What is a map?

[Vibroverse]

@LastThursday 

a map basically is for helping us find our way, and try to see the bigger picture by assuming that we can get to its essence in a way that makes sense to us. and the experience of reality, in a sense, is like maps within maps within maps, and you might even say that it is maps all the way down. 

in a sense, that's what the popperian scientific method is. the purpose is to find a better map of reality, and to never have the assumption that you've transcended the map, because all you do is look for a map that explains reality better. 

when you think about it, even us talking about what a map is is done through another map called language right now. it is a map that is trying to understand what a map is, in a sense. the question is what exactly is language, and can we know what it is without referring to another use of language. 

 

[LastThursday]

13 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

you might even say that it is maps all the way down

Is there any room for "direct experience" in that case? Or is all of experience "indirect" i.e. a map of some sort? Is there a concrete end point to the map of a map of map?

13 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

what exactly is language, and can we know what it is without referring to another use of language. 

Yes? How is language understood at all? Does it use another language - a mental mapping language? Or is there some non-language that language is understood by?

Sorry lots of questions marks.

Edited November 8, 2023 by LastThursday

[Vibroverse]

Well, i believe that it is possible to see from a view that transcends all maps, in a sense. I believe that there is an experientiality, so to speak, that is transcendent to all maps, including language.

I believe that it exists, and turning back, more and more, to the inner stillness is how we do it, in my opinion. Simple awareness of where we are and acceptance of it through stillness is one of the best ways possible, in my opinion, in a sense. 

And that which is transcendent to all maps, that is you and me, in a sense, might be the source of all maps, and that through which we also can understand the nature of reality, including maps, also. 

 

[ZzzleepingBear]

Consider a map to be a object of interest. It's not that much different from searching without a map, if you look to what the behavior itself alludes to, (Looking for rewards). So a established map in your mind is tied to prior raw experiences through some reward response on your part. I'd even go as far as to say that, no map would be possible to form without a reward response of some sort.

Notice that for NLP to be a way to change in your behavior, you already need to have the urge to change from those past memories that you investigate. So it's more about a latent change that can be brought forward imo. 

Direct experience on the other hand, can bring about a change in you whether you want it or not. So the imprint part on the mind is more about raw data being taken in, as opposed to the process part that already is in play. So any processing of memories with NLP is linked to our already established behaviours and inclinations to act for that change if we want it enough already.

[Carl-Richard]

From a cognitive science perspective, maps are created by your ability to manipulate information from current sensory input and information stored in your long-term memory, using your working memory, a.k.a. your own inner cognitive workspace. These maps may consist of simple and concrete representations like mental images, colors, sounds, shapes, spatial qualities, etc. (like when navigating a familiar building in your mind), or they may involve abstract representations like language, symbols, mathematical operations, logical reasoning, etc. (like when remembering the multiplication table or Hegel's theory of dialectics). When people say "the map is not the territory", they often refer to the more abstract kinds of maps.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Hojo]

map to terriroty would be a sign saying leo is eating pizza right now

and leo eating pizza in front of you screaming in your face that he is eating pizza and spitting pizza on your face and he has pizza breathe and its making you frightened. Hes also pointing a handgun on at your head and hes tripping on psychedelic. but that part wasnt on the map.

a map is just pictures putting reality on paper, it is a very complex thing to do

Edited November 10, 2023 by Hojo

[LastThursday]

6 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

When people say "the map is not the territory", they often refer to the more abstract kinds of maps.

That's true. I'd say an abstract or mental map is a very different thing from any other type of map - even language.

Your example of navigating a building is interesting. Even when you're actually in the building and trying to navigate it, you're still using an abstract mental map to do it. I think most would call this "direct experience" instead, but there is a sense in which we're still using mental maps even when directly experiencing (anything) - and we can't actually get away from this. Although @Vibroverse thinks/knows it's possible to do so.

6 hours ago, Hojo said:

but that part wasnt on the map.

You've touched on something important, in that a map isn't meant to explain everything. Is a map always a simplification of what it represents? Is a map always a particular point of view?

On 11/9/2023 at 8:22 AM, ZzzleepingBear said:

Notice that for NLP to be a way to change in your behavior, you already need to have the urge to change from those past memories that you investigate. So it's more about a latent change that can be brought forward imo. 

This is just fate or determinism by another name, personally I don't believe in determinism. But it's very possible there is a guiding force pushing us in certain directions - which is nearly like determinism. The guiding force is still "us" but one that we're not much conscious of.

 

[Vibroverse]

When you think about it from a deeper level, i think we can say that map and territory are also distinctions in consciousness, that you cannot really say where the map ends and the territory begins, so to speak. 

I was thinking about how Al Farabi interprets the idea of Mohammad receiving revelation from the angel Jibril. Al Farabi basically says that prophets are ones with a great capacity of imagination, and for they don't, usually, know about abstract reasoning, they tend to interpret abstract universal ideas through imagination. 

It is like, Al Farabi thinks, Mohammad perceives the idea of the universal intellect, and connecting with the universal intellect, in the form of the angel Jibril coming to him and giving him revelation, kinda like the idea of Hermes, the messenger of Gods, in a way. 

But he also says that, as far as i understand, even though Jibril is like a representation of the universal intellect, still it has its own reality unto itself. So it is like Jibril is both a map and a territory, depending on your perspective, in a sense. 

Now, imagine that you are looking at a literal map of some territory, like you are looking at a map of California. You might say that from one perspective, California the physical place is the territory, and the image of California on the paper is a map. But, for instance, from a Platonic perspective, you might say that even California the physical place itself is a map to be read, so to speak, as some sort of a possible gateway to the idea. 

In that sense, the map of California is a map of a map. And that's why Plato was critical of art, for instance. He would say that the painting of a rose, for instance, is an imperfect imitation of the physical rose, and the physical rose is an imperfect imitation of the idea of a rose, of the abstract rose, so to speak. That's why he said that arts distance you even further from the real reality. 

And Schopenhauer says that Plato is wrong about that, for the painting of the rose, by its existence, contains the idea of the rose, the perfect rose, within itself, and that it can function as a gateway, so to speak, for grasping the ideal form. And Aristotle also thought similarly, and that's why, overtly speaking, Aristotle was protoscientific and Plato was, in a sense, antiscientific, even though this might be a subtler debate in its details. 

Anyways, in short, this distinction between map and territory, or theory and reality, is a pretty nuanced subject, kinda like the idea of the ship of Theseus, in a sense, where it is not pretty clear what the difference, in a sense, between that which is the ship of Theseus, and that which is not the ship of Theseus. 

 

[UnbornTao]

Maybe there's nothing there, existentially. And we add to and superimpose on that.

This is a deeper study, that of experience and concept.

Edited November 10, 2023 by UnbornTao

[ZzzleepingBear]

I'll leave you with this. A map is a visualization tool. Nothing more nothing less. And inorder to follow or create a map in the first place, there needs to be a initial incentive to do so. 

Good luck with mapping this out.

[not-a-faerie]

On 11/2/2023 at 8:38 AM, LastThursday said:

the map not being the territory.

i don't need a map to be on the territory

[LastThursday]

On 11/19/2023 at 8:06 AM, not-a-faerie said:

i don't need a map to be on the territory

Agreed. But you might need a map to find the territory or to navigate around it.