THE CROWD IS THE UNTRUTH... In the Social Imagination!

 

The Crowd Is "Untruth" From Soren Kierkegaard's "That Individual": Two "Notes" Concerning My Work as an Author, published posthumously in 1859. "There is a view of life which conceives that where the crowd is, there also is the truth, and that in truth itself there is need of having the crowd on its side. There is another view of life which conceives that wherever there is a crowd there is untruth, so that (to consider for a moment the extreme case), even if every individual, each for himself in private, were to be in possession of the truth, yet in case they were all to get together in a crowd -- a crowd to which any sort of decisive significance is attributed, a voting, noisy, audible crowd -- untruth would at once be in evidence... "[A] crowd in its very concept is the untruth, by reason of the fact that it renders the individual completely impenitent and irresponsible, or at least weakens his sense of responsibility by reducing it to a fraction. Observe that there was not one single soldier that dared lay hands upon Caius Marius -- this was an instance of truth. But given merely three or four women with the consciousness or the impression that they were a crowd, and with hope of a sort in the possibility that no one could say definitely who was doing it or who began it -- then they had courage for it. What a falsehood! The falsehood first of all is the notion that the crowd does what in fact only the individual in the crowd does, though it be every individual. For 'crowd' is an abstraction and has no hands: but each individual has ordinarily two hands, and so when an individual lays his two hands upon Caius Marius they are the two hands of the individual, certainly not those of his neighbor, and still less those of the crowd which has no hands...For every individual who flees for refuge into the crowd, and so flees in cowardice from being an individual (who had not the courage to lay his hands upon Caius Marius, nor even to admit that he had it not), such a man contributes his share of cowardliness to the cowardliness which we know as the 'crowd.' Take the highest example, think of Christ -- and the whole human race, all the men that ever were born or are to be born. But let the situation be one that challenges the individual, requiring each one for himself to be alone with Him in a solitary place and as an individual to step up to Him and spit upon Him -- the man never was born and never will be born with courage or insolence enough to do such a thing... The crowd is untruth. Therefore was Christ crucified, because, although He addressed himself to all, He would have no dealings with the crowd, because He would not permit the crowd to aid him in any way, because in this regard He repelled people absolutely, would not found a party, did not permit balloting, but would be what He is, the Truth, which relates itself to the individual...it is not so great a trick to win the crowd. All that is needed is some talent, a certain dose of falsehood, and a little acquaintance with human passions..."

ONLINE SOURCES:

 https://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Archives/The%20Crowd%20Is%20Untruth.htm


https://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Kierkegaard/kierkegaard_the_crowd_is_untruth.html

Charades in the Social Imagination...

Don't do as I do... do as I say...Mmm!

Charades most common signals -

• A number of fingers at the beginning of play gives the number of syllables in the answer.
• Pointing at or tugging on an earlobe means "sounds like"...
• Moving hands or fingers closer together without touching means "shorter"..
• Holding the hands or fingers close together without touching indicates a short word such as "the" or "of" that is difficult to act out on its own..
• Moving hands or fingers farther apart means "more"...
• "Come on", "close", or "keep guessing" may be indicated by any "come here" gesture or by holding one's hands toward each other and spinning them in circles...
• "More" or "add a suffix" may be indicated by similar movements or by miming the act of stretching out a rubber band..
• "I" may be signed either by gesturing to one's chest or eye..
• "Yes, correct", in addition to more general signs such as nodding, is often expressed in charades by pointing at or touching the nose with one hand while pointing at the correct guesser with the other, signifying "on the nose".

Of course, this game depends on what you and your friends understand collectively... in the social imagination. And, what you act out means to you and your friends, lest they won't get what you are acting out. Its a game but even games have meaning in them.

Do you ever get the feeling that we are playing a game... the game of life with odd twists and turns and cards that either get you out of trouble or into trouble.  We often hear people say or demonstrate this idiomatic expression, "Don't do as I do, do as I say". In this game, its difficult to determine what people really mean. And, so...we often bet on who we think the winners are going to be over who the losers might be. We signal to others where we stand and hope that it will give us an advantage in the game of life.

You have to ask yourself is it the game designer calling the shots or the dealer in this fallen world who gave you the bad hand you think you are holding? They both serve a purpose. How? They get you to take a stand and act it out accordingly... don't they?



Do as I say, not as I do. = Take my advice, even though I am acting contrary to it...

The Nature of Meaning in the Social Imagination...

Its not 'nature' as in plants and animals but rather the nature of something that we are about to explore. Its the knowledge of how the thing in question acts, reacts, enfolds, unfolds. It's behavior, the way it behaves.

As you well know, the position taken on this blog is that all reality exists in the social imagination. Given that, we must conclude that the nature of something exists there explicitly.  We can and do have a knowledge of how a thing acts, reacts, enfolds and unfolds but if we just accept that a certain thing does this or that alone we have yet no real knowledge of it unless we apply what a thing's action means to us. 

For instance, let us look at colors. We have been told by marketers that colors play an important role in advertising. Why? Because, colors as things have meaning that is both subjective and objectively held by different people and or societies in every culture worldwide. Its not just blue that makes a bottle of shampoo attractive but what blue means to us. The same can be said about the colors purple, red, green or yellow.

A dog is a dog until its a pet. Food is an object of desire until its a celebrated meal. The sun is a star until it sets or rises and then it means so much more to us in the place where we are. And that goes for all and or most things that are objects of desire, usefulness and or just elicitors of emotions. A knife for example can cut up a watermelon or be a weapon that takes the life blood. 

Meaning is so much more than meets the eye. This is my point and certainly when something means something to us we understand that meaning is deeper than skin deep. It cannot be extracted once embedded in the psyche because it has been implanted by social interaction, social context, it is in us and around us ... we are in it and can not be removed from it lest we stumble into a glitch or even a void of sudden and shocking (to our very being)....meaninglessness. You can take the girl out of the country but you can't take the country out of the girl.   

And, now you should see what I mean. Just because we here in America understand and practice open 'democratic' society with certain and necessary civil liberties in place for all along with a free market  doesn't mean that every newbie that enters will get it right away. 

They will have to reeducate themselves, they will have to willingly prune what they bring with them, leave that old baggage of meaning behind for new. Its not easy but by the 3rd generation it happens. 
Nor can they visit here and go back and try to immediately implement what we have in the place where they are or wherever they come from. 

Whenever we try to change the meaning in our lives, there are usually radical measures that are employed.... ask or read the writings of Saul Alinsky. I do not advocate such measures nor do I agree with them or the beast behind them. The nature of meaning in the social imagination is a delicate and perish thing for those that experience it in the place where they are and it is theirs to have and hold onto... unless, they themselves decide to leave what something means to them for what something means to someone else. 

And, folks that does not happen often and it is not always successful. It is painful and yet it may also be joyful; and that depends on the one who made the decision to change the meaning in their own life for another's.

Lens of Viewing the World in the Social Imagination...

A “lens” is a metaphor to communicate the idea of looking at an event, experience, and/or a set of data through a particular perspective.  The extension of this metaphor being that one can look at what is occurring and construct an interpretation and a subsequent action based on the “lens” being employed at any given time.  Each of us views the world through a set of lenses everyday – it is how we read and make meaning of the world. 

Using 'our' lens we intentionally employ to sharpen our focus on the ways in which help us to move in the direction that we think is right for us in terms of the meaning we make of the world. Now, can we step on other people's toes... others using their lens? Yes, and for some this becomes a practice because it works for them and their meaning. Yes, it may be negatively impact other people’s ability to make progress on the things they care about and/or preventing individual or collective action toward the achievement of a particular goal. 

The purpose of using any given lens is to improve the predictability of our actions relative to a desired outcome. We believe we increase the likelihood of successfully reaching a given set of objectives when we consider what is happening and what action to take from multiple perspectives – if we examine situations, relationships, practices, and policies, etc using multiple critical lenses (inquiry, change management, adult learning, etc).  Summarized from ~ https://nationalequityproject.org/resources/featured-resources/lens-of-systemic-oppression

All people everywhere live as described above because they live in a social imagination of their making. The social imagination is the only 'social' reality we all experience and or can ever experience because we live in an information universe. We are collectors of information, it composes us as much as we consume it. Its who we are and are not. We can share information but that does not mean it will have the same meaning or even be used in the same way by people in our place or theirs.

Over the course of human history in every human group this has applied and it still does as the use of present perfect suggests. You see, obvious physical differences as well as abstract concepts are all information that is agreed on and used in order to identify oneself in the group. This gives us meaning. So, the color of skin, beliefs and traditions, the location of the interaction between individuals in a place over time all create a framework of structure that seems to be working for the majority of like people in that place... this is a basic truth that exists in all human groups. This is often called, culture.

Within that structure exists a social hierarchy which supports the majority in the place. It could be a majority of yellow skinned people, red, white, brown, dark brown and black. As they find themselves in a place over time, they practice what works for them in the place where they are because it has meaning for them. Meaning is often beyond any 'imagination' even for those in the group; in the sense that it is difficult to describe while its understood.

When meaning is lost, the group's identity is lost. The group is unformed, disassociated, untamed and destructive lost in its own destruction. Why? Because, just as the National Equity Project tells us...Each of us views the world through a set of lenses everyday – it is how we read and make meaning of the world. 

What happens when the majority in their place over time is disrupted? When its practices are subject to outside threats or dropped in least elements that seem to appear alien? They react in a way that is defensive. This is true for any group anywhere in the world including aboriginals in the Amazon or nomads in the desert, mountain dwellers, plainsmen, town folk, city dwellers, islanders, or coastal folks etc...

There is only one way forward in this situation for those attempting to become or integrate into the majority... become them or find a way to live along side them that does not dismantle or destroy them. That means leaving your meaning behind for making new meaning of the world. If that is not possible because you value your lens of meaning more...then, consequences will follow and no one will have peace, not them and not you.

Point being... someone has to give into the 'majority' meaning or your lens of meaning has to be attractive to them. It does not seem fair but that's how it is everywhere in the world. If you were the new kid on the block and wanted to be liked how would you approach the majority in your neighborhood? Slowly...its called the politics of accommodation which Booker T. Washington understood and proposed as the best means forward; especially in a fallen world where everyone thinks their lens of meaning is the best at least the best for them.

Is the Current Social Imagination prepared for a Brave New World?

Aldous Huxley was born in England and graduated from Balliol College, Oxford. Such a fortunate opportunity was his as he came from money; and, perhaps that is why he considered himself to be a humanist and pacifist. Out of that, he grew interested in philosophical mysticism and universalism. In his most famous novel Brave New World (1932) and his final novel Island (1962), he presented his vision of dystopia and utopia, respectively.

In an article published online [see source below], Brave New World is set in the future of our own world, in the year 2450 A.D. The planet is united politically as the “World State.” The Controllers who govern the World State have maximized human happiness by using advanced technology to shape and control society. People are grown in bottles and brainwashed in their sleep during childhood. As a result, the citizens of the World State are physically and psychologically conditioned to be happy with their place in society and the work they are assigned.

Every citizen belongs to a “caste,” ranging from highly intelligent and physically strong Alphas to Epsilon “semi-morons.” Lower-caste people are produced in batches of more than a hundred identical twins, and live their whole lives alongside their duplicates. All citizens have instant access to pleasures of all kinds. They are conditioned and socially encouraged to be sexually promiscuous.

“Synthetic music” and “the feelies”—movies with physical sensation as well as pictures and sound— provide immersive sensory experiences. Whenever citizens do experience an unpleasant feeling, they are encouraged to take soma, a drug which provides a “holiday” from negative emotion.

Most of the novel’s events take place in England. Huxley uses familiar English landmarks to help his readers decode the future he has imagined. Charing Cross Station in London has become the “Charing T Tower,” because Christian crosses have been replaced by the “T” of Ford’s Model T car, while train stations have been replaced by towers which launch intercontinental rockets.

The novel’s other major location is the “Savage Reservation” in New Mexico. The Savage Reservation is an area where the technologies of the World State have not been introduced. The “savages” still give birth, believe in gods and endure physical pain and emotional suffering. The people and customs of the Savage Reservation are modeled loosely on the traditions of Zuñi Native Americans. The setting of the Reservation allows the novel to contrast all historical societies— from the Neolithic era to Huxley’s own— with the society of the World State.

Isn't that interesting? It certainly is and more so coming from the social imagination of a man (author of Brave New World) who lived quite well when compared to others of his time period. One might speculate that from loftier social positions in the wider social imagination, disgust with society at large is built in from the beginning.  And, thus one could be so motivated to re-imagine the social imagination, write a novel and call it ~ Brave New World.

Certainly, an intelligent, curious person would/should ask what would be the most dreadful event that could usher in a brave new world and who would benefit? Perhaps, it could be a nuclear exchange between super powers or a devastating world wide economic collapse, a global pandemic or an alien arrival? And who would benefit? Well, it would not be the lower caste or the 'savages'... would it?



ONLINE SOURCE ~  https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/bravenew/setting/ and https://www.britannica.com/topic/Brave-New-World

*For interesting reading ~ https://www.andrewleunginternationalconsultants.com/new/2020/03/the-coronavirus-could-reshape-global-order.html

Ai in the Social Imagination ~ Applied as in UpLoaded!

According to IBM and MIT, artificial intelligence is the ability of machines to perform tasks usually associated with human beings. It includes concepts such as machine learning, deep learning, neural networks, natural language processing, and visual recognition. AI uses supervised learning, unsupervised learning, reinforcement learning, and deep learning to learn and train models with data.

Artificial intelligence (AI), is used in computer programming. Why/How? Why, because there is no other way to program and how is just a matter of the 1s and 0 commands/directives that are necessary in programming. 

You see, though we call it machine learning its still the process of taking in and sharing information over time through social interaction (which for machines is the same: taking in and sharing information [what something is and is not] via programming and downloads... essentially 'shared info).

This is in fact the same for humans after all, we grow in our social awareness/social imagination and social knowledge because of 'discrimination' illustrated by deep learning, neural networks, natural language processing, and visual recognition (what something is and is not). Hence, this can only occur through the 'natural' process of information discrimination.

Humans discriminate information in terms of positive/negative, its usefulness and or successful or unsuccessful application. AI does the same because it uses human supervised learning, unsupervised learning, reinforcement learning, and deep learning to learn and train models with data.  That is exactly the point of discriminating 'one thing from another'.

That is why, AI can result in bias by selecting for certain neutral characteristics that have a discriminatory impact. There are very simplistic examples put out there that show people who live closer to the office are likelier to be happy at work. So an AI algorithm might select only resumes with certain ZIP codes that would limit the potential commute time. 

Yes, an algorithm could have a discriminatory impact on those who do not live in any of the nearby ZIP codes, inadvertently excluding residents of neighborhoods populated predominantly by minorities. AI also can result in bias when a company tries to hire workers based on the profiles of successful employees at the company. If the majority or all the high-performing employees who are used as examples are men, any AI algorithm evaluating what makes a person successful might unlawfully exclude women. 

And, new evidence shows that Facebook’s algorithm, which automatically decides who is shown an ad, carries out the same discrimination anyway, serving up ads to over two billion users on the basis of their demographic information.  

You see, Ai begins in the social imagination...and certainly that does NOT mean its better or wiser or smarter. Ai is based on/coded on the way we imagine and learn and its on steroids.

"Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened" ~ Romans 1:21.

‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are His offspring.’ Therefore, being offspring of God, we should not think that the Divine Being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by man’s skill and imagination" ~ Acts 17:28-29.

 Keep in mind, in your social imagination, that the ultimate programmer is unseen...and that applies for the Ai man creates. But, what man creates and applies does not have the goal of the Creator! Why? Because, what He has in mind for us is not what most people think... since we live in entropy our goals are biased. His goal for us is to be uploaded into a better version of what we already are ~ HIS.






 *ONLINE SOURCES ~ https://developer.ibm.com/technologies/artificial-intelligence/gettingstarted/

  https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/04/05/1175/facebook-algorithm-discriminates-ai-bias/

  https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/artificial-intelligence-discriminatory-data.aspx

  https://ainowinstitute.org/discriminatingsystems.pdf

Reality Architecture in the Social Imagination...

Inception is a 2010 science fiction action film written and directed by Christopher Nolan, who also produced the film with his wife, Emma Thomas. The film stars Leonardo DiCaprio as a professional thief who steals information by infiltrating the subconscious of his targets.

The plot goes like this...Dominick "Nick" Cobb and Arthur are "extractors": they perform corporate espionage using experimental military technology to infiltrate the subconscious of their targets and extract valuable information through a shared dream world. Their latest target, Japanese businessman Saito, reveals that he arranged their mission himself to test Cobb for a seemingly impossible job: implanting an idea in a person's subconscious, or "inception".

To break up the energy conglomerate of ailing competitor Maurice Fischer, Saito wants Cobb to convince Fischer's son and heir, Robert, to dissolve his father's company. In return, Saito promises to use his influence once the job is done to clear Cobb's apparent criminal status, which prevents him from returning home to his children.

Though Arthur believes the task is impossible, Cobb insists that it can be done. Cobb accepts the offer and assembles his team: Eames, a conman and identity forger; Yusuf, a chemist who concocts a powerful sedative for a stable "dream within a dream" strategy; and Ariadne, an architecture student tasked with designing the labyrinth of the dream landscapes, recruited with the help of Cobb's father-in-law, Professor Stephen Miles. While dream-sharing with Cobb, Ariadne learns his subconscious houses an invasive projection of his late wife Mal.

After Maurice dies in Sydney, Robert Fischer accompanies the body on a ten-hour flight back to Los Angeles. The team (including Saito, who wants to verify their success) uses this as an opportunity to sedate and take Fischer into a shared dream. At each dream level, the person generating the dream stays behind to set up a "kick" that will be used to awaken the other sleeping team members from the deeper dream level; to be successful, these kicks must occur simultaneously at each dream level, a fact complicated due to the nature of time, which flows much faster in each successive level. They use "Non, je ne regrette rien" as an auditory cue to help coordinate the kicks. The first level is Yusuf's dream of a rainy Los Angeles.

The team abducts Fischer, but they are attacked by armed projections from his subconscious, which has been specifically trained to defend against such intruders. The team takes Robert and a wounded Saito to a warehouse, where Cobb reveals that while dying in the dream would normally wake Saito up, the powerful sedatives needed to stabilize the multi-level dream will instead send a dying dreamer into "limbo": a world of infinite subconscious from which escape is extremely difficult, if not impossible, and in which a dreamer risks forgetting they are in a dream.

You see, this concept of dream architecture follows agreement reality, it follows subliminal messaging, the use of propaganda, brainwashing with its tokens for mass hypnosis...all with the aim of getting people on board with an agenda that is not their own (a fake reality that has a grip on those using it and as long as they continue to use it, with the continual fake feed that drives it, they will live in a fake reality which will either run down or loop eternally).

This explains the reality in which we live. Yes, it is an agreement reality but it is the fake one. It follows with all those ideas of  fake feed input that will have it run down or loop forever. There was a real construct. But, it fell.  So, what we are seeing and or experiencing is not the original. That's because at the beginning an opposing directive caused an error in the basic construct.

The original was violated/corrupted and the existing one is only a fake ... or poor copy of the real one caused by error which was brought on by doubt 'second guessing' the real architecture and its true architect. For sure, those that are creating Ai that grows or evolves must be concerned about this very thing. Lest they forget they are dreaming.... a deception.

We need to wake up to the fact of our 'fake' agreement reality or like in the movie risk forgetting we are in a 'dream' looping eternally in a 'fake' reality architecture or rather very poor copy of the original.


*ONLINE SOURCE ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception#Plot