Outline
Self-Establishment
AI summary: The audio transcripts show the speaker talking about their creative process, especially with videos and writing. They explain the difficulty of communicating ideas clearly, wanting to be both brief and thorough. The speaker struggles to balance personal experiences with bigger, universal themes, aiming to make their message clear and powerful. They also recognize that every medium has its limits, and truth can be different for each person. Throughout their journey, they constantly check and improve their work, taking risks in order to stay true to themselves and their values. In the end, the speaker accepts their flaws and the uncertainties of life.
My thoughts: This is a very stream of consciousness attempt at expressing the underlying worldview informing my writing, so take it as just me rambling about what occupies my mind. It will likely offend, since it may be considered a sin to have something so loose, unstructured, and vulnerability-revealing released. One can see the contradictions and "errors" in the way that I express myself, but that is just the point of having these recordings published in the first place.
-
AI Summary
This audio excerpt details the speaker's struggles and evolving approach to video communication. The loss of over 2,000 previously recorded videos significantly impacted their perspective, highlighting the value of creating a comprehensive archive of their creative journey. The speaker emphasizes the importance of accessible communication, advocating for segmented content and various media to enhance understanding. Ultimately, the text focuses on the iterative process of learning and refining communication skills through experimentation, feedback, and continuous self-reflection, aiming to foster meaningful discussion and address complex issues effectively.
Key Topics
- Video Production
- Communication skills
- Content creation
- Feedback analysis
- Problem-solving
Transcript
Okay. Uh, since I finally finished the last video, I feel like I should also kind of talk about a bunch of other s*** cuz like I got to segment my recordings cuz if I record everything in one 10 million hour video, it will not actually it will be too long, you know? It will be one it will be too holistic. It will be too long lengthy. The problem about videos is that they're they're very heavy. The good thing about text is that they're very light and compact and I've be able to express a lot in text. But then again, I have seen the value of video. I have seen what I can express and what I can express on video. Um, the thing about videos is that you can only say as much you can say and the like getting get growing accustomed to videos is not that difficult. Like I will probably make a video after like I'm making this video these videos after like months after more than a year like like six months over six months of not recording videos much at all. Um, and I haven't really discussed much. I haven't really recorded much especially since I lost all my f****** videos. That that obviously uh plays a role into how I perceive recording videos and that's Why? For the last 2 3 months, I haven't really recorded as much because when you lose over,000 videos, it really impacts the way that you perceive videos as a whole. Especially when you no longer um have to go through 12,000 videos because they're all f****** gone. I was going to go through 2,000 videos in the hopes of like talking about them, writing about them each um and providing a summary of everything that I said in each of those videos. The thing is, I didn't really say that much, but at the same f****** time, I said a lot. You know, what I did say was limited, but it did reflect my limitations at the time, which is incredible documentation. You don't want to show everything, but then you want to show a lot anyway. You want to show the progress of your arts journey. You want to show the progress of your the way that you communicate and the way that you think and the way that comes out in the way that you say things in video. And you want to see that journey and I since I have lost um over 2,000 videos, I have lost a great thresh sure that I will never be able to recover and I'm just going to have to accept that and move on, move forward and find ways to record videos now with my with with my refined communication skills since I've been able to write so many words and that influences the way that I communicate in speaking. Right? When you write 1.7 million words, that affects the way that you think and the way that you speak as well. Especially when you're recording videos and you're not just recording videos. um where you just do nothing but like they are talking head videos. So they're specifically for the purpose of discussion. Well, more like a monologue, but the goal is to discuss. The goal is to hopefully uh incite or no provoke uh conversation to to trigger conversation to um to stimulate to stimulate conversation to elicit conversation all of that. Um like that's the goal, right? Discussion because there's a lot of things that I've yet to discuss about. There's a lot of things that I've yet to write down about. There's a lot of things that I've yet to address and if I can't address them, if I can't discuss about them, if I cannot have all those laid out and outlined in spoken voice, then it's going to be harder, significantly harder for me to express and communicate because people will have a harder time understanding because they will just see things through when videos would certainly make that a lot more accessible and make that a lot more whole, right? All embracing, right? Anyways, um now that I made a lot of personal websites and I've also provided means of like uh housing many different kinds of writings and files and s*** like that. Um and I continue to do that continue to find more ways to represent different information to segment further to section further in hopes of really like making it not feel too holistic that it's hard to read because it has to be segmented for accessibility. Um but yeah, it's not going to be easy. It's not going to be easy. It's going to be gradual and I'm only going to do as much as possible like my ation is only going to grow more sophisticated over time and stream over time and but right now it's not going to look like it. It's going to like I've already improved so much but then it's not it's not going to look like it. I'm going to see a lot of setbacks. I can imagine because I have yet to really uh really explore a fuller version of the personal websites that I am now starting to well starting to establish and I'm not seeing feedback yet. But once I start seeing the way that people respond to them, especially to the videos that I try to record, like if I want to edit videos, then I'm going to have to see a lot of the feedback and see how people react to it because I have to make them entertaining. But I've yet to do that. And for now, the main goal is to express anything at all. And that's been the case since 2021. While I've experimented a lot with editing, well, I've experimented a lot with different kinds of videos, music, um, video essays, and just talking head videos, that doesn't necessarily mean that I have already reached a point where I can say that I have accomplished the task of video communication, visual communication, video, visual auditory communication through video, right? It goes safer writing because while I've accomplished much, there is still so much to redefine, to reframe, to reaccomplish, to reinterpret it because I am seeing a lot of responses. I'm seeing like not necessarily direct responses, but I'm seeing a lot of responses in terms of like what people engage with, what people what appeals to people and what people find boring or un uninteractive. If They feel like they can't interact. They don't feel um like it's engaging. They don't feel like they can interact with it. They don't feel like they there's no way to uh know what they feel about it. Then that impacts severely that you know that negatively impacts um the effectiveness of the you know the point of communication really in the context of personal websites, the context of videos, in the context of all this like it's feedback is essential and even now still a lot to work with. Basically, like I feel like it's just it's just I'm just talking about very universal things. Again, very universal things that that's a point of conversation. I kind of like talk about universal things because if I sound too crazy, nobody's going to understand what I'm saying and nobody's going to understand what the f*** I'm talking about. What am I referencing? What am I talking about? What am I saying? What is what is going on through my mind? If I can't like talk about it in straightforward terms, it's not going to make sense. So that is the point of this video. That is the point of all this and I'm reiterating it again and again mainly because of course it's still it's been a long time since I recorded myself. It's been a long time since I've discussed about anything related to my life in video. I can imagine just the extensive like wealth that I have yet to kind of like reprocess, you know, like um when you're when you're videoing, you're not just expressing yourself again. You're reinterpreting the same f****** information that I like the same f****** information that I've written down and and expressing it through uh through speech, right? Through facial expressions, body language and all of that. Uh it's a reinterpretation and that is why it is essential to have both not just to have different mediums but also uh a overall fuller ecosystem of signs and symbols. Like I've done this many times when it comes to uh live streaming. I have recorded hours of me just kind of talking about the my my life and stuff like that. And I have lost a lot of those live streams that I've exported to my YouTube channel. And I hope that I don't have that same issue anymore. But like I'm not necessarily discouraged to the point of giving up because I have grown as a result of all those live streams. I've grown as a result of all those videos talking head videos. So each video has allowed me to reimagine myself and re you know to re see myself in a different way to see myself again in a very different way each time a new way of seeing myself and I will slightly adjust. You know you take risks you take risks you compromise and you hedge and then you adjust ly you fine-tune and you do that again and again over time the feedback is there as a part of it right each time I do it I change the way that I view about it and I find more intentional and refined ways of expressing the same information or you know and I'll find new things to talk about because then I will receive that confidence that that that linearity that smoothness that comes with having expressed my initial topics you know and I will dive into more complex topics or more challenging topics or topics that just don't come naturally when I'm like talking spontaneously or impromptu in video recordings. Eventually, I will have covered everything and and I say quote unquote on that everything but everything within my limits within the limitations of video recording. Eventually, I say eventually um very wishful wish wishful wishful very uh wish oriented statement For example, like I can talk about the different mechanisms that make a make something work, whatever it is, you know? I can talk about the way that I think when I'm playing a video game. I can talk about the way that I think when I'm writing a f****** story. I talk about the way that I think when I do anything. And I can talk about what I feel about anything. Anything specifically. And that is Even if I end up soundly opinionated, the goal is not to sound opinionated, of course, but then the goal is to kind of express as much as I can within my limits because eventually I'm going to be I'm going to be pressured to do that. There going to be situations in the future where I will have to address issues where I'll have to communicate them where I'll have to say these are my concerns. These are my perceptions. These are my this is my perspective on the issue and this is what I believe will be valuable moving forward. If we address these concerns, this is what what's going to be valuable moving forward. If we don't address these concerns, I believe that we're going to struggle to do this. I believe that this is not going to be easy moving forward. I think we're just going to like it's it's like we can talk about the same f****** issue again again, but like it's only as valuable. It's only as effective. As much as we've considered all the possible angles, all the possible options, everything that this problem could possibly take, all the forms that this problem could possibly take, and find a way to compromise on an on a solution that covers as much as is valuable or as is practical, right? Because like you you're gonna I'm going to take risks constantly in terms of communication, in terms of frameworks, in terms of writing, in terms of mediums of communication. And it's not going to be easy. It's not going to be simple. It's not going to be straightforward and I'm going to take lots of risks. When I recorded myself back in live in 2021 or live stream myself back in 2021, I had to I took a risk because I did not know how to do it and I did not know what was going to happen. I I knew I was going to get burned out and stressed, but I didn't think it was going to be that uncomfortable and stressful. So, but at the same f****** time, it's like I kind of push myself because I believe that um even if it was difficult now that it would eventually be a very important memory of failure and what I can do to improve like what I what I improve my way approaching it in the future. When I live stream again back in early 20 24 in February 13 and I did that until April 27 Wait, no, that was not uh April 27. That's that's actually the serialization. I actually live streamed the same time as I was serializing my novels. So, I was not only serializing serializing the novels, I was also live streaming. Of course, I wasn't live streaming every day, but I was live streaming anyway. And during that time, um I realized also even now that even if I even if I've learned I know a lot better compared to 2021, I also don't know a lot better. I constantly have to reinterpret and retest again and again because I can't I will not be able to perceive all the issues and even if I can perceive a lot of issues actually solving those issues is a very different matter because I first I have to identify those issues which is already a demanding task because I'm going to have to write it down and really explore everything about it and it's not just about Minecraft we're talking about dealing with universal frameworks we're going to have to dive into like literal fields like example like psychology sociology and stuff like that and I'm not it's not just for fancy sake it's for communicating exactly What makes those problems important? What makes those problems tick? The mechanisms of all those issues. When we talk about cultural challenges, of course, we're going to talk about the context. We're going to talk about particularities. But then we can only navigate them only as much as we can define them. So, if we can't define them, we can't navigate them. We can't identify them. And so, we can't really solve them. And if we do solve them without identifying them, I don't know how the f*** the problem exists in the first place. Because identification is basically saying the problem exists. Even if If we're able to solve the problem without realizing it, we want to be intentional. We want to approach the problem with a a task in mind. And that task, the goal is that it is solved. If we keep relying on chances, we're not going to be able to do anything. So the point of identification, the point of studying all DVT's academic topics is to communicate. It's to identify the problem and to lay out the solutions and to lay out the details of why all of those options suck and why this is the OB. optimal solution, even if it is limited, even if it is at best a lesser quote unquote evil, right? We're dealing with fic victories every day, even if we don't necessarily realize it. And if we recognize that each victory that we accomplish is a fick one, then we'll be able to see the nuances of each accomplishment and see the unintended consequences that come with every action. And that's not going to come naturally. Again, a lot of hindsight, a lot of like we fail and then we realize, we fail and then we realize it's just constant taking risks, constant failure, constant mistakes, and then constant readjustment. This is what defines our intellect or skill. It's not about knowing what the problem is going to be before it happens. It's not about predicting everything. It's not about judging somebody before they say something. It's about giving time for the situation to unfold itself and then addressing different patterns that emerge and and and and being able to tell them apart, be able to tell apart and to identify anything at all. Even if it might seem judgmental at first, but with the end goal of adapting to it and giving it its situational basis, giving it its own perspective, personality, and tailoring to that specific issue, right? That's why we have particular specific names for different hurricanes. Not because we want to sound endearing or fancy or or or whatever, but because we have to personalize issues because issues are only as important as they are identifiable.
-
AI Summary
This is a transcript of a self-reflective monologue, likely from a video recording, where the speaker analyzes their communication style. The central theme revolves around the speaker's struggle to balance detail and conciseness in their communication. They explore the challenges of conveying complex ideas effectively, emphasizing the need for contextual relevance and universal accessibility, while acknowledging the inherent limitations of language and representation. The speaker uses analogies, such as coding and economics, to illustrate their point and reveals their ongoing process of self-improvement through self-analysis and constant reinterpretation of experiences. Ultimately, the monologue demonstrates a deep engagement with the epistemological complexities of communication and knowledge creation.
Key Topics
- Concise communication
- Effective communication
- AI speech analysis
- Universal ideas
- Practical applications
Transcript
Okay. So, I've been able to turn uh one of the videos that I've recorded just now today. Just just just a while ago. Like the last video that I recorded, I turned it into an audio file and then I sent it in to a AI language model to be analyzed so that I could see the patterns of my communication, the patterns of my speech. I repeat a lot and I noticed that I say a lot of ah and yeah, that could be improved. I've seen cosmic skeptic which is who is a YouTuber and I've seen the way that they communicate in debates. and they sound a lot more concise and they don't say a lot of filler words and being able to do that would be great. Of course, that's easy to do when you've kind of rehearsed the same arguments and you've kind of explored them in many different ways. So, you're basically a master of the very things that you talk about every day. And that is what I do as well. I talk about the the same topics again and again. Well, I do explore them in many different angles again and again. Each time reinterprets that especially with the start of the content X at the time of the recording. That does not mean that there is no opportunity for a systematic approach or you know like as time goes on it will grow much more intuitive because I will have done it so many times to count which will affect systematicness. I feel that this video uh could be a another uh another video for me to explore different um I don't know what else I have yet to address. I feel like I've kind of like given a very high level overview of a lot of the things that I'm concerned about, a lot of the things that occupy my mind that that go through my mind when I address issues or stuff like that. Um what else? Yeah, it's really it's not that simple. You know, if I could talk about the milk that I'm drinking right now, that would be great because I I it's hard to talk about the everyday. It's hard to talk about the everyday details mainly because everything needs to make sense. Everything needs to be productive, constructive. If you're just listing down details, it's not productive. You need to be able to list down details and you need to be able to tie them into a broader context because if it doesn't make f****** sense and it's just a list of details, then it's useless. And that's why I sound very universal at times, even if it means um trimming a lot of the det that I could record because I can only record so much about the same details and concerns and topics again and again without ending up becoming verbose. The goal is to constantly find new ways to communicate it even if I sound the same every time because eventually the more that I look at the videos, the more that I see the videos and see how I communicate and have AI analyze it, the more that I'll see the repetition, the more that I'll notice patterns that should be corrected in order order to not necessarily correct it but that should be eliminated in order for more concise compact communication because I will be able to be as effective as a person at a debate as somebody like if I am the kind of person that can debate somebody in public and do that every day that would be great because impromptu communication is not easy face to face communication is not easy like I need to be able to drink this coffee and I need to be able to identify it as it is and say this is the moment this is the call of the moment but I also need to be able to tie it in to universal ideas and that play that is essential to debates that essential to just clear communication right if you sound too obscure it's not going to make sense if I talk about this plate and I just say this plate is the way it looks like in the way that it is it's not going to make sense why because you don't have a framework for understanding whether something is a lot it's colorful you can there's already a framework for colors and you can definitely take a picture and say this is the color what it is But then even colors are impacted by light. The more that the more brighter the room, the more brighter it's going to be or the color will change. There's always going to be some contextual factor that really makes it hard to tie things into the universal level. The color is not going to be the same everywhere. Even if it's the same f****** rice. And I may say that there's a lot of rice, but like not everybody's going to have the same idea of a lot and not everybody's going to have the same idea of a little bit. Even if I was able to measure it in weight. The question is going beyond such details, how can we interpret such details and make it univer universally accessible and useful? It's not just about accessibility. It's not just about precision. It's not just about listing details. It's not just about accumulation. It's about utility. This is why I often ignore a lot of things. But that comes at a cost of recording things and documenting things, documenting things that could be useful. and I never know it. And then I realized that in hindsight that oh no, I could have recorded this. I could have done this. I could have stored this file. I could have this did this. But then I didn't really think it was important. Right? There's a lot of details that are going to be important. There's got a lot of details that are not going to be important. The goal is to explore as much angles as possible, as many angles as possible while ensuring that I am still working in a streamlined form or fashion. And I say streamlined as in I need to be able to operate with stability. But I also need to be able to operate within some experimentation like a balance between that does not really exist. It's going to be dynamic. It's going to depend on my current needs at a time. It's going to depend on my current limitations, resources, and situation. And that situation is not going to manifest as a singular object. It's not going to manifest as a singular situation. It is often going to be intersection of many different factors, many different situations, many different circumstances. that don't interact neatly and in ways that feel diametrically opposed. It's not even going to contrast each other in a stark way. It's going to contrast each other in a way that is so intricate that it feels like it is both yes and no, gray and blue and black and white and green and all of the colors and none of them at all. These are what goes through my mind. But this is not just my perception. This is how difficult it is to communicate anything. That's why I don't always take pictures. I don't take pictures of my plate, for example. I don't pick pictures of the cartoons I drink every day. I don't just take pictures of my face every day. It depends on what I feel. If I feel like I would need to take pictures, I do it because I can't really define how much how many pictures I need or how many how many how many picture or how little pictures how many pictures I need basically because I can I can say, well, I need to take this much pictures every day and you can say, "Well, yeah, but then the time that you spent taking pictures could be could have been spent elsewhere." It's not about regretting that you took pictures. It's about accepting that you did it anyway and you did it because you wanted to and you did it because you felt that it was useful, even if it might not end up that useful in the future or in my future. Maybe it'll end up useful 500 years in the future. You know, you never really know. But you don't really define things based on the future or in in the now or in you just define things as much like in the now. Yeah, you define things in the now, right? Only as much as the now as the you now says is important, right? That's not always going to make sense. There's no universal uh across time thing that is always going to be effective, right? Basically, I feel like I'm just kind of reiterating the same idea, just kind of finding new ways of rephrasing and re and reexpressing it. Right? If I if I take pictures of these clothes, if I document them, if I write about them, I need to consider how they are, what they are, how they relate to everything else. That's why I rely on analogies so much because they help me talk about things that are not important right now, but I can use them as analogies. For example, I use the island syndrome as a way to un to explain my current situation, my current lifestyle. Right now, now that sounds hard, but then you will actually have to see the passage that I wrote in order to understand how that comparison was made. But it's not about that specific example. It's about how it reflects the need to analogize to integrate all sorts of different ideas in order to create something that is that is unique, you know, that is engaging as in it doesn't just repeat the same information and it re reinterprets the same ideas in ways that expands someone's understanding of that issue. So it doesn't sound abstract, it sounds grounded because you can visualize all sorts of ways of approaching it, right? Because some things are so obvious, but they're only obvious because you have spent so much time with the same f****** issues that it's obvious. But for a lot of people, they will not experience those issues in the same way. And because of that, they will not come to the same conclusions and they will not come to the same particulars. You know, the numbers, if you're talking about a tool that you use and you have the certain settings or certain numbers or certain resources that you believe it should be this amount that are necessary for this tool to operate and whatever. There's going to be different approaches, different s*** that influence somebody's decision- making. And the goal is to be both locally effective but also universally addressing like you're addressing the universal as well as the local. Right? This is why when you're coding, you have to segment constantly because you have to address things in a way that reflects there. So self-contained problems, concerns, essentials while also making sure they're not intermingling and causing contradictions in the packages or in the code base. You want to have everything make sense on their own. Some things can only happen on their own. Each local function will operate and make sense eternally and the only reason they'll make sense is because they do not wholly combine. The thing about holistic holism is that it is incredibly segmented. Why? Because people do not always access themselves by holes. We access our uh each other by what we can provide to each other. The things that we can provide whereby we can achieve cooperation. We don't show everything. We don't provide everything. We don't exchange everything. We don't communicate everything. We communicate what is relevant. We communicate what is contextually relevant. Always what is opposite. Never what is entire because you're going to spend too much time logistically having to do all that. I can't share my dog with somebody else and expect that they will come to the same conclusions as me when it comes to like the philosophical approach or philosophical aims that I have when it comes to actually like showing that dog in the first place. That sounds completely uh obscure or convoluted, but you can kind of like get just based on how convoluted it is that people's situations, especially when they're foreign to yours, are going to look convoluted. And that's why you can only converse and relate on contextual and accessible means. So my comparison is convoluted, but to somebody else that will not be convoluted. To somebody else that will make sense and that's how we operate. That's how we exchange the details. That is how we accomplish unity, holism, segmentation, recognizing the limitations of local realities, local bubbles. When you think about economy, you think about local bubbles, you think about macroeconomics, you think about global bubbles or macroeconomics. And I say bubbles in a very flexible and loose way. I'm not actually saying it's going to be like a bubble as in it's going to explode. I'm not talking about bubble as in Japanese economy. I'm talking about bubble as in like just this whole whatever I'm just using the word bubble arbitrarily. So yeah, you can understand it as micro and macro. You can understand the individual decision- making. You can understand global decision- making. You can understand cultural decisions that that influence nations interests. You can understand individual interests that influence your decision- making. Right? And you can see how the culture impacts people individually, individual by individual. But you can understand how it impacts social structures which are very different. Sociological is going to be very different from psychological right because psychological is not individual. Sociological is not individual either. It's it's not even group because group does not exist. It's a general umbrella term and it's abstract which means that it doesn't really exist in real life. There's no such thing as a group. Group only exists in the frameworks that find use of it that find that it is useful. We use the word group in sociology Not because we can define the word group in its entirety in all the f****** forms it manifests in reality, but because it is a useful umbrella term that we can use to define a group. Not a group as in group in all its forms, but a group in its most practical and umbrella and very surface level way. And then we apply the context, we apply the nuances, we add everything in. But then when I look at the group, when I used the word group I have a very different interpretation from it based on it if I use in a story I'll have a very different way of expressing the idea of a group not because the idea of a group doesn't exist but because the idea of a group does not really have objective like essentials there's no essential thing that makes a group a group you could say that well a group is composed of individuals of members but members do not really exist presuppositions rely upon presuppositions. So when we rely on the idea of a group to exist, we rely on the idea of members to exist. A group is defined by members. A group is defined by individuals. These are presuppositions, right? It's recursive. We go from group, we say it's a presupposition. We say we rely on the idea that group exists and we say that the reasoning for it and and then we untangle, we remove the the presupposition um image and we say that it exists because of this because they're members and individuals. But then we also we turn those members and individuals to prepositions themselves. This is epistmology ep epistemology in that everything is pre relies on presitions. We rely on assumptions that have no objective evidence. Like when when you say I like chicken because quantum mechanics that doesn't make sense. You You can say that physics makes sense but it does not necessarily mean that that your car is going to be something you like more than something else. You can definitely uh explain it in psychological terms. You can definitely explain it and you can definitely be factual as in like there is critical evidence to suggest that this person will like blue more than red because of these psychological factors, these cultural factors and stuff like that. But you're addressing things in local reality which means it's factual but it doesn't necessarily address every single thing. That is the red herring, right? That is the red herring of reality. Because everything is interconnected, but everything is a divergence from each other. Not because there's no reality as a whole as in everything connects to each other and energy is like transferred and transformed rather than deleted, right? But then when you're making analogies between physics and whether you like a card or not, that's hard to define. That's hard to really like decide. And you even if you extend it to psychology, it's hard to be factual when you're operating within frameworks or local reality because something can be true but it's not the whole truth. Local reality is local truth which means it only makes sense internally like a local function. But then when you extend that to global you see that there are segmentations of reality where it is true in a self-contained way but it would be contradictory. if it was deoized which means if you integrated it more holistically I remove the segmentations that define each local reality or each local function. I'm talking about code bases because they are perfect analogy to defining reality but reality is not necessarily a codebase which means that it's even more complex and ambiguous and there's no true definition of it. The reason why I'm giving this framework is because it makes sense not because it is true. It gives a satisfactory way to define it not necessarily that it is the way that it is really right but I am operating upon the proposition of energy um energy uh the energy the the laws of the dynamics right I'm I'm relying on that um to define what I I I identify as local reality and global reality and that we are limited by to what we know and because of that we can only rely on the facts that are available to us but then I started the full explanation of what and all the facts that make something true right we can say that something happens because of this but then what happens because of that thing then or what what happens that makes that cause possible, right? We could say a car is because of parts, but what makes those parts parts? Then we can go all around be recursive and then we tie it all to the beginning of everything or the beginning of of basic ideas and we realize that even those very ideas are precarious as in they're fragile because everything breaks down but they don't break down in atomizations. They don't break down at the basic level. They break down even at the level because there's no definition of what make what makes something an atom or an object. But then some people say again like that that that they're objects in themselves, things in themselves. K said um transcendentalist uh transcendentalism posits that um objects in themselves exist. There's a objective reality outside of ourselves and there is this idea of like this objective like fundamental thing that navigates us all that that that that ties us all together somehow. It's not like really modest. I don't describe it. I feel I'm describing it incorrectly. Anyways, um I still am trying to understand uh how to express that idea better. I feel like maybe there's a lot of like uh errors in the way that I express that. I could imagine, but I'm still reading a lot of like philos as much as philosophy as much as possible. Of course, I'm not reading it constantly because again, you're kind of like uh processing it slowly. That's how you kind of learn space repetition. Not by reading books constantly, but by reading books and then trying to understand it. Most of the actual growth happens when you actually process it rather than when you read it. Because you can accumulate all that details, information, you can accumulate all kinds of experiences, but if you're not able to reinterpret them constantly and process them in ways that are applicable and actionable and practical, that they're only going to be as useful as just memories, right? Your memories are going to be as useful as dreams. As in like they're only as useful as they are practicalized, right? When somebody says, "I changed my life because of dream," that is in the same effect as I changed my life because of memory. And I'm not saying that they're literally entirely analogous. I'm saying that like in in the effect that something is only as useful as it is made effectual. So you can say you can argue that memories uh the the actual reality of those memories that those memories represent is is impactful. And you would be correct those actual experiences have a uh arguably greater impact than dreams do because dreams are not You could argue that they're not as as intense or vivid as experiences, real life experiences, and you would be correct. But I am talking about representations. I'm talking about memory as a representation. The same way dreams, even if they are experiential in in a way, they're also represent. You can also argue that they're kind of representational in that they represent things. So people interpret them, interpret those memories, interpret those um dreams, they're interpreting representations. And that's why I'm saying to the same effect that they're only as useful as they are practicalized. They're only as valuable as they are practicalized. I'm not saying that everything is only valuable as much as they are made useful, but you don't exist until you make yourself exist. Not that you don't exist objectively, but you don't exist until you have given yourself a voice. You have voiced out something, right? Not not because not be not that you don't exist objectively. I'm just saying that like you're only going to be as much as you communicate. You're only going to be as much as you interpret. You're only going to be as much as you communicate not to others necessarily, but to yourself as well because those interpretations are um expend when extended to self-reflection and self-awareness make those past experiences um more than just past experiences that you remember from memory. They practice ize it, they turn into something real, grounded, actionable, something that you can interpret, something you can put into grounded, concrete um actions, concretize, intellectualize, systematize. Like these terms don't make sense by themselves, but they make sense within the broader idea of definition. And that again is a very precarious and fragile thing. But the attempt, the essay otherwise is valuable in and of of itself, even if it's not necessarily like quotequote effective. But again, you're also addressing the self, which means you're not necessarily communicating for perfect communication to the world. You're communicating to yourself in the process of trying to communicate.
-
AI Summary
This audio recording presents a speaker outlining four overarching goals for a self-defined digital ecosystem. These goals involve documenting past experiences through fiction and non-fiction writing, establishing a comprehensive digital presence across multiple platforms, integrating all aspects of life into this digital space primarily through writing, and addressing all past media consumption and creation. The speaker emphasizes the crucial role of "frames of reference" in understanding and communicating experiences, arguing that seemingly disparate elements—like Minecraft gameplay and academic texts—can contribute to a holistic self-understanding. Underlying these goals is a personal journey of navigating past traumas and rebuilding a sense of self, with the digital ecosystem serving as a crucial tool for this process.
Key Topics
- Personal goals
- Digital ecosystem
- Media frameworks
- Self-expression
- Effective communication
Transcript
All right. So, I'm going to talk about a different topic um but still within the same uh scope. Okay. So, the compasses of this video is uh the my current assumptions moving forward. My current assumptions moving forward is that the four goals specifically uh let me let me actually look at those goals because I have I don't memorize everything. um goals. Okay, the first goal is I have yet to write down a fiction stories and non-fiction framework writing um as a way to represent all kinds of past experiences and go what goes through my mind just my Minecraft server for my Twitch viewers back in my two-month live streaming journey 2021 which was like a virtual town virtual town created from scratch. Number two, I've yet to have a more established digital digital ecosystem with all the websites and platforms including but not limited to Tumblr, New York City, Space, BTW.Oo, Blogger, and GitHub pages. Now, before I move forward, I have to explain that these platforms are completely invalid and useless on their own. They're only useful within the ecosystem that I seek to define. And I say I seek define because it's not something that I've yet to concretize and solidify yet. Okay, returning to what we were talking about number three. I've yet to integrate every aspect of my life into the digital ecosystem as it seems that for now writing is the main and practically only language of that ecosystem. It is not necessarily bad that this is the case given the laws of the videos and the compound character of writing. But the issue of the writing is that it can blindside me to certain topics that one might encounter most often when writing or reading. Some experiences such as those earlier memories of walking through the streets and going to events need to be prepared properly with images, videos, maps, music, and all other languages. And number four, I've yet to address every single piece of media that I have consumed and created throughout my life. To give examples, I've yet to talk about every single piece of Roblox video and game from throughout the years. And I've yet to do the same for each of my Facebook posts. I've yet to do the same for academic texts and novels and do the same for all of my Roblox games. These examples are just examples. They're they're parts they're part of the proposed ecosystem that I seek to build because if I cannot define what is what is is then I will not be able to explain anything. Media are very critical terms and I say terms as in media not not media as a term but media as frames of reference. They're frames of reference the same way a framework is a frame of reference or An example is a frame of reference. When I talk about One Piece, a lot of people will use One Piece and will use other anime as a way to compare One Piece and elements of One Piece. They will define One Piece based on other frames of references. And that goes the same for every single piece of media. When I talk about Roblox videos or games or Facebook posts or academic texts or novels or my Roblox games in particular, each will be a path, a frame of reference whereby I will be able to explain everything and I say everything because each path presents the opportunity to explain a very critical which is entirety or an everything in itself and when people operate based on context and fragments and segmentations that each have the power to completely change your life we're working with life changers so we can understand based on what I've mentioned the goals the four goals that there is still a lot to work with, right? To be honest, every time that I talk, I keep thinking that I sound autistic or some s***. Like being analytical is being autistic or some s***. Um, but like honestly, when you're dealing with the kind of past past experiences that I have had, you're going to be forced to kind of try to express everything because if you're if you're not able to express everything, you're going to struggle to cope with a world that is hard to define, that is in inherently ambiguous, especially when you've been exposed to past experiences that have left your definitions fragile or broken. You know, because the definitions that I had were not able to cope under the pressure because they were fundamentally broken, right? It's like uh it's like do uh past experiences. It's like experiences, life events that make somebody lose their confidence in those in their more black and white frameworks or uh frames of reference. It's not that I was black and white. It's that I had fundamental assumptions that could not be invalidated without a complete revision of my entire sense of everything. Right? It's not like I couldn't learn. I could learn and absorb and integrate new information. It's just that when those new information is in the form of a life event that completely changes everything about everybody that I know and everything that I know, then that will change everything. When people that I trust betray, when when people that I trust betray me, I lost significant frames of reference. When you say role model, you're you're defining them in terms of frames of reference. They're a critical frame of reference in whereby I will understand everything else because they are well they play a very big role in my self-development, my development of my psyche, development of my sense of self, right? When I when it comes to role models, people that I trust, uh figures of authority, they underpin who I am. And that is why when it comes to transition to adulthood when it comes to so when it comes to those life events you can kind of see why I have reached this point why I have needed to talk about the words definition or words such as definition because it's just a natural result of having all of those definitions crumble and I say the word natural with quote unquote because it's natural for me it was a natural course of action for me over the course of so many iterations so it wasn't natural it was organic in that it did not make sense in each of those moments but as time passed it it gradually aligned into that path right and that's how it basically happened so now that I've addressed the four goals and I've addressed the background of why those goals came to be uh I can talk about yeah those are my assumptions I was going to talk about assumptions those four goals were my assumptions they they they are assumptions in of themselves And they are they rely on assumptions as well, right? They they are assumptions in of themselves because they um to me they inherently self- validate. They self-justify as in they do not need explanation. They self-explanatory. But I can if I wanted to describe them there are assumptions that I have uh made that I that I have that underpin those four goals, right? Assumptions like such as like if I do this, if I record FPS media, I will make it easier for me to address a lot of issues frames of reference. These are very epistemological and semiotic in in nature but like the point is that I do have philosophical leanings and I do have philosophical foundations otherings that help me define things. Of course, when we're talking about debate and we're talking about neutrality in debate or you know particular perspectives, there's going to be a lot of while while there's going to be a lot of frames of reference reference, effective debaters usually don't rely too much on the idea of a frame of reference. They usually rely on um rhetoric and rely on well just effective uh argumentation of course effective argumentation that is not felacious. It's not necessarily about being right because there's no right right there's only what allows a person to be comfortable right and if you can challenge their beliefs you're challenging with what what what they're comfortable with and that exchange allows for a lot of development in terms of like how somebody can communicate more effectively. How somebody can respond to all kinds of different situations such as attacks on the character or in the case that they do sound like they're attacking on the character or they they just the way they're phrasing is uh unproductive or something like that. There's a lot of growth that can happen in those kind of situations. But it's not debates themselves to which it is restricted because the groundwork built in order to foster those debates already are valuable in and of themselves as as markers of growth. Right? I feel like that I have said a lot. Um what else have I not uh expressed? The assumptions, the four goals and the background of those four goals. I think that is all for now. I will not go into depth. I was hoping to kind of risk extend this to 20 minutes of video, but then I realized that uh I've kind of like said a lot of things already and if I say anymore it will kind of just be kind of the same thing. Usually you would want I would want to be structured and concise but then videos are not necessarily valuable because they're structured and concise. They're valuable because they express what they need to say at that moment. And if they're not valuable they're not structured and concise it express it reflects that particular marker that particular point of my journey. But if they're structurally concise it it means that I've refined my abilities and I've grown. But if I was already refined from the start, then you will not be able to see the journey and you will not be able to understand what made me the way that I am. Because nobody is born knowing how to do and everything. They're born relying on a lot of presuppositions. They're born growing basically and growth is inherently historical as in like you can see the person history over time. Maybe not necessarily like directly but like you will see you'll be able to you will be able to at least perceive and assume that there is assumptions in such a sort of in such growth or just in code in general right in that version history you'll be able to understand better by having the data having the information related to that code right so if I write talk in stream of consciousness in this video then you can understand that like like this is very stream of consciousness I'm already diverging um but there's no s such thing as diverging right that's a very subjective thing uh searching and nonlinearity are subjective. They don't actually exist. Uh they exist in terms of standard standardization, but a lot for a lot of people that's subjective, right? Presentism is when you rely on present standards of whatever and you say this is what defines objective reality when in reality there's no such thing as objective reality and there's no such thing as the present because the present is only as much as it is as much as people define it to be. Which means standardization validate themselves by enforcing upon people which which kind of like thereby make those standards what they are standards which means that there structures of power they define people and people defined by them sustain those structures which creates this cycle I I hope that makes sense. Yeah. Anyways, I need to drink milk or something. So, when I play Minecraft and I say I don't feel like playing Minecraft, I'm going to find a way to validate that claim. If I play Minecraft and I say there's some value in Minecraft, I'm going to find a way to validate validate that claim that claim. Not necessarily because I'm actively looking for it, but because there's always a reason for things. You can argue that Minecraft can be a valuable way to express yourself and you can argue that it's not a valuable way to express yourself not because it's not a valuable way to express yourself but there are other means that might be more productive for that particular person. If somebody feels that they are able to express themselves effectively in Minecraft then you then you can then just do it then if somebody feels like it's not efficient then just do it then and there other means like writing then so so be it. It is true that right that Minecraft is a limited uh form of communication but it doesn't necessarily mean that everybody should stop playing Minecraft. It just means that for Some people they feel that they express themselves better not in my craft but in writing. It's not about one or the two or one one or the other. It's about what is relevant to somebody. If they feel that they can express themselves sufficiently already in Minecraft, then they're valid. If they feel that they need to express themselves with more precision and they feel that there's a lot like Minecraft is not as universally accessible or not as precise as words, then they're also valid because somebody is only as much as they express themselves to be which means that what is contextually relevant to them is valid whatever form that takes in terms of like communication that is I'm not talking about like actual moral concerns such as murder or something like that I'm talking about communication and why it matters what somebody wants to express rather than the actual result themsel themselves the actual result results themselves matter because of course you want somebody wants to refine their communication but often times people express themselves without necessarily expressing themselves intentionally, which means body languages, body language, tone of voice, and stuff like that are not conscious all the time. People don't necessarily know that they said something by the way that they move their body. Sometimes people don't even know what they feel. They just kind of like try to make sense of it and then somebody's able to tell what they feel based on body language. I'm not saying that's always true. I'm saying that people are not what they intentionally express themselves to be, which means that if they play Minecraft and they feel that it allows them to express themselves, they are valid. And if they feel that they express themselves with writing, they're valid as well. Why? Because there's no objective definition of what expression is supposed to be. Because somebody will want to express themselves and what they want to express will not always make sense universally. And that means that it will be constrained to a particular medium or context. And even that will be limited because there's no perfect match. There's only what is available to somebody and what one feels match the most. And that feeling is relevant to what they want to express. Even if there got lots going to be lots of factors or unintentional characteristics such as body language that will express a lot of other things for them without their intentionality. That is critical to other sonic communication. I'm going to be honest, it's really hard to define anything. Like I've said this many times, right? But if you're if you're talking about like for example like if I'm going to talk about 1.79 mill words, it's it's really hard to bring it anywhere else. In the internet, you can make sense but not necessarily say what you mean to say, right? Which means you can be accessible without actually saying anything of value to you or to other people, right? You want want to make it engaging, but you also want to make it precise. And that balance is not easy to achieve. And often times you're going to deal with people who will say that it's not engaging. People say it's not precise enough and it just sounds generic. And that's got to be true, right? Regardless. So what you say right now is valuable and that it says everything it needs to say even without you knowing exactly everything that it says because a lot of things are expressed without our intentionality as said earlier. Even then, we want to refine our writing. We want to be more precise. this we might be more intentional and that is also valid and that's what I am currently doing right I can I'll try my best to make these videos to write as much as possible to have the websites also try my best to communicate with people in real life as much as I can I just don't know how that's going to be possible until I have at least established some websites because I feel like websites are effective because like even if I can't even if I can't meet them in real life I can at least uh point to them to websites Okay, I think that's good. I I don't I feel like I'm still going to take the time to sit down and just let things happen. So, I'm going to end this video. Usually, I just edit the last three videos. I would just edit it without really saying anything. Um because I really I was able I I was able to say everything. But this video, I guess I just have to edit it a lot more. intentionally. But that goes with everything. Again, case by case. Not everything's going to happen perfectly. And it's more important to be case by case than to be so structured that you end up not really applying it to any context effectively.
-
My thoughts
This is probably the most convoluted recording here, but I think that it is worth having anyway. The messier, the more revealing and, by extension, the more impactful and worth expressing. It is a train wreck, but at the very least, it is one that allows one to see what goes in my mind, not in all circumstances and points of my life so as to define me permanently, but in a way that shows how ideas do not come from the void. Ideas start off very weak and "nonsensical" (ineffectively communicated and incoherent, even if the underlying intent or ideas are valid), but overtime, they gain more substance as the borders between meaning and projection become fluid.
AI Summary
This audio excerpt explores the complex and often misleading nature of terminology. The speaker argues that definitions, while seemingly constructive ("sculpting"), are inherently abrasive, corrosive, and erosive, impacting our understanding of concepts rather than objectively reflecting reality. They contend that increased precision doesn't equate to greater accuracy, challenging the assumption that detailed descriptions bring us closer to truth. Ultimately, the speaker emphasizes that the relationship between terminology and concepts like positivism or happiness is contingent, not intrinsic, urging a critical examination of how we perceive and use language.
Key Topics
- Terminology's effects
- Realism vs. representation
- Precision and reality
- Language and communication
- Positivism and terminology
Transcript
I'm going to be talking about the same things uh in this video, but I'm going to be rephrasing and reinterpreting it. Terminology is abrasive. It corrods, it erodess, uh it destroys the picture. And that sounds really weird because there's no like my definition of picture is a lot more. Let's imagine signs and symbols, but we're talking about a picture in terms of, you know, theatic or topical um relevance right the idea of relevance not as like relevant to this conversation but the idea of relevance in a general level right so we can understand terminology as being a streamliner as in it streamlines and we can view streamlining as abrasive which means it it it erodess it corrods it breaks in order to create How? Because definition is sculpted and sculpted is a more neutral or positive term even it's a more artistic and creative way of expressing that. But we can also interpret it as destruction, as erosion, as corrosion. Why? Because there's no true definition of what makes a term effectively what it is in a way that is positive. The same way sculpting um you know expresses because terminology can be equally as damaging and dilitter harmful and that's why erosion, corrosion and destruction are valid ways of describing terminology. When somebody describes people in a horrible racist way, that's terminology corroing corroding them. When terminology describes somebody in a way that is alienating to them, that's eroding. It's not necessarily in a in terms of ethical harm. Terminology is erosion is not about ethical harm. It is about its effects on ideas. Which means that we are only as much as we are. If I use 10 words to describe a situation, I'll be more precise. But it doesn't necessarily mean I'll be more closer to reality. Right? You can use complexity as way to interact and express reality in a way that is more precise, but not necessarily in a way that is close to reality. Precision does not necessarily mean that you're closer to reality. That's something that people need to get across. Just because you're using an umbrella term doesn't mean that you're not talking about something real. Abstraction and concretizing are often seen as like concretizing the abstract and making it real. But that's not necessarily true. When I say I'm concretizing it, I'm not saying that it becomes more real because a term is as real as it represents. Which means that a dog is is a real term describing a real thing because people interpret it to be referring to a real thing. Just because somebody goes into specific depth in describing a dog does not make it closerly closer to reality. You could just use a dog. You don't have to use um the scientific term. You don't have to use scientific descriptions descriptions. You're just over complicating it. If your goal is to just say a dog and referring to a dog, then just use a dog because science and symbols. You don't get closer to the reality. with more precision. You just add complexity, add precision, and depending on what you're trying to say, it can be either verbose or relevant. If you need to describe those particular parts of the the body of the dog because you're like it's a medical or whatever, then it's relevant, but that's not necessarily going to make you close to reality. Representation is not going to get close to reality just because you add more detail. Realism is not objective. I I know that sounds crazy, but realism is not objective. Even if you get the exact visual whatever s*** of reality. I know that sounds crazy, but representation is not reality. No matter how like exact the fidelity is visually because visual is not reality. What something looks how something looks like is not reality because visual is just visual. Human eyes see. But visual if we're talking about visual objectivity, it doesn't really exist. What something looks like or appears is something that humans define. There's no real way to define visual because there's no such thing as as visual beyond what we described it to be. The actual idea of appearance and form and shape is is does not really exist in the way that we define it. It could look totally different and that could change everything about what we believe to be visible. shape form. So when I say it doesn't have a shape or a form, I'm not saying that really doesn't exist. I'm saying that it could exist. It like it is its own thing, just not in the way that we described it to be, right? Which means that it could very well not be visual at all because human visual might be completely different from actual visual, right? If it is describable under that term, right? Because I'm using that term visual. That's why I say no shape or form because form and shape are completely tainted by our ceptions, but it doesn't mean that it's it's it's not valid to use the word a dog or a form or a shape. Like I said, it's okay to use a dog, it's okay to use a shape, it's okay to use those terms. But again, being more precise doesn't get you closer to reality. Being more straightforward doesn't not get you closer to reality. Also, just because you say a form or shape doesn't mean you're close to reality than if somebody went into complexity or into depth. Again, verbosity does not mean close to reality, but neither does consist. I felt that I need to address that and why it's also important that we consider how terminology can be erosive, corrosive and it's not as simple as just precision or concision because these things are not real. How we perceive them is important and of course language is about communication. So we care about concision, we care about precision but beyond that beyond those things those immediate things that we perceive them to be the particular context and how we perceive this to be whether it's too much or too little beyond that right beyond that and recognizing how terminology is not straightforward as sculpting. It's not as positive as sculpting. There's no positive or negative. There is we're talking about philosophical positivism in the sense that like um we could describe it in a political way as in like we could describe um terminology in a way that's empirical. We're not necessarily um talking about there's no really happy way to describe terminology, right? When we say it's util it's it's useful, we're not describing anything happy necessarily. We attribute it with positive feelings. We attribute it with good feelings, with good words, but not necessarily it's not necessarily objective, right? Um when we say positivism, we're not talking about happiness and we're and and talk about empirical, we're not necessarily uh how do I describe it? Um we're not necessarily saying that like empirical like it cannot be understood empirically because you can understand terminology empirically. We can understand how people perceive it empir empirically those terms but again we're working within local empiricism and local reality local positivism right and that is why it is critical to recognize That terminology is not necessarily defined by positivism or by positive feelings or happy feelings. It's neither defined by happiness or positivism necessarily. It can be defined but it's not necessarily defined. There's no intrinsic relationship between the two. And that is at least that is how I view it right terminology as a corrosive thing in a way that that uh contradicts or conflicts with the idea that terminology is strictly positive and positivist. I'm not saying that's that when somebody says um something like cars uh cars exist right you you it's like when they're making that claim they have to give they have to back that claim they're making a uh they're making a claim right they're making a positive claim. So they have to back up that claim. Um it is it is not it's not on the burden the burden of proof is not on the person denying that claim. The burden of proof like we we can I agree that that is the case but I'm talking about positivis I'm talking about terminology in a way that bypasses even the scope of positivism and you know even happiness right and I am describing it and I'm saying that it it it is not strictly uh happy or positivist. And that's why I use the term corrosive, eroding and abrasive and that we can understand it in those terms and be valid anyway. Which means that positivism and happiness is also a valid way to interpret that relationship uh that implication of terminology that and there as such that we can conclude that all of these relationships are vital to defining or understanding terminology. Okay, so now that I've said all of that, I feel like uh that's just a lot to take in. I can imagine, but again, a lot of this are still very like they're great ways of understanding uh the the assumptions that we make. We in we we tie things intrinsically together as intrinsic to each other. But then of course that's just it doesn't often times those relationships don't really exist and we just attributing things to things because that's just cultural. We attri terminology to positivism because it does interact with positivism. We're attributing terminology to happiness because it does interact with happiness. But then just because they interact with each other doesn't mean they're intrinsic to each other. That is what I'm saying. That is why I open up with the idea that terminology is abrasive, corrosive and erosive because they might contradict with other people's ideas of positive and positivism in terms of how they view terminology. Not that I'm saying that you cannot that that the relationship between making a claim and burden of proof on the person making claim and all that. Like I'm not denying that. That is not what I'm talking about. Anyway, that is all that I meant to say. I feel like I've summarized effectively and so we're good. Even if it was team
-
AI Summary
This audio excerpt reveals a personal reflection on the speaker's commitment to moral consistency. The speaker strives for linearity and coherence in their actions, acknowledging inherent limitations and inevitable inconsistencies arising from compartmentalization and incomplete understanding. Their solution is a detailed autobiographical journal, aiming to externalize thoughts and actions, thereby facilitating self-analysis, improved self-awareness, and ultimately, more informed decision-making. The overarching goal is not perfect morality, but rather a striving for continuous self-improvement through meticulous self-reflection and reasoned justification of their choices.
Key Topics
- Moral consistency
- Self-awareness
- Journaling
- Defining morality
- Personal growth
My thoughts
This recording encapsulates my perspective on the limitations of language and how it intersects contradictorily both with my desire to maintain moral integrity through the clearance of ignorance and the impossibility of defining and expressing myself fully. In other words, I desire moral clarity and consistency, but do not trust that "clarity" and "consistency" of language. The urge to preempt moral faults through awareness and self-awareness is thus absurd given that I combine it with the belief that language is ultimately ambiguous. So when I say that "I do the things that I do because I have a reason," that is ridiculous, because how can reason be defined? How can "done my best" be defined? How can "living as much as I can" be defined? "I don't know if I will have failed because I was limited or I will have failed because I didn't do the right thing," is a key quote here.
Transcript
Okay. So, now that I've talked about a lot of things, I can talk about um in a more personal matter. So, I do the things that I do because I I have a reason. I try to maintain um a linear thread uh and a linear and coherent thread uh across all of the things that I do. Of course, it's not going to be perfect and I'm going to uh not be able to define things like the boundaries between things are not always going to be well defined. And because of that, I will have a lot of segmentation and compartmentalization, which means that I will be definitely hypocritical at times, even if I don't want to. But the goal of my writing, the goal of the autob journal is to uh like remove as much hypo hypocrisy as possible and increase as much moral integrity as possible. Now, that's not going to be easy. Of course, the goal is to write down as much as possible. If I can't write down as much as possible, then I cannot identify things and because I cannot identify the boundaries and the definitions of things, I'm not going to be able to define what's right or what's wrong effectively. If I can't explain or reason or justify an action because I'm not able to define it. If I also cannot define where I could have improved, where I could have done better, then I'm not going to be defi able to define what to do next. And because of that, I will not have been, you know, I will not have had immortal integrity. Modal integrity for me is about being coherent and linear, but also recognizing that there's going to be a lot of segmentation and compartmentalization due to the my limited resources, limited knowledge and limited, you know, my limited brain, right? Because I can only do so much. I can only comprehend so much. I can only express so much. So even if I try to like try to express everything, I will still not be able to express everything because I will not be able to do anything. um within a short amount of time especially like I can only do so much and even if I can say it I can't necessarily do it. Even if I can do it I can't necessarily say it. I do things that I can't really explain entirely. Not because I don't have a reason to do it but because it's hard to define reality. It's hard to define what you see because what you see is not just a tree. What you see is not just a room. What you see is everything that that room signifies. Everything that that room that this room or that other room means to me is so much more than what it looks like than what it appears on the surface. So what I say I want to do I do the things that I do because I have a reason that is a way of saying that my belief is that I have to be consistent morally that I have to be consistent throughout across everything that I do not necessarily that I'm going to do things that are morally objective or ethically universal which means a lot of people disagree with me when it comes to the things that I do and they'll say that I did not do things morally but that is just their perspective and what I consider to be moral is not always going to be consistent with everybody's morality which means my goal is moral consistency which means I might do something that might consider morally inconsistent with the rest of the world but it will be morally consistent for me because I have certain beliefs and I I have certain beliefs and I have certain things that I don't believe and I disagree with and that's the reality of it So, if people see my behavior and they think that I'm morally inconsistent, that's not the goal. My goal is to be defeatable. My goal is to be falsifiable, which means they have to be able to defeat me. In order for them to defeat me, they have to be able to identify what I'm saying. In order to identify what I'm saying, I have to express myself fully because if if if what I say is not representative of who I am or I feel alienated by my own words, then that's not great. The goal is to be as expressive as possible. But again, that's impossible. You can't express everything. But I I need to express as much they can while also still being accessible so that I'm not giving them a wall of text. That's the goal. If I want to be model consistent, I have to be communicative. I have to identify problems clearly within very specific terms. Why do I have to communicate it? Because if I cannot compare it to anything else, then I will not be able to judge whether it was the right action or not. Measurements are necessary, boundaries are necessary, definitions are necessary. If I cannot identify the problem, then I cannot identify the issue. Then I can defi identify what should I do. response to that and because of that I will not be identify what's right or wrong. If I do something that's wrong then it's probably obvious but usually most things are not obvious. Most things are a lot more harder to define and because of that I will probably do a lot of things that are not great and I will have done it unintentionally because I will not because I did not know because I did not wasn't able to understand it identify it or define it properly. I was not aware of the problem. I was not aware of what I could have done, which in a way could be considered to be a moral failure. But just because somebody doesn't know does not mean they're morally horrible. However, one could argue that somebody is morally horrible because they did not take the f****** time to be aware of what they could have done better. And that is what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to be morally consistent by trying to be aware and self-aware as much as I can. Which means I'm trying to write down everything in hopes of externalizing everything in hopes identifying everything. in hopes of communicating everything in hopes of being transparent about everything so that I can hopefully do the right thing for once in my f****** life and not feel like I just did it on a whim or just did it because it was easy or did it because I don't know like the goal is that it has to be practical though because like I can't do everything. I can only do what I can. But at the same time at the very f****** least I want to address what I can or what I cannot do. In order to define that I need to be able to really analyze and cross analyze literally everything in my f****** life. and everything that I do with everything else and also considering the context of my situation, the situation, my situations, my current circumstances, my background, my everything that influences my behavior so that I can understand my limitations and see how that compares with everybody else's and everywhere in the f****** world because everybody's going to have their own limitations, their own definitions, their own ethical frameworks and all of that is going to matter if I'm going to make any decision. So, when it comes to moral integrity or moral consistency, It is critical that I develop the autobiography journal if I want to be morally consistent or more intentional about it at the very least. So I do the things that I do because I have a reason. That is a crucial for me. That is a crucial statement for me. I I don't I want to die knowing that I at least tried my best to do the right thing even if I did not necessarily need to do the right thing all the time. And that's why I care so much about being honest. That's why I care so much about living my life hopefully with the hopefully by by dying um having done my best because like you can only live as much you as you can and if if you die without feeling that you've lived as much as you can then I don't know it's not going to feel great I'm going to feel like I I failed but at the same f****** time I don't know if I will have failed because I was limited or I will have failed because I didn't do the right thing I don't know I'm just going to try my best and hope that it works out and if it doesn't work out then it sucks because I I want to be perfect and I wish I was perfect from the get-go, but then it's not hard to be perfect. It's not easy to be perfect when there's no definition of what perfection is. And because of that, there's no definition of what good or bad is unless I can strictly define it in key in terms in in description and I can compare those terms with everything else. And it doesn't sound like a dogma. It sounds like I've actually f****** taken the time to consider everybody's perspectives so that I can hopefully make a decision regarding things that are a lot more controversial, that require a lot of deep thought, and that require a lot of comparison because it's not easy to live in this chaotic and very cultural, traditional, uh, progressive, political, every f****** world. It's hard because there's so much ethical boundaries being crossed every time. But you can't necessarily argue that everybody is horrible, but you also can't argue that everybody's good either. And because of that, I want to know, I want to study. I want to learn and I want to process and that's why I'm writing everything down and that is how I that is how everything is at least that's how I perceive everything that's my perspective and that is the meaning of the statement I do the things that I do because I have a reason
-
AI Summary
This audio excerpt reveals a speaker grappling with the complexities of moral consistency and self-expression. The speaker wrestles with the inherent gray areas of morality, rejecting simplistic black-and-white views in favor of ongoing dialogue and compromise. Their struggle stems from a desire for authentic self-expression, acknowledging that their feelings and actions, while potentially flawed, are driven by deeply held beliefs and a commitment to continuous self-improvement through constant refinement, rather than aiming for unattainable perfection. The speaker ultimately concludes that their life's journey is one of constant adjustment and refinement, acknowledging the inevitability of imperfection and the limitations of self-representation.
Key Topics
- Moral consistency
- Sentimental language
- Effective dialogue
- Self-expression
- Life's limitations
My thoughts
This was a very important recording as to defining how I view myself relative to everything.
Transcript
Okay, so this is a new video and we're going to talk about uh the last video. I could have very uh very well used sentimental language in the last video a lot more. I feel like maybe I did use sentimental language, but um you know sentimental language in the sense that I appealing to the emotions. Um and I can do it in this video. I can use sentimental language in this video. I can talk about how I um one of the things that I could I'm concerned about of course is moral integrity and moral honesty. And that's not easy to do because of course you don't like defining things is hard. It's hard to define things. Some things are so complex and nuanced that it's really hard to find things. If I saw in the the world in black and white, I would kill people because I don't like horrible people. And I feel like horrible people should die. But I don't believe that. And because I don't believe that, I don't just kill people. I try to talk and dialogue with them. And dialogue is a critical. If I'm debating with people instead of killing them, that is a very gray way of living. my life. And some people consider that to be compromising. You should kill people instead of talking with them because you're morally honest. But that's not true. Moral consistency is not black and white. Moral consistency does not mean that you do not compromise. In fact, one could contend that moral consistency requires that you do recognize everything around you, including the things that you're not sure about. And you're not going to be sure of everything. And because of that, motor consistency is something that's better defined by dialogue. But of course, that would probably be a very specific perspective and not everyone's going to share that viewpoint. But I contend that anything that doesn't like at least fit one of those uh qualifications uh qualities is probably a lot harder to describe as a moral uh code when it doesn't it's not falsifiable. It's not subjective. Just subject to debate. Subject to dialogue and it's more like I'm just going to be a a very horrible person who destroys people's lives because that's my belief or something like that. Like the goal is like if I I believe something I want to dialogue with people I want to converse I want to uh conduct a conversation discussion and I want to describe everything but in order to do that I have to understand everything in and I have to express everything and I don't understand everything and I can't express everything. So what I will do is I will express what I can and I'll understand what I can and what is available to me. So yeah, I was supposed to use more sentimental language but I didn't end up doing it. So but I maybe I did use sentimental language. Um it's not like it's not easy. It's not simple to just say I want to do the right thing or I have a reason to do things. I do the things that I do because I have a reason. Like I could explain why I say that but that's not necessarily going to be objective. It's not going to be like all incompassing, all embracing. It's not something that everybody will be able to interpret um in a way that feels favorable. Some people will look at it and think that That sounds like a horrible statement and but for me it describes what I be to say even if it's not necessarily going to be what everybody will want to say which means that I'm going to have my own perspective and everybody's going to have their own perspective it's not all going to align together and I know that sounds very generic or universal but it's something that I just have to say because it's not easy to communicate basically an entire life which means that I'm not going to be able to use simple statements to describe everything. But those apherisms exist because I need to define my life in simple statements whether I like it or not because education requires coision requires titles requires all of that and they have a place they have a place right so moving forward as said already I was supposed to turn this video into sentiment more sentimental video um about the last video but yeah it's not it's not something that just happens uh like If I had to be more sentimental, I don't know how I'd do it. I think it would just come out more naturally and just organically. Um, wanting to do the right thing is is great. And I can talk about my personal context. I can talk about how I reach this point in my life. Um, but it's not going to be simple. It's not going to be easy, right? I've spent too much time thinking about everything and making sure that I can address everything because I'm afraid of doing the wrong thing. I'm afraid of doing something I don't want to do. And For the longest time, I've done everything that I believe that I had to do or believe that was the right thing or a belief that I'm not sure about, but I have to do anyway because I have to see and see because I felt that if I didn't do it, I would be doing something that I shouldn't be doing, which is not being honest. So, even if I did do things and say things that were not great, um, in hindsight, like the things that I do, the things that I have done, I did it because I was probably f****** frustrated about something that I believed in even if I in hindsight I don't actually think that was the right way to express that but at the same time self expression is not perfect which means that I'm always going to end up doing something that I shouldn't have done I'm always going to live the way that I shouldn't have done and I realized that there's no right way to live there's only what cannot be really that what what is not really constructive or productable productive to dialogue right and the goal is to improve dialogue but dialogue is not so easy to find either right can't really define dialogue as anything. You can only defi you can possibly define dialogue as successful dialogue, but just because it's not successful doesn't mean it's not dialogue, right? Because dialogue is something that you strive towards. And that's not something you can just accomplish off the bat. And because of that, you're going to have a lot of mistakes and there's going to be a lot of milestones that one will have to meet in order to eventually to to eventuate in greater precision, greater concision. and greater agreeability in the sense that like you're able to convince somebody uh because you're a lot more logical and you've covered a lot of different uh considerations that people have in mind and because of that it's easier to talk to you and you don't sound as um insular in a bad way. So, I'm trying to address all of these things, right? I'm trying to address all of it and that's why I'm reading and writing so much and talking so much. I've been I've been trying to talk so much. I've been trying to communicate so much. I've been trying to say so much. I've been trying to address so much. I've been trying to do everything that I can to f****** express to myself, express everything. And I have said really horrible things. I've talked about um things that I that I shouldn't have talked about in video because if but at the same time, I also don't regret it because I had to say it because those were my actual feelings. I did feel like that. That's what I felt. I did feel so bothered that I felt that this was the right thing to do and I felt that this was morally incorrect. Um, and that the only way to solve it was to do this one thing that I felt was the only way to resolve the problem. But then of course in hindsight my improve my communication skills have improved and I'm a lot more confident in my communic communication skills because of that I don't feel the need to communicate in a more drastic way. I can communicate uh with peaceful dialogue Um, of course it's not necessarily going to be peaceful because dialogue is always it's not it's not as simple as that. It's just not straightforward, right? But at the very least, it's not literally murdering somebody um in response to alienation and a feeling that communication will not work through other means. And the only way to communicate is through literally killing people, which doesn't sound great whatsoever. Um, like again, I'm trying not to get banned here by YouTube if I ever post this on YouTube. So, Hopefully I didn't end up saying something that sounds horrible. So hopefully I don't get banned because of this video. Although I'm not going to post this on YouTube probably. Anyway, the point is that uh yeah, I am trying my best and trying to make sense of things and I don't think I'll ever make sense of everything. So I'll just try my best right now and do what I can even if it never really makes sense. And I feel like even with all the refinements and growth, I feel like there's still so much things that I've yet to address, yet to uncover, yet to discover, yet to talk about it's just an endless thing. But even if it's endless, that doesn't mean that it's not that it's bad to try that I should just give up. So I'm trying my best. I know it sounds idealistic, but my circumstances, my actions, everything that I do, a lot of people have their have a moral code, have a all of this. People who do who are not morally consistent or who do not feel consistent, who feel like they're a lot more arbitrary or who they feel a lot more is consistent because they're not communicating effectively. They're harder to work with and I'm trying not to be somebody who is hard to work with. But the thing is when you're dealing with people and you're dealing with situations and you're dealing with things that are not great because they they're controversial, especially in a dynamic where there's a lot of f****** s*** that can be done um that is not great. It can be very hard to just say, "Okay, simple as that." And because of that, it's going to be incredibly difficult to just conclude anything really without it ending in something a lot more uh a lot more not constructive. But at the same time, it's like it's hard to define constructive because you do have to eventually say what you feel. It's just that it doesn't always get there and you're kind of Like there's always going to be constant tension. There's going to be the stalemate, but there's no true stalemate. There's only what you can do right now and what you can't do. And someone's my particular context might make it impossible for me to communicate with other certain people, but at the same time, it's like I also don't want to stop trying, but at the same time, I also need to choose my battles wisely. But at the same time, it's not as simple as that. So all of these say, all of these things, all of these things, they often kind of break down and kind of lose their f****** touch. when you start comparing it to the context. But it doesn't necessarily mean that they're useless. It just means that it's great to use these aphorisms. It's great to use these sayings, these quotes, but let's be honest, once you start bringing it down, it's harder to find. And that's what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to go deeper and more uh closer to the actual reality of the context. But it's going to be a uphill battle, and I don't think I'm going to be able to describe it right now or at all really. Even with all of my writings, I don't think they they really represent me as a whole. Even if I do share them with somebody, I don't think they're going to be able to understand me as a whole. They're just going to understand the person writing it, but not necessarily the person who lived his entire life. Um, yeah. So, it's going to show my perspective, but not who I am as a whole throughout the entirety of my life. And that's unfortunate, but like that's that's the best I can do, right? So those the the things that I have said uh all all converge and come together to form how I see the world but not directly just you know they contribute to my current perspective right so when I say I do the things that I do because of a reason you know like there there is the I I said a lot in the previous video and I I say a lot also in this video um and I hope that uh forms up more complete picture of what I'm trying to say because it's not that simple. And I've said this many times. It's not that simple. Like I'm probably going to die. I mean, I am going to die, but yeah, I'm going to die. I think. Yeah. And I guess that's it because I can't really do anything about it. Um, what can what else can I do? Um, I'm probably going to die. I'm going to die. I'm probably going to scream and cry that I'm going to die. Um, if I lose all my privileges and my all my resources, all my files, all my text files, I'm probably going to I'm going to lose my mind probably. But like, yeah, I'm fragile. I'm human. I don't think I will ever be able to describe myself anything beyond that. like there's those ideals that I have but at the same time I can only do so much. I I am constantly compromising, constantly hedging, constantly taking risks and constantly adjusting which means that I'm adjusting, adjusting, adjusting, trying to adjust and trying to refine constantly. And that that just means that there's just no version of me that will ever feel complete or per perfect and I can die as any f****** time. If I suffer, I suffer. If I scream, I scream. Scream. There's no way to interpret everything that I have experienced and everything that I'm saying as reflective of some cosmic being because I'm just a guy. And I know that very well. I know that I can only do so much. And I've met face to face with all of my limitations again and again. And every time that I try to do anything, I am always I always fail. Uh but at the same time I also recognize that failure is a part of life because in order to refine my abilities I have to make mistakes because well refining means that I am not perfect. But the thing is I'm probably not going to be able to be perfect. So that's it. That's the end. I'm just constantly refine myself with no perfection in mind. But that end of refining doesn't necessarily mean I'm better than before in like inherently there's there. I'm just refining the abilities that make me feel most comfortable, right? That is in line with my interests, not necessarily refining my sense of self so that I am more me or something like there's no such thing, right? I was already myself when I was already when I was younger. I was already alive when I was younger. I am not more alive growing up. I'm just here. I'm just alive as usual. Which means there's a lot of things that haven't changed like my consciousness. I'm still the same person that I used to be. But I've also changed so much. A lot of things that I feel right now are not that crazy. If people went through what I went through, they would probably be affected by it the same way that I was affected by it. Maybe not necessarily come to the same conclusions, but again, I can only do so much. And because of that, I can only say so much. And because of that, I will be affected. And because of that, I don't know what to say except that's it. That's that's it. There's no that's it, but that's it.
-
AI Summary
This audio recording reveals a deeply introspective individual grappling with existential questions about their purpose and worth. The speaker uses the self-deprecating term "loser" to highlight a feeling of limitation and alienation, both from society and themselves, stemming from the inherent constraints of their own being and experience. Despite this perceived inadequacy, they emphasize a commitment to self-expression and continuous striving, acknowledging the simultaneous presence of guilt, self-doubt, and pride in their efforts. The speaker ultimately finds solace in the ongoing process of self-discovery and acceptance of their present reality, however uncertain the future may be.
Key Topics
- Self-perception
- Existential guilt
- Life's limitations
- Constant questioning
- Acceptance of self
My thoughts
"I am as close to death as I am to life."
"I question whether I really exist in the way that I think that I am. I question everything that I am. But at the same time, I also kind of just have to accept that I can only do so much. Which means that I can only rely on the assumptions that I have right now."
This sound recording is not a reflection of the limitations of life, but a limitations of one's ability to reflect upon one's life so as to feel that one has made sense of everything.
"It's just that um I'm going to wake up tomorrow. I'm going to wake up tomorrow and I'm going to wake up in my body again. And I know that I'm not uh and I'm going I can also die anytime. It's just you never know, you know. And that's it. That's just that's it. That's all that's all that's all I can say because there's nothing else to say. What am I supposed to say? I tried. Okay. And I will keep trying. And I tried and I failed and I'll keep trying. There's nothing else to say, but there's so many things to talk about."
"'I guess' is a very important word, because that is my life."
Transcript
Okay, let me record again. I just have to express that I when I use the term loser in reference to myself, in the reference to academics, in reference to anybody that has a hobby or interest, I am saying that in a positive way usually, but I also kind of say it in a negative way in the sense that we are limited by what we are and what we do. In the sense that like I can write all I f****** want, but that's not necessarily going to make me more myself and in a way I describe myself as a loser because what can I say I'm limited by my current circumstances by situation even if I had a very rich vast and complex life growing up it doesn't necessarily mean people will agree that I had a rich vast and complex life growing up which means that even if I do describe everything and I can express exactly how I felt and why it was so rich and vast and vivid and complex that doesn't necessarily mean that everybody will agree with me or they will rest it will resonate with them so I for the most part I am a loser you know and for a lot of people I I I a lot of people I would say are losers as well in the sense that we're only limited to what we can do so we lose we are losers. We are outcasts. Not necessarily because we are all outcasts because that that wouldn't make sense because but at the same time it would make sense because alienation is a common theme. So in in a way we are outcasts because we can only be ourselves as much you know as much as we can be. And that is not a lot. It's not hard to be ourselves and being ourselves is not something we can truly define and that makes it even harder. So we are outcasts not only the rest of society but also to ourselves. And in a way we are in that way we can describe ourselves as losers. Just a bunch of losers who do nothing except try their best. And honestly, it never really makes sense. It's just what it is right now. What it is, what it can be. But beyond that, we don't know. We all losers in that sense. Everything that I've talked about, they sound like Oh man, this guy has has taken the time to really think about things. But like, let's be honest, I don't know what's going on. I don't know anything. I know what I know, but I don't know anything beyond that. And it's not like my perspective isn't valid. I do have my perspective, and it is valid, just like everybody else's perspective is valid, but it doesn't mean anything beyond that. Beyond that, I'm just another loser. Just another guy. I am I'm just another guy who's focused on something and who has their own focus, interests, goals, priorities. And honestly, I feel guilty for existing. I feel guilty that I even exist because I feel that I am hurting myself by existing. Like life is pain. Life is selfdamaging. Life is like making me feel s*****. Life hurts me. Life makes me feel like guilty that I'm still alive. I'm guilty that I continue to live. I continue to express myself and I continue to try. I feel guilty that I wake up in the morning because I don't want to wake up in the morning. I just want to die. But at the same time, I don't want to die. I feel guilty for being at all. But at the same time, I'm also proud of myself for having tried my best. But at the same time, I feel guilty. I feel s*****. And you can just say that it's just emotions and it's just psyche or whatever s***, but it is a very um crucial underpinning of my perspective that I don't really know what's going to happen next and that I have I am just going to keep trying even if I'm I'm a loser even if I there I guilt is something that I feel about my existence every day I have to constantly question myself and constantly question whether I deserve to exist. And it's not like I'm saying that I believe that I don't deserve to exist. It's just that I I feel that I have to question that every day because I believe that it is important to question yourself. I believe that it's important to question whether you deserve to exist because it is important to question what you do, who you believe you are, what you believe is the right thing, and everything else. And I do that every day because it allows me to remind myself that I can die any time, that I am so close to death as I am to life. I am so close to being alive as I am to losing my sense of self. I'm just as close as I am to drinking this milk as I am to disappearing from this world forever. And I think about that every day. And that's what allows me to value communication because I believe that the best that we can do is express ourselves and That is what allowed me to enjoy my life growing up and that is what allows me to accomplish my ends right now and the things that I believe are important. I cannot help uh I cannot help but miss the feeling of waking up in the morning and feeling like um I don't have to concern myself with this but at the same time I'm doing exactly what I wanted to do which is to address issues and to do something about That doesn't necessarily mean that I actually am going to address them completely. Maybe I might solve problems, but like let's be honest, those problems are defined by me. I don't know what lies beyond what I know. Maybe I'm not addressing the right problems. Maybe I'm these problems that I think are problems don't exist. Maybe I'm just making everything up and nothing really is here and I'm just talking to myself and and and and I never I don't exist. I don't know. I question that. I question whether I really exist in the way that I think that I am. I question everything that I am. But at the same time, I also kind of just have to accept that I can only do so much. Which means that I can only rely on the assumptions that I have right now. So I have a lot of assumptions. I have a lot of pres presuppositions. I have a lot of these things. But like that's it. I just keep going anyway knowing that like I'm going to look outside and know that I don't know if I look outside it could be completely different. You never know. Maybe everything will change. And it's not like nothing is changing. It's that everything is changing. It's but like everything could change and I would never know. Um and or maybe I could everything could change and I will know. I don't know. I'm just going to keep going and keep doing this loser me guilt. All of this s***. It's doesn't really exist. It's just me and everything that I am. And me and everything that I am is my entire world. The same way everything uh them and every and and everything that they are is is everybody else's entire world. Um and that's it. That's really all I can really say about that. Which means that I I can't I can't reach out to the abyss. I cannot reach out into nothingness. There are so many things that I want to talk about, but again, I can only talk about so much. Again, I I I can try to make this video last long, but like I keep hitting the same brick wall, but it doesn't mean that I'm not making any progress. It just means that part of life is learning that I cannot go past a certain point. And that happens every day. So, I'm going to go outside, talk about s***, do s***. I'm going to achieve so much. I'm going to accomplish all my goals. I I know that I can accomplish my goals. But at the same time, even if I can accomplish my goals, even if I can do that, even if my goal, even if my goals are realistic, even if I can accomplish them, I know that it will never be truly there. I will never be truly there. I will feel like there's something off every day because that's what allows me to stay sane. If I feel like things make too much sense, I'm going to feel weird because life for me has been about so many things just going wrong and I've gotten used to that feeling and because of that I constantly focus on trying to redefine and reexpress myself so that hopefully I can become more clear over time and express everything because I will I want to do that. I need to do that. It it helps me cope It helps me define things. It helps me deal with s***. It helps me thrive. Because in many ways, I have grown so much that like a lot of people would probably say that the things that I've done is not just something you do in the morning. It's something you do after years of spending your life doing this one thing. And I believe that a lot of other people do the same things. And in that way, we are losers both in a positive way and a negative way because that's great. But at the same time, that is what we can do. and that's it. But that's not a bad thing. It's just that um I'm going to wake up tomorrow. I'm going to wake up tomorrow and I'm going to wake up in my body again. And I know that I'm not uh and I'm going I can also die anytime. It's just you never know, you know. And that's it. That's just that's it. That's all that's all that's all I can say because there's nothing else to say. What am I supposed to say? I tried. Okay. And I will keep trying. And I tried and I failed and I'll keep trying. There's nothing else to say, but there's so many things to talk about. You know, it never ends because, you know, but at the same time, it's like I'm not saying it never ends as in there's nothing else left to do and that I don't have goals anymore and that there's nothing really to say. It's just that there's nothing to say as in like I can only say what I can. I can only do what I can I can only accomplish what I can and when I do accomplish them it will have been within my means but then anything beyond that I can only stare and watch at at the very best right so that's it that's that's all I can say that's all I can really do if I wanted to go outside stay inside here write a book make a website do all sorts of things, make music, draw, write and all of that. Any form of expression, anything, any anything that I do, any activity, any action, whether going outside, communicating, creative expression, I am inevitably going to come face to face with the same with the with the with that realization that this is this is what it is and I will stay here forever. Not that I will not change, but this is where I am right now. now. And this is this is I'm just going to live like this. Not forever. Not that I will not change, but this is I'm going to exist and then I'm not going to exist one day. That's it. Um that's how I see it. And that's okay because I mean what else can I do? What's my what am I supposed to say? Like I can I cannot make like I can make grandio statements and okay fine if I feel like it. Um but like let's be honest like it. I'm not that like it's not that crazy. It's crazy, but it's also not that crazy, right? And there you have it. I guess. And I guess is a very important word because that is my life.
Back to top ⤴
Others
-
AI Summary
This audio excerpt discusses the immense complexity of integrating diverse information sources and systems into a coherent whole. The speaker emphasizes that creating even a simple text RPG necessitates systematic design and modularity, extending this concept to encompass broader projects, including large-scale writing projects and knowledge-based applications like Notion. The core challenge lies in connecting seemingly disparate domains—coding, writing, visual design, information architecture—requiring not just knowledge but also a sophisticated ability to synthesize information, creating a holistic structure from diverse components, a process described as demanding considerable skill, time, and precision. The speaker highlights the difficulty of integrating various formats and systems seamlessly while maintaining a clear, cohesive narrative, emphasizing that true integration transcends mere juxtaposition, demanding deep understanding and explicit connections across different media and disciplines.
Key Topics
- Text RPGs
- Folder organization
- Information architecture
- Knowledge application
- Holistic integration
Transcript
Okay. So, right now, um there's a lot of things that I'm that I haven't there's there's just a lot of things, right? Um so, what it is, it's relatively easy to make a text RPG by itself. Of course, it depends on the complexity of the text RPG, but in general, if you want a functional text RPG and if you want to expand it and make it scalable, it's not that difficult. Of course, there going to be certain scenarios where it's going to be a lot more difficult, but that's usually because of a lack of skill on the developer part because they haven't um made it flexible or they're just not flexible enough to handle the need to incorporate changes that would, you know, require a more systematic or systemic change, right? Um, but like that's part and parcel of development uh in any project. It doesn't even have to be a coding project or codebase. Could be literally anything. It could be about um the drafts of one's story or something like that. Anyways, so if we're it's relatively easy to be a text RPG by itself in and of itself, but if we're considering text RPG in its broader implications. If we're considering folder organizations, the system systemization and if we're considering the various context like uh for example Roblox games like there are so many different ways to make a Roblox game and there's there's a really big rich history as to the different Roblox games that were created and the different ways that they approach the way the same general concepts not just in like visually but also how it feels which you know connects to the code the actual code that is utilized right so the various Roblox games the code bases specifically that required complex yet modular systems such as cases where stats, character specific skills and judge had to be implemented into one continuous script while remaining modular and simple. But it's not just that. There's also like locations and different ways of like everything coming together. You know, you have sets, you have stages, you have s*** like that and you have to make sure it all makes sense. Not just in terms of like the actual physical location, but in terms of like how the combat system works, how the GUI system works and all of that coming together, right? And it's not just that. It's also fold folder or organizations composed my in writings, media, images, videos, files, folders, and such. Website layouts, organization, and indices, right? Trying to like the word index doesn't really seem that much, right? All you have to do is just put it all together. But it's different when you start to consider just how much impact visual and layout have on the actual person using it. Accessibility and quality of life with dates are essential. There's a reason for that. It may seem as though quality of life of dates are completely useless, but when you're consumer, even the smallest issue does have an impact on the way that you perceive the entire product. Like a small issue with the application, the visual, maybe it's not as accessible, maybe just not as satisfying. Maybe the margin is a little too small. Maybe there's not enough space with for the for the for my thumb to you know touch on it. Like it's it's small things like that that would completely ruin or you know really like make it good. So that goes over fiction stories, liter stories and like like my 1.8 million word autobiography journal as well and also knowledge based applications. There's notion in Obsidian and many more, right? It's not it's not text RPG per se. It's about trying to combine all of that into to form some f****** thing that exists in a grand scale. And that's we're not talking about grand scales. We're talking about trying to make something that makes sense, you know? Um that's not that's not easy. That doesn't just happen right off the bat. It's something that you have to like process. You have to be incredibly intelligent. And I'm not saying like you're so smart. But I'm just saying that like you're going to spend so much f****** time. Like anybody that has to spend their time writing 1.8 1.8 million words is not somebody that has that that can just do that, you know? They have a lot of time um they have a lot of time in their hands and they have a lot of time enough to write all that. It's not just writing, it's also writing really precisely. So you have to be a good writer. Just as much as you are good at trying to organize and put everything together, which means you also have know the code, you also have to understand like knowledge uh based applications. Well, not just knowledge based applications, but the very idea of information architectures like that's not just something you just do right off the bat, right? It kind of makes sense, you know? It's like, okay, we just have the systems and then we're done. No, trying to put that all together, not in in and of itself, not in a intrinsic project that makes sense in and of itself, but try to apply that across different disciplines, across the different domains and areas and really try to find where everything kind of like intersects in a way that makes sense. All in all, that's not easy, right? I've been reading so many like innumerable I've reading so many books and I've seen the way that they approach very specific problems and each has different ways of approaching it and that's great. All of them are great but it's different when you're not just a writer who writes a very spec on a very specific topic. You're you're you're writing a treatment. You're writing a a a a treatise. You're writing a whatever you're doing. It's a very specific thing but like trying to inter integrate all of that all together within a broader spectrum of everything whatever like that means like information itself has a very wide thing. It's not easy. You don't just go to YouTube and think, "Okay, I'm going to write down every single thing that I just consumed and this is everything like not just data as abstract, but data as contextualized. Not just not just folders as just a bunch of f****** things to hold your stuff, but as everything interconnected in order to form this publishable like format. Like it's not just formats by itself, you know, single format somehow magically applying to everything, but formats in formats, right? Formats in formats structure in structures, architectures and architectures, it doesn't have this, it doesn't put fit together nicely. So you have to constantly segment constantly segment and yet you have to maintain a holistic whole. So you're basically trying to navigate all these different media, try to navigate all these different formats, navigate all these different architectures, all these systems, and yet trying to maintain a coherent thread throughout it all throughout it all. That's not something you just do on a day-to-day basis. You don't just wake up in the morning and say, I'm going to write a liturgy story and how somehow make it make sense in in integr ation with something like notion. It makes sense though. Lit RBG can be represented informationally in an architectural way in notion. That was the point of notion. Notion has been used to do that. But it's different when you do it when your mind is still considering things like how can it be moreize my writing. Sometimes people kind of give up one for the other. That's kind of the issue. You know, you you stop you stop improving your writing because your mind is too focused on things like organizing through knowledge based applications such as notion. So there's a lot of people that just don't get actually get anything. productive done when you're using notion. So, it's like you want to be able to use these systems, these these um these visual approaches to present the information while also being uh refining your skills in trying to present everything textually as well because there's textual, there's visual and it's not just simple as textual visual because there's different domains of visual organization. There's different different ways and I'm not going to say sectors, I'm going to say domains because these are completely different worlds and a lot of the times you won't really see a connection. A lot of the times you're just be like, okay, It makes sense because it all connects to me. But like just because it connects to me does not necessarily mean because it makes sense or it is it is effectively integrated and utilized across or intersectionally. Right? So there needs to be a lot of explicitness. There needs to be a lot of elaboration. There needs a lot there needs to be a lot of precision. There needs to be a lot of hi halism. There needs to be a lot of modularity. There needs to be a lot of systematicness. That sounds completely meaningless. It's like reading focal book. and saying that's not just a book that's a book within everything that's a book within all the things that I have read that's a book that exists outside of itself that's not something you just do the brain already does that in a way but it's different when you're actually explicitly making that connection it's different when you say okay I'm going to make this comparison right now I'm going to but like and your brain's cognitively cognitively making those comparisons already but it's different when you're actually thinking from a very like integrated pursuit like you're trying to endeavor to put everything in this like in a way that makes sense beyond just its original medium, original format, original container and trying to put it all into this. It's not just like code bases. It's not just knowledge or domains. It's about completely different ways of interacting with information even to the point that it feels like you're interacting with a completely different kind of matter. It's as if the physics of law has changed. That's how I'm going to express the idea of different domains, but I wouldn't just say it's different domains because that completely um makes it seem as though it's just a matter of just putting things together, just putting words together. No, nobody's going to read a book about this completely esoteric topic and then to read this book about this completely different esoteric topic and then combine it together. Even if you're reading both and you think that you actually understand it, that doesn't necessarily mean that you can actually just write about it and actually write something that isn't just a compromised nothing burger. Actually talking about it, actually learning from it, actually subsuming it and integrate it into your writing. It's not something that just happens, right? You can try to just wrote memorization your way into heaven and say, "Okay, well, I've already integrated these various information from different domains." But no, it's different when you're act when it's actually appearing in your writing. That's not something you just do. That's not something you just wake up to. It's something that you have to build a very vast interconnected explicit and specific structure architecture or something that just will never relent to your whatever. It will not relent. And that is idealistic at that point because it's not you can't really it's it's impossible to describe. It's supposed to be ineffable, you know. But like it's something that you're just going to have to keep like throwing into the atmosphere stratosphere or something and just hope that there is this thread that appears at the end of it all.
Back to top ⤴