Fun Criterion

Using a fun-violating criterion is bad because it impairs the correction of inconsistencies between explicit and inexplicit ideas.

– https://twitter.com/daviddeutschoxf/status/949243539451531264

internal-conflicts by what is most fun to do
a strategies for accesssing complex-potential-states

Argument for that

considering all(theories/ideas/knowings) that can happen in our experience
- ideas, theories, knowings taken all synonym
- no good word for these "things" has been found
locations of knowing
- conscious
  - implicit/tacit
    - things that cannot easily me spoken with language
    - e.g. playing a ballsport and having the theory that the ball will move into "that" direction
  - explicit
    - conflicts can be solved alone with logic and experiment
    - always comes together with implicit/tacit knowing
- unconscious
  - not presently known
  - might become immediatly known, say, if you asked yourself the right questions or if something happende in the evironment which brought one or more of them to mind
internal-conflicts arrise between all this "things"
a mood points to an existing internal-conflicts
Possible criterions to resolve conflicts(broad)
- disrecard all(irational, antirational)? but your explicit theories/ideas/knowings
  - meaning leave out the feeling and solve the problem only with the mind
  - top-down
- romantic stance
  - explicit ideas are just conventional decorations
  - not really human
  - bottom-up
  - don't mean anything
  - what is really important are feelings
  - you try to reach into your feelings and follow them
    - its irational
      - choosing between theories according to irrelevant criterion compulsivly
    - it does not look on the content but only the type of theory(types are: emotion, feeling, though, physical sensation, etc.)
      - e.g feeling > thought
        
        it therefore does not look at what the feeling is saying
  - you actually cannot act on your feelings if you do not know what they are.
    - you may be mistaken
    - feeling something is wrong does not tell you what to do
    - intuition without theory?
    - you need knowledge to act on
to solve conflicts/problems you need conjecture, criticism, error correction
- for this you need to create new knowledge
- but you would need to do things with all the types and implicit theories and unconscious theories is very hard and for some impossible
- how to cross this difficulty to translate between the types
all these "things" are evolution
- they evolved in some environment
- so the environment/organism and where you where in created these
- the environment mostly consists of other ideas
  - ideas effect each other by evolution
- when things are going well the conjecture, criticism are working in a way where they are taking in account of what the others are doing or are
- idealy you get into a state of mind where they are all effecting each other
  - meaning less fragmented and more being whole
  - when all are effecting each other you are having fun
    - logos

https://insighttimer.com/morpheus/guided-meditations/short-insight-story-the-4-yogis

Argument for that

Related

Links