On Limitations on Recording, Storing, Analysis, and Playback in the Brain

It's interesting that I have had the basic ideas for a writing like this in mind, but I have been unable to properly compartmentalize exactly what I want to get across. The interesting part is I want to express some insight on compartmentalization/compression.

Nick Szabo talks about compression in relation to our brains, in that we are so complex, and information can only be compressed so far, that there is a limit on our ability to perfectly step into another person's shoes, or express the entirety of what is in or own heads. *This link is broken and I cannot remember if I am referencing the correct paper and with the proper context but its the link I had in mind.

This is related to Adam Smith's impartial spectator, that we can theorize about a conceptually ideal and neutral perspective without suggesting it is wholly possibly to ever enter this perspective.

Krishnamurti levates this perspective through his dialogue and encourages one to move in the direction of invoking it individually and inwardly. Bohm formalized group invocation of such an objective perspective

In regard to one's own brains and minds (whatever relationship we ascribe them to have with each other) I think it can be said that we have some natural tendency to try to make sense of our experience, but I think it comes not from a psychological need but rather from a need to compress and store the experience.

Probably in some form of debriefing stage (like dreaming), it could be supposed that the mind uses complex association in order to compress and compartmentalize as much information as possible.

This creates a need for some “very stable” centers in which different concepts are linked to and that they can “unfold” from.

From another approach, we represent our experiences with some form and magnitude (or level) of metaphors, and we sometimes struggle to fit new experiences and understandings into whatever basic metaphors or building blocks we have constructed to represent the compressed information.

The “core” of these metaphors, or the most basic of blocks, would be the most difficult and traumatic to change (some possibly or nearly impossible), especially in a society that generally uses this paradigm (whether they know or understand they are using it or not).

Some experiences, or insights could lead to a change in the base structure, and we would expect this to be very uncomfortable for the individual or the psyche or “ego”. Depending on the cause we might expect very unfavorable (ie unsociable) fragmentation or disorder.

This would be like metaphors that are locked in some kind of fast memory or RAM, that cannot be dumped or debriefed to a long term storage, or in other words they do not fit in with the current compression methods. It might be as a whole or it might be in conflict with the base blocks.

Then it could be said that there might be the possibility of FAVORABLE change/evolution, and that the basic blocks used to store the compressed information might be able to be evolved.