One of the most controversial thoughts is that of checkpoints.
Moments in time that determine the significance of the next.
The science equivalence would be activation energy. The propulsion of action through satisfied conditions that define the occurrence as it occurs.
The philosophical version doesn’t base its conditions on chemical interactions. Rather, our atoms are the thoughts that come to us as we come into being us.
Why do we have thoughts and why do we have the thoughts we do?
If we consider the significance of checkpoints, each thought can be diced down by a checkpoint. Instead of the dicing being chemicals, we dice the way we form the thoughts we use to investigate our thoughts.
For example, words are checkpoints. Alphabets are checkpoints. Sentences are checkpoints. The significance of a word is based on the checkpoint it reached to be of any meaning. The checkpoint is based on a continuous function/ a recursive function. As soon as the checkpoint is reached, another checkpoint is reached.
If a word is used outside its normal context, it loses meaning. The checkpoint it reaches are different enough that the word becomes something else.
Another example are ants searching for food. We can see ants as organic search functions. They act until they reach a checkpoint that controls their next search. They move on the ground and stop. Having reached a checkpoint, they then determine their next move. And then they stop again and determine where to go based on the context that has created a checkpoint to initiate investigation.
Investigation as a checkpoint is relevant insofar that investigation plays a role in creating the next checkpoint. When we investigate, we create a mirror perception of what we take reality to be with intentional input from our own meddling. This mirror feeds itself back into reality as consequences, checkpoints that necessarily contextualize our own being before our being can even investigate.
After investigation, checkpoints become Chess-like pieces in a game where the consequence act as feedback to the validity of our mirror perception.
The degree of validity determines the shape our perception goes on to take. Both as forceful reshaping and a investigative reshaping with our own intentions still manipulating the feedback loop of consequences.
Through agreeing on checkpoints, we can create social structures of our collective actions/intention. For example, tax that as a checkpoint to provide universal healthcare.
Checkpoints lead to determined consequences based on universal and objective forces. But these consequences also include the ability to determine checkpoints by a recursive understanding of how checkpoints play a role in creating the understanding we use to act in the world; ie investigation allows for creation.