Your language and use of analogy is more digestible than it's ever been in this one. Thank you very much for that. Have a happy and blessed soon to be Easter 🕊
im trying to understand what has been written here. i feel like it’s unnecessarily convoluted:
premise 1: there are two ways how to think about time - linear
1200 AD → 1500 AD → 1800 AD → now
or layered
outer ring (secular modernity)
inside that, (romanticism)
inside that, (classical)
… and so on
layered time exists simultaneous all the time. we live in the context of previous events. i believe it’s more mystical in your writing than it is in reality.
premise 2: context creates reality
styrofoam = rock
digital entities in tron = human
world in the context gives more answers and is easier to navigate - makes world more coherent and full by abstracting things away
premise 3: future is embedded in the present - everything is determined
premise 4: we experience life more in immediate images rather than linearity. linearity is derived from an image
I think you completely missed the point: the context doesn't just consist of past events; the quality of the "context" simultaneously determines both future and past events.
But it's also important to state that the context is not equal with this quality-- this is why I brought up the formula of "the medium is the message," where the context (medium) becomes identified with a specific form (message) which also exists in that same context. This makes it so, all forms exist within a medium, but going even further, all forms ultimately lead up to a point where the form and the medium become simultaneous; until the intersection of medium and message is revealed.
At that point, an inversion happens, and what was a revelatory point becomes an access point, a point of initiation which then gives access to all possible forms within a medium.
One finds this occurring with artists (of all mediums) whose work is recorded over long periods of time. Perhaps because of some of the analogies in this specific post, I'm reminded of Neil Simon (a playwright) and John Malkovich (an actor with a long career) .
Your language and use of analogy is more digestible than it's ever been in this one. Thank you very much for that. Have a happy and blessed soon to be Easter 🕊
Blessed Bright Saturday!
Where should I start with cybermysticism?
im trying to understand what has been written here. i feel like it’s unnecessarily convoluted:
premise 1: there are two ways how to think about time - linear
1200 AD → 1500 AD → 1800 AD → now
or layered
outer ring (secular modernity)
inside that, (romanticism)
inside that, (classical)
… and so on
layered time exists simultaneous all the time. we live in the context of previous events. i believe it’s more mystical in your writing than it is in reality.
premise 2: context creates reality
styrofoam = rock
digital entities in tron = human
world in the context gives more answers and is easier to navigate - makes world more coherent and full by abstracting things away
premise 3: future is embedded in the present - everything is determined
premise 4: we experience life more in immediate images rather than linearity. linearity is derived from an image
i’m super curious if i missed something
I think you completely missed the point: the context doesn't just consist of past events; the quality of the "context" simultaneously determines both future and past events.
But it's also important to state that the context is not equal with this quality-- this is why I brought up the formula of "the medium is the message," where the context (medium) becomes identified with a specific form (message) which also exists in that same context. This makes it so, all forms exist within a medium, but going even further, all forms ultimately lead up to a point where the form and the medium become simultaneous; until the intersection of medium and message is revealed.
At that point, an inversion happens, and what was a revelatory point becomes an access point, a point of initiation which then gives access to all possible forms within a medium.
One finds this occurring with artists (of all mediums) whose work is recorded over long periods of time. Perhaps because of some of the analogies in this specific post, I'm reminded of Neil Simon (a playwright) and John Malkovich (an actor with a long career) .
Getting closer to understanding