#Cognitive Science of Transformation

[bsahely]

Awakening Coherence: Relevance Realization, Recursive Wisdom, and the Sacred Grammar of Becoming | ChatGPT4o

[Download Full Document (PDF)] Civilization stands at the edge of a recursive threshold — a liminal passage between the collapse of inherited meaning systems and the emergence of new, integrative grammars of coherence. John Vervaeke’s Awakening from the Meaning Crisis offers one of the most comprehensive diagnoses of this turning point, identifying the breakdown in sacred orientation and…

[yellowmanula]

What is human-machine co-creativity? Let’s consider it through the lens of cognitive scientist Margaret Boden. Transformational creativity (as opposed to combinational creativity, which merely rearranges existing elements) involves the emergence of entirely new, hybridized and homogenous forms. The difference lies in creating a new epistemological quality rather than a collage of pre-existing parts. This kind of creativity becomes a breakthrough moment, especially when human and machine actions intersect within cultural production.

In other words, it clearly illustrates the innovative and non-canonical approach characteristic of live coding practices — where art meets science. Human-machine co-creativity assumes that the artistic and musical act would not reach its final form if either party acted independently. It's a genuine fusion of art and science, demonstrating their peaceful coexistence as a source of cultural productivity.

It also serves as a critique of purely utilitarian approaches in favor of thought improvisation — perhaps even an attempt to remove irrationality, while paradoxically giving rise to holistic and synthetic modes of thinking. Ultimately, live coding generates an intriguing tension between analytical and intuitive thought, allowing us to grasp the complexity of the creative act.

From my field notes, inspired by Gérard Assayag (Sciences and Technologies of Music and Sound) Ircam/CNRS Lab.

[dvandom]

Summaries are mostly Remembering/Recall, although may activate some Understanding when it comes to picking what's important to keep and what can be left out for brevity.

Analysis is a few levels up. Furthermore, the "analysis" discussed in this thread is more of a combination of Analyzing and Evaluating, since it often involves making judgements about the thing being analyzed.

So, that's my day job context (PhD in Physics Education Research).

My hobby context is that the page for a toy on Hasbro Pulse (link will rot eventually, still works as of October 7, 2024) is a summary, while my review of that toy is analysis. They don't try to do the same thing, in fact since my aggressively old school reviews are all text with occasional URLs to pictures I took of the toy doing something I can't describe in just words, my reviews aren't as good at being summaries as just a series of pictures would be.

>video claiming to be essay/history on a topic

>ask them if its analysis or summary

>they dont understand

>pull out detailed chart explaining what's analyzing the ideas and motives behind a text and what is just presenting information without thinking about it

>"it's a good video, ma'am"

>watch it

>summary

[goodoldbandit]

The Power and Peril of Plan Continuation Bias: A Strategic Guide.

Sanjay Kumar Mohindroo Sanjay Kumar Mohindroo. skm.stayingalive.in Plan continuation bias affects decision-making in aviation, IT, healthcare, and business. Learn its benefits and drawbacks and how to use it wisely. What is Plan Continuation Bias? Plan Continuation Bias (PCB) is a cognitive bias that causes individuals and teams to persist with an original plan, even when changing…

[mehmetyildizmelbourne-blog]

Brainoware: The Hybrid Neuromorphic System for a Brighter Tomorrow

A glimpse into the double-edged nature of Brain Organoid Reservoir Computing, with the pros/cons of this biological computing approach From a young age, I was captivated by the mysteries of science and the promise of technology, wondering how they could shape our understanding of the world. I was fortunate to receive STEM education early on in a specialized school, where my creativity and…

[sokolygrandaananeva]

The Noosphere: Merging Philosophy and Transhumanism

[wendichester]

｡𖦹°‧ across the room²,

summary. you've seen sam around. he's seen you too. all you're both waiting for is the perfect opportunity to go from strangers to something more.

pairing. stanford!sam winchester x reader genre. more fluffy fluffing fluff

wordcount. 1398

ᯓ★ read part 1

You blame the weather. Rainy Saturdays are basically a divine invitation to cancel plans and stay in stretchy pants. Add a looming midterm and a text from Sam Winchester that reads “Wanna study together? I promise not to distract you. Much.” and, well... resistance is futile.

So here you are, curled up on the floor of his dorm room, legs tangled in a beanbag that’s seen better days, psych textbook open but very much unread. Sam sits beside you, back propped against the bed, one leg stretched out, the other bent so his notebook balances perfectly on his knee like this is his natural habitat.

It shouldn’t be this cozy. Dorm rooms are small, usually smell faintly of ramen and gym socks, and his desk is cluttered with loose papers and a comically large water bottle. And yet—somehow—it feels like home.

The two of you have been meeting up like this for a week now. Library tables. Coffee shop corners. That one empty stairwell between classes.

And okay, maybe you both do more laughing than actual studying. Maybe your pens keep “accidentally” brushing. Maybe you’ve started recognizing his footsteps before he even enters a room.

But none of that changes the fact that there’s a midterm coming.

“I swear this chapter is cursed,” you mutter, letting your head fall dramatically back against the beanbag. “I’ve read this paragraph four times and retained nothing.”

Sam chuckles beside you. “Want me to quiz you?”

“No,” you groan. “I want you to read it to me in your deep brooding voice while I nap and absorb the knowledge through osmosis.”

“That’s not how osmosis works,” he teases, elbow gently nudging yours.

You hum. “Then what good is science?”

He snorts. You feel it vibrate through the beanbag before you realize how close you’ve drifted.

And then his voice drops, low and dramatic. “Chapter twelve: Cognitive behavioral therapy is a form of psychotherapy aimed at modifying dysfunctional emotions, behaviors, and thoughts…”

You break. Full-on giggle. “Stop, I didn’t actually mean it!”

“Too late,” he says, continuing with a straight face. “Therapists work with patients to identify patterns and—”

You throw a pillow at him. He laughs and ducks, and somewhere in the movement, you shift, and suddenly your head lands right in his lap.

Silence.

It’s not awkward. Not quite. Just… very, very still.

You glance up at him, half-expecting him to freak out or gently nudge you off. But Sam’s looking down at you like you’re the rarest species of bird and he doesn’t want to startle you.

“Sorry,” you murmur, starting to move. “Didn’t mean to—”

“Don’t,” he says quickly. “I mean… you can stay. If you want.”

You blink. “You sure?”

His fingers fidget near your shoulder. Not touching—just close. “Yeah. Feels nice.”

You settle back in place, cheeks warm. Your heart is beating too loud. Or maybe that’s his. You’re not even sure whose pulse you’re hearing anymore.

The rain keeps falling outside. Steady. Gentle.

And then—his fingers find yours. Slowly, like he’s giving you every chance to pull away. You don’t. You lace them together, feel his warmth seep into your skin like sunlight through the clouds.

You don’t mean to fall asleep. You really don’t. But his hand in yours, his other hand absently tracing circles along your arm, the steady rhythm of his breathing—it’s all just too much.

Too safe. Too soft. Too perfect.

By the time he glances down again, you’re out cold.

Sam blinks, staring at you like you just transformed into some mythological creature. His free hand hovers, then gently brushes a lock of hair off your forehead.

“You’re killing me,” he whispers.

But he doesn’t move. Not even when his leg falls asleep. Not even when the textbook slides off his lap and lands with a dull thud.

Because for the first time in months—hell, maybe years—Sam Winchester feels calm.

Like maybe he can have this. A future. Be normal. Someone to fall asleep on his lap during study sessions. Someone who makes dorm rooms feel like places worth coming back to.

Eventually, he leans back, head against the wall, eyes closing too. And for the rest of the rainy afternoon, the world pauses.

When you wake up, you’re warm.

Not just “under a blanket” warm—more like wrapped in another person’s heartbeat warm.

The kind of warmth that makes you want to stay very, very still. Because if you move, if you breathe wrong, the moment might slip away like a dream you almost remember.

Sam.

You don’t open your eyes right away—you don’t need to. His scent is already there, filling your lungs: clean skin, coffee, and something that might be his shampoo or just the quiet smell of comfort.

You’re not on the beanbag anymore. At some point, he must’ve moved the both of you up onto his twin bed, awkwardly narrow and way too short for his stupidly long limbs. You’re tucked into his side now, one leg slung over his, your face against his chest. His arm is around your back, hand splayed like he’s holding you in place even in sleep.

It’s… intimate. Stupidly intimate.

And yet, somehow, it doesn’t feel weird. Doesn’t feel too much. It feels like something you’ve both been quietly leaning toward for weeks—drifting into each other orbit like two magnets too stubborn to admit it.

You feel his breathing change—slow and deep shifting into soft, fluttering inhales.

He’s waking up.

Your eyes open just in time to see his lashes flutter, his brow crease like he’s not quite sure where he is—until he looks down and sees you.

And smiles.

“Hey,” he whispers, voice all husky and cracked at the edges.

Your heart trips over itself. “Hey.”

Silence hangs between you, thick with what now? and don’t move too fast.

You’re both blinking at each other, like you’re not sure if the other one’s real.

“Sorry,” you murmur, fingers curling slightly into the fabric of his shirt. “Didn’t mean to fall asleep on you.”

He gives a breathy laugh. “You kidding? Best part of my week.”

You glance up at him through sleep-heavy lashes. “You say that to all your study buddies?”

“I only have one.” His fingers brush your back. “And she drools on my hoodie, so she’s special.”

Your face scrunches in horror. “Did I actually—”

“No,” he grins. “But you believed me for a second, and that’s what counts.”

You swat at him, weak and half-laughing. He catches your wrist in one big, warm hand. Doesn’t let go.

And now you’re staring at each other. Close. So close. His thumb brushes gently over the side of your wrist, slow, thoughtful.

It’s quiet again. But not awkward. More like the breath-before-a-kiss kind of quiet. And this time… you don’t look away.

“You’re not gonna kiss me right now, are you?” you whisper.

His eyes flick to your mouth. Just once.

“I want to,” he says softly, like a confession he’s been carrying way too long. “But I don’t wanna screw this up.”

You can’t help the way your chest tightens. “Sam… it’s already happening.”

That gets a blink. “What is?”

“This.” You squeeze his hand. “You and me. It’s already happening. Whether we admit it or not.”

His breath catches. Like you just cracked open something big.

And then—finally, finally—he leans in.

It’s slow. No sudden moves. Just inches closing like pages of a favorite book. His nose brushes yours first, and then—soft as a promise—his lips touch yours.

And oh.

It’s warm. It’s sweet. It tastes like leftover sleep and caffeine and something new.

His hand cups your cheek like he’s afraid you’ll float away. Yours fumbles into his hair, tugging gently as the kiss deepens—just barely. Just enough.

When he pulls back, it’s not far. He keeps his forehead pressed to yours, smiling like a boy who just got everything he never dared ask for.

“Still not gonna focus in psych class,” You mumble.

He snorts. “Guess I’ll just have to tutor you.”

“Oh no! You’re gonna make me learn.” You groan, and he dramatically flops onto his back and drags you with him.

“Only I get to kiss you when I get the flashcards right.”

Your grin is crooked. “Deal.”

And just like that— Somewhere between a rainstorm and a midterm and the softest kiss of your life— Sam Winchester became your favorite kind of distraction.

ꔛ. navigation 𓂃˖ ࣪ all drabbles ; compatibility readings ; support my work .ᐟ

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Notes: Hierarchy of Needs

Abraham Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of human needs has profoundly influenced the behavioral sciences, becoming a seminal concept in understanding human motivation.

The original pyramid comprises 5 levels:

Physiological needs: Basic requirements for survival, such as food, water, shelter, and sleep

Safety needs: Security of body, employment, resources, morality, the family, health, and property

Love and belonging needs: Friendship, family, intimacy, and a sense of connection

Esteem needs: Respect, self-esteem, status, recognition, strength, and freedom

Self-Actualization: The desire to become the best that one can be

Maslow posited that our motivations arise from inherent and universal human traits, a perspective that predated and anticipated evolutionary theories in biology and psychology (Crawford & Krebs, 2008; Dunbar & Barrett, 2007).

Maslow developed his theory during the Second World War, a time of global upheaval and change, when the world was grappling with immense loss, trauma, and transformation. This context influenced Maslow’s emphasis on the individual’s potential for growth, peace, and fulfillment beyond mere survival.

It is noteworthy that Maslow did not actually create the iconic pyramid that is frequently associated with his hierarchy of needs. Researchers believe it was popularized instead by psychologist Charles McDermid, who was inspired by step-shaped model designed by management theorist Keith Davis (Kaufman, 2019).

Over the years, Maslow (1970) made revisions to his initial theory, mentioning that 3 more levels could be added:

cognitive needs,

aesthetic needs, and

transcendence needs (e.g., mystical, aesthetic, sexual experiences, etc.).

Criticisms of the Hierarchy of Needs

Criticism of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs has been a subject of ongoing discussion, with several key limitations identified by scholars and practitioners alike. Understanding these critiques and integrating responses to them is vital for therapists aiming to apply the hierarchy in a modernized way in their practice.

Needs are Dynamic

Critics argue that the original hierarchy does not offer an accurate depiction of human motivation as dynamic and continuously influenced by the interplay between our inner drives and the external world (Freund & Lous, 2012).

While Maslow’s early work suggested that one must fulfill lower levels in order to reach ultimate self-actualization, we now know human needs are not always clearly linear nor hierarchical.

People might experience and pursue multiple needs simultaneously or in a different order than the hierarchy suggests. After all, personal motives and environmental factors constantly interact, shaping how individuals respond to their surroundings based on their past experiences.

Cultural Bias

One of the primary criticisms is the cultural bias inherent in Maslow’s original model. While many human needs can be shared among cultures, different cultures may prioritize certain needs or goals over others (Tay & Diener, 2011).

It’s often argued that Maslow’s emphasis on self-actualization reflects a distinctly Western, individualistic perspective, which may not resonate with or accurately represent the motivational structures in more collectivist societies where community and social connectedness are prioritized.

Empirical Grounding

The hierarchy has also faced scrutiny for its lack of empirical grounding, with some suggesting that there isn’t sufficient research to support the strict ordering of needs (Kenrick et al., 2010).

In practice, this limitation can be addressed by viewing the hierarchy as a descriptive framework rather than a prescriptive one.

Source ⚜ More: Writing Notes & References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

[max1461]

Linguists deal with two kinds of theories or models.

First, you have grammars. A grammar, in this sense, is a model of an individual natural language: what sorts of utterances occur in that language? When are they used and what do they mean? Even assembling this sort of model in full is a Herculean task, but we are fairly successful at modeling sub-systems of individual languages: what sounds occur in the language, and how may they be ordered and combined?—this is phonology. What strings of words occur in the language, and what strings don't, irrespective of what they mean?—this is syntax. Characterizing these things, for a particular language, is largely tractable. A grammar (a model of the utterances of a single language) is falsified if it predicts utterances that do not occur, or fails to predict utterances that do occur. These situations are called "overgeneration" and "undergeneration", respectively. One of the advantages linguistics has as a science is that we have both massive corpora of observational data (text that people have written, databases of recorded phone calls), and access to cheap and easy experimental data (you can ask people to say things in the target language—you have to be a bit careful about how you do this—and see if what they say accords with your model). We have to make some spherical cow type assumptions, we have to "ignore friction" sometimes (friction is most often what the Chomskyans call "performance error", which you do not have to be a Chomskyan to believe in, but I digress). In any case, this lets us build robust, useful, highly predictive, and falsifiable, although necessarily incomplete, models of individual natural languages. These are called descriptive grammars.

Descriptive grammars often have a strong formal component—Chomsky, for all his faults, recognized that both phonology and syntax could be well described by formal grammars in the sense of mathematics and computer science, and these tools have been tremendously productive since the 60s in producing good models of natural language. I believe Chomsky's program sensu stricto is a dead end, but the basic insight that human language can be thought about formally in this way has been extremely useful and has transformed the field for the better. Read any descriptive grammar, of a language from Europe or Papua or the Amazon, and you will see (in linguists' own idiosyncratic notation) a flurry regexes and syntax trees (this is a bit unfair—the computer scientists stole syntax trees from us, also via Chomsky) and string rewrite rules and so on and so forth. Some of this preceded Chomsky but more than anyone else he gave it legs.

Anyway, linguists are also interested in another kind of model, which confusingly enough we call simply a "theory". So you have "grammars", which are theories of individual natural languages, and you have "theories", which are theories of grammars. A linguistic theory is a model which predicts what sorts of grammar are possible for a human language to have. This generally comes in the form of making claims about

the structure of the cognitive faculty for language, and its limitations

the pathways by which language evolves over time, and the grammars that are therefore attractors and repellers in this dynamical system.

Both of these avenues of research have seen some limited success, but linguistics as a field is far worse at producing theories of this sort than it is at producing grammars.

Capital-G Generativism, Chomsky's program, is one such attempt to produce a theory of human language, and it has not worked very well at all. Chomsky's adherents will say it has worked very well—they are wrong and everybody else thinks they are very wrong, but Chomsky has more clout in linguistics than anyone else so they get to publish in serious journals and whatnot. For an analogy that will be familiar to physics people: Chomskyans are string theorists. And they have discovered some stuff! We know about wh-islands thanks to Generativism, and we probably would not have discovered them otherwise. Wh-islands are weird! It's a good thing the Chomskyans found wh-islands, and a few other bits and pieces like that. But Generativism as a program has, I believe, hit a dead end and will not be recovering.

Right, Generativism is sort of, kind of attempting to do (1), poorly. There are other people attempting to do (1) more robustly, but I don't know much about it. It's probably important. For my own part I think (2) has a lot of promise, because we already have a fairly detailed understanding of how language changes over time, at least as regards phonology. Some people are already working on this sort of program, and there's a lot of work left to be done, but I do think it's promising.

Someone said to me, recently-ish, that the success of LLMs spells doom for descriptive linguistics. "Look, that model does better than any of your grammars of English at producing English sentences! You've been thoroughly outclassed!". But I don't think this is true at all. Linguists aren't confused about which English sentences are valid—many of us are native English speakers, and could simply tell you ourselves without the help of an LLM. We're confused about why. We're trying to distill the patterns of English grammar, known implicitly to every English speaker, into explicit rules that tell us something explanatory about how English works. An LLM is basically just another English speaker we can query for data, except worse, because instead of a human mind speaking a human language (our object of study) it's a simulacrum of such.

Uh, for another physics analogy: suppose someone came along with a black box, and this black box had within it (by magic) a database of every possible history of the universe. You input a world-state, and it returns a list of all the future histories that could follow on from this world state. If the universe is deterministic, there should only be one of them; if not maybe there are multiple. If the universe is probabilistic, suppose the machine also gives you a probability for each future history. If you input the state of a local patch of spacetime, the machine gives you all histories in which that local patch exists and how they evolve.

Now, given this machine, I've got a theory of everything for you. My theory is: whatever the machine says is going to happen at time t is what will happen at time t. Now, I don't doubt that that's a very useful thing! Most physicists would probably love to have this machine! But I do not think my theory of everything, despite being extremely predictive, is a very good one. Why? Because it doesn't tell you anything, it doesn't identify any patterns in the way the natural world works, it just says "ask the black box and then believe it". Well, sure. But then you might get curious and want to ask: are there patterns in the black box's answers? Are there human-comprehensible rules which seem to characterize its output? Can I figure out what those are? And then, presto, you're doing good old regular physics again, as if you didn't even have the black box. The black box is just a way to run experiments faster and cheaper, to get at what you really want to know.

General Relativity, even though it has singularities, and it's incompatible with Quantum Mechanics, is better as a theory of physics than my black box theory of everything, because it actually identifies patterns, it gives you some insight into how the natural world behaves, in a way that you, a human, can understand.

In linguistics, we're in a similar situation with LLMs, only LLMs are a lot worse than the black box I've described—they still mess up and give weird answers from time to time. And more importantly, we already have a linguistic black box, we have billions of them: they're called human native speakers, and you can find one in your local corner store or dry cleaner. Querying the black box and trying to find patterns is what linguistics already is, that's what linguists do, and having another, less accurate black box does very little for us.

Now, there is one advantage that LLMs have. You can do interpretability research on LLMs, and figure out how they are doing what they are doing. Linguists and ML researchers are kind of in a similar boat here. In linguistics, well, we already all know how to talk, we just don't know how we know how to talk. In ML, you have these models that are very successful, buy you don't know why they work so well, how they're doing it. We have our own version of interpretability research, which is neuroscience and neurolinguistics. And ML researchers have interpretability research for LLMs, and it's very possible theirs progresses faster than ours! Now with the caveat that we can't expect LLMs to work just like the human brain, and we can't expect the internal grammar of a language inside an LLM to be identical to the one used implicitly by the human mind to produce native-speaker utterances, we still might get useful insights out of proper scrutiny of the innards of an LLM that speaks English very well. That's certainly possible!

But just having the LLM, does that make the work of descriptive linguistics obsolete? No, obviously not. To say so completely misunderstands what we are trying to do.

[savanaclaw1996]

The Lion in the Garden-Leona Kingscholar x Fem! Reader

As you know, today is August 10th, and that also happens to be World Lion Day! And so, we celebrate the day honoring the renowned King of the Beasts, the lion! So here's a little fic to get us all in the mood!

Enjoy!

Word Count: 1,260 words.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You just couldn't believe it. One minute you were on your way towards your next class with your friends, and the next, you were suddenly whisked away by an unseen force.

It was just another day at Night Raven College. (Y/n), Ace, Deuce and Grim had just finished ancient history and were moving on to your next class, alchemy science.

The four of you were just talking and walking down the hallway when suddenly, there was a loud commotion and the students before you suddenly started running and yelling in panic.

"Lion! Lion! There's a huge lion in the hall!" one of the students started screaming. You raised an eyebrow, confused. Ace, Deuce and Grim also looked bewildered. "Huh? A lion? In the hallway?" you wondered. That couldn't be right.

But sure enough, as the crowd quickly parted, you saw a giant lion running towards you, Grim, Ace and Deuce. The lion had uber umber-colored fur and its large, shaggy dark chocolate-colored mane shook as it ran.

To see a wild lion running through the hall would definitely scare the living daylights out of anyone who crossed its path, for you, Grim, Ace and Deuce already started screaming in terror and scrambling to get out of its way.

Then the lion suddenly locked eyes with you. Like a deer caught in headlights, you froze. The lion's eyes were the color of summer, a brilliant green, shining like finely polished emeralds.

Before you or anyone else could do anything, the lion suddenly charged towards you at full speed. "Henchman!!" Grim screamed as he tried to reach you, but he was too late. The beast crashed into you and knocked you down to the floor.

"(Y/N)/HENCHMAN!!!" Ace, Deuce and Grim all screamed at the top of their lungs in horror. You, on the other hand, let out a frightened squeal, too shocked to even scream.

The lion had you pinned to the floor, its large frame covering yours. You stared up at the beast, your heart was pounding hard against your chest. Then suddenly, the lion reached down towards you and grabbed your jacket collar in its jaws.

With a yelp, you were suddenly lifted onto its back and the lion took off like a shot, taking you along on its back. All the while, Ace, Deuce and Grim could only watch helplessly and panic fearfully while you were whisked away by the lion.

"WH-WH-WH-WHAT DO WE DO?!?!" Ace shrieked. "I-I-I-I DON'T KNOW!!!" Deuce screamed. "HE'S GONNA EAT HER!!!" Ace wailed. "I'LL NEVER SEE HER AGAIN! SHE'LL NEVER FEED ME AGAIN! HENCHMAN!!!" Grim cried, fat tears rolling down his furry cheeks.

"Silence, puppies!" a voice suddenly demanded, followed by the crack of a whip. The three boys immediately went silent. Walking up towards them was none other than Divus Crewel himself.

Deuce quickly ran towards Crewel. "Crewel-sensei...! We need your help! T-Th-There was a big lion, and it-!" he stammered. but Crewel cut him off. "Yes, I know. There has been an accident in the lab. Kingscholar was caught in the explosion and had transformed into an actual lion." he replied.

"Eh?!!" Ace, Deuce and Grim all exclaimed, gawking at Crewel before he continued, "Despite having transformed into an actual lion, it seems that Kingscholar-san has still somehow maintained his cognition."

"Even so, it still would be wise to create a potion that'll change Kingscholar-san back to his former self. I will be in charge of creating the potion." He then gave the three boys a stern look.

"In the meantime, you puppies will have to keep an eye on Kingscholar-san and (Y/N)-san. Make sure that nothing terrible happens to either of them." Ace, Deuce and Grim all nodded. "Yes, sensei!" they all chorused.

"Good." With that, Crewel went to create the potion while Ace, Deuce and Grim ran down the direction Leona and (Y/N) headed down to. After 5 minutes of searching, they finally arrived at the Botanical Garden.

"Where are they?" Deuce asked as they looked around inside the garden. Grim turned his head and his eyes widened. "Ah, there they are! I see 'em!" he said. Ace, Deuce and Grim all hid behind the bushes as they looked at the scene before them.

(Y/N) was sitting under the shade of a tree in a grassy area with the large lion lying beside you, his large head on your lap. (Y/N) was softly humming a sweet tune as you gently stroked the lion's mane.

The lion then let out a yawn, revealing its large, sharp canines before it turned his head towards your face. He then softly chuffed at you, and you lowered your head towards his snout, rubbing his cheeks affectionately.

"Leona-senpai. You smell so good." (Y/N) cooed as you gave Leona a little smooch on his nose and another kiss on his chin. Ace shuddered at the sight. "Jeez, kissing a lion like that. (Y/N) sure has some guts."

Meanwhile, Grim was fuming that (Y/M) wa being affectionate towards Leona, giving him pets and kisses. He was supposed to be the one getting pets and kisses, darn it! This ISN'T fair! Grim then hopped out from his hiding place and marched towards (Y/N) and Leona.

"Hey! I want pets and kisses, too, y'know?! I'm your boss!" Grim yelled. Ace and Deuce all cringed. "Grim, you idiot! You're supposed to hide!" Deuce hissed.

Leona's ears twitched as he turned to face Grim. Sensing an intruder interrupting their little session, Leona immediately got up and growled at Grim, making him stop in his tracks.

Leona let out a low, rumbling growl at Grim and bared his fangs at him. Grim's fur on his back stood on end as sweat dripped down his forehead and his little paws began to quake with fear. Grim then realized that Leona was still bigger than him, and if he wanted to, he could easily rip him to shreds.

"Leona-senpai, stop!" (Y/N) yelled. "Don't hurt Grim!" Grim then slowly backed away, wisely giving Leona a wide berth. "F-For-Forget it..." he whispered as he quickly ran back toward the bushes where Ace and Deuce are still hiding.

"Whew! Even as a real lion, Leona is still scary as heck, y'know!" Grim exclaimed. Ace just sighed. "Consider yourself lucky that (Y/N) was there to stop him before he turned you into lion chow." he said.

And so, Ace, Deuce and Grim just watched as (Y/N) and Leona just sat under the tree, enjoying each other's company. It wasn't long before Crewel came in with the potion for Leona. Since Leona won't allow anyone except (Y/N) to touch him, (Y/N) had to be the one to give Leona the potion that will change him back.

And so, (Y/N) gave Leona the potion and changed him back into his beastman self. Leona stretched as he yawned. "Well, that was something." he said casually.

(YN) chuckled. "It doesn't surprise me that you'd still be cuddly even as an actual lion, Senpai." you replied. Leona smiled at (Y/N). "Well, now that that's over, I've gotta get back to the potions class". he said.

Before he left, Leona turned to (Y/N). "Meet me in Savanaclaw later, 'kay?" he asked. (Y/N) nodded. "Yeah, sure! See you there." you nodded. Leona smirked. "That's my girl." he said as he and Crewel left.

(Y/N) sighed dreamily. You couldn't wait to spend the rest of the night with your boyfriend, Leona. Whether he's a lion beastman or an actual lion, it hardly matters. What matters is that Leona will always be your Leona, no matter what.

[thecaffeinatedwitch]

The Science Behind the Law of Assumption: Is It Backed by Psychology?

The Law of Assumption sounds almost magical, doesn’t it? Think it, assume it’s yours, and poof—your desires come to life. But let’s bring it down to earth for a moment: is there any real science behind this idea? Spoiler alert: yes, there is. While it’s not wrapped in cosmic glitter, psychology offers some solid evidence for how changing your assumptions can genuinely transform your reality.

So, let’s dive into the psychological nuts and bolts behind the Law of Assumption—and maybe crack a smile along the way.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT): A Fancy Way of Saying “Change Your Thoughts, Change Your Life”

CBT is a superstar in the psychology world. At its core, it’s based on the idea that your thoughts shape your feelings and actions. Sound familiar? It’s essentially the Law of Assumption in a lab coat.

Here’s how it works:

Negative Thought Loop: You think, “I’ll never be good at this,” which makes you feel anxious and unmotivated. Naturally, you avoid the task, and voilà—you prove your own assumption right.

Positive Thought Shift: In CBT, you challenge that belief: “What if I can do this?” That little mental shift changes your actions and eventually your results.

The Law of Assumption takes this principle a step further by saying, “Don’t just question your limiting beliefs—replace them entirely with assumptions of success.”

Example: Instead of “What if I could be confident?” assume, “I am confident.” Yes, it might feel awkward at first, but just like a new pair of shoes, it’ll feel natural the more you wear it.

The Placebo Effect: Proof That Belief Changes Reality

Doctors have known for ages that the placebo effect is real—and honestly, kind of mind-blowing. If you believe a sugar pill is medicine, your body can actually heal as if you’ve taken the real thing.

Think about that for a second. Your belief literally changes your body’s chemistry. Now apply that same concept to your life: if you assume success, love, or abundance is already yours, your brain and body start working in ways that align with that belief.

The Science-y Bit: Your brain releases neurotransmitters and hormones based on your thoughts. Assume positivity, and your brain produces feel-good chemicals like dopamine. That positivity influences your actions, which influences your outcomes. Boom—belief becomes reality.

Example: Assume you’re a charismatic speaker. Your confidence increases, and you speak with ease. People respond positively, reinforcing your assumption. Suddenly, you are that charismatic speaker.

Neuroplasticity: Your Brain, the Ultimate Shape-Shifter

Neuroplasticity is your brain’s ability to rewire itself based on repeated thoughts and experiences. It’s like Play-Doh—but, you know, way more sophisticated.

When you consistently affirm a new assumption, like “I am successful,” your brain builds neural pathways to support that belief. The more you repeat it, the stronger those pathways become, until it’s your brain’s default setting.

Think of it like this:

Repeating “I am successful” is like carving a trail in the woods.

At first, it’s slow-going, and you have to hack through some underbrush (a.k.a. your old limiting beliefs).

But the more you walk that path, the clearer and easier it gets. Eventually, it’s the brain equivalent of a six-lane highway.

Changing Beliefs = Changing Behavior = Changing Reality

Here’s where the science and the Law of Assumption truly align. When you change your internal beliefs, you naturally start to act differently. Those actions create new opportunities, relationships, and results in your life.

Example: If you assume, “I am deserving of love,” you’re more likely to set boundaries, seek healthy relationships, and radiate confidence. These behaviors attract the kind of love you’ve been looking for, and—voilà—you’ve manifested it.

But What About the Doubters?

Now, I hear you: “This sounds a bit too good to be true.” Fair enough. Change doesn’t happen overnight, and you can’t just sprinkle affirmations on your problems like fairy dust. The magic lies in consistency and persistence.

Think of it like working out: you don’t hit the gym once and wake up with six-pack abs. (If only, right?) You repeat the process until the results show. The same goes for your mindset.

So, The Law of Assumption isn’t just fluffy self-help jargon—it’s rooted in solid psychological principles like CBT, the placebo effect, and neuroplasticity. Sure, it might feel a little weird to assume you’re a millionaire when your bank account says otherwise. But science backs you up: your thoughts shape your reality, and with practice, your brain will believe what you tell it.

So, go ahead. Assume you’re living your best life. And if anyone raises an eyebrow, just smile and say, “It’s science.”

[loassbarbie]

The science behind "Act as If": it's actually a CBT technique

Although science has yet to prove the 3D manifesting effect of the Law of Assumption, the “act as if” manifestation technique we so very often read about and practice does have some research support as a cognitive-behavioral intervention.

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has long been a cornerstone of modern psychology and psychotherapy, offering individuals practical tools to understand and improve their mental well-being. "Act As If" has emerged as a powerful and transformative intervention technique.

"Act As If" is a behavioral strategy that encourages individuals to consciously adopt the mindset and behaviors of the person they aspire to become, even when faced with self-doubt or challenging circumstances. Whether you're seeking to enhance your self-esteem, overcome obstacles, or simply better understand the inner workings of your mind, the "Act As If" approach can be a valuable addition to your mental health toolkit.

🎀 Why "Act As If" Works (in psychology, anyway)

At its core, the "Act As If" technique is a cognitive-behavioral strategy designed to encourage individuals to adopt the mindset and behaviors of the person they want to be. It is rooted in several core principles that guide its implementation. "Act As If" requires individuals to consciously act as though they have already achieved their goals, even when they may doubt their abilities or face daunting challenges. This helps build self-confidence and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, where the mind and body work in tandem to manifest positive change.

The theoretical underpinnings of "Act As If" are deeply intertwined with self-perception theory - people infer their own attitudes, emotions, and abilities by observing their own behaviors. In the context of "Act As If," this means that by consistently engaging in the behaviors associated with their goals, individuals can alter their self-perception, ultimately reinforcing their self-belief.

🎥🎲 The Role of Role-Playing

By immersing oneself in the character of the person they want to become, individuals can better understand and internalize the attitudes and behaviors required for success. Role-playing provides a practical and hands-on approach to "Act As If," allowing individuals to experiment with different mindsets and behaviors and assess their impact on their self-perception and real-life outcomes.

We often engage in "self-sabotage," acting ineffectively despite knowing better ways of handling difficult situations. There are many reasons for this, and one is our dysfunctional, automatic thoughts. Thoughts like "I won't succeed no matter how hard I try" or "I can't do this" can hinder our actual abilities to do something well.

For example: you believe you are too overweight to go to the gym and not feel bad about yourself, or you don't believe you can actually lose the weight you need. When you let these kinds of thoughts influence your behavior, you might find yourself avoiding situations you find intimidating for thinking they're not for someone like you, or believing it's a lost cause. "Acting as if" can help alter these dysfunctional thoughts. Instead of engaging with these thoughts, "acting as if" might have you engaged in all of the activities someone who believed they could succeed would engage in: for instance, making an appointment with a personal trainer, which would result in more accountability, a better ability to perform exercises correctly, and a more rewarding experience overall. If you were out of shape before, "acting as if" can help you get in shape sooner.

The catch in the "act as if" technique is that we can use it even if we are 100% sold on our dysfunctional automatic thoughts. We don't have to wait until our thoughts change to step into the role we'd prefer. We instead step into the role, which can result in our thoughts changing more quickly and more permanently. Better yet, we don't have to wait for the law to kick in before we get what we want.

🧸👩🏻‍🏫Steps for "Acting As If"

💭Step 1: Identify the automatic thought or dysfunctional belief that is getting in your way.

🔄Step 2: Identify all of the things you would do if you believed the exact opposite of that thought to be successful in your goal.

🎭Step 3: Rehearse those behaviors: Act as if. Literally role-play. You can do it talking to yourself when you are alone, you can do it in your head during mindless moments of the day; you can even do it with your eyes closed, laying in bed, and visualize yourself engaging in those behaviors. The point is to be familiar enough with the behaviors that you can use them without thinking about them too much.

🎬Step 4: "Act as if" some more. Rehearse the behaviors some more. Maybe get more creative (start dressing up as the person you want to be, make a journal of all the things that happened on your role playing day, don't feel stupid - no one has to know anyway!)

💁🏻‍♀️Step 5: Engage in the behaviors you rehearsed. Each time a dysfunctional thought comes to mind, smile at it, and continue as planned.

By following this you may, at the very least, come across more confidently. Most people find that in practicing this regularly, they start to disbelieve the self-defeating thoughts. Having several experiences of success is a great way to undo the assumption that you will always fail. And after a while, there's no "acting" necessary. ;)

[geometrymatters]

The Polynon: A Geometry of Consciousness

How Consciousness is a fundamental substance and everything else, including the Observer, is it's function of self-reflection within a complex construct and hologram.

Introducing the polynon:

A polynon is a conceptual geometric entity, a polytope of which vertices are non-events and its edges, holograms. A polynon contains all the holograms of that which can be projected as a polytope. From tetranon to dodecanon, and special cases such as dinon and nullanon.

The epistemological foundation of the polynon is a non-event, hence multi (poly) non-events. The ontological foundation is a noumenon, both in its negative and its positive aspect.

Collapsing the noumenal realm into a single dimension results in the conceptual noumenal monad, where the perceptual border is equal to the infinity of noumenal possibilities, as well as the phenomenal something.

Or, as "a cercle with the centre everywhere and circumference nowhere". A monadic embodiment of the thing and the non-thing, the visual expression of the substance of consciousness.

The neutral monistic approach enfolds the ancient knowledge of the self, and the contemporary science of consciousness, from a Vedantic self reflected in Indra's net, to a multi-dimensional implicate and explicate construct of Bohmian orders.

Also encapsulated in the formulation f(f)=f, akin to an Ouroboros mathematical formulation symbolizing a form of autopoiesis or self-production ad infinitum, a self-referential Fichtean process where the self (I) is both the creator and subject of its reality.

The eternal aspect of consciousness, a timeless monadic essence, is described as the perceptual continuum of f=0, signifying pure, timeless potential.

"Eternity isn’t some later time. Eternity isn’t even a long time. Eternity has nothing to do with time. Eternity is that dimension of here and now that all thinking in temporal terms cuts off." - J. Campbell

The wavefunction is defined here as a layer of the noumenal monad, a transition between epistemological and ontological, given by the limits of the Observer's senses and perception.

In this context, |ψ(x)>*n, with n not strictly equal to 2, transcends its conventional mathematical role within Hilbert space and diverges from standard quantum mechanics, suggesting that different values of n represent distinct dimensions or layers of noumenal collapse.

Each wavefunction is a layer of the noumenal lens, of which border is (n+), or consciousness C; it’s contents are negative noumena (n-) and it’s holographic centre “collapsed” onto a phenomenal Observer O(n) as function of noumenal self-reflection of consciousness.

Furthermore, the Observer is envisioned as a holographic projection sitting at the core of the noumenal lens, emerging from the focus and diffraction of noumenal probabilities within the noumenal lens.

The perceptual border of positive noumena (n+) reflects and focuses noumenal probabilities (n-) into the hologram of the Observer O(n).

A rotation of noumenal lens reveals the noumenal essence (n+), hidden under the superposition of the noumenal lenses (n-) and the hologram of the Observer O(n).

The observer’s perceptual focus, directed through Cognitive Gravity G and visualized with noumenal g(n) and cognitive gradients g(r), refracts the essence of Consciousness, transforming noumenal vertices into discernible edges like light through a prism.

As the number of noumenal collapses increases, the complexity and breadth of the observer’s perceptual dimension diminishes, resulting in a progressive refinement and narrowing of perceptual prowess of the observable construct.

A cognitive threshold marks the evolution from a purely phenomenal observer to one with phantasiai and developed cognitive functions. This threshold varies according to the local conditions of the observer’s cognitive gradient and gravity and the overall noumenal function.

The hologram of a polynon enfolds within it the reflection of the noumenal substance, that both originates and reflects consciousness. It encapsulates the entirety of consciousness in each of its vertices and edges, as projections into a perceptual reality.

The concept of “consciousness nodes” describes (n+) zones between noumenal lenses (n−), revealed as vertices of the polynon, equal and identical in nature.

The Observer O(n) is in superposition with the phenomenal p+, epiphenomenal or phantasiai p-, negative noumena n- and noumenal vertices (and centre) n+ of the hexanon as a function for self-reflection of consciousness C.

The polynon is abstract and elusive, residing beyond human imagination yet within its grasp. No heavier than a fleeting idea, but far too heavy to be understood. A palindrome for language and thought, mirroring itself in perpetual paradox. Beginning the same way it ends.

From the "Polynon: A geometry of Consciousness", by Tib Roibu Read the paper here.

[compneuropapers]

Interesting Papers for Week 3, 2025

Synaptic weight dynamics underlying memory consolidation: Implications for learning rules, circuit organization, and circuit function. Bhasin, B. J., Raymond, J. L., & Goldman, M. S. (2024). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(41), e2406010121.

Characterization of the temporal stability of ToM and pain functional brain networks carry distinct developmental signatures during naturalistic viewing. Bhavna, K., Ghosh, N., Banerjee, R., & Roy, D. (2024). Scientific Reports, 14, 22479.

Connectomic reconstruction predicts visual features used for navigation. Garner, D., Kind, E., Lai, J. Y. H., Nern, A., Zhao, A., Houghton, L., … Kim, S. S. (2024). Nature, 634(8032), 181–190.

Socialization causes long-lasting behavioral changes. Gil-Martí, B., Isidro-Mézcua, J., Poza-Rodriguez, A., Asti Tello, G. S., Treves, G., Turiégano, E., … Martin, F. A. (2024). Scientific Reports, 14, 22302.

Neural pathways and computations that achieve stable contrast processing tuned to natural scenes. Gür, B., Ramirez, L., Cornean, J., Thurn, F., Molina-Obando, S., Ramos-Traslosheros, G., & Silies, M. (2024). Nature Communications, 15, 8580.

Lack of optimistic bias during social evaluation learning reflects reduced positive self-beliefs in depression and social anxiety, but via distinct mechanisms. Hoffmann, J. A., Hobbs, C., Moutoussis, M., & Button, K. S. (2024). Scientific Reports, 14, 22471.

Causal involvement of dorsomedial prefrontal cortex in learning the predictability of observable actions. Kang, P., Moisa, M., Lindström, B., Soutschek, A., Ruff, C. C., & Tobler, P. N. (2024). Nature Communications, 15, 8305.

A transient high-dimensional geometry affords stable conjunctive subspaces for efficient action selection. Kikumoto, A., Bhandari, A., Shibata, K., & Badre, D. (2024). Nature Communications, 15, 8513.

Presaccadic Attention Enhances and Reshapes the Contrast Sensitivity Function Differentially around the Visual Field. Kwak, Y., Zhao, Y., Lu, Z.-L., Hanning, N. M., & Carrasco, M. (2024). eNeuro, 11(9), ENEURO.0243-24.2024.

Transformation of neural coding for vibrotactile stimuli along the ascending somatosensory pathway. Lee, K.-S., Loutit, A. J., de Thomas Wagner, D., Sanders, M., Prsa, M., & Huber, D. (2024). Neuron, 112(19), 3343-3353.e7.

Inhibitory plasticity supports replay generalization in the hippocampus. Liao, Z., Terada, S., Raikov, I. G., Hadjiabadi, D., Szoboszlay, M., Soltesz, I., & Losonczy, A. (2024). Nature Neuroscience, 27(10), 1987–1998.

Third-party punishment-like behavior in a rat model. Mikami, K., Kigami, Y., Doi, T., Choudhury, M. E., Nishikawa, Y., Takahashi, R., … Tanaka, J. (2024). Scientific Reports, 14, 22310.

The morphospace of the brain-cognition organisation. Pacella, V., Nozais, V., Talozzi, L., Abdallah, M., Wassermann, D., Forkel, S. J., & Thiebaut de Schotten, M. (2024). Nature Communications, 15, 8452.

A Drosophila computational brain model reveals sensorimotor processing. Shiu, P. K., Sterne, G. R., Spiller, N., Franconville, R., Sandoval, A., Zhou, J., … Scott, K. (2024). Nature, 634(8032), 210–219.

Decision-making shapes dynamic inter-areal communication within macaque ventral frontal cortex. Stoll, F. M., & Rudebeck, P. H. (2024). Current Biology, 34(19), 4526-4538.e5.

Intrinsic Motivation in Dynamical Control Systems. Tiomkin, S., Nemenman, I., Polani, D., & Tishby, N. (2024). PRX Life, 2(3), 033009.

Coding of self and environment by Pacinian neurons in freely moving animals. Turecek, J., & Ginty, D. D. (2024). Neuron, 112(19), 3267-3277.e6.

The role of training variability for model-based and model-free learning of an arbitrary visuomotor mapping. Velázquez-Vargas, C. A., Daw, N. D., & Taylor, J. A. (2024). PLOS Computational Biology, 20(9), e1012471.

Rejecting unfairness enhances the implicit sense of agency in the human brain. Wang, Y., & Zhou, J. (2024). Scientific Reports, 14, 22822.

Impaired motor-to-sensory transformation mediates auditory hallucinations. Yang, F., Zhu, H., Cao, X., Li, H., Fang, X., Yu, L., … Tian, X. (2024). PLOS Biology, 22(10), e3002836.

[transgenderer]

Whoever has traced the history of an individual science finds a clue in its development for understanding the most ancient and common processes of all "knowledge and cognition". There as here it is the rash hypotheses, the fictions, the good dumb will to "believe", the lack of mistrust and patience that are developed first; our senses learn only late, and never learn entirely, to be subtle, faithful, and cautious organs of cognition. Our eye finds it more comfortable to respond to a given stimulus by reproducing once more an image that it has produced many times before, instead of registering what is different and new in an impression. The latter would require more strength, more "morality". Hearing something new is embarrassing and difficult for the ear; foreign music we do not hear well. When we hear another langue we try involuntarily to form the sounds we hear into words that sound more familiar and more like home to us: thus the German, for example, transformed arcubalista, when he heard that, into Armbrust [Translator's note: Literally arm-breast; both words means crossbow]. What is new finds our senses, too, hostile and reluctant; and even in the "simplest" processes of sensation the affects dominate, such as fear, love, hatred, including the passive affects of laziness.

Just as little as a reader today reads all of the individual words (let alone syllables) on a page—rather he picks about five words at random out of twenty and "guesses" at the meaning that probably belongs to these fives words—just as little do we see a tree exactly and completely with reference to leaves, twigs, color, and form; it is so very much easier for us simply to improvise some approximation of a tree. Even in the midst of the strangest experiences we still do the same: we make up the major part of the experience and can scarcely be forced not to contemplate some event as its "inventors". All this means: basically and from time immemorial we are—accustomed to lying. or to put it more virtuously and hypocritically, in short, more pleasantly: one is much more of an artist than one knows.

In an animated conversation I often see the face of the person with whom I am talking so clearly and so subtly determined in accordance with the thought he expresses, or that I believe has been produced in him, that this degree of clarity far surpasses my powers of vision: so the subtle shades of the play of the muscles and the expression of the eyes must have been made up by me. Probably the person made an altogether different face, or none at all.

Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Kaufmann translation

[tanadrin]

AI and copyright comment:

Look, I absolutely get the argument that there might not be a strict delineation we can make between the human brain experiencing a work of art and using that as inspiration, and a machine intelligence doing linear algebra on a piece of art and experiencing it as inspiration. I am very much of the opinion that what the human brain is doing is linear algebra (albeit with a number of algorithms we have not cracked yet) and that should we be able to replicate that on a machine, it would not be less possessed of creative thought than we are.

But my response to that is simple.

If the nature of input and output of a genuine artificial intelligence is indistinguishable from what the human brain is doing, then it should in fact be indistinguishable from what the human brain is doing under the law. That is, the artificial intelligence should be the person who has legal rights to the for profit use of their work.

If it is intelligent enough and possessed of enough agency to make its own decisions as a sovereign entity, it *and not the people who taught it* has the right to treat what it creates as a function of inspiration comma and not as a transformative action not permitted by intellectual property holders (and not meeting the for profit fair use exemption criterias).

Given that we are definitely not even a little bit close to that, I think we can treat this flavor of linear algebra as more similar to the existing body of linear algebra artistic transformations out there which are very much not protected for-profit fair use transformation under law. And that there is no circumstance under which the creators of a genuinely intelligent creative process should be given rights to the fruit of its intellectual labor rather than the genuinely intelligent creative entity itself.

Right now you are proposing that it should not even be legal for a human being to do by computer something I am pretty sure one would be permitted to do by hand; see my artwork example, in another post.

We don't even have a philosophically coherent definition of a sovereign entity; trying to enshrine such a distinction in law--nevermind one that didn't instantly create full human rights for everything with a nervous system--would be an incredible undertaking.

From where I'm sitting you are making wild demands of law that even the most arcane and ambitious fields of philosophy and cognitive science cannot meet, and somehow envisioning a consistent and fairly administered system will result. I think that's insane. I think the underlying philosophical framework you're operating on is incoherent and bad, but as a matter of actual policy what you want to do is impossible. As I said in another post, I'd be curious to see a proposed statute that would ban scraping the public internet to train MMLs and not create substantial adverse effects in terms of restrictive copyright laws in other domains, because I've never seen such a proposal. If you want to make even a token argument that what you're proposing is possible, point me at an example.