A discussion of how to preserve the momentum in your actions.Support the show
How to create a glitch- monologues- season 41- chapter 4.
This is season 41 of how to create a glitch in the matrix monologues episode 4. In this episode, we will be talking about how to conserve your direct ground.
To start off, it was explained how projecting a fixed belief upon the other, that is, making assumptions about their action, as a projection of intention, renders you subject to their reaction. This is the essential bifurcation of consensuality and non consensuality. To the extent that your projection is correct, you remain within a consensual space. When your projection is wrong, it leads to a non consensual space. Now, giving the other the direct ground, that is making assumptions about their behaviour or projecting their intentionality renders you subject to the result, non consensual or consensual. The result invariably produces some reactive emotionality which binds you to a contingency. That is to say, your mind, your very substance are entangled in that relationship through the assumptions underlying your action.
There are ways of avoiding giving the direct ground to the other. They include not acting on a perception of the other. Acting without contingency, that is without contingent objective. Acting with intentional attention. These methods all centre on keeping the supposition within your action, preserving the faith in your own intentionality. In this state, others action will be rendered contingent through the processing of direct to indirect ground. Which is to say, acting without contingency shapes the substance of the result. Acting with contingency, projecting a fixed belief on the other, turns every action into a confidence wager. But acting with supposition is unattached, the confidence is in the action, not in the result. In this type of action, the supposition becomes the momentum of the intention.
Now, we also talked in season 40 chapter 4 about social orbits and de-synchronization in a way that elucidates this discussion. Social orbits can be eliminated one of two ways. First, through recession. Second, through accession. Recession occurs when perturbations in the orbit, "knock" that individual out of a social orbit. Accession occurs when there is a collision of the two involved individuals.
A collision often occurs within a dissonant consensuality. A collision involves the rejection of an affirmatory narrative in a dissonant space, resulting in desynchronization and aversion or avoidance. But collisions also represent momentum transfers. In the collision of two individuals, there is a fundamental failure of the projection of intention. An affirmatory narrative within a dissonant space represents an attempt to draw another into one's consensuality. The failure to accomplish this is a failure of direct ground. A failure in the projection of another's action.
Thus, in the bifurcation of outcome represented by a projection of direct ground, non consensual and consensual, there is a net gain or loss of momentum. An individual who acquires their projection has succeeded in a confidence wager. An individual whose projection is defeated, loses the confidence in their own projections. That is to say, that in a dissonant space, an individual can accrue some degree of social momentum through their non cooperation with the other's affirmatory narratives.
All of this is to say that social orbits represent situations where two individuals have a common assumption, a common direct ground, about the other. To the extent that that common assumption is incorrect, it leads to collisions within dissonant spaces, that result in elimination of the social orbit.
That's the end of the podcast for today. If you enjoyed it, please like, comment and subscribe.