corbden: (Default)
Our brains evolved to comprehend stories. Stories are the natural result of linear time, i.e. this causes that which causes that and so on. A species which evolves to understand this fundamental nature of time will have an extreme advantage over competitors. It gives us the ability to learn from past mistakes and predict future outcomes. Our advanced ability to consciously understand and communicate narrative is ultimately what sets us apart from other animals.

Our ability to understand and create story is so important that our biology forces each of us to practice every single night... when we dream.

Symbols are a basic aspect to stories and the words we tell them with. The word is not the thing. A word is merely a symbol we use to refer to the thing. But words are not the only symbols, and our subconscious thrives on pre-verbal symbolic thinking (though it can understand words, too). And an assembly of these symbols in some kind of cause/effect sequence is what we call a "narrative." Narratives are often told with words, but can take visual and other forms as well. For instance, a game is a narrative. Who will win? How will they win?

As a writer, I study how narratives work. Every movie and TV show I watch, every book I read, a part of my brain is studying the author's narrative style, character development, metaphor and symbolism, theme, foreshadowing, plot and pacing, and all the other tools of the trade.

One "no-no" in the writing world is the dream sequence. Or at least, dream sequences need to be handled with care. A reader/viewer doesn't want to feel they've wasted their time. We don't like our football yanked away. A depiction of something shocking and consequential (like the death of a character), and then ending with, "It was all a dream!" feels cheap and disappointing. It undermines trust in the rest of the narrative. It damages the suspension of disbelief. A writer needs to handle a dream sequence very carefully to avoid a disappointed audience.

But a dream sequence can be beneficial if it conveys new information or has a material effect on the rest of the story. This can either be the character learning something about their waking world because of the dream, or it inspires action, or the dream conveys symbolic information to the viewer that helps us understand the character or story theme.

Bad dream: The protagonist is riding her bike and gets hit by a bus oh no! wait, she wakes up and "it was all a dream."

Good dream: The protagonist is riding her bike and notices a sign she passes every day. But now the sign has a picture of her best friend. A bus crashes through the sign and she awakens with the sense that her friend is in trouble. She calls her friend.

Good dream: The protagonist is riding her bike and a bus nearly hits her. She notices the face of the driver is her co-worker holding a knife. Later in the story's real-world, her co-worker is revealed to be the antagonist who is secretly trying to "kill her ambitions" and "cut off her avenues" to success.

Good Dream: The protagonist is riding her bicycle and is hit by a bus. As she is dying, she sees that the driver is herself. Upon waking, she doesn't understand the dream, but the viewer, putting together other parts of the story, realizes that the character is unknowingly undermining herself.

Stories are like dreams in that they convey information to us about our waking world. The symbols of our collective dreams mirror the symbols of our collective stories. Likewise as a writer, my individual symbols mirror the symbols that appear in my stories. By learning about narrative symbology, we can learn about our own collective and individual subconscious language. This helps us get more in touch with our inner lives and the inner life of our larger culture. Stories and dreams intertwine to give us a richer, more connected, more pro-social and psychologically healthy world. When we can understand symbols and how they reinforce theme in a story, we can better come to appreciate what an author does when they weave a compelling narrative. I have a lot of "I see what you did there" moments now while consuming narratives created by others.

For more information on understanding the symbols in your own dreams, I recommend the book "Radical Dreaming" by John Goldhammer.

For understanding use of theme in narrative, in a how-to sense, I recommend "Story" by Robert McKee.

For understanding myth in narrative, there are the old standbys by Joseph Campbell, especially "The Hero with a Thousand Faces," or just watch his interviews with Bill Moyer, "The Power of Myth": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE8ciMkayVM

Campbell's work was inspired by Carl Jung, and his book "Man and His Symbols" is an excellent primer on the topic.
corbden: (Default)
I'm planning to do some writing here, and wondering if anyone has had issues with DW losing posts in mid-creation. I want to fuck around, but I'd rather not find out.
corbden: (Default)
See subject. I need more active journals to follow. I'd like at least a handful of posts in my feed every day. Recommendations? Lost friends to connect with? Preference is for deep thoughts on various topics, but diary "what I did today" stuff would be cool too.
corbden: (Default)
I had a realization last night about what I call the Teleporter Problem, and what Wikipedia calls the Teletransportation Paradox. This video explains and will provoke thought. The Wikipedia article is less entertaining and doesn't convey as well the energy behind the concept.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfHbsMa_wao

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teletransportation_paradox

The point of the thought experiment is to suss out the question, "What is self?" Alan Watts frequently explores this question in a lower-tech way, as do the Hindus and Buddhists.

I first saw this video before going through several levels of Ego Death. The thought was terrifying. Of course if my present self gets deconstructed, I will die, even if an exact copy is instantly created which shares my memories and even if that copy "feels" a continuance of consciousness. I've gotten over many of my attachments to what I thought "self" was, so this is less terrifying.

And now the reveal: I concluded last night that we all go through the teletransportation paradox every single moment.

Think on this: The You that you were at age 10. Can you experience consciousness through that version of you RIGHT NOW? Or can you look out the eyes of the you of yesterday? What about five minutes ago? What about going back to the moment when you started reading this sentence?

The only thing that creates the illusion that you are the same person in each of these instances, is your memories. But you can't look out those eyes, hear through those ears, and think those thoughts again. Your conscious self from all of those moments *is already dead*.

Is. Already. Dead. Stopped breathing. Stopped perceiving and thinking.

It's just as if you went into the left-side teleporter, it blasted you into smithereens, and an exact copy appeared on the other side with the sensation of continual consciousness.

Just the same.

The you that existed a moment ago is gone. Destroyed. No longer exists. Can never return to.

The ego creates the illusion of continuity. The ego underlies your drive to continue existing. The ego is who freaks out at thought-experiments like this one.

This is just one piece in a larger puzzle I've been fiddling with for many years, but it's an important piece. I still don't know how it fits in to the larger picture, but I'm working on that. For instance, what does this imply about the zoomed-out question, "What is the self, then?" What does this imply about the potentiality of "eternal life"? What does it say about the nature of consciousness?

I don't know. But I have concluded that we're all undergoing the teleporter paradox moment by moment. There is no need to fear. Step inside...
corbden: (Default)
Confused about how to lock a post just to my circles. I read this and I'm not clear. https://www.dreamwidth.org/manage/circle/

The word "Access List" is ambiguous. I have the choices for my post:

Everyone (public)
Access List
Private (just you)
Custom Filter
>Trusted Readers

I just made Trusted Readers, an Access List where I had to manually add the people who follow me. What happens when I just choose "Access List"? It was there before I manually made an access list. What's the easiest way to restrict a post just to DW friends, without having to remember to add people to a list when we subscribe to each other?
corbden: (Default)
My dad and I got into a fight about Elon Musk and Twitter last night. My dad has this thing where he thinks he knows more than I do on topics he as zero experience with, and it's incredibly invalidating, so things got really heated. Because he spent about a week on Twitter maybe back in 2010 and I've spent nearly every day on there since 2007. And he was defending Musk using conspiracy theories that didn't pass my smell test. Like, at all. But he defended them passionately, even though he didn't have nearly the stake in the question as I do, and had a fraction of the knowledge I have. He also said he KNEW his beliefs were correct, whereas I was merely pushing what I thought were high probabilities.

So afterward, I began ruminating, as I do (it's terribly unhealthy), and tried to get at what underlying belief my dad was *really* defending. Capitalism is good? Billionaires are perfect? Fox News is right?

No, it's deeper and far less conscious than this. I know what belief he's defending because I once had it: The Chosen Messiah Will Always Save the Day

It's not surprising I had this belief, or that a lot of Americans have it, especially if we've got a Christian background, but it permeates our secular media, too. Luke Skywalker can take down the Death Star by himself. Neo will destroy the Matrix with his sheer talent. Harry Potter will take out Voldemort with his superior wits and power. Sure, their friends helped, but only because they had a single leader strong enough to overcome the overpowering darkness.

I was challenging his unexamined belief in the Savior Myth. Which might cause him to question his literal Savior. All very incredibly subconscious cognitive dissonance resolution ala Leon Festinger stuff. (This is all very much along the lines that I write about when I explore mind control and why people believe things. I know I'm wildly speculating here, but remember, this topic is my wheelhouse.)

So first my dad has to invent overpowering darkness that Elon was rescuing Twitter from, like every Savior narrative needs. But none of that story added up to me. (Apparently the 3700 laid off employees deserved it because a handful of them were selling verifications for $15k on the side? It wasn't making sense and he didn't have a lot of details for his story which was one reason it didn't pass the sniff test. I need details!!) Any of my challenges to Elon's character seemed to raise his ire. Every single bad decision I listed off, my dad defended. Even while I had to explain basic, rudimentary ways that Twitter (and the rest of the internet) function. He was completely unwilling to question a single cog in his cognitive structure.

When we look at these surface-beliefs that we think a group of people have, that's usually not the real belief. They don't know it themselves. And I know this primarily from examining my own beliefs, and uncovering the underlying value set that I'm extending like a ladder to get the resulting belief. What support stone am I pulling out when I go up against someone in disagreement? That's the real reason people get emotional. I was emotional because Twitter has been my online homebase for 15 years. I expressed that. But my dad didn't know why he was emotional. Maybe I don't either, but I'm guessing it's this. If Elon isn't the Savior dad thinks he is, then maybe there are a lot of other Saviors he's got to question as well.

Edit to add: I've examined my internalized Savior myth. That was one of the biggest shifts in my politics, because it's that kind of underlying belief about how the world functions that results in grand conclusions. I learned through experience and seeing evidence that nearly every great accomplishment was done with a team or large collective. The biggest things ever accomplished (especially in free societies) were done by huge teams of people all doing their part. Saving Twitter (if it needed "saving"?) needed to be a team effort of thousands of Twitter employees and millions of Twitter users. It seems ridiculous to me now that one single person, even as a leader of people, could fix the kinds of complex issues Twitter had.
corbden: (Default)
Twitter truly was a hive mind. We had a decade and a half of conscious thought on a mass scale. I don't know if anyone saw those various maps people did, especially in the early days, these huge academic projects to study how everyone was connected, and what the echo chambers looked like, and it looked like a neural network, or a lab-grown culture in a Petri dish.

Map of Twitter hashtags that looks like a neural net

Source: https://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/view/620 I highly recommend opening the full-sized image and zooming in. This is way bigger than it looks from the top level ... just like a brain.

And that's what it felt like being on Twitter. Each echo chamber represented a specified "brain function." Did some of those brain functions fight each other? Yes. Savagely. But tell me you've never been at war with yourself. Or that one part of your brain has never tried to kill another part of your brain.

We had these massive conversations, over years, and came to conclusions. That's one reason we got so mad at people who raised issues long ago settled, crossed lines that were so long ago drawn. They weren't there when we had that discussion, and no one was in any mood to have it again because it was brutal the first and second and third times we had it.

We decided things like, do Black lives matter? Are they/them pronouns singular? What is the purpose of content warnings, what should they be called, and how mad should we get when they're not used? What should we do about trolls? What was wrong with Twitter and how should it be fixed? How should we organize? Should we bother voting? How do we decide who is most expert at a topic and who should we defer to or not defer to? What is considered ablism and what isn't? Is autism a disorder, disease, or difference? How do you know if you're really trans? Is it ok to say "bisexual" or is that nonbinary-exclusionary? How much racism is there, really? What are the best forms of activism? How do we measure moral behavior in the most consistent way? What is our relation to power? Does that end justify this means?

Sometimes we were wrong. Sometimes we were right. Sometimes I didn't agree with a mass-decision but usually I did., because reasons were so often well-expressed, properly challenged, and backed with evidence. I got to participate in all of these conversations and more, so so many. (Please, in the comments, let us know some more of these kinds of questions that got answered long ago and became part of the culture on Twitter.) Sometimes I was just reading the various positions on a topic until I made up my own mind, and sometimes I jumped in an argued my points, got my vote in for how it turned out.

I was a single neuron in a massive network of functioning thought by an organism that was too big for any of us to fully recognize. I even wonder sometimes if there were enough of us, and did the right mechanisms exist, for it to have been even, dare I say it, self-aware? Was the sum greater than the parts?

It's funny as I come back to "LJ," think about who I was when I transitioned from online journalling and to Twitter microblogging. "Here" on LJ, on my old account, I was a libertarian and an Ayn Rand Objectivist. Yup. That was me. Against all forms of collectivism and then I went and joined one of the larges collective minds that has ever existed. Arguably the largest of its type. (It's smaller than a government or military, religion or corporation, but the rapidity with which us as neurons could connect and the level of contribution we each individually got to make made it different than those kinds of organisms.) I got to be part of a hive mind and it turned out, it wasn't as scary as my Ego thought it would be. It was actually pretty neat.
corbden: (Default)
I'll miss Twitter, if it goes away which I think it will. 210k Tweets (including RTs, I think is how it works). 2833 followers. Following 1145. 15 years of short-form navel-gazing. The later part of which I transitioned to a promotional platform for my writing.

It was good in a lot of ways, but also maybe not so good. I'm hoping a switch back will rewire my brain. My connections on LJ were deeper, and I was able to explore ideas more deeply as well. Now that I'm a Real Writerâ„¢, journalling might be a better way to explore some of my deeper ideas without needing to craft a witty 260 character with the goal of getting widespread attention. Modern social media feels more about the numbers. How many retweets, how many likes. And even though I've been able to form a more healthy relationship to that drive for eyeballs, maybe dropping that drive altogether will be for the best.

That said, I was able to promote my books on Twitter, and this doesn't feel like such a space for that. What I would like, however, is a more close-knit, thoughtful community of exploring ideas with the time they deserve. That is the intention I'm setting out there. I don't know if it's still possible to have the kind of community I had on LJ, but I do desire something like that. So I'm going to give it a shot.
corbden: (Default)
Twitter has always been a dumpster fire, but now the dumpster itself is burning. So I'm going back to long-form navel-gazing. Some topics I hope to talk about:

Psychology, religious trauma, philosophy, religion, politics (leaning philosophical rather than wonky).

I may also do personal journalling here, but I want my "important thoughts" to be siloed from my "whining about emotions." I'm hoping I'll figure it out as this takes shape.

Profile

corbden: (Default)
Luna Corbden

November 2022

S M T W T F S
  12345
67891011 12
1314 15 16 171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 7th, 2025 04:08 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios