>>11488320>>Without novel thinking but with the world still continuing to operate, it slowly accumulates errors and we get situations like now where in 2020, people try to analyze "things that happened over the past decade" since 2010. People will say "things have changed, this has gotten better, that has gotten worse" as they might figure to respond as if through actual observation, but when they show what they're talking about, what they think has changed, and you see that it actually hasn't changed at all, it's the logical conclusion that humanity never have a valid understanding of what "change" even meant and are merely propagating the word as reactionary mimetic behavior.
Humanity's understanding of "change" isn't viable.
What "change" ought to mean is that, given a red block exists and is observed, then the red block instantly gets replaced by a blue block, then "the red block has changed into a blue block" should be the NPC understanding.
Instead, the NPC understanding is more like
>"a red block exists" >"a blue block exists">"the feeling of change"as three distinct, separate, unrelated objects, such that they can recall the isolated idea of "the feeling of change" mimetically and apply it to something where "the feeling of change" is expected, such as looking at the past decade from 2010-2020, because this very notion of "a decade in review" was a pre-established concept prior to 2010.
