dimensional_morality.md 3.9 KB
all things Korean my wife is Korean daehan mingug I associate a particular set of colours as being Korean colours and it was because of some of the books, notepaper, pens, writing utensils, bags, pencil case, small tools some sort of objects that were small and utilities of some sort stationary in any case, I saw certain colours which I came to associate as being normal Korean colours, as it was my first time dealing with a Korean person ( my wife) in real life, and she seemed to have these objects the colours were pink, pale grey, and perhaps peach or flesh coloured I later saw these again when I was examining different syntax themes for Vim they had a colour scheme called Seoul 256, and it was indeed these same colours now it's totally possible htat I simply fooled myself into believing these are the same set of colours but it really seemed as though the some of those were carrying over from my previous experiences obviously I recognize the path of bias available simply because of the name of the vim colourscheme but nevertheless, I felt really convinced by htis association and Iw onder if it has any truth to it exit here we go having a conversation again talking about shapes the shape of the universe, the shape of the human experience the shapes of things we can perceive, shapes of movement are shapes of movement analogous to shapes of thought are shapes of thought analogous to patterns of behaviour value judgments axioms producing the forms of patterns observed to occur how do these things all tie into one another? is it based on the manner in which the human mind can conceive of things? or is it that manner in which things can exist as a whole? would such patterns be morally different in a Universe which had a different number of dimensions? How could that occur? How could that be ascertained? would someone have to exist in a dimension whose properties were such that the dimensions of movement and conception available is equal to that of the dimension with the higher number of dimensions out of the set of dimensions being observed? How do we go about making that distinction? can we produce postulates from a Universe with a lesser number of dimensions? would we still be able to infer any morality, and if so especially the same morality, as that which is inferrable within the Universe of greater dimensions to those who inhabit it? If we are to understand human experience, biological experience, within the properties of our 3+T Dimension Universe, then we understand that having dimensions allows for movement of matter, such that the conception of change can occur, by material transformation expressed as a valence of vector matrices across said dimensions and that, because of this, the transformations include the movement of energy and matter into the manifestation of stars and planets, with behaviours producing an increase in the complexity of material components to the point of evolving organic life and the human experience a declared observation of the material transformations, and likely transformations occurring beyond what can only be perceived as material transformation. Nevertheless, a declaration that such transformations have been observed, and that these include the transformations to which, at some level of observation, a human is perceiving the universe through a composed field of observation into which the experience of the human body is intrinsically bound such that there are mechanisms being influenced within that system of experience of that one perceptual instance that are not perceptible to the same level of direction by other perceptual instances, and which influence the observation taking place within the perceptual instance these include the experience of respiration, neuromuscular activation, neurochemical adaptation, reception of sensorial input, mechanisms to affect the environment, and so forth How do we posit that such things are not merely the same experience with an additional degree of dynamism? exit