Awareness Development

Slave/Master relationship,
(servant, served,) (Lacan):
*Fulfillment of need determines existence.
*Served-no worldly needs-pursuit of erotic.
*Servant -fulfills needs of Served.

Construct
*visual/mental
*biological/non-biological
*a constant for consideration
The construct is a series of 5 bottles on a shelf
Observer as Servant
*fulfills needs of construct with mere acknowledgement.
Observer as Served
*construct serves observer by providing information.
Each new piece of information received by viewer recontextualizes
construct.
Observer as Servant
*observer reacknowledges the construct.
Back and forth switches in Servant to Served relationship in
millisecond
shifts, with the construct becoming more complex with each millisecond
that
passes.

Complex Construct
*experienced by more than one observer at a time
*TV allows for the same experience at the same time, by millions.
*The construct becomes more valuable to human existence with the
increase in
numbers of observers.

Looker/ Seer
Looker
*attains information-Served
Seer
*merely acknowledges construct-Servant.
Can specific looker/Seer shifts be choreographed into a construct?
*Vacant vs. crowded spaces.
How are Looker/Seer shifts stimulated?
*deconstruction/certification
*public/private

Voyeur
Voyeur inverts the typical architectural paradigm. Observer not
intended to
see inside, rather, sees outside of the building. The inhabitants look
outside.

Wall Street
*quintessential Looker/Seer model
During the day bustling with people and empirical data flow, the
buildings
serve as shields of armor for the arteries of world business activity
within. During the night, the arteries empty out, the buildings become
placid transparent beautiful forms. The innocent (hapless) voyeur need
only
catch the incredible light show created by the hundreds of lit offices
to
look up and in to the buildings.

Habit
Repetitive experience as identity
*retention of recognized experience informs future recognition.
*reception – perceptual activity
*projection – application of engagement with a construct

Difference
The differences inherent within any comparison are traces of the
events,
which occurred, ultimately describing the purity of the cause and
effect
collection amounting to the elements of the comparison. The difference
does
not define any meaning which has been applied to the cause and effect
scenario. The clarity of the activity which brought about the situation
is
exposed in comparative analysis, the notion of significance is an event
which must be applied
with linguistic detail, as an added layer of engagement with the
elements
being compared.

Thinking that precedes perception and action is causal thinking,
devised
events or intention. The editing of intention occurs after perception
of the
action, "That wasn’t my intention."

The use of suggestion to interpret perceptual activity confuses the
looker /
seer paradigm. A person receives a prediction from a psychic that they
don’t
believe, then the predicted event actually occurs, and this confuses
the
person’s sense of being. Exposure to advertisements and advice from a
friend
or a therapist are other examples which can provide extra-intellectual
mechanics for use in navigating perceptual information.

Perception formed by an unconscious state (a dream or a coma etc.)
confuses
the simple looker / seer ordering. The understanding informed by a
direct
unconscious state, that is one in which the perceiver is considered
unconscious, accesses the tools of control and memory in a different
manner,
as intention may be differently directed.
To what end do people go to reference the original. What is the minimal
amount of information required
to trigger a comparison with the origin of an element.
A plastic lemon which is identical to a natural lemon.
A photo of a natural lemon.
A lemon yellow colored table.

1. At what point is difference established?
2. When and why do we end our comparison with the simulated and the
inferred
original?
3. Does the result of the comparison between the simulated and the
inferred
original, signal the purpose or intention behind the act of the
simulation?

Can a correlation be drawn between the referenced and the inferred
(implied
and perceived?)
Can a correlation be drawn between the referenced and the inferred
(implied
and perceived?)

Let : X= context, N= new, R= referenced, I= inferred, C= correlation,
A=
active memory, Z= inactive memory (not consciously active)
R + I = C, followed in a millisecond by R + IC = NC, then R + INC = NNC
etc

Coupled with a condition of reception and perception like memory:

A + Z = X
--------------- = next millisecond
R + I = C

Could time be determined to exist as perceptual activity, reflecting
the
common sentient condition of humankind?

A woman sitting at an outdoor cafe says to her companion "nice tree,"
the
companion looks and sees no tree, but rather an awning above them with
an
all over printed leaf pattern on it. Would the woman have said "nice
tree"
if the pattern had appeared on the tablecloth instead of the awning
above?

Quaint is a simplified range of possibility.
The loss of possibility condenses the experience of renewed context,
creating a void within the Reference / Inference model of the
non-quaint.
The non-quaint or less quaint, situation has a broader band of
possibilities
for renewing contextual foundation.

Reference / Inference – Intention / Reception
Reference and the resulting inference are a system based in
deconstructive
activity.
Intention and reception of an intended idea are based on supposition,
drawn
from the context in which the idea was communicated.

Intention – Reception
The curious gap between the intended idea and its reception by a
perceiver.
The great pyramids.
MTV
Non-electronic face to face conversation

Can an idea be communicated throughout time?
If yes, how does an idea become timeless?
If no, how is intention lost?

The tabulation of millisecond shifts over 60.000 years?

Can a millisecond shift in context be mapped and tied to the activity
which
caused it?

Can the movement of each particle of sand in the oceans be considered a
record of the unified activities, which brought about the movement?

Is a grain of sand or a human breath, actually a computer of the likes
we
have not yet developed, capable of down loading, saving, processing and
re-presenting 60,000 years of continuous millisecond shifts in context
and
all within a millisecond?

–Max Yawney, 2001