On Making Observations and The Emperor’s New Robe

So much fake, where the real go? Hoes hate me, I’m a a-hole

• Nietzsche

Gotta sip a couple, you can’t let the whole clip off

• Trapland Pat

Can an observation change the significance of the event being observed? Is there an event without observation? Can an observation be had without there being significance? Can significance only occur in observations? What does it mean to observe meaninglessness? What is the significance of observing meaninglessness?

Is meaninglessness the same as nothing? Is nothing the same as a void? If the universe is an anti-void because it’s populated by “observations” (measurements), does it necessarily follow that we don’t live in a void (vacuum)? Does it follow that if we don’t live (exist) in a vacuum, all measurements are correlated/ related to one another?

We can find “relatedness” in all encounters of observation. Our observation themselves exist because of relations. One reductionist example is the relation between neurons and our thoughts and whether our thoughts are “just” neurons.” Since the relationship is so strong. You cannot have one without the other once you start with scientific axioms.

Beyond depending on scientific axioms, we can relate awareness to more mythical origins. We ascended or descended from a starting point. Some myths (abductions) are more scientific compatible than others but that’s only when our myths are grounded (tethered) to scientific axioms. It’s popular in my cultural group to encourage a loyalty to scientific axioms because it’s proven to be consistently correlated with positive outcome for the health and well being of society.

How do we deal with the experience that each person has a differently motivated reaction to the same non-void that we live in?

We assume cultural subtext to answer this question. We at times transcend our own cultural identity and claim our reaction is based on an eternal understanding of right and wrong but this isn’t scientifically friendly. Focusing on cultural subtext, we can avoid “the void” of not understanding each person’s unique experience via a significant but small presumption of awareness that our questions are answers consisting of established subtext we were raised with. A constructed subtext that we help build but are, in childhood, aided in the construction by our environment.

In maturity and with the proper subtext, we grasp an understanding of autonomy. At first this concept was taught to us by our environment. At one time we just cried and the environment (hopefully) calmed us. A thing developed that could understand its own contentment; it understood a correlation between the outside environment and its “internal” experience.

The internal experience eventually learns a deep correlation between the internal experience and the outside environment. The learning is an abstract construct somehow formed by the environment and what the internal experience “understands.”

But the internal experience understands that it cannot understand beyond what the environment correlates with the axioms it establishes.

Axioms are part of understanding that justify the circular reasoning that understanding runs into. The nihilistic end of understanding, ignorance. When we don’t know, we go to axioms to reestablish the relationship between our inner experience and the outside environment.

It’s problematic to always run to axioms because part of existing is understanding that axioms are no substitute for the non-void that is the universe (Reality). We will meet people outside our cultural groups and we will not understand them unless we understand that they are even without our understanding; that is understood both ways as long as both groups show an understanding of each other’s ignorance.

Most of the time, however, there is a xenophobic tendency to react to ignorance with a loyalty to the axioms we have established from before. So that our reaction maintains the integrity of our axioms at the cost of the outsider.

A consistent cause-effect understanding that we are at times at a loss of understanding but that the explanation is corroborated by other patriots/members. The existence (correlation) of our understanding is based on our understanding that our existence is measured by a loyalty to these axioms.

What other axioms can be used (abducted) to explain the disconnect between the correlated universe, our knowledge of correlation, and our awareness of lacking knowledge of correlation?