What Is Context? ⚠️

[UnbornTao]

15 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

The way I feel about this discussion is: you can spend a lot time drawing semantic connections between words just for the sake of doing that (or you can do it really quick and get on with your life), or you can simply use words in a larger context of solving or understanding a larger problem, and you will build your understanding of words that way while actually doing something productive with your life.

The odds are if you take an average well-read person or intellectually engaged person and you ask them what context is, they will be able to come with everything you guys have come up with and more, and likely also in a way that is more structured, concise, streamlined and insightful. Because learning what words mean requires actually using them in context. And once you have learned a bunch of words, constantly asking "but what does it mean??" eventually just becomes an exercise in trying to force an understanding that doesn't exist.

It isn't just about words or semantics. Then again, there is an experiential insight to be had - that's why we contemplate in the first place, based on that observation. If it were simply a matter of receiving an answer, we could have just Googled it and moved on with life. And yes, topics like these can seem aggravatingly irrelevant when it comes to our self-concerns and our daily lives. Despite that, what is true in the matter? 

It's a bit like Newton grasping a principle: every idiot knew that objects fell down, so what was overlooked that only a genius like him realized? I suspect that virtually no one truly grasps the nature of context, even though it could be discussed intelligently. Simply concluding something intellectually isn't the goal. And this being a forum thread, its function may be more akin to stimulating conversation and opening a few doors, taking into account that insight can happen for anyone at anytime.

The insight occurs as an increase in consciousness.

Edited Friday at 04:53 PM by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

10 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Are we considering subtext and how it comes into play with this definition?

Context = environment that gives shape 'background that frames the foreground'

Subtext = the hidden or implied meaning beneath the surface

Maybe pulling subtext out in a defined way will refine where this is going. It seems to me to be present most of the time, but it is not always relevant.

Then again, maybe this is going to muddy the water (not that it could get any worse, this thread is like walking through molasses)

 

Can you give it a try at pulling subcontext out?

Wouldn't subtext be a subset or type of context? 

Subtext relates to communication, which is based on language-context. There has to be an environment (space) first before there can be an implicit meaning beneath the surface (the source of this surface may be the context for it.)

Context as the possibility for new domains of distinctions to arise - is how I define it.

When consciousness creates it, the content within it can come to pass. 

When thinking of language, the content is usually what comes to mind. 

Selling molasses by the river.

Edited Friday at 06:11 PM by UnbornTao

[Carl-Richard]

48 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

It isn't just about words or semantics. Then again, there is an experiential insight to be had - that's why we contemplate in the first place, based on that observation.

What experiential insight?

 

48 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

It's a bit like Newton grasping a principle: every idiot knew that objects fell down, so what was overlooked that only a genius realized?

Newton did a lot of math.

Edited Friday at 02:39 PM by Carl-Richard

[UnbornTao]

3 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

What experiential insight?

Experiencing what context is as itself. So far, what we have are notions about it. These notions themselves aren't the same as context. Recognizing our unconsciousness regarding the matter helps us notice that possibility.

For example, we often assume that our experience is merely a reflection of what's "out there," and so we fail to grasp the reality that is created along language.

Quote

Newton did a lot of math.

He realized that objects don't fall upward or move sideways! In that story with the apple hitting his head, he consciously experienced a principle of the physical world - he had a sudden, personal encounter with something real. He wasn't just making something up or having a new thought. Now we take it for granted as obvious, but so did others before Newton.

We tend to overlook the possibility of personally discovering shit, especially when it is profound.

Edited Friday at 05:59 PM by UnbornTao

[Carl-Richard]

The function discussions like these serve is you try to focus on throwing in variation, challenge existing assumptions, introducing novelty into the system, through brainstorming and free association. And this can have a function, but the thing is this same function happens automatically as you do things (through mind-wandering, the Default Mode Network). And as anomalies stack up, you can have new insights. But these insights also tend to happen largely automatically (unless it's a very difficult and complex insight that happens during problemsolving). Generally, it doesn't have to be forced. You can force the increase in novelty, but the insight that happens as a result is often automatic. That was more what I was aiming to say with what @Eskilon pointed out.

Edited Friday at 03:39 PM by Carl-Richard

[MuadDib]

Consciousness.

 

[AION]

Context is the frame or the meaning aka interpretation of a thing within a mind. 

Edited Friday at 04:13 PM by AION

[UnbornTao]

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

The function discussions like these serve is you try to focus on throwing in variation, challenge existing assumptions, introducing novelty into the system, through brainstorming and free association. And this can have a function, but the thing is this same function happens automatically as you do things (through mind-wandering, the Default Mode Network). And as anomalies stack up, you can have new insights. But these insights also tend to happen largely automatically (unless it's a very difficult and complex insight that happens during problemsolving). Generally, it doesn't have to be forced. You can force the increase in novelty, but the insight that happens as a result is often automatic. That was more what I was aiming to say with what @Eskilon pointed out.

Yes, that's better put. Having other minds contribute to the discussion helps too, in any case. I'd say that insight is something generated - sudden - and that one has to work for it: by focusing, questioning, staying open, and wondering about something. It can be intellectual in nature, but it isn't limited to that realm. It's a Eureka moment, one that usually demands experiential investigation, depending on the subject.

[UnbornTao]

@MuadDib

[UnbornTao]

1 hour ago, AION said:

Context is the frame or the meaning aka interpretation of a thing within a mind. 

Sounds accurate.

What about existential context? Like the mind. The "place" where thoughts occur.

[ExploringReality]

What is this experience that we are having right now? Why colors? Why sounds? Why feels? What the fuck is all this? How is any of this possible? How am I able to be conscious of existence?

[UnbornTao]

2 minutes ago, ExploringReality said:

What is this experience that we are having right now? Why colors? Why sounds? Why feels? What the fuck is all this? How is any of this possible? How am I able to be conscious of existence?

I share the sentiment.

For this thread: Why context?

[AION]

3 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Sounds accurate.

What about existential context? Like the mind. The "place" where thoughts occur.

It is the time-space or space-time dimension. Content is the material while context is the frame. 

Edited Friday at 09:43 PM by AION

[ExploringReality]

Context in its purest form, is the condition of conditions, the infinite background in which all specific contexts arise.

[UnbornTao]

17 hours ago, AION said:

It is the time-space or space-time dimension. Content is the material while context is the frame. 

Sounds good.

Is space not a context for objects, though ('dimension' being a function of space)?

You addressed the above question in your second sentence. So "the time-space or space-time dimension" might be missing the mark.

17 hours ago, ExploringReality said:

Context in its purest form, is the condition of conditions, the infinite background in which all specific contexts arise.

You may well be using that figuratively, but is context not unformed?

Other than that, the sentence makes sense... Still, you might start calling that "consciousness" instead. If it's infinite it goes beyond being a background.

Edited Saturday at 03:29 PM by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

Maybe the real context was the friends we made along the way.

[Human Mint]

Context is just ego, right? You pretty much nailed the answer already, context is just a mental construct. And maybe you can't answer the question by creating more context (more structures, mental maps), which is a catch 22

[ExploringReality]

7 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Maybe the real context was the friends we made along the way.

That's a context to a song, a long story through life or possibly an awesome movie 🤘😎

[ExploringReality]

3 hours ago, Human Mint said:

Context is just ego, right? You pretty much nailed the answer already, context is just a mental construct. And maybe you can't answer the question by creating more context (more structures, mental maps), which is a catch 22

To truly see beyond context, you’d have to fall outside of context,  which ego interprets as groundlessness, nothingness, or death. 

Context is a convenience. A way of packaging the unpackaged. Ego is a web of meaning.