18-09-10 Words to Create (Creating Concepts)

1. Moving ideas out of and across domains[a] [b][c]

The making of consilience, the reification of the unity of knowledge
Invert creativity (non-novel value)
Making the discrete continuous[d]
The mechanism that selects identities[e]
1. Both identity in this moment and the identity(ies) worth moving towards
2. Meta-identity?
Re-name the curse of dimensionality
Invert Chaos
1. Statistical Mechanics? This is how I’ve been describing it, as stat-mech vs. chaos.
2. Need a temporal version of distributions
  1. Gaussian / Poisson Process?
Need a verb for mutual information, for ‘has information about’[f]
1. Can say x is correlated is y, but can’t say x is information with y’
  1. You can say x ‘depends on’ y
2. This is a problem because you can say ‘anti-correlated’, but can’t say anti-has information about
  1. Actually nvm, this is a tragedy where correlation can say that the relationship is positive or negative because linearity implies that the relationship always is positive or negative. You can’t do that with mutual information, it captures non-linear relationships.
For the way that the future is always in the present[g]
1. Ex., how differently you treat someone you’ll be with forever
2. I consistently frame this in terms of the iterated vs. uniterated prisoner’s dilemma, but it needs a word
Words for the different forms of meaning
1. Meaning that comes from devotion / sacrifice to something higher than yourself
2. Meaning that comes from connection, community, relationship
The use of dramatic social upheaval for a fundamental values shift
He needs an <insert word>
He needs a social rite of passage
He needs a social cleansing
None of these are close..
Making the binary probabilistic
Map-territory conflation[h][i]
Concept-instantiation conflation
There needs to be a word for the ‘bayesian problem’ where you just don’t take the prior into account when they’re doing causal inference.
Ex., canonical success traits that work but that are underrepresented in the base population
There needs to be a word for 'the class of which this object is but one element'. I want to apply it to language, for example. It’s not enough to say ‘things like language’. You have to identify that properties that are shared between the elements of the class, that are invariant across the class.[j]
Attributes that are defined by outputs, rather than by inputs. Ex., is an idea ‘creative’ vs. is an idea ‘recursive’.[k][l]
Creativity
1. What kind of a concept is it?
2. It's not defined by the inputs, it's defined by the outputs.
3. It's about whether the output is novel and valuable.
4. Is there a name for this kind of concepts?
5. If creativity was defined by the inputs, automating it would look like seeing one mechanism or understanding an inductive bias.
6. Since creativity is about the output, it looks more like an objective function that rewards novelty that is valuable.
I am the way that self-reference creates contradiction, the space of that which recursively destroys itself[m]
Omnitpotence recursively destroying itself
Identitilessness recursively destroying itself
That which has slain abstraction, before it was born again
1. Russel’s Paradox destroying Frege’s foundations for mathematics
2. Godel’s Incompleteness theorem
Jumping on a claim which indicates a totality (all, never, every) as a discrete, not continuous failure mode
Teleological Block, where your creative stopper is the goal you have in mind
Felt truth vs. objective truth (a word that sticks that we can happily split truth over - I know that it’s memetically unfit)
The PCA effect where you want words that are different from existing words
Refrence dependence.
A modifier that makes something recursive, or makes something infinite. It’s not meta-x, it’s not trans-x.[n]
A positively connoted ‘adverse selection’, where people optimize for a positive selection effect.
A predator who makes false allegations to destroy people (Slanderer, Defamer, and Perjurer are not functional)[o][p][q]

To create words, you need etymology[r]. Roots and their meanings.[s] [a]"translation" (etymonically: across-carry-ing, parallel with "metaphor") is roughly this, properly understood, i think. personally i'd just want to reclaim the proper meaning of those words. but if we want another word, maybe: idiolation (idea-carry-ing) alloideation / heteroideation (other-idea-ing) exenideation (out-in-idea-ing) [b](most / all my suggestions will have this "composing morphemes" flavor, which is the sort of contribution i'm trying to learn to make--but that's a narrow style which is often less inspiring than allusions, metaphors, examples, etc., so take it or leave it :) ) [c](if you don't want so many comments on the version you share with lots of people, you could make a copy of the google doc while copying the comments over, and then delete the comments here) [d]continuousify? continuify? continuize? continuumate? befluss ("make flowing")? [e]reclaim "soul". but if we want a technical term:

autopoet ("self-creator")? this is more accurate, but sounds weird (like a robot wordsmith)

bathyautos (greek "deep-self")

"coreself" [f]not naturally a verb, but "entangled / entanglement". "x is entangled with y"

"x is informative about y" if you want to emphasize one direction of flow. possibly could say "x informs y".

could also say "x influences y", though this maybe suggests too much causality.

"x overlaps y" [g]"provisional" (fore-seeing) is fairly close, though maybe narrower than you mean, and has not great connotations of flimsiness (https://tsvibt.blogspot.com/2023/03/provisionality.html)

nunmellon (greek, "now-future") [h]hm. should have a general pattern for X/Y conflation, but seems unwieldy. i mean you can just say "X Y conflation".

general note: example sentences are useful to illustrate the grammar that one wants. e.g. are we trying to say

"i think you're «X Y conflating»"?

maybe just shorten to "flating" lol

map-territory flation--- oh that sounds like inflation

one-syllabe guys: flation; fusion; blurring; mixing 1.5-syllable: flattening

"projecting" or "mind-projecting" is somewhat standard for that direction, and that direction is more discussed i think--like thinking that ghosts (specifically , phenomenal apparitions that you've filled in with imagined detail / substance) are real, or thinking that annoyingness is a property of toothpaste tubes, etc.

maybe "anti-projection" or "reverse-projection" for [thinking that X is only in one's mind, or is integrally / essentially part of one's mind, or is dependent on one's mind, when really it is not]? [i]though both of these assume the speaker is taking some stance on what specifically the mistake was, when you probably mean something more general, like [there may be some territory stuff and/or some mental stuff, and the person isn't appropriately treating them separately as territorystuff or mindstuff] [j]right... this seems like a good request-for-word, but i don't immediately see why to expect we can make a word... isn't the way that you're generalizing going to be pretty variable? possibly there could be stereotyped ways, analogously to question words: why = what way who = what person when = what time how = what method which = what alternative where = what place whose = belonging to what person how many/much = what quantity

so there could be words built like: "Art-S" (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Art#German, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Denkart#German) or "species-S" or "type-S", where S is some morpheme used as a suffix (or prefix) chosen from a set, so that e.g.

"language use-type / use-species" means " the class of things which are used for similar purposes as language is used" (e.g. animal noises used for coordination in hunting or mate-finding; internet TCP; generally, things used for communication / sharing ideas+info / coordinating)

"language way-type" means "the class of things which use similar ways / methods / materials as language" (e.g. music, song, alarm bells, small marks drawn on paper to control how bugs walk around, ...)

etc. [k]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensional_and_intensional_definitions

functional (only based on input-output behavior) vs structural/syntactic (based on how it's constituted / written / implemented) [l](neither of these are what you asked) [m]this is Hegel's dialectic as i understand it [n]i mean, "meta" does as a special case make it recursive, and separately as a special case probably makes it infinite; you're complaining that it's overloaded / poorly understood, or too broad? (fair)

examples would help (so we can see whether the word is satisfying)

if you want recursive in the sense of narrowly "applies to self", maybe "auto-" or "sui-" or "self-"? doesn't capture the "iterated" aspect, and only hints at the "self-encompassing, self-reflecting, whole-self-exercising, self-transcending" aspects [o]darvo / darvoer? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARVO [p]i guess that's more specific to when the darvoer has been accused, and adds stuff beyond slander [q]not clear this needs a word? it's two separate things:

they predate
they use defamation

is [ predation + [defamation specifically, but not some larger cluster like DARVO] ] a cluster / stereotyped class? [r]right... i built this, which is the world-best-in-class https://radix.ink/

but it's not actually good. there are many ways to improve it, and i'd guess it can be made actually good, but it would require more resources (one or two really good, dedicated programmers), which i can't put it now because of my earthly mission. but i'd happily get someone else up to speed [s]see also https://tsvibt.blogspot.com/2023/05/the-possible-shared-craft-of-deliberate.html

especially productivizing + expressivizing the morphemicon : https://tsvibt.blogspot.com/2023/05/the-possible-shared-craft-of-deliberate.html#expressivizing-the-morphemicon

Source: Original Google Doc