edit on 2-3-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SystemResistor
 


I am going to think carefully before I post another response. I know how frustrating it can be introducing fresh ideas and not being understood. Or misunderstood. I going re-read this whole thread a few times so my mind grasps its introduction with clarity.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Wow I just realised how dumb I am....good luck with your thing guys



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
I LIIIIIIKE IT!!!

The pieces seem to have fallen into place. This will be my first flag. I don't see how you could have explained it any other way. Cheers for you! Woo-hoo! This thread is precious. I sound like a schoolgirl, I know. But thank you for this.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join