Association


inspired by a facebook  dialogue
 

Anybody can associate anything to anything else.


That is a fact.  That is true.

It is just one of the little freedoms we have in life.

Let me give you an example.  I hereby associate this to wild horses.

 
But the picture is not wild horses.  Nor for that matter is it even a picture of wild horses.  It is in reality just a picture of dirt, rock, sage brush, sky, a man and some metal sculptures up on a hill. 

So i ask:  What is the nature of my association of this to wild horses? 

Well the answer is that the association was quite arbitrary and done by me.  That association did not change anything in the world, nothing on that hill, nothing in the metal of the sculpture, and certainly did not change any wild horses.  No, that association was quite subjective to me, and may or may not be of interest to anybody else to whom i communicate it. 

Now here is another example:  I woke up Sautrday morning in a very free mood, Denise having gone to Detroit for the weekend.  So i decided to go on My Trip To  Spokane.  Unfortunately, in a small country store in Roslyn i read Mark's 16514 which has totally missed the point and changed the subject from my 16511 ... he had hankered back to our old disagreement about the relitiveness of truth itself.  Oh well! 
 
Misassociation

So i had to take a shit in that motel bathroom in Spokane ... afterwards i looked in the toilet ... and made this an association:

 
In other words i have associated your diversion from my message with the shit i left in a motel bathroom.  Now, of courser that association is quite subjective on my part.  It does not change whatever you were saying in your item ... it did not get it shitty ... it did not mutate what is so about your item .... but none the less i made the association quite passionately when i took the picture and the two thing are now associated in my mind.  

 
The associations I make in life are important
 
... they form a meta-world which represents the reality which exists for me ... yet those associations as they stay in my thoughts and words are malleable by an infinity of possibility.    What is actually so, is not so very malleable ... it is not so very subjective just to me ... for everybody, not just me, creates it.  Yet i can only perceive what it is through my associations and those of others who i trust. 

Tags

  1. association
  2. item 16514
  3. item 16516
  4. misassociation
  5. meta-world
  6. freedom
  7. associations

Comments


Seth says
You can think of this kind of "association" as simple Pavlovian conditioning.  If i show a dog a picture of meat and give him meat, then just show the picture, he will salivate.  The dog has that picture associated with meat.  We can also make associations voluntarily and quite capriciously. 

Now unfortunately you probably have Pavlovian conditioning associated with a negative image of materialism.  Too bad.  It will be hard for you to get past that elephant ... cannot help you there.  But anyway this is the kind of association that i am talking with in relation to language.

Mark de LA says
Here is the taking apart of the word association via the Visual Thesaurus. It is similar to the word relationship in my mind or one might code in JSON or RDF.
Mapped out:

Seth says
M 2013-05-14 14:56:44 16516
Fascinating associations are those of Obama & :
the Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers & Tony Resco . Saul Alinsky & the Muslim Brotherhood.

Watch how fast you reject associations as having truth, Seth.

You are actually talking about a different usage of the word "association" here than am I.  You talk of involvement.  Obama perhaps was involved with the first 4 people on your list.  I don't think that a person becomes a sign of something else, or becomes associated with it in a thinking mind,  just because they end up with some involvement with that in their life.  For example, i became involved with Larry Dodson and even Common Logic ... but i don't think i am associated with them in any mind.  Nobody would ever use my name or image as a poster boy for that group.   Look at the way i am using the word "association" in this item ... i'm talking about semantics and language ... not social involvement.

In fact it is you who are making the association {Obama: Wright, Ayers, Resco, Alinsky, Muslim Brotherhood} ... any "truth" to  that  association is entirely in your mind.

Note it is a person who interprets the word "yojo" to mean cat  ... it is the person who has that word associated with cats in their mind ... that is why the word "yojo" will function correctly for them.

Seth says
seth 2013-05-14 17:17:27 16516
M 2013-05-14 15:54:15 16516
seth 2013-05-14 15:51:58 16516
M 2013-05-14 15:45:54 16516
Now you redefine association. Association as a word is pretty useless unless the type of association is specified for the context intended.  For example Seth has the association father of (or presumed father) of his son Jason.

most natural language words have multiple meanings.   Use the one in my first sentence:
Anybody can associate anything to anything else.
...

LOL ... one-way associations.

well associations can be made by a single individual ...  once made, they are communicated to others ... and if catchy they spread thought the community.  i have no idea why you would associate that with the humor of a "LOL". 


Seth says
M 2013-05-15 07:46:05 16516
It is a worthless distinction of questionable value -so  what?



Yes, you are quite free to associate your recognition that anybody can associate anything to anything with worthlessness.

To me, the consequences of that are  frightening and exillerating at the same time.  

Is not freedom Great after all ? 



Mark de LA says
seth 2013-05-15 08:01:17 16516
M 2013-05-15 07:01:12 16516
The first two sentences of this item are untrue!
A completely blind person from birth can not associate color to anything.
Such a reasonable fact invalidates the second sentence.
IMHO, those premises make the unremarkable first sentence also untrue.


Well actually a blind person can associate a color to something.   They know of the color based upon talking to other people.  They then can associate that color to whatever.  

In fact, i said that  first sentence to say that these "associations" are frequently totally imprecise and to other people perhaps quite arbitrary.   That is the whole point.  Everybody is quite free to associate whatever to whatever.   The association is a personal event. 

Since I define "truth" as the relationship between the metaworld in my mind and the world, and since anybody can associate anything in their mind to anything else, consequently it is clear to me that everybody's truth ends up being quite pecurlair to themselves.  In that sense, they are quite free of my will ... and i am free of theirs ... that is a An Exhilarating and Frightening Freedom in fact.
A blind person, has no sense of color! All they can anchor is a word to some communicator who has a sense for color to that person's tonality & body language; howevermuch they can sense the latter. You define a different world to yourself.  I sure that pleases you. enjoy

Mark de LA says
As a matter of fact you can't anchor something for which you have no sense to detect it.
<=

Seth says
M 2013-05-15 07:01:12 16516
The first two sentences of this item are untrue!
A completely blind person from birth can not associate color to anything.
Such a reasonable fact invalidates the second sentence.
IMHO, those premises make the unremarkable first sentence also untrue.


Well actually a blind person can associate a color to something.   They know of the color based upon talking to other people.  They then can associate that color to whatever.  

In fact, i said that  first sentence to say that these "associations" are frequently totally imprecise and to other people perhaps quite arbitrary.   That is the whole point.  Everybody is quite free to associate whatever to whatever.   The association is a personal event. 

Since I define "truth" as the relationship between the metaworld in my mind and the world, and since anybody can associate anything in their mind to anything else, consequently it is clear to me that everybody's truth ends up being quite pecurlair to themselves.  In that sense, they are quite free of my will ... and i am free of theirs ... that is a An Exhilarating and Frightening Freedom in fact.

Mark de LA says
Seth's idea of an association is basically what the the NLP world calls an anchor.

Mark de LA says
The first two sentences of this item are untrue!
A completely blind person from birth can not associate color to anything.
Such a reasonable fact invalidates the second sentence.
IMHO, those premises make the unremarkable first sentence also untrue.


Seth says
M 2013-05-14 20:25:20 16516
seth 2013-05-14 17:47:04 16516
seth 2013-05-14 17:17:27 16516
M 2013-05-14 15:54:15 16516
seth 2013-05-14 15:51:58 16516
M 2013-05-14 15:45:54 16516
Now you redefine association. Association as a word is pretty useless unless the type of association is specified for the context intended.  For example Seth has the association father of (or presumed father) of his son Jason.

most natural language words have multiple meanings.   Use the one in my first sentence:
Anybody can associate anything to anything else.
...

LOL ... one-way associations.

well associations can be made by a single individual ...  once made, they are communicated to others ... and if catchy they spread thought the community.  i have no idea why you would associate that with the humor of a "LOL". 

To have an association without the reverse association is ludicrous .  I give something to Seth & seth has the opposite relationship of receiving something from me. It is like an unbalanced Tao.

that is not the usage of the word "associate" that i am using. 

I'm talking about the relationship between a name and a thing named.   But that would be a bit too specific for my purposes here ... so i generalized it to the word "associate".   The image of a thing in your mind is associated to the corresponding thing in the world.  That is a special relationship ... a special kind of association.   The point is that "Anybody can associate anything to anything else".  That covers more cases than merely saying "anybody can name anything whatever they want".

Back to your example ... if a thing in the world acts upon another thing in the world there is usually a reciprocal reaction back.   But not so when one thing is in your mind, and the other thing is in the world.   That would be the case where you would think about punching me out, and i would feel it ... which, of course, is not what i am talking about.

Mark de LA says
seth 2013-05-15 08:16:14 16516
M 2013-05-15 07:46:05 16516
It is a worthless distinction of questionable value -so  what?



Yes, you are quite free to associate your recognition that anybody can associate anything to anything with worthlessness.

To me, the consequences of that are  frightening and exillerating at the same time.  

Is not freedom Great after all ? 


Solipsism seems to be your freedom, enjoy!

Mark de LA says
To quote a famous man & state clown "THERE IS NO THERE THERE"

Mark de LA says
Janis Joplin
Me & Bobby McGee
(*************)


Mark de LA says
seth 2013-05-15 11:31:05 16516
M 2013-05-15 10:49:58 16516
seth 2013-05-15 10:38:39 16516
Strange ... if freedom is quite so worthless to you, then why are you so concerned with the government infringing it ?

I do not understand the coherence of what you associate with freedom.   Do you just throw these associations out there, willy nilly, with no concern for the importance of a meaningful relationship between your mind, the mind of your audience, and the world?  Do these associations, which you are now making with freedom in this context, titilate your particular and peculiar ego?  Do they make you feel really really good?

Are there not better associations that we could make in this context?
I just demonstrated to you that random association (anchoring) is truthless & useless!
Q.E.D. Thanks for getting the point on your use of that word.

but, of course, the randomness of the association was never my point.  read my point again:  anything can be associated to anything.  anything can become associated.  anything can be used to represent anything else.  anything can be a sign of of something else.  Skip to the last paragraph of the  item:  --> The associations I make in life are important <--.   Does that still sound to you like i was advocating making random associations?

Mark, there is always a better association ... err, there is always a better truth. 
Your point Seth is that you are right!
Associations are random if all you want to illustrate is that anyone/everyone makes them (your starting premise).  There is no truth to pursue in your mind (just a going forward or backward in collecting more associations). There is little reason to hold anything together as all they are all just associations.  You are a bag of associations & in your mind so am I.  The associations you make in life are important to you! Why would they be important to anyone else.  I still will not get the purpose of your entire item except to argue and go back to your truthy thingy.



Seth says
M 2013-05-15 10:49:58 16516
seth 2013-05-15 10:38:39 16516
Strange ... if freedom is quite so worthless to you, then why are you so concerned with the government infringing it ?

I do not understand the coherence of what you associate with freedom.   Do you just throw these associations out there, willy nilly, with no concern for the importance of a meaningful relationship between your mind, the mind of your audience, and the world?  Do these associations, which you are now making with freedom in this context, titilate your particular and peculiar ego?  Do they make you feel really really good?

Are there not better associations that we could make in this context?
I just demonstrated to you that random association (anchoring) is truthless & useless!
Q.E.D. Thanks for getting the point on your use of that word.

but, of course, the randomness of the association was never my point.  read my point again:  anything can be associated to anything.  anything can become associated.  anything can be used to represent anything else.  anything can be a sign of of something else.  Skip to the last paragraph of the  item:  --> The associations I make in life are important <--.   Does that still sound to you like i was advocating making random associations?

Mark, there is always a better association ... err, there is always a better truth. 

Seth says
I thought i would write about Association again  today and make an item just devoted to it, for the nature of association holds a special place in my apprehension of the metaworld of thought. 

... er, buy why do it again ... i already did it before ... and here it is.

Mark de LA says
seth 2014-06-25 16:21:36 16516
I thought i would write about Association again  today and make an item just devoted to it, for the nature of association holds a special place in my apprehension of the metaworld of thought. 

... er, buy why do it again ... i already did it before ... and here it is.
Glad you kept the picture of you associating with the truth in it -
which is which?


Seth says
Seth 2016-06-15 03:53:07 [item 16516#52901]
i’m going out on a limb here and saying that “Thoughts are associations”.  Nothing more … nothing less. 
nathan 2016-06-15 11:22:31 [item 16516#52937]
Thoughts are vibrations. In physical terms, they make up something much like a strand of DNA, but of vibration pairs instead of RNA pairs. A single DNA strand describes a complete living thing. A thought describes a complete living concept.

This is the basis of what thoughts are. At some level thoughts can associate. You may get a clue to that level by thinking through where and when DNA associate.  
Seth 2016-06-15 12:08:20 [item 16516#52940]
well the pairs of association of the nucleotied bases are just that – pure associations made physically if you must use that name “physical” in in your ontology.    strands of DNA are complex harmonics (or combinations) of those basic associations.  your story and mine are complementary yes.

there are many aspects of thinking and thoughts … some, me thinks, are exquisitely modeled by vibrations and cycles, repetations and changes … others might be better modeled with other models. 

there is one aspect of association and thinking that must be observed in any model of it.   and that is that anyone can make any associaton … when you look at just one such association in isolation.   but when you start thinking about a mind thinking, where there are many many associations,  then to that mind a new association may or may not get absourbed. 

i think you may see that saying that “thoughts are associations” is not at all incomparable with saying that “thioughts are vibrations”.  
nathan 2016-06-15 12:16:30 [item 16516#52941]
Yes. Notice I never said they were not compatible. I know that others who write here are either for or against  something and act as if the middle ground is nonsensical. With me, that is not the case. I simply add what I know by having asked it of my verse. I do not operate on the for or against (RWG) continuum. And even in this relating I am not for or against, but only providing a way you can simplify writing with me by throwing out that “what is being said is for or against” filter … for it is almost always just something coming in and being related … no bias being considered.  
?

Si says
Mark de LA 2016-06-15 12:27:04 [item 16516#52942]
Someone says thoughts are relationships. Connections & associations are not the same thing. DNA is connections. Associations have causes & effects.  For more info google associations connections
Seth 2016-06-15 12:38:47 [item 16516#52945]
sure, there are lots of ways that “thoughts are relationships” yes

mostly, in the context of thoughts,  the associations are between sign and being … or complex sign to complex sign … and all other combinations that one could do.  for example the association of the character string “San Francisco” with that beautiful city by the bay … sign associated to being, with here the word “being” being associated to the city itself. 

i think that what is refered to generally as “associations” and what is refered to generally as “connections” are so very similar that one would need to drill down into some particular context to make a real distinction.  in many contexts both can carry cause and effect vibrations.
?

Seth says
Mark de LA 2016-06-15 12:27:04 [item 16516#52942]
Someone says thoughts are relationships. Connections & associations are not the same thing. DNA is connections. Associations have causes & effects.  For more info google associations connections
nathan 2016-06-15 12:32:00 [item 16516#52944]
A complete thought is a complete and singular thing, very much like a crystal, and structured similar to how DNA is structured but of vibrating energy and the complexity of a DNA chain is represented in the harmonics of the exact vibrations.

Thoughts can make associations, but a thought is not an association, it is a thing like a crystal. Many people even experience thoughts that way, as crystalline things.
Seth 2016-06-15 12:45:15 [item 16516#52947]
sure a thought can be called an association.   it is the association of the representation of the thought to it’s meaning.  the meaning of a thought certainly can be experienced … even as a crystal. 
nathan 2016-06-15 12:47:40 [item 16516#52948]
Yes. I am trying to help Mark focus usefully instead of antipacially. For this, he needs to focus on a thought as a thing.  
?

See Also

  1. Thought Nice Metaphor for ThreeFolding with 3820 viewings related by tag "misassociation".
  2. Thought There is no such thing as freedom with 388 viewings related by tag "Freedom".
  3. Thought Seeking Information with 329 viewings related by tag "Freedom".
  4. Thought The Objective World vs The Occurring World with 303 viewings related by tag "association".
  5. Thought Thoughts re freedom & Christ ... i don't want to forget ... with 161 viewings related by tag "Freedom".
  6. Thought What is freer than a bird ? with 130 viewings related by tag "Freedom".
  7. Thought Example of a misassociation with 125 viewings related by tag "misassociation".
  8. Thought Radical Navigation of Attention with 116 viewings related by tag "Freedom".
  9. Thought A thought causing an action with 111 viewings related by tag "association".
  10. Thought about: Pure will is what makes plants grow - comment 76633 with 25 viewings related by tag "Freedom".
  11. Thought All stories obtain with 14 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  12. Thought A Better Obamatrap with 7 viewings related by tag "associations".
  13. Thought My Cunt-tree Tis of Thee with 7 viewings related by tag "misassociation".
  14. Thought Loui Jover: Interesting Art Style .... with 6 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  15. Thought about: about this misassociation with 6 viewings related by tag "misassociation".
  16. Thought Trump on the Brain with 6 viewings related by tag "misassociation".
  17. Thought Prepositions - Tiny Words with a Big Difference with 5 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  18. Thought The wisdom of the natural seperating of being with 3 viewings related by tag "Freedom".
  19. Thought The Semantic Triangel with 3 viewings related by tag "meta-world".
  20. Thought Good vs Evil with 2 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  21. Thought I go with what happens with 2 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  22. Thought Guilt by Association with 2 viewings related by tag "association".
  23. Thought Liberty & Freedom - American Top Values with 2 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  24. Thought The Connections & Relationships Project with 2 viewings related by tag "associations".
  25. Thought Tagging Is A Better Memory Substitute Than Hyperlinking with 1 viewings related by tag "associations".
  26. Thought Diversity is part of Freedom with 1 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  27. Thought If we think, feel, and act like it matters, then it does. with 1 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  28. Thought miscellaneous subjects & hashtags with 1 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  29. Thought #FailedStupidMemeAttempts with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  30. Thought an organic conspiracy of what works with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  31. Thought about: I do not create 100% of my experience - comment 55928 with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  32. Thought the dynamic relationship between freedom, authority, habit, and the eog/otherness boundary with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  33. Thought Individual Freedom vs Humanity with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  34. Thought Conscious Awesomeness! with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  35. Thought Manifesto: Freedom of The Internet with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  36. Thought Interaction with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  37. Thought The Metaworld VS Direct Experience with 0 viewings related by tag "metaworld".
  38. Thought Going Meta with 0 viewings related by tag "meta-world".
  39. Thought Secrecy vs Power vs Freedom with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  40. Thought about: a new wrinkle in time - wsj with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  41. Thought Vaporous Things - Beliefs with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  42. Thought What are the limits of liberty? with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  43. Thought When Words Become More Significant Than What They Point to with 0 viewings related by tag "misassociation".
  44. Thought about: This is Water with 0 viewings related by tag "item 16516".
  45. Thought Any truth ? with 0 viewings related by tag "item 16514".
  46. Thought An Exhilarating and Frightening Freedom with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  47. Thought Seth and the ultimate freedom with 0 viewings related by tag "item 16516".
  48. Thought Good VS Evil with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  49. Thought Trump personifies what is positve with ego, and what is negative with egoo. with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".
  50. Thought Little Essays on Truth with 0 viewings related by tag "freedom".