tweening

re-assessing all cumulative data, resetting to pre-interpretation for all of it

(or maybe it's more like adding an overlay of counter-interpretive uncertainty? it adds up to something similar)

like every year/month/minute going "okay if I had never built a mental model in the first place and had just been doing data collection what would I infer from this point in time"

"what observations/movements are available that have strong odds of being useful independent of ontological lens"

("useful" seems to mean the intersection of "generative" and "apparently non-interfering")

I don't move forward from old models, like I don't wait until they're disproven to move on (reasoning: in retrospect, if now is far enough along in to model-make, then any models derived prior to now are suspect), and when I do move on it's not iterative

I find the most true model for right now, and then I sort of tween into it? it's not continuous iteration of form, it's continuous transition between discontinuously-established forms. (this is an argument for starting with a monolith and not splitting up into services until you know where the load-bearing pillars naturally show up. ◊ also, occasionally you see an opportunity to create relief by merging select confused services into a purposeful monolith! example: I am inextricable from my husband.)

this kind of transition only feels jarring to me when it happens the first time on a previously-unrecognized plane of meaning. once I can think-model the feel-shift ahead of time, I can get after achieving similar phase transitions adiabatically, such that neighboring meaning-planes go unperturbed. (concluding that I am unsure if I exist, as a functional technical position, was a difficult one to stabilize. everything else after that has been pretty much fine.)

it maybe looks like cognitive refactoring as a regular habit? without being attached to where the entity boundaries are drawn? this could sound soulless but please hear me when I say that I feel soul in everything, I'm just flexible with the outlines of "thing". it's not depersonalization, except insofar as everything seems to be made out of the same fundamental aliveness, which itself is ... emergently personal, and maybe not otherwise personal?

I think my frame of consciousness has a healthy immunity against its own conceptual gerrymandering, applying organizational force in calculated response to apparent trends in apparent forces

(context: I am the CEO of a healthy 12-human company, and the only organizational principle I maintain for the thing (as distinct from "what apparent portions of the company apparently maintain for themselves", and we all translate for each other all the time) is "recursive health".)

superposition-as-resting-place is definitionally more stable than any specifically collapsed ground - I tested that by living with it, and now that knowledge is inhabited. from here, discomfort is always resolvable by finding a loose thread that - when pulled - forces a re-knitting of one's reality-making. it's comforting because we all seem to survive that process, every time. all apparent forces continue in appearance.

I'm not certain this is coffee, but I love it :)

---

◊ as an aside, the most durable splits seem to happen in threes, as in one model-instance under evolving load naturally recomposing using three other models, letting each part of the composition adjust by ratio against the others. self/other/neither seems like a durable minimum for non-symbolic (like, pre-cartesian-split; see: should) navigation, which itself seems to work as a literal physical system, one which seems to describe the process of reasoning itself