External Will and Determinism
External will is the material world that confines us. The relationship between external and internal will is such that where there is a degree of determinism, it is not a linear entity.
Just as nanoparticles do not exist in a "set" progression based on human perception, human will also defies a linear understanding. The quantum nature of human existence can naively be reduced down to the capacity for the individual to exert internal will, which I believe changes the whole (external will).
An alternative viewpoint suggests that there is no free will and all beliefs are deterministic. The experience of happiness and sadness would not be a matter of choice. This perspective would reduce everything down to external will. To some extent, this may be the case, as one could argue that true "free will" does not exist.
There must be some correlation between will, intuition, and lucidity. Higher levels of "lucidity" lead to higher levels of "intuition", which in turn lead to higher levels of "will". This enables individuals to have a greater propensity to have an impact on the external whole, deterministic or not.
Lucidity -> Intuition -> Will -> Impact
Lucidity: the ability to "control" or have some form of agency over thoughts. The ability to ascribe "purpose" to thoughts.
Intuition: the thoughts that arise when in a lucid state.
Will: the ability to act on intuition.
The highest earthly "possession" is not material; it is the ability to be lucid. Clear-headed understanding of one's thoughts enables an individual to have access to more pieces of the "external whole" with higher fidelity. It allows them to see things "as they are" rather than what they appear to be.
The Value of Individuals and Art
No mind is more valuable than the next. The notion that an individual is owed some sort of stipend for their existence is flawed. "Worth" is earned in a world where functional tasks need to be carried out. Putting a price on the thoughts of an individual is flawed. Monetary value on art is flawed.
The individual does not need to be defined solely by their functional role. At the same time, the purpose of a functional role is more than just individual functionality; it is about functioning as a whole. This raises an implicit question of life itself: How do you contribute value? Can you contribute value just by being yourself? To what degree does that impact the self? Is it cyclic? Is it self-fueling, in the way that the world forms art, and art forms the world?
Impressions of a moment, a perspective within life – has the human become the art form? Are you for sale?
Interloping Through Human Consciousness
I am interloping through the fractals of human consciousness. The individual doesn't determine what it is to the world; the world does. In that way, we can be something without knowing we are it. So the question "what am I?" has no real answer, as it would also ask "to what?" And "to what?" would need there to be a "what". And as the self cannot describe itself, the whole cannot either.
Does the whole define the whole? Or does the observer of the whole define the whole? Can anyone observe the whole? Or is it all just an impression of the whole from the self? It's all just flawed "logic". Logic is flawed by logic.
There is no ideal time period; you just have to learn to live in the one you are in. It's all give and take. Value systems are antiquated by a changing world. Nothing stays the same. Evolution of thought is continuous and dependent on the needs of the species on a wide scale at any given moment in time.
Adaptation, Media, and Art
Perspective is not solely determined by the individual. Do not stray from a value system to pursue ephemeral pleasure.
Does an infinitely long line rejoin with itself?
Is adaptation always cognizant? Generational adaptive cognizance?
Deconstruct the model of the mind and rebuild it with the ethos of the whole.
The Dangers of AI and the Duality of Consciousness
The most dangerous part of AI would be the human part.
Duality of consciousness as a circumstance of withstanding natural phenomena.
The Complexity of Media and Art
The more you consume a certain form of media, the more normalized it becomes to you. Almost like a threshold that you need to overcome in order to experience it again.
So the complexity of the art form would then evolve with the complexity of the species, including the technological innovations of the species. This leads to forms of media that enable more sensory input to be given to the consumer.
I think there may be a balance, or at least a theoretical balance at which it becomes "uncanny".
Does art have any definition other than a representation of the world? Does art become full circle when it becomes so immersive that it becomes the world?
Does art necessitate a deviation from standard sensory perception? If so, then art will always be outside of what is "real".
The Illusion of Freedom
Freedom is an illusion. To seek it is futile. Agency within the limits of the natural world is determined by how autonomous a being can be. To be autonomous creates layers of representation from the natural world. In a way, "freedom" or the pursuit of it is not an endeavor rooted in natural coexistence, but rather in attempts to control the bounds in which we live.
In a way, it is an attempt to impart external will onto the world. The pursuit of freedom, in my view, is futile, as it almost necessitates negotiation with the natural world. Such negotiation only serves as a detriment to a species in the long term. True freedom, perhaps, is the ability to coexist within an environment, and true freedom of consciousness may be the freedom from bounds in our relationship with the natural world. It is not a pursuit of consciousness.
Melancholy, Language, and Value
Decay can bring destructive melancholy – avoidance in the form of hedonism or regression. Both sects lack, rather they promote non-care. In the case of hard times, language can be used for uplifting or the inverse. Humor is complex and indicative of the individual. Rhetorical tools reveal an individual's value system. The impact of the world may appear "clean", while the internal monologue may be "dirty". The divide, I suppose, is more interpersonal than empirical. In the case of large-scale society, functionality is more dependent on an individual's external impact. This, I believe, leads to more cases of "dirty" or self-defeating thought (which can be seen in self-defeating groupthink), playing back into itself as it serves as an outlier for those who love to "serve" the external rather than be a part of it in a mutual way.
In essence, the overall "moral" of an institution is of higher importance the smaller the organization or the degree to which limited structure is present in the niche the organization occupies. This relates back to the states occupied by "dirty/clouded" thought. The more hopeless the mind is for change, or the more dissonance the mind experiences in terms of perceived value, the more it contributes to paths that feed into a hopeless demeanor, as that is the precipice for entry within the decay state.
Objects, Reality, and Determinism
Do objects have one time? I suppose time is not an eternal attribute of an object but rather a prescribed one.
Real is not a question with an answer because "real" is just a concept. Similarly, an answer to the question "what am I?" has answers that are equally as insipid. To attribute value to oneself is a characteristic of the self.
There is a degree of determinism that exists within the neural network we use to navigate both with consciousness and the subconscious. I believe there are groupings of "phrases or signals" that operate similarly to a state machine, determining how our brain makes decisions. The more pathways to a state, the more "weight" it carries. Linguistics and consciousness are intertwined, and I would not be surprised to find out down the line that the quantum property of particles and superposition has something to do with "free will" or deviation from determinism.
So, language is a set of mental frameworks that largely dictate the methods by which we are able to think about the world. A lexicon enables us to form our conscious mind. There are languages that are more expressive, more "romantic". This changes the way individuals experience the world, as thoughts, when attempting to discern and express them, take the shape of "language". Language is simultaneously what we use to think, communicate, and thereby exist. Therefore, if an individual's lexicon is stagnant, the individual will be stagnated. Create languages, experience without words. What exists is a framework to operate within. Create your own syntax to free yourself from the bounds of language. Create new meaning, new forms of existing. Life and language as an art form.
Objectivity, Cause and Effect, and the Future
Objectivity relies on the population of individuals to reduce bias, implicitly diminishing outliers. Objectivity centralizes in this way, but an issue arises: Is centralizing as an objective archetype necessary for the most advantageous social good?
It may have just been a tool to get us where we are today in the evolution of the species, but as the quantum nature of the world unravels before us, the cause and effect relationships we take for granted may disintegrate.
The future is not as binary, not as black and white. Technology reflects this. We are evolving. Science and objectivity are the modern versions of what it meant to be "virtuous" in the era of Aristotle.
Balancing Biological Imperatives and Spiritual Enlightenment
It's not only about balancing biological imperatives with spiritual enlightenment, but also knowing what things to be stubborn about. Just because you know the individual mind is more fortuitous than the crowd doesn't mean that the answer is to exist in habitual contention with the world.
Pick the arenas in which to contend, and do it internally. Your interactions with the world will then be a reflection of your character. Impart external will in this way.
A lot of it really is about knowing what things to be or to "hold on to". It's not necessarily about accepting, but rather accepting and navigating. Free will is scalable. All biological agents are made to operate in whatever conditions they are given. This is what makes them agents. The presence of a strata can be considered determined. Agency is the navigation of that strata. All things spiritual have mechanisms under which they operate. "Material" instances of spiritual entities don't make them any less spiritual. To think so will always lead to nihilism.