A reconceptualization of social exchanges as compression events and dissonant consensualities as analog spaces.Support the show
How to create a glitch- monologues- season 42- chapter 5.
This is season 42 of how to create a glitch in the matrix monologues episode 5. In this episode, we will be reconceptualizing dissonant consensualities and social exchanges.
To start off, in any social exchange, when two people meet, there are 9 different dialogues occurring on nine distinct plates. All of these dialogues are subsequently integrated into the behaviour of each participant leading to changes in behaviour. Except, dissonant consensualities, which are incorporated into the linear stream through parsimony but not necessarily in the internal stream of the participants. Now, dissonant consensualities are interesting because they represent manifestations of a non-binary, analog self. All other qualities generate binary selection between narratives either affirming or negating. But dissonant consensualities are different in a fundamental way. They represent behaviours which the other affirms, which are negated by the other actor. These dissonant consensualities represent the expression of the corresponding impulses, which due to it being within a dissonant space, are non binary, analog representations of the system.
If you imagine that each social intersection with another person is a compression of your being into binary categories, occurring through topological properties, combined with the narratives that the other affirms, as well as negated behaviours, within the plates below the plate of the face, then you can see that each exchange with another is a compression event. In that compression event, the behaviours which cannot be compressed produce analog spaces contained within the wake of the actor. In other words, the two individuals communicating can be thought of as two fluids of different density, with one creating a wake in the other through the momentum transfer (the dissonant consensuality).
In other words, rejection of affirmational narratives in dissonant spaces accrues momentum, which produces a wake (dissonant consensuality) between the two distinct density actors. Likewise, within non consensual spaces an individual is non compressible, precisely because non consensual spaces are analog spaces. This makes perfect sense, because consensual spaces are comprised of behaviours we consciously affirm or which are topological, in which case others affirm. It is only in non consensual space that non binary spaces can exist. This also tells us that each social exchange is a compression event. We are literally being compressed into binary packets each time we have a conversation which does not produce a dissonant consensuality.
As we can now conceptualize social exchanges as compression events. It becomes possible to reconceptualize multiplicity as a form of packet loss. Observing the multiplicity inherent in the action of another becomes a sign that some of the local data is not being transformed into binary packets. Thus, dissonant consensualities, multiplicity, represent some analog component of our action, which is fundamentally traceable to trauma created cognitive dissonance. Since we know that historical traumas create dissonant consensualities...
That's the end of the podcast for today. If you enjoyed it, please like, comment and subscribe.