Scientia e Lux

Are single people more self-obsessed than those in relationships?

It stands to reason I suppose!

If there is no one to focus one's attention on, then that attention will more likely revolve around what is there, ie oneself. Putting it another way - one's attention (or focus or view of the world) can be viewed as a sphere, emanating from oneself in the middle, like a sphere of light from a single source - a little like the Platonic concept (insert reference here).

The light is strongest closest to the source and that is where the person can see most clearly, but note the person can only see outwardly - since the person is looking forwardly and the light views forwardly. Anyway, one can see most clearly closer to oneself and the further out one peers, the dimmer the light and the harder it is to discern things.

This metaphor works well if the light source is like a fire, or candle, or equivalent - it is precisely what Plato conceptualised (insert here the actual text from Plato).

But the metaphor can also be extended to incorporate modern technology. Say that the light source is a torch. A focussed beam of light which shoots a long way into the distance but is narrow, so that only a few things can be seen in a narrow field of view. This ewuates to the increasing specialisation of knowledge that has been developing since man first spoke and wrote. This is very much apparent in recent times (the last couple of hundred years) where many people know a lot about a very small area (their torch illuminates a small patch on the distant cave wall but shows nothing else of the cave).

And the metaphor can be extended even further. Newer technologies (here, in the metaphor equating to new ways of providing light) correspond to new ways of thinking, new modes of knowledge, new domains of knowing, new concepts of understanding.

Some of the metaphors include: floodlights - a large light source, illuminating a wide area - we have the resources now to know a lot about many subjects, in a short period of time - technology, particularly computing and communications technologies, allows one to find out a lot very quickly, and (sometimes) to a surprising depth. But, just as with a floodlight, there are still shadows, and the light only goes so far.

Interestingly, with knowledge, the more that the "cave" is lit up, the larger the cave seems to get, and the more nooks and crannies and previously undiscovered passages and holes - and whole other caves - become apparent. And the cave (caves) itself even seems to change shape as more and different lights are added to those already there.

The best analogy is that of a construction company slowly building a scaffolding of multiple lights of all kinds and types to illuminate every part of the "cave". Slowly, lots of knowledge is made known to many more people. Indeed, the size of the cave thus illuminated becomes so large that a single person can not explore the whole lit area in just one life. In many case, people simply stay in one place - far too much effort to try anything else. Sometimes, people decide the add extra specialised lights to the general illumination so they can look at a piece of the cave in more detail.

This raises an interesting point. Can (or should) one work at developing new technology to either (1) more quickly build the illumination platform/structure in more parts of the cave system, and/or (2) more quickly travel through the cave, viewing/photographing (storing for later retrieval) the parts/walls of the cave travelled through.

This is a knowledge engineering exercise. Actually, more precisely, it is an exercise in engineering a facility which processes knowledge in another manner (whether that manner is better, faster and more efficient, more effective and more efficacious is a matter for consideration by those using the method and those observing such use. It is a contingency decision).

Thus, there have been technologies developed to assist in travelling through the cave more quickly (speed reading for instance, accelerated learning is another example. Other examples could include hypnotic suggestion and there are those that would propose a variety of pharmaceuticals (drugs and other substances) which enhance or assist knowledge acquisition (learning) or knowledge use/retrieval).

Further analogies/metaphors could be conceptualised in relation to this knowledge "geometry". One could conceive of a whole series of fibre optic cables criss-crossing the cave, connecting one point to another (actually, a better analogy would be tiny targetted lasers which shine from one point to another). This would be the Semantic Web - inter-connected knowledge.

Another metaphor would be that of somebody walking through the cave, but with lights strapped to all parts of their body. As they turned, the lights on their head and shoulders would illuminate what they were facing but there would also be lights on the shoes, in all directions, illuminating where one was standing and where one wanted to walk. There would be stronger lights on the waist, forward, sideways and in the rear, which would cast a bright glow all around the person, in all directions, so that the person could not only readily see the general vicinity, but that also other people could readily see that person (and the same applies of this person to other persons).

What does this metaphor mean in practice, to knowledge and knowing. It could be interpreted in many ways, since the precise mechanism of knowing relating to this metaphor does not really exist yet at this stage. One interpretation could be as follows.

The person represents the act of knowledge gathering and even knowledge creation. The person is the understanding of learning (how to learn) and getting to know. This is a process (a living moving entity) but it is also a thing, it is also knowledge itself (it may not be well defined knowledge, it may be ephemeral or volatile knowledge but it is still knowledge).

The act of the person moving through the cave is the act of learning new knowledge. The movement is guided by the lights on the feet as well as on the waist. These are "focusers"of knowledge. These are pieces of knowing, of a certain type, which assist in guiding the further investigation into knowing - knowledge about how to know (or learn) about something else. The something else is what is being illuminated by the lights on the head and shoulders, which one volitionally points at (ie the knowledge that one wants to know about or learn).

The other knowledge, which is illuminated from the feet (mostly) is unconscious - or more properly, non-volitional - knowledge. It is "provided" as a matter of course, to help guide the learning process. It is illuminating a topography which has been created by someone else (and may have even been created by oneself earlier) to help guide one's investigative perambulations.

In today's current terms, this "topography" would be conceptualised as ontologies (or taxonomies or topic maps - even though these terms are not synonymous) but not necessarily one single ontology or static ontologies, but as multiple ontologies which are linked together, and as ontologies which may be personalised, on an individual basis, based on a core ontology but modified for one's own use. These ontologies guide one through areas of knowledge, indicating what needs to be known, where it is and how to move from one piece or area of knowledge to another.

The "as important" element of this metaphor is the creation of a "knowledge base" for the individual as they move around, acquiring knowledge. The process used to acquire that knowledge is recorded and stored (as a knowledge structure, ie ontology and instances, itself) and the knowledge thus acquired (or attempted to be acquired) is linked (stored), possibly together with an evaluation of the strength of the acquisition (how well the knowledge was understood) (corresponding to the strength of the luminosity maybe in the metaphor).

This is the knowledge of the "body" as it moves and is the illumination which radiates from the lights at the waist of the person. This is most likely knowledge that the person themselves will use but it is also helpful knowledge for others - it allows them to "model" that others have done to get to a certain point (to understand something or to behave in a certain manner)0 and thus, possibly learn more quickly.

This is one of the essences of NLP - and this process just described is one means of "encoding" NLP.

The other potential extension of this already rather too extended metaphor is relating the luminous light in a sphere surrounding the person from the lights around the waist to the sphere of light which is a person when a sorceror can "see" other people properly in the series of Don Juan books by Carlos Castenada.

A person is really a ball of light, a complex conglomeration of light fibres which constitute and surround the person (at the same time), and extend out (or reach out) from the person. Some of the light "fibres" can reach out for great distances, and these are the means for sorcerors to travel great distances in no time, or even to "time travel". They are also the means whreby sorcerors can change shape, into other animals, or into other people, or even into various non-human non-natural "mythical" shapes/creatures.

Every living being consists of these fibres of light. Some beings are much "brighter" and "stronger" than others, because they have developed their consciousness more (their ability to "see") and some people have learnt (been taught) the ability to manipulate the fibres or strands of light - in order to perform extraordinary deeds.

The metaphor from the Castenada series deals with knowledge but mostly from the perspective of what one can know in order to gain or have power. The knowledge to manipulate the light fibres gives on power - which allows one to do things - the ultimate of which is to disappear completely - not die (ever), not live (ever).

How does all this relate to knowledge acquisition and processing? To the Semantic Web and such forth? No idea.

How does it all relate to single people being more self obsessed than "coupled" people?

It maybe that the metaphor just does not apply. Two people standing together, close together, will project more light than just one person. They theoretically could see more and understand more. But, is this the case? And, even if it was, does it help? Does it mean anything?

It might be that the single person must "marshall" their energy more, in order to maintain their focus and seeing, and that this increases the "self-obsession". Plausible and possible but not meaningful in the metaphor.

Finally, it may be that two people coupled together must be aware of each other, so as not to coause troubles with the others "apparatus" (so to speak, if you know what I mean). Thus, they are more aware of the "other" - initially the "significant other", and, then, as an extension and a by-product, all others (and thus, by definition, less self-obsessed). Once again, plausible and possible - and this time, more meaningful in relation to the metaphor. Being "forced" to understand (to know) someone else also focuses one's efforts at knowing, and one's knowing or knowledge itself, in an outward manner.