The challenging thing about people making movies (according to my cognition theory) is to balance the decisions they make, on the movie theme and the way it is presented, between two not-clearly-defined borders:
- on the one hand you want the movie to present patterns that the people can relate, to raise empathy (ταύτιση in greek) and find a way to channel your messages to their emotions and Driving Forces... So you need something close to the patterns that they are already used to!
- on the other hand you want the movie to present something new, non-detrimental, non-usual, non in-context, in order to capture the attention of their Selector (and only through this you can make your signals travel deep inside their minds)... So you need something not really close to the patterns that they are already used to!
Thus, you need something that they know and at the same time something that they don't know! You are presented with an upper and lower boundary of familiarity that is different for every individual, so there is no universal solution to this problem and that is why there are no movies that are equally liked by all people in the world!
The only thing you can do is aggregate your (speculative) data, make an estimation of the lower and upper boundary of your target group and work with that goal in mind. Still, you won't please all people equally, but you'll do the best you can (from a statistical point of view).
Tuesday 9 November 2010
Saturday 6 November 2010
A long overdue status update
I think it's time to say a few things about what's been going on in my head (not much actually :)) the past 5 months.
First of all, I've hit a brick wall! I realized that the brain does not compare the expected input with the actual input for action ONLY, but for EVERYTHING! I.e. in whatever state we're currently in, there are some things that are normal to expect and we consider "in-context" and anything is more or less unexpected and considered "out-of-context". It doesn't have to do only with action! This comparison of expected-actual inputs is constant.
A typical example that is very easy to prove at home, on the road, anywhere, but only for men (ladies excuse me) is if you move your... "equipment" on the other side of the crotch than your "usual" side. Whatever you do for the next minutes you will notice it! It will constantly send you signals that are unexpected/out-of-context and your Selector will can't help but notice it and create a driving pocket out of it (and drag your thought process towards it, if you don't have anything better to do, i.e. a bigger driving pocket).
And the sideeffect of this observation of mine is that: not only the in/out-of context comparison happens all the time and not only during action (as my theory predicted up until now), it is appears to move from out-of-context to in-context without action and feedback (although I'm not sure about that, because I have not been able to explain its mechanics up until now and it feels wrong). Going back to my previous example, after a while you will stop noticing it and after a lot you will consider it normal. It will have become in-context to you without actually acting upon it to make it in-context!
Troubling isn't it?
As you can imagine, this disruptive observation was enough to disorient my reasoning for months... since I had to erase and rewind; restructure my theory to incorporate and explain these processes.
In order to overcome these difficulties, I have amended a few things:
With this mechanism, the Selector does not need to deal with the mundane task of comparing DPs and sending signal. This is done automatically by a "dumb" Battery. The Selector's operation directly affect the reinforcing process of the Battery by energizing DPs (which will make the Battery divert more of its capacity towards this DP) and this is why I originally thought that the Selector was part of this operation as well.
This mechanism also has the added advantage that it explains INACTION!! (a very troubling question that I had for years). Inaction is simply conflicting strong DPs that each steal a large part of the Battery's capacity not leaving enough signal for any DP to get to the other side (the action endpoints) and convert this DP into action.
So if I tell you to steal that candy, you will briefly "taste" the candy in your head and this will create a DP out of it. But on the same time it will also bring to your head the memories of getting scolded by your mother for steal stuff and this will create another DP (probably stronger) that will steal a lot of the Battery capacity and not leave enough signal for the original DP to manage to activate the action endpoints and act upon your will to take the candy and eat it.
Of course, the situation also depends on how paved the road from the DP to the action endpoints is. So, let's take depression as an example. You have a large DP in your head about something that bothers you a lot, e.g. the death of a loved one. It pains you to think about it. It is out-of-context (you're not used to it) so you focus on it. The brain tries to make everything from out-of-context to in-context. The problem is that as much signal as the Battery sends (which will probably loop and create thoughts), you can't find a way to make your mind at ease, to attach it to something in-context and stop dealing with it. If it was something like "Oh, why is the mop on the floor? Ah, I just remembered that my wife told me she left in a big hurry", you can easily attach it to something in-context. You saw the mop on the floor, it was out-of-context. The DP made you deal with it, mostly by thinking upon it. Through this added signals sent by the Battery, you managed to recollect your wife telling you about leaving in a hurry, and you put two and two together. This is now in-context because it might have happened again or you might have done the same in the past etc...
But in the death of a loved one, as much as your brains tries to attach all those unknown/out-of-context patterns to something familiar, it can't. Thus, this DP dominates your brain and steals most or all of your Battery capacity, rendering you incapable of doing anything! You can of course perform your bodily functions, because you have done them all your life, the paths are very well paved and even the slightest signal from the Battery can push you to perform them. But you can't do anything else, until this DP decreases in strength.
So there you have it: an explanation for depression, inaction and the method for making a decision (if you've followed my reasoning up until now, you'll have understood that there is actually no true decision; if the signal manages to reach the action endpoints, we act upon it, until this DP ceases or some other DP steals us the battery capacity necessary to perform the action. There is no decision anywhere on the action process!).
I'll continue this post in a few hours, because I have to go.
First of all, I've hit a brick wall! I realized that the brain does not compare the expected input with the actual input for action ONLY, but for EVERYTHING! I.e. in whatever state we're currently in, there are some things that are normal to expect and we consider "in-context" and anything is more or less unexpected and considered "out-of-context". It doesn't have to do only with action! This comparison of expected-actual inputs is constant.
A typical example that is very easy to prove at home, on the road, anywhere, but only for men (ladies excuse me) is if you move your... "equipment" on the other side of the crotch than your "usual" side. Whatever you do for the next minutes you will notice it! It will constantly send you signals that are unexpected/out-of-context and your Selector will can't help but notice it and create a driving pocket out of it (and drag your thought process towards it, if you don't have anything better to do, i.e. a bigger driving pocket).
And the sideeffect of this observation of mine is that: not only the in/out-of context comparison happens all the time and not only during action (as my theory predicted up until now), it is appears to move from out-of-context to in-context without action and feedback (although I'm not sure about that, because I have not been able to explain its mechanics up until now and it feels wrong). Going back to my previous example, after a while you will stop noticing it and after a lot you will consider it normal. It will have become in-context to you without actually acting upon it to make it in-context!
Troubling isn't it?
As you can imagine, this disruptive observation was enough to disorient my reasoning for months... since I had to erase and rewind; restructure my theory to incorporate and explain these processes.
In order to overcome these difficulties, I have amended a few things:
- The Selector has lost a lot of its former "glory". The operation of reinforcing signals from the DPs to get the signal to "the other side" is now done automatically by the "Battery".
With this mechanism, the Selector does not need to deal with the mundane task of comparing DPs and sending signal. This is done automatically by a "dumb" Battery. The Selector's operation directly affect the reinforcing process of the Battery by energizing DPs (which will make the Battery divert more of its capacity towards this DP) and this is why I originally thought that the Selector was part of this operation as well.
This mechanism also has the added advantage that it explains INACTION!! (a very troubling question that I had for years). Inaction is simply conflicting strong DPs that each steal a large part of the Battery's capacity not leaving enough signal for any DP to get to the other side (the action endpoints) and convert this DP into action.
So if I tell you to steal that candy, you will briefly "taste" the candy in your head and this will create a DP out of it. But on the same time it will also bring to your head the memories of getting scolded by your mother for steal stuff and this will create another DP (probably stronger) that will steal a lot of the Battery capacity and not leave enough signal for the original DP to manage to activate the action endpoints and act upon your will to take the candy and eat it.
Of course, the situation also depends on how paved the road from the DP to the action endpoints is. So, let's take depression as an example. You have a large DP in your head about something that bothers you a lot, e.g. the death of a loved one. It pains you to think about it. It is out-of-context (you're not used to it) so you focus on it. The brain tries to make everything from out-of-context to in-context. The problem is that as much signal as the Battery sends (which will probably loop and create thoughts), you can't find a way to make your mind at ease, to attach it to something in-context and stop dealing with it. If it was something like "Oh, why is the mop on the floor? Ah, I just remembered that my wife told me she left in a big hurry", you can easily attach it to something in-context. You saw the mop on the floor, it was out-of-context. The DP made you deal with it, mostly by thinking upon it. Through this added signals sent by the Battery, you managed to recollect your wife telling you about leaving in a hurry, and you put two and two together. This is now in-context because it might have happened again or you might have done the same in the past etc...
But in the death of a loved one, as much as your brains tries to attach all those unknown/out-of-context patterns to something familiar, it can't. Thus, this DP dominates your brain and steals most or all of your Battery capacity, rendering you incapable of doing anything! You can of course perform your bodily functions, because you have done them all your life, the paths are very well paved and even the slightest signal from the Battery can push you to perform them. But you can't do anything else, until this DP decreases in strength.
So there you have it: an explanation for depression, inaction and the method for making a decision (if you've followed my reasoning up until now, you'll have understood that there is actually no true decision; if the signal manages to reach the action endpoints, we act upon it, until this DP ceases or some other DP steals us the battery capacity necessary to perform the action. There is no decision anywhere on the action process!).
I'll continue this post in a few hours, because I have to go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)