What is „importance“?

[UnbornTao]

4 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

Is caring the same as importance?

It seems like something has to be deemed important first before it can be cared for. 

[UnbornTao]

@Xonas Pitfall Nice, thanks for such a detailed response. I liked your examples on the list above, they're quite illuminating and can serve as an intellectual exercise to get a better handle on this.

Beyond that, what is your experience of value?

I'm not even sure what we're looking into anymore. A few things have come up: value, meaning, worth. Anyway...

Value shows up as a relationship, doesn’t it? We might recognize that objects themselves don’t possess inherent worth--so, as you say, it’s assigned by the self doing the relating. Could it be a charged, self-referential interpretation based on one’s agenda--hence an activity? By the way, the way I see it, an explanation isn’t really the point here, but rather the act of questioning itself and the possibility of insight.

It seems we often resist exploring these things because we fear it will erode or undermine our sense of value, but it doesn’t have to. We could keep enjoying the same things, only now we’d be recognizing what worth and value are in and of themselves.

Edited May 29 by UnbornTao

[Xonas Pitfall]

6 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

@Xonas Pitfall Nice, thanks for such a detailed response. I liked your examples on the list above, they're quite illuminating and can serve as an intellectual exercise to get a better handle on this.

Beyond that, what is your experience of value?

I'm not even sure what we're looking into anymore. A few things have come up: value, meaning, worth. Anyway...

Value shows up as a relationship, doesn’t it? We might recognize that objects themselves don’t possess inherent worth--so, as you say, it’s assigned by the self doing the relating. Could it be a charged, self-referential interpretation based on one’s agenda--hence an activity? By the way, the way I see it, an explanation isn’t really the point here, but rather the act of questioning itself and the possibility of insight.

It seems we often resist exploring these things because we fear it will erode or undermine our sense of value, but it doesn’t have to. We could keep enjoying the same things, only now we’d be recognizing what worth and value are in and of themselves.

What do you think you were hoping to understand when you asked that question?

I completely agree that exploring and questioning are incredibly valuable and meaningful in their own right. But I’ve found it helpful to also be honest with myself about what kind of expectation I’m bringing into those questions – what kind of clarity or relief I might be unconsciously hoping for.

It’s similar to when people begin exploring spirituality and ask, “What is God?” If they don’t acknowledge the expectations tied to that question, like hoping for something overwhelmingly majestic or a perfect solution to all their problems, then even a genuine insight can feel disappointing or uncomfortable, simply because it doesn’t match the imagined ideal. As a result, you might completely overlook or reject the actual truth simply because it doesn't feel right. When we don't examine those assumptions beforehand, we risk filtering out insights that don't align with what we hoped to find rather than seeing things as they truly are. It makes the process less honest, open, and objective.

It doesn’t take a lot of contemplation to understand that value isn’t something built into an object by default. It’s something that arises from the relationship we have with that object, idea, or experience.

For example:

• A stone has no inherent worth.
• But if it’s your grandfather’s lucky stone, it becomes valuable because of your relationship to it.

I have an old videotape of my mother, who has passed away. To anyone else, it might just look like a cheerful woman singing and smiling. But for me, watching it always brings me to tears. The same thing happens in countless other contexts. Someone raised on rigid conservative media might see LGBTQ people as threatening or wrong, even demonic, while a young person struggling with their identity could see those same people as symbols of hope and freedom. A highly logical and technical person might look at abstract art and see only randomness, while someone more creatively inclined could be moved by just a few notes of a melody or the colors in a painting.

Different things hit each of us in different ways and hold different kinds of meaning, and honestly, I find that beautiful. It doesn’t take away from the idea of value at all – if anything, it makes it more real, more personal, and more deep.

Edited May 29 by Xonas Pitfall

[Xonas Pitfall]

+------------------+--------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+------------------------+
|     Observer     |                 Perspective                      |     Object 1          |     Object 2        |      Object 3          |
+------------------+--------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+------------------------+
| Artistic Human   | Emotional, symbolic, beauty-aware                | Abstract painting →   | Custom rifle →      | Tax forms →            |
|                  |                                                  | Deep meaning          | Design, craft       | Dull, lifeless         |
+------------------+--------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+------------------------+
| Ant              | Survival, instinct, function-first               | Sugar crystal →       | Twig →              | Human →                |
|                  |                                                  | Colony treasure       | Bridge/path         | Obstacle, unknown      |
+------------------+--------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+------------------------+
| Abyssal Octopus  | Sensory, spatial, harmony-based                  | Current →             | Anchor →            | Reef →                 |
|                  |                                                  | Orientation guide     | Disruption          | Home, camouflage       |
+------------------+--------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+------------------------+

+------------+----------------+---------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Perspective|     Object     |                     Interpretation                      |                    Underlying Value                        |
+------------+----------------+---------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------+
|    God     | Act of evil    | Expression of distortion - hunger, power, rebellion,    | To know what it's like to not be all-loving, to feel       |
|            |                | inability to love, inability to see self in other       | separation, disconnection, fragmentation                   |
+------------+----------------+---------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------+
|            | Human brain    | Self-reflection machine for the human -                 | Experiencing limitation, duality, identity, and choice     |
|            |                | biological interface of consciousness                   | through a finite lens                                      |
+------------+----------------+---------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------+
|            | Distant nebula | Silent explosion of gas, dust, and starlight -          | Beauty without witness, raw cosmic creation,               |
|            |                | cradle of stars, chaotic balance of forces              | art that exists regardless of observation                  |
+------------+----------------+---------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------+

+------------------+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------+
|     Object       |   Perspective  | Interpretation / Assigned Value                          |
+------------------+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------+
| Act of Evil      | God            | Fragmented self - to feel separation, powerlessness,     |
|                  |                | inability to love - a lens on disconnection              |
|                  | Artistic Human | A tragic character arc - a study in suffering, trauma    |
|                  | Ant            | Irrelevant unless it disrupts the colony                 |
|                  | Octopus        | Sudden violent movement - a predator, danger to avoid    |
+------------------+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------+
| Human Brain      | God            | Self-reflection machine - interface of finite mind       |
|                  | Artistic Human | Source of creativity, emotion, identity                  |
|                  | Ant            | Possibly a large, moving obstacle - no concept of brain  |
|                  | Octopus        | Emits electricity and sound - complex lifeform to watch  |
+------------------+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------+
| Distant Nebula   | God            | Cosmic art - creation without audience                   |
|                  | Artistic Human | Unreachable beauty - inspires awe and humility           |
|                  | Ant            | Beyond comprehension - sky is just light/dark            |
|                  | Octopus        | Unknown pressure pattern above - meaningless visually    |
+------------------+----------------+----------------------------------------------------------+

 

Edited May 29 by Xonas Pitfall

[Xonas Pitfall]

These are just silly examples, but they highlight the absolute relativity of what value is and isn’t.

The only reason we might think value is objective is if we look at it from a human point of view, for example:

• Decreasing suffering is usually better than increasing it.
• Safe, collaborative environments are generally better than hostile, dangerous ones.

But I’m sure you can think of examples where the opposite is true:

• A spoiled luxury child might need a metaphorical "punch in the stomach" to get going.
• An ungrateful, lucky narcissist might need some suffering to self-reflect and grow.

Human perspectives, but especially from a god’s or the universe’s point of view, value is absolutely relative and undefined.

Value is relational and mental.

1. Value only exists through relationships and perspectives.
2. Potential and undefined until an observer actualizes it through their bias, preference, or meaning.
3. God or the universe contains potential "undefined experiences".
4. All are possible until they become actualized through fragmented perspectives, preferences, and meaning-making.

[Xonas Pitfall]

7 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

I'm not even sure what we're looking into anymore. A few things have come up: value, meaning, worth. Anyway...

 

Value = Meaning = Worth = Significance = Importance = Merit = Purpose = Relevance = Benefit = Desire = Utility = Priority

[PurpleTree]

9 hours ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

Value = Meaning = Worth = Significance = Importance = Merit = Purpose = Relevance = Benefit = Desire = Utility = Priority

= Separation

[krazzer]

@PurpleTree

There is no inherent importance in anything. The mind can create a concept and then perceive it as important, but that importance is not intrinsic, it's assigned. Others may also see it as important, but only if their own conditioning or identity aligns with it.

From the perspective of the Absolute, nothing is important, and nothing is unimportant. It simply is.

[Xonas Pitfall]

21 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

= Separation

Ding ding! ✅

[UnbornTao]

@Xonas Pitfall Yes, being open is incredibly useful (See? Value ). Some people fear that investigating this might undermine their sense of value - but why? As you said, the only implication is understanding it. What you do with that understanding is entirely up to you.

I agree with your claim that value is relational. Reaching a conclusion doesn't go far enough, though. Bring to mind Newton: he didn't just think about gravity but personally encountered the principle itself. He had insight.

Meaning, value, and worth seem to be the core categories here, while the others might be secondary forms of those three -- though I'm not entirely sure. The differences may be subtle, but suggesting that every element in your comparison list is exactly the same thing isn't quite accurate. Different words are used for a reason. And different doesn’t necessarily mean separate.

Edited Saturday at 05:48 PM by UnbornTao

[Xonas Pitfall]

10 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Some people fear that investigating this might undermine their sense of value - but why? As you said, the only implication is understanding it. What you do with that understanding is entirely up to you.

Correct! It's inevitable. From a young age, we're fed all kinds of narratives about what matters and why being "important" is something to chase. Celebrities, the wealthy, and cultural icons are idolized, while living an ordinary life is often framed as something to avoid or be ashamed of. It makes sense that questioning your own value feels threatening. The ego craves an objective standard to measure itself against, something solid it can point to and say, "See, as long as I embody this, I matter. I’m worthy. I’m safe."

It’s comforting to believe in that kind of certainty. Just like it’s comforting to believe in an all-knowing, all-loving creator who protects you and punishes those who hurt you, it's upsetting to imagine yourself as the one who might be harmful, evil, or deserving of punishment. The ego naturally resists that. It clings to a good image, so it often avoids questioning its motives or examining whether its intentions are good, pure, or free of selfishness. That’s why it’s much more common to see victim mentality, projection, and blame than honest self-reflection and personal responsibility.

That’s also part of why religion can be so appealing. Why wrestle with your values and morality when you can adopt a ready-made framework that does the thinking for you? You get to blend in with the community, follow the script, and feel a sense of certainty. You don’t have to ask yourself if you’re actually good or not - the book already says you are, so that must be enough, right? 

10 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

I agree with your claim that value is relational. Reaching a conclusion doesn't go far enough, though. Bring to mind Newton: he didn't just think about gravity but personally encountered the principle itself. He had insight.

Yes, I think this is why spirituality (or at least the kind we’re doing here) is so powerful. It's one of the first fields I’ve come across that actually makes this distinction (like Leo’s State of Consciousness blog post!). You can understand all of this conceptually and logically, but the real work is applying it to your day-to-day experience. In the relative "human" world, you cannot escape your judgment or the judgment of others.

The way I usually navigate this is by recognizing that there are two layers of values we deal with.

First, there are more "global" human values. These are helpful to be aware of, because they show up almost everywhere:

• Being seen as attractive, intelligent, independent, capable, and well put together
• Doing more good than harm is usually better for humanity overall
• Striving for your happiness and the happiness of those closest to you, while minimizing suffering

Then, there are personal values. These are things you can only discover through direct experience. You have to live life, observe yourself, and slowly figure them out. Questions like:

• What are my talents and virtues?
• What moves me or inspires me? What is my style?
• What disgusts me?
• What kinds of people give me energy or drain me?
• What kind of conversations light me up? What is my purpose? What kind of impact do I wish to have?
• What environments make me feel most like myself?

You find these by exposing yourself to a wide range of experiences, while passively observing and self-reflecting. Journaling helps a lot, too. Over time, you build a personal “value bank”, a sense of the things you naturally gravitate toward.

For example, imagine if I asked you, "What makes you laugh?"
And for the past six months, you had been consciously tracking every moment you laughed, even writing it down.
You’d start to understand your sense of humor, the types of jokes that work for you, the comedians you love, and the people who bring out your creativity and playfulness. That’s valuable insight. It’s deeply personal, but incredibly useful. Leo’s course touches on these layers well, actually! 

Even though in the "Absolute God-state or the infinite singularity of love and beauty", everything is equally valuable, we still need to understand what makes us tick on the relative plane. We have to learn how to build a life that fits who we are. That begins with discovering our real values. This also means being careful not to let the outside world program us into adopting values that are not truly ours. One of the first ways to avoid that trap is by asking yourself, "What is value? What is importance?" (just as you are!) And not being afraid that asking those questions might somehow make you less valuable.

10 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Meaning, value, and worth seem to be the core categories here, while the others might be secondary forms of those three -- though I'm not entirely sure. The differences may be subtle, but suggesting that every element in your comparison list is exactly the same thing isn't quite accurate. Different words are used for a reason.

Yes! I was just having fun with those words, sorry haha! There is definitely nuance between them, but meaning, worth, and value often overlap a lot. Usually, if you know what you value, you also understand what gives your life meaning. Most of the time, you find that thing worthwhile, purposeful, or connected to your sense of self-worth. We tend to use many of these words interchangeably or in similar ways, so I just wanted to point that out.

10 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

And different doesn’t necessarily mean separate.

Yes! What I meant is that since everything is ultimately Singularity, or One, or "God," trying to make something more important or valuable than something else creates separation. But that idea is more about metaphysics and less about the practical side of value discussed here, so it doesn’t matter as much for now! 

Edited Sunday at 03:52 AM by Xonas Pitfall

[Reciprocality]

From the limits of resources thresholds are set, spontaneous recollections of particular moments satisfies the threshold and from repeated exposure to this we intuitively couple the word "importance" to that invariant structure, allowing us to know what other mean when they use the term.

What I wanna know is at which point does the human or personal kind of important become unique or distinct from the universal structure of importance, can precise point of distinctness be somewhat generalised, can the universal structure of importance be separated from other universal structures, or does that separation only exist in our head via its inherent ability to decouple variables?

[Xonas Pitfall]

• Universal importance could be thought of as patterns or structures that remain invariant across all conscious agents. For example, survival, self-preservation, or the tendency to minimize suffering might be considered “universally important” in any system that is aware and limited.
• Personal importance is filtered through an individual's particular mind, memory, experiences, and goals. What is important to you may be completely irrelevant to someone else, even though both of you operate under similar constraints (like time, energy, attention).

I don’t think personal importance ever truly breaks away from universal importance. It just becomes more complex, abstract, or in some cases, deeply distorted. A helpful analogy is computing.

At the lowest level, all computers operate on the same simple universal principle: ones and zeros, basic binary calculations, and logic gates. That’s the universal foundation. But as more layers are built on top, you get sophisticated applications that seem totally unrelated to binary math. Photoshop, for instance, is used for editing images, and its purpose seems worlds apart from basic computational logic. Or take an AI in a self-driving car – it's scanning environments, making decisions, and navigating real-world traffic. But underneath it all, it’s still just built on the same logic gate systems, running instructions. Of course, no one says Photoshop’s "value or function" is in computing numbers – we say it’s for creating digital art. That’s the point.

In the same way, you could say humans operate from a few fundamental "universal preferences" – survival, avoidance of suffering, pursuit of comfort, pleasure, and ego preservation. But over time, these simple drives evolved into incredibly complex behaviors, shaped by society, language, identity, trauma, and culture.

So we end up with things like:

• Someone thinks they need to break their bones to become a few inches taller just to hit 6ft on Tinder, thinking that’s what it takes to be loved now. That’s today’s version of a mating strategy.
• Someone decides the best way to survive is to become a quant, staring at tiny candlesticks and charts all day. Hunting’s been replaced by tracking pixels on a screen.
• Someone feels so much pain or emptiness that their only way to stop the suffering is to end their life, not running from danger, but from their mind.
• Someone gets so wrapped up and brainwashed in a belief system, a sense of group identity, and purpose that they blow themselves up for it.

All of these are still expressions of the same core motivations - they’re just processed through incredibly sophisticated and sometimes warped systems of meaning. So, personal importance is never separate from universal importance. It’s just the same principles dressed in layers of thought, emotion, and experience so intricate that the original foundation is hard to see. Just think about how insanely far we've drifted from basic human-animal behavior - the survival instincts are still there, but they've evolved into these complex, layered, almost unrecognizable strategies. The way we try to survive now is so sophisticated that it barely resembles anything natural anymore. At least that's how I think of it, but I'm very open to being wrong! 

22 minutes ago, Reciprocality said:

What I wanna know is at which point does the human or personal kind of important become unique or distinct from the universal structure of importance

Can we generalize the point of divergence?

It’s hard to pinpoint a precise “moment” where importance becomes personal. But it generally begins as soon as a conscious agent starts forming preferences or developing a model of reality tied to its own identity and history.

• That moment might look like: the first time a system has to choose between two actions based on expected outcomes for itself, and not purely based on external physical laws.

This is such a hard thing to know, because when we're kids, we're basically just running on instincts and genetics without any self-awareness, little brainless zombies. Maybe one day we'll develop more advanced psychological tools that can map or predict these early tendencies, but for now, not even close. All we have are personal memories of what we were naturally drawn to as children, often without realizing why. It's one of the areas I'm especially curious about, too. I really love your question! 

26 minutes ago, Reciprocality said:

can the universal structure of importance be separated from other universal structures, or does that separation only exist in our head via its inherent ability to decouple variables?

Hmm... 

Whether the universal structure of importance can be separated from other universal structures really depends on what you mean by "universal."

If you’re talking about universals within humans, then yes. There are universal value structures that apply to ants, water currents, aliens, games, computers, and even inanimate objects. Since all of these are limited in some way and grouped by shared patterns, we can identify universal values within those limits.

But if you mean the "ultimate" or absolute (like God or infinity), then no. There aren’t separate universal structures because infinity includes everything. You can’t have another absolute infinity outside the original. It would simply include that other absolute infinity within itself. As an infinite entity, it "absorbs" anything outside of it instantly, making it self-defining and all-encompassing.

[UnbornTao]

On 6/1/2025 at 5:16 AM, Reciprocality said:

From the limits of resources thresholds are set, spontaneous recollections of particular moments satisfies the threshold and from repeated exposure to this we intuitively couple the word "importance" to that invariant structure, allowing us to know what other mean when they use the term.

What I wanna know is at which point does the human or personal kind of important become unique or distinct from the universal structure of importance, can precise point of distinctness be somewhat generalised, can the universal structure of importance be separated from other universal structures, or does that separation only exist in our head via its inherent ability to decouple variables?

the what?

 

@Xonas Pitfall That was quite the explanation and story. Thanks.

Edited Monday at 05:28 PM by UnbornTao

[Xonas Pitfall]

@UnbornTao  You're welcome!