What is a map?

[LastThursday]

There is a lot of talk on here about the map not being the territory. But what is a map exactly? How does a map relate to stories, hallucinations and imagination?

Let me know your thoughts.

[rachMiel]

Perhaps the map is any symbolic representation of actual reality (territory)? Any set of symbols or glyphs that denote something other than themselves? 

[LastThursday]

@rachMiel does it have to be just symbols or are you meaning symbols in a general sense? And how is a representation related to the territory?

[Vibroverse]

Let's say i tell you "leo is eating pizza now", these words will create some image in your mind, but if you look at the sign "leo is eating pizza now" itself, you will see that there are nothing but letters that are organized in a certain way that creates a vision in your mind, but that organization of letters, within themselves, is not similar at all to what they are representing. 

Language itself is a modelling of reality where we are using symbols to which we have assigned meanings, and through those symbols we evoke those meanings in our minds. So the statement "leo is eating pizza now" is a map of a territory. These are like codes that create an image in your mind, but the codes themselves are not the image that they are creating in your mind. 

 

[UnbornTao]

One definition of thought could be: "a concept about the reality or experience of, something."

Key difference would be that a concept is about something, not it. The it is unknown.

Edited November 10, 2023 by UnbornTao

[rachMiel]

38 minutes ago, LastThursday said:

@rachMiel does it have to be just symbols or are you meaning symbols in a general sense? And how is a representation related to the territory?

@LastThursday I mean symbols in the general sense, things that represent other things. 

"And how is a representation related to the territory?" 

How is the map of a square kilometer of the Swiss Alps related to the actual 'living, breathing' territory of that square kilometer? 

[LastThursday]

1 hour ago, Vibroverse said:

but that organization of letters, within themselves, is not similar at all to what they are representing. 

So the letters are a map to the spoken word and then the spoken word is a map to images in my mind? Would the images in my mind be map also or not?

58 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Key difference would be that a map is about something, not it. The it is unknown.

What does "about" mean in this case? If the it is unknown, then how would a map represent it? Shouldn't it be the case that something has to be known before making a map for it?

43 minutes ago, rachMiel said:

How is the map of a square kilometer of the Swiss Alps related to the actual 'living, breathing' territory of that square kilometer?

I intuitively know, but I want to actually know what the linkage is between the two things: the map and the territory? How does a symbol get attached to something in the territory?

[Vibroverse]

17 minutes ago, LastThursday said:

So the letters are a map to the spoken word and then the spoken word is a map to images in my mind? Would the images in my mind be map also or not?

 

Yes, yes and yes. You can think of the letters like chemical elements where if you combine 2 hydrogen and 1 oxygen atoms, what you get is an emergent phenomenon that is water. In a similar, but artificial this time, sense, when you being the letters, say, d, o and g together, what you get is a collective symbol, in a sense, of the animal that is being signified by the word "dog". And if you create a different combination, you can create the word "god", and so on. 

These are all arbitrary significations, in a sense, where the word dog has actually nothing to do with that animal that it is signifying. That's why it has different names in different languages, and you can even think of it as different interpretations, and namings, of the same event, in a sense. But this would be a really long conversation, for now, to further expand on this. 

Then, your question about if the image in your mind also is a map, the answer depends on your metaphysical assumptions. For instance, from a Platonic point of view, yes, the things you are perceiving here might be seen as flawed representations of perfect ideas that are timelessly and spacelessly, and transdentally, existent. Any dog that you see on the street, for instance, would be a flawed representation of the perfect idea of "dogness". 

 

[Schizophonia]

the map : concept 

territory : experience 

[rachMiel]

3 hours ago, LastThursday said:

I intuitively know, but I want to actually know what the linkage is between the two things: the map and the territory? How does a symbol get attached to something in the territory?

Good question. I am neither a semiotician nor a linguist, so I'll resist winging it and probably getting it wrong! Ask GPT or Bard: What is the link between the map and the territory? How does a map symbol get attached to something in the territory?

[UnbornTao]

On 02/11/2023 at 5:36 PM, LastThursday said:

What does "about" mean in this case? If the it is unknown, then how would a map represent it? Shouldn't it be the case that something has to be known before making a map for it?

It is a conception of it, not a direct experience of its nature. It is an indirect encounter so to speak. As an inaccurate analogy, a map represents, models or symbolises a piece of land, the experience of standing in that land is "it."

At this point it'd be better to call it something else, like concept or thought rather than map. Map seems to be a specific thought that models what something is or how it works so that a workable relationship can be established between you and what the model tries to represent.

Edited November 3, 2023 by UnbornTao

[LastThursday]

12 hours ago, rachMiel said:

so I'll resist winging it

Ah shame I was hoping for your human ideas. But kudos for owning up to not knowing.

9 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

At this point it'd be better to call it something else, like concept rather than map. 

 

13 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

the map : concept

Ok so a map is a concept, and that somehow references the territory or direct experience. Why have a concept (map) at all? Is it necessary, why not just engage first hand with direct experiences or walk in the territory itself? What is a concept exactly?

15 hours ago, Vibroverse said:

from a Platonic point of view, yes, the things you are perceiving here might be seen as flawed representations of perfect ideas

What is it about "perfect ideas" that make them perfect? Is a dog on the street imperfect and why? Is the dog I imagine in my mind imperfect? How does the dog in my mind relate to the dog in the street? Is it only via a "perfect idea"? Is that what links a map to its territory: a perfect idea?

 

[Vibroverse]

@LastThursday what is meant by the perfect idea is the form of something that is the essence, it is what makes you able to know that there is such a thing as a dog. it is the perfect dog, so to speak, from which all the individual dogs are projected, and therefore it is beyond any sensual experiences. any dog that you see or imagine would be one of the modes of the idea of "the dog", in a sense. 

let's think of it in terms of geometry, it might be easier to understand. for instance, when i say "triangle", you understand what i mean, but if you try to imagine or draw a triangle, it will always be one of the possible triangles. it will have its own unique size and angular structure. but you can never imagine or see the universal form of triangle itself. 

so, in that sense, when we say perfect and imperfect, it is not necessarily something like an ethical judgment, like saying that one is superior to the other. it is just a purely conceptual explanation, to try to understand what makes something that thing, like what is it that makes you capable of seeing individually different forms and calling them a triangle or a dog. 

 

Edited November 3, 2023 by Vibroverse

[ZzzleepingBear]

I'd say that a map is interlinked cues for the mind to envision a path that is about to be experienced/discovered. The map is not the territory because the map itself don't contain the experiences that it supposedly points towards.

[UnbornTao]

On 11/3/2023 at 9:18 AM, LastThursday said:

Ok so a map is a concept, and that somehow references the territory or direct experience. Why have a concept (map) at all? Is it necessary, why not just engage first hand with direct experiences or walk in the territory itself? What is a concept exactly?

Those are good questions to contemplate. Remember to leave the matter wide open: What is experienced/experience? What is concept?

Consider the experience of a pencil: pick one up, then take away all concept you've got of it. What is that object for itself, with value, use, meaning, and function stripped away?

This leaves us with a fundamental not-knowing about what anything is. Now, it might be possible to grasp what something is for itself, yet this possibility would go beyond intellect.

I'm currently inquiring into these things, too.

Edited November 8, 2023 by UnbornTao

[LastThursday]

On 11/3/2023 at 5:47 PM, UnbornTao said:

Consider the experience of a pencil: pick one up and then take away every concept you've got of it. What is that object for itself, regardless of value, meaning, function, etc?

You sum up nicely what it might be like to work without concepts (maps). I'm sure there's some trickiness in your pencil example though. I mean, isn't an "object" a concept? Is it really possible to get away from concepts altogether (rhetorical question)? I mean even if you work outside of language, isn't that still a "thing" you're holding? It makes me suspect that maps are much deeper ingrained and harder to escape than we think.

On 11/3/2023 at 2:04 PM, ZzzleepingBear said:

that it supposedly points towards.

That's really the point I'm trying to explore with my original question. How does "pointing" itself work? How does a concept (map) get linked to a thing it points to in the first place? What is that linking process exactly?

On 11/3/2023 at 10:03 AM, Vibroverse said:

what is it that makes you capable of seeing individually different forms and calling them a triangle or a dog

Do you think platonic perfection is a kind of nexus between the map and territory? For example if I said to you "imagine an infinitely long road", the map is the utterance, the actual road is the territory, and between them is the perfect notion of infinity (and road)? That perfect notion is the linkage between the two?

As an aside do you think that the perfect platonic notion of "infinity" is an actual infinity?

Edited November 6, 2023 by LastThursday

[ZzzleepingBear]

I think the linking process comes from way back in the development of language through pain and pleasure responses, that later works as cues in the mind from the external stimuli that has translated into an inner imprint on the mind.

To experience is different because it can cause new impacts on the imprint, while the imprint (map), is a isolated version of a particular experience recalled as memory patterns. 

[UnbornTao]

On 06/11/2023 at 11:26 AM, LastThursday said:

You sum up nicely what it might be like to work without concepts (maps). I'm sure there's some trickiness in your pencil example though. I mean, isn't an "object" a concept? Is it really possible to get away from concepts altogether (rhetorical question)? I mean even if you work outside of language, isn't that still a "thing" you're holding? It makes me suspect that maps are much deeper ingrained and harder to escape than we think.

 

Holding that there's some "thing" might as well be a concept, too.

"Concept" is also taken to be an object just as fear, joy, love or tree are. Concept is what creates and determines the experience of that "thing" for you. Without it, there couldn't be a "thing" there. In other words, our experience of everything is conceptually-based. We don't know what it is for and as itself.

The "holding" itself is context which allows that "thing" to exist as itself in the first place. For example, language isn't just symbols, it is a contextual possibility that allows for the creation and existence of symbols. Without the context of language, communication, internal dialogue, math, knowledge or science can't exist. Context allows for the existence of whole worlds without which they couldn't even be conceived of; they simply wouldn't occur.

Concept doesn't seem to be limited to language, and it is more than just a thought you have. For example, "self" may be a conceptually-based experience and yet it looks real and tangible for us. Concepts are imposed upon what's "real." Assumptions, a form of concept, in fact show up as "reality" for us.

What language, context, experience, concept and perception are form the basics of our experience of life. It is an extremely worthwhile study which I'm currently pursuing mostly by means of personal contemplation.

What is (reality) and what is concept?

Edited November 10, 2023 by UnbornTao

[petar8p]

Map is a representation of some Truth. Of some path.  

It is not the path itself. You gotta walk the path. No one can draw it on a paper. 

Rest is mental masturbating really..

[LastThursday]

On 11/7/2023 at 1:18 PM, ZzzleepingBear said:

To experience is different because it can cause new impacts on the imprint, while the imprint (map), is a isolated version of a particular experience recalled as memory patterns. 

NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming) says that for a person to change and transform (i.e. therapy), you recall the imprint and then modify it with new experience (called anchoring in NLP).  In effect changing the mental map of the person. 

I'm thinking that your "imprints" and @Vibroverse's "perfect platonic ideas" are one and the same thing. Somehow it is the currency that we use for thought and understanding - I'd call it a mental map or conceptual map.

4 hours ago, petar8p said:

Map is a representation of some Truth.

That is the utilitarian view of a map, which answers the question "why have a map?". A map then allows you to gain knowledge of truth by bringing it to your attention, you can then "walk the path" as you say.

So this is what I've got so far:

map -> mental map -> reality

The map can be anything tangible that is symbolic in some way. This then is attached to a mental map (imprint/platonic idea), and in turn is attached to a real experience. 

I think the mental map arises in response to symbols and/or experience, and the attachment happens because the same mental map gets triggered by more than one thing: the squiggle on a piece of paper, triggers the same mental map that a mountain in reality does.

Edited November 8, 2023 by LastThursday