Science Forums 2

[HydrogenBond]

I would like to present a model I developed, many years ago, that is a useful tool for representing psychology in a graphical way. One can plot any orientation of psychology or specific theory via this schema. It is based on simple geometrical analogies for types of thoughts and thought processing dynamics, that include pathological states of mind.

I am going to develop this slow so I can make sure it is clear. There are basically three levels of human memory or thoughts. With respect to this model they can be represented as 1-D thoughts, 2-D thoughts and 3-D thoughts. At this time I will focus on the range between 1-D and 2-D.

Using a geometric analogy a 1-D memory is a line or linear memory. Examples of this are one's name, the letters of an alphabet, Babe Ruth's batting average in 1935, etc., It is very specific or linear in nature.

As thought dimension increases from 1-D, we get (1+)-D thoughts. Using the geometric analogy the straight line of linear memory begins to gain some curvature or a slight twist. This curve or twist to linear memories is common in language, where one word can have several meanings. For example, the word set can mean a TV set, set the table, or the girl has a nice set, etc. The word set is not linear like Babe Ruth's average, which is exactly defined, but rather has a curve to it.

As the thought dimension increases from 1-D, the curvature also increases meaning that more and more subtle shapes of meaning can be expressed. At maximum curvature, the line curves onto itself to form a circle. This is represented by 1.5-D thought. The thought dimension beginning at 1.5-D imparts a subjective meaning that is not a simple variation in language but is connected to subjectivity defined by culture. It can be understood as a prestige affect. For example, a child's teddy bear, may only be teddy bear to you or I, but the child will add a (1.5+)-D affect that makes it more than what it appears in reality.

As the thought dimensions increase from 1-5-D, the prestige affect has wider and wider social subjective appeal. This is geometrically implicit of the circle of prestige getting larger and larger. For example, a new game for X-box can get close to 2-D, when it first goes on the market. The imagination and market hype will make it appear a must have, while having it will give one a subjective enhancement in the eyes of others. It is not quite rational and won't be felt by those who don't play games.

The limit of this prestige affect (social subjectivity) is at (2-)-D. This object is expressed by money. It has limiting social prestige because it allows one to buy all the things below it in the scale of subjective prestige. If one had enough money one, could even buy an abstraction, like a royal title, imparting an aura of social enhancement. This prestige range is more often expressed with objects although subjective abstractions can also be expressed.

At 2-D the circle of subjective prestige becomes infinite. This defines the infinite plane behind the 2-D thought dimesionality of cause and affect or logic. In other words, through most of history many kings have achieved the limites of social prestige, i.e, crown of the king is a large circle. But money and prestige of title alone can not buy continuing peace or prosperity. That takes thought dimensions of 2-D and higher, i.e., reason and wisdom.

If we look at data collection, solid data is 1-D because it is very definitive. Fuzzy data is greater than 1-D since it throws a curve allowing more than one possible way to interpret that data. Statistical studies are not quite 2-D, since either cause or affect has some statistical fuzziness. Such results are less than 2-D and require the use of spin to help increase the level of social prestige. When science reaches 2-D, spin is no longer necessary, since the cause and affect relationships can be reproduced and verified, and do not require cultural subjectivity.

If one looks at marketing, placing the babe in the car, is a subtle way to add a subjective enhancement to the car. This will focus the mind at less than 2-D in the realm of social subjectivity. There anything is possible, even things that are out of touch with cause and affect. But this is part of the fun of life and should be included to make one complete. A purely materialist person may never need to get all the way to 2-D thought but can still exist fine in culture. But on the other hand, they would have no logical defense against all the subjective spin going on below 2-D. For example, one may flow with the tide of social subjectivity with respect to fashion, being willing to waer a fuzzy wrap because the social prestige says this is cutting edge allowing one to appraoch 2-D.