Artificial Ruleset

Intro: The artificial ruleset. At least, an aspect of it. Ethics, right and wrong; good and bad. setting, being sometimes meant to be an action or process, typically intended to bring about change I have some news: Our brains from birth have rudimentary systems for determining good and bad. Your brain also has little to no clue what's going on until quite a ways later. Once you've determined goo and bad, you can now start associating these to actions and properties (and items). Even though our brains from these very rudimentary systems aren't always accurate, they can be tuned and tweaked, like tiny little robots. Most commonly, it's new experiences, including media, that change our minds about things. The way our brains subconsciously process data and sort information of our experiences of things, is both impressively harmful and helpful. Since we know that our minds can be changed by experience, and we know that experience is data and information, we know that data and information is the actual thing that changed our mind. And because thinking can bring about new data and information, then thinking alone can change our minds and drive forward experience. This, for example, happens with the self awareness of emotion and reading our subconscious behavior. These can trigger new data and information by reading what would otherwise also still be automatically there. For instance, you are thinking with the "monkey brain", but also thinking outside of the "monkey brain" to use all of the information at your disposal and derive a more conscious decision that, when also keeping in mind the consciousness of others an information you know of them, otherwise forming mindfulness, delivers a deliberate conscious decision to execute a specific action that intentionally affects the world in a certain way. This releases a "wave" felt by the items of the world, see or unseen, that is perceived by everyone else in a different way, depending on the level of information those that perceive it have of the item that performed the action. It is difficult to maintain a level of clarity to see this at all points in time.

Think again of the "monkey brain" as an automatic, knee-jerk-like response. Think of elevated response as that time you took a time out from cursing out that rude customer at the store. Now think of it from the other perspective, how annoying it must be that that customer had to deal with a mid-20s, completely apathetic, fake voiced worker. Stoicism was meant to be, I suppose, seeing a situation from an objective perspective, with awareness of the self's perspective, and/or another's perspective, or another group's perspective. The photo above is meant to be a guide to the defaults of a user-programmable system. All of these elements can be manually tweaked with the appropriate view, or thought, or experience. ̶I̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶y̶ ̶w̶e̶r̶e̶ ̶r̶i̶g̶i̶d̶,̶ ̶s̶e̶l̶f̶ ̶h̶e̶l̶p̶ ̶b̶o̶o̶k̶s̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶e̶x̶i̶s̶t̶,̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶m̶a̶n̶y̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶m̶s̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶e̶d̶u̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶r̶e̶d̶u̶c̶e̶d̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶a̶s̶h̶.̶ It is only when all the individual parts of the complete thought process is carried out perfectly do you have the absolute, objectively best action-response choice. We know nothing is perfect because we see faults and inefficiencies, and shortcomings. And even still, any part of the system can be performed with a default setting, or the wrong setting, producing ends that are imperfect, or otherwise harmful in some way. But how close one approaches to that level is affected by their ability to keep up with all the elements and rulesets.