Candide hyperspace
In my years and years of growing up I have encountered a curious habit among the people I have interacted with. They have always functioned in a mental framework incorporating their abstract take on the world around them. And all of us in some way do that. These metrics give a sense of rationality to the individual. Now to what degree the rationality holds is altogether a different discussion. But the basic hypothesis still holds: Each one of has a scale. There is another curious observation further on these lines: these metrics often tend to be one dimensional. My parents, my teachers, my friends and even the Bollywood stories around me followed this pattern. For the early years of my life I struggled to put things in this format. As my world got bigger I discovered a vast majority of crowd also religiously follow some version of this model either consciously or sub consciously while interacting or making sense of themselves, the people within and outside their communities, objects and laws around them, situations, opinions etc.
The very basic foundation of that model, I may be allowed to simplify before digging further, is a binary space which looks like:
Each person initially defines their point of action. The point may lie anywhere in this space but is categorized by the simplest parameter: On which side does the point lie: does it lie on the x plane or on the anti-x plane. Between those planes there is the "Axis of division" separating these planes. It doesn't matter where the point exactly lies within the planes. It doesn't matter if it is far away from the axis or near the axis, if it a big blot or a small point, if it lies at the top or the bottom. All that matters is: if the point lies on the x plane or on the anti-x plane. Going forward we may have to give this whole space a name. And we shall call it Candide hyperspace.
I chose the name Candide hyperspace due to the analogy it may hold while applying in the real life use cases. Candide was the fictional character created by Voltaire who satirized the Leibnizian optimism that existed in the paradise where he lived. My model attempts to create a space which can map as much cases as necessary, including the cases which I personally may not agree on. Hence they may not be "optimistic" from my point of references (or anyone with that logic). Now if the model puts any kind of constraint on the nature of dimensions of this space, it will also limit the scope of our understanding, or reinforcing an underlying bias within us or society or oversimplifying things beyond a justifiable point. Such practice leads to denial which often gives rise to a judgmental attitude. So I classified it as a hyperspace. Hyperspace originally meant n-dimensional vector space before science fiction writers hacked it to use as a method of traveling at faster than light speeds. As long as one is willing to and is able to find orthogonal properties, she can keep adding the dimensions. Hence the name. We will be talking more on this hyperspace's properties as we progress.
Now in everyday life, each person exercises certain level of tolerance. While the above model is good to declare something black or white, or right or wrong, or good or bad, or apple or orange, there is a need to assign qualitative (or quantitative) values to them. We tend to function in grey areas, tolerate certain wrong doings, forgive certain badness and so on. So a more realistic model of the above one dimensional space or, as we may call it, Candide 1-D space will look like:
It should make sense. we have red color representing one extreme and blue color representing the opposite extreme. Most of the real life applications if simplified and theorized will follow the above model.
But there is drawback in the above model. I had deliberately chosen the blue and red color instead of black and white. That is because we often ignore the properties of the points around the axis of division.
In the above model the blue color fades out completely, the area near the axis of division becomes white and then the white fades out to make way for the red color. Such case is a very special case where one is trying to accommodate the neutral or indifferent points. While it may sound perfect for someone who admires and aspires to bring higher order of rationality in her daily life, humans often don't function that way. In real life the neutral or indifferent points play no actual meaning or difference in one''s behavior. An individual tries to see any given point as displacement from her point of reference, ie in reality this scale is not absolute but relative from the point of view of the person scrutinizing it. So our Candide 1-D space has to be modified as this:
The red color represents a certain property or school of philosophy and the blue color represents the opposite values. As we move closer to the axis of difference, the degree of that property weakens. Eg if we are applying this model to liberalism and conservatism spectrum, then each color will represent each of them. Since we all know the degree of liberalism and conservatism varies from a person to person in our society, so a person near the axis but falling inside the liberalism spectrum will be someone who is liberal in standing but has certain issues in accepting some kind of things. These "certain kinds of things" will determine the position of that person's point in this hyperspace.
This can be illustrated by this example. Suppose there are two persons A and B. Both of them may claim to be liberal. But only A, for the sake of the argument here, supports constitutional rights for the people with pedophile-ic fantasies to own sex dolls resembling kids in their own private bedroom, while B doesn't. In that case A will lie farther away from the axis of difference than B.
It is very important to note that we are only trying to understand the spectrums existing in the society through this model. One may label one property as good or bad or right or wrong, but that is an indeterminate dimension functioning in a highly localized space restricted to a particular or a group of individuals. Such kind of dimension has no meaning or existence in a true Candide hyperspace.
So it is very important to carefully determine our dimensions. While this model can also be applied with dimensions like "good - bad" but then why need this model if you really want to choose such metrics? One can simply go ahead and label something good or bad straightaway anyway rendering the purpose behind this model useless. The purpose of this model is to accommodate and help us understand the world around us from a larger perspective.
Now there is this curious thing about our society (or even extends for an average person). It often tries to build multiple Candide 1-D spaces, each for a set of property and anti-property which they may have to momentarily deal with. But as a person gains more exposure and the society gets more complex the hyperspace evolves. A person who runs an organization or has indulged in ground level journalism or is an immigrant, or simply has exposure to the complexities of how the world functions, usually extends her hyperspace to 2 dimensions. This part is especially interesting. Once someone is able to break the 1 dimensional norm, her hyperspace becomes 2 dimensional, and she can find greater comfort when dealing with the eccentricity with which the world functions. She can better understand a larger set of people and schools of thoughts than before.
Such a model will be the Candide 2-D space. In simple terms it will resemble the 2x2 matrix and is most exploited framework sociological and organizational models. Some of the examples are: Nolan chart in politics, growth-share matrix in business, managerial grid in management, Thiel's definite-optimism matrix in ideas etc. They all resemble the Candide 2-D space which looks like:
This model is can help one dissect and understand a complex or secondary points. Eg. when understanding concepts like far-right / far-left breaking or Nordic capitalism breaking down each of them into their constituent orthogonal dimensions is important (and perhaps equally difficult). There are some concepts like horseshoe theory but they are highly customized frameworks which are not as user friendly for inspectors or learners as the Candide hyperspace model.
To understand the applications of Candide hyperspace, let's take a particular case and escalate its dimensions and scope of study step by step. Consider this Candide hyperspace:
As a starting point, I have kept this Candide hyperspace one dimensional. One end represents optimism which can be defined as hopefulness for the future. In real life applications it simply represents confidence in an individual about the future. On the other end there is pessimism, which gloominess and represents an individual's fear of the future. Now let us add another dimension to it:
The second dimension I have taken is theism-atheism. Theist refers to someone who believes in a supreme being and atheist refers to someone who doesn't. I have chosen such indeterministic dimensions because our real lives are largely driven by such abstract dimensions.
In the above case, the degree is quite debatable when it comes to theism and atheism. Who is more atheist? Who should lie on the top most position of the above Candide hyperspace? And which atheism should be classified as someone nearer to horizontal the axis of division?
Consider a person C who is an atheist and indulges in charity. This act of charity may be driven by the desire to get fame and admiration, making her lie in the farther top end. Or, this act may be driven by the sub conscious construct in mind that one should give back to the society to bring greater balance of justice, which will make her lie in the bottom region of the atheism-optimism quadrant.
Now what about Harry who is an anti-theist? Well, this is a complex point and we need to define another dimension, let's say tolerance-dogmatism. This 3 dimensional Candide hyperspace will have 8 quadrants.
Now here is an interesting situation: What if you do not know anyone who is a pessimist, a theist and a tolerant. Does the model makes sense?
Yup. Just because there is no such person existing in your knowledge doesn't mean that they don't exist altogether (or may not have existed or will not exist).
In some cases the frequency distribution model may show extreme scarcity in a particular quadrant of a Candide hyperspace, which completely fine. In practice such scarce cases are often ignored giving rise to disadvantages for the minorities. When reinforced by majority it becomes a norm or social judgment. Sometimes lack of examples in a certain quadrant often biases us to believe someone is just an exception or delusional.
By adopting Candide hyperspace model one can avoid such deadlocks. One can add as many orthogonal dimensions to her Candide hyperspace until it satisfies her in understanding a sample under inspection.
In addition to all these fundamental properties, there are two additional properties of the Candide hyperspace model.
1: It is important to define a certain point in Candide hyperspace in terms of two fundamental properties:
a) Its mean position in the hyperspace
b) Its shape and size, ie one can exhibit a (continuous) range of a particular dimension rather than restricted as only a point.
It is so because a person or group's opinion or value or attitude or consequence or any such property may not exist as a fixed definite point in the hyperspace but as a flexible function or an approximate around a specific area. Thus the Candide hyperspace has no points or hypercubes but rather hyperclouds similar to the wave mechanics model. This minimizes errors and enriches the model to incorporate more applied meanings. So the person actually has some breathing space to deviate from his behavior every now and then. That is why you can make a near guess about someone's behavior or take on a person but can never exactly extrapolate it based on his past data.
2: I don't know if Kip Thorne will be particularly impressed or not, but there must exist trajectories and wormholes in the Candide hyperspace. So in an event of crisis or temporal experiences, the set of dimensions governing a person's actions may undergo changes. It can be gradual over one's lifetime or faster, can be permanent or can take a reversal path again.
It can also be absolutely sudden. During a calamity a person can exhibit opposite dimensional behavior. Eg. an optimistic person may turn pessimist when her lover dies. Or an optimistic employee in a 2008 Lehman Brothers like organization may exhibit pessimistic characters immediately after a similar meltdown event.
For the sake of simplicity I have considered a 0 dimensional Candide hyperspace in the above illustration. There may exist the wormhole as shown in the left side, allowing a faster transformation of a person or society's property or behavior. So if a person switches from 2 position in Candide hyperspace, it may have made the transition either via the wormhole or the line which crosses the axis of division.
Further I have named that line along which a person transitions gradually from one end of dimension to the other as Highway 61, also the name of a song by Bob Dylan in which someone describes a problem which is resolved on the highway itself.
So in real life practice, it may mean that someone initially had started from a certain part of hyperspace. But with time and learning, to solve her own abstractions she may have to get to the other side of the axis of division, thus the need for her to travel along the Highway 61. Now the journey may be bumpy, and one may even face a gate or a gatekeeper or an obstacle near the axis of division. One may travel slowly or may pause and resume depending on someone's need or enthusiasm or capability etc.
But that is up to the person herself.
Now let us go back to one of the fundamental thing of this model: orthogonal dimensions.
Well, orthogonal dimensions vary from person to person and model to model. One can even form complex dimensions as long as two dimensions are orthogonal or unrelated to each other. Some examples of orthogonal dimensions are:
1: 1 dimensional: Economic left-right
2: 2 dimensional: Liberty-control vs Rationalism-Irrationalism
3: 3 dimensional: Liberalism-Fascism vs Capitalism-Communism vs Feudalism-Egalitarianism
and so on...
Please note the above definitions are quite un-mathematical. You cannot really draw a line when one crosses one boundary and reaches other. So the axis of difference may vary from individual to individual, unless one specifically defines it so. Please note that Candide hyperspace is a framework which you can use as per your problem statement.
One of the interesting use cases in this model is that one can define a complex dimension by roughly combining two properties. Eg instead of breaking every time the hyperspace into optimism-pessimism vs atheism-theism, I sometimes tend to choose a dimension: delusional vs realist. This delusional-realist dimensions can be broken down in multiple ways: optimism-pessimism, atheism-theism, sensitive-resilient, rational-irrational. But since we humans are more comfortable with simpler order of matrix so it is sometimes recommended to deal with two-three dimensions beforehand so as to zero in to your solution or conclusion with a bit of more ease. I always thought of listing down a exhaustive list of dimensions, but then let's be honest that would have been too much already :)
The very basic foundation of that model, I may be allowed to simplify before digging further, is a binary space which looks like:
I chose the name Candide hyperspace due to the analogy it may hold while applying in the real life use cases. Candide was the fictional character created by Voltaire who satirized the Leibnizian optimism that existed in the paradise where he lived. My model attempts to create a space which can map as much cases as necessary, including the cases which I personally may not agree on. Hence they may not be "optimistic" from my point of references (or anyone with that logic). Now if the model puts any kind of constraint on the nature of dimensions of this space, it will also limit the scope of our understanding, or reinforcing an underlying bias within us or society or oversimplifying things beyond a justifiable point. Such practice leads to denial which often gives rise to a judgmental attitude. So I classified it as a hyperspace. Hyperspace originally meant n-dimensional vector space before science fiction writers hacked it to use as a method of traveling at faster than light speeds. As long as one is willing to and is able to find orthogonal properties, she can keep adding the dimensions. Hence the name. We will be talking more on this hyperspace's properties as we progress.
Now in everyday life, each person exercises certain level of tolerance. While the above model is good to declare something black or white, or right or wrong, or good or bad, or apple or orange, there is a need to assign qualitative (or quantitative) values to them. We tend to function in grey areas, tolerate certain wrong doings, forgive certain badness and so on. So a more realistic model of the above one dimensional space or, as we may call it, Candide 1-D space will look like:
It should make sense. we have red color representing one extreme and blue color representing the opposite extreme. Most of the real life applications if simplified and theorized will follow the above model.
But there is drawback in the above model. I had deliberately chosen the blue and red color instead of black and white. That is because we often ignore the properties of the points around the axis of division.
In the above model the blue color fades out completely, the area near the axis of division becomes white and then the white fades out to make way for the red color. Such case is a very special case where one is trying to accommodate the neutral or indifferent points. While it may sound perfect for someone who admires and aspires to bring higher order of rationality in her daily life, humans often don't function that way. In real life the neutral or indifferent points play no actual meaning or difference in one''s behavior. An individual tries to see any given point as displacement from her point of reference, ie in reality this scale is not absolute but relative from the point of view of the person scrutinizing it. So our Candide 1-D space has to be modified as this:
The red color represents a certain property or school of philosophy and the blue color represents the opposite values. As we move closer to the axis of difference, the degree of that property weakens. Eg if we are applying this model to liberalism and conservatism spectrum, then each color will represent each of them. Since we all know the degree of liberalism and conservatism varies from a person to person in our society, so a person near the axis but falling inside the liberalism spectrum will be someone who is liberal in standing but has certain issues in accepting some kind of things. These "certain kinds of things" will determine the position of that person's point in this hyperspace.
This can be illustrated by this example. Suppose there are two persons A and B. Both of them may claim to be liberal. But only A, for the sake of the argument here, supports constitutional rights for the people with pedophile-ic fantasies to own sex dolls resembling kids in their own private bedroom, while B doesn't. In that case A will lie farther away from the axis of difference than B.
It is very important to note that we are only trying to understand the spectrums existing in the society through this model. One may label one property as good or bad or right or wrong, but that is an indeterminate dimension functioning in a highly localized space restricted to a particular or a group of individuals. Such kind of dimension has no meaning or existence in a true Candide hyperspace.
So it is very important to carefully determine our dimensions. While this model can also be applied with dimensions like "good - bad" but then why need this model if you really want to choose such metrics? One can simply go ahead and label something good or bad straightaway anyway rendering the purpose behind this model useless. The purpose of this model is to accommodate and help us understand the world around us from a larger perspective.
Now there is this curious thing about our society (or even extends for an average person). It often tries to build multiple Candide 1-D spaces, each for a set of property and anti-property which they may have to momentarily deal with. But as a person gains more exposure and the society gets more complex the hyperspace evolves. A person who runs an organization or has indulged in ground level journalism or is an immigrant, or simply has exposure to the complexities of how the world functions, usually extends her hyperspace to 2 dimensions. This part is especially interesting. Once someone is able to break the 1 dimensional norm, her hyperspace becomes 2 dimensional, and she can find greater comfort when dealing with the eccentricity with which the world functions. She can better understand a larger set of people and schools of thoughts than before.
Such a model will be the Candide 2-D space. In simple terms it will resemble the 2x2 matrix and is most exploited framework sociological and organizational models. Some of the examples are: Nolan chart in politics, growth-share matrix in business, managerial grid in management, Thiel's definite-optimism matrix in ideas etc. They all resemble the Candide 2-D space which looks like:
This model is can help one dissect and understand a complex or secondary points. Eg. when understanding concepts like far-right / far-left breaking or Nordic capitalism breaking down each of them into their constituent orthogonal dimensions is important (and perhaps equally difficult). There are some concepts like horseshoe theory but they are highly customized frameworks which are not as user friendly for inspectors or learners as the Candide hyperspace model.
To understand the applications of Candide hyperspace, let's take a particular case and escalate its dimensions and scope of study step by step. Consider this Candide hyperspace:
As a starting point, I have kept this Candide hyperspace one dimensional. One end represents optimism which can be defined as hopefulness for the future. In real life applications it simply represents confidence in an individual about the future. On the other end there is pessimism, which gloominess and represents an individual's fear of the future. Now let us add another dimension to it:
In the above case, the degree is quite debatable when it comes to theism and atheism. Who is more atheist? Who should lie on the top most position of the above Candide hyperspace? And which atheism should be classified as someone nearer to horizontal the axis of division?
Consider a person C who is an atheist and indulges in charity. This act of charity may be driven by the desire to get fame and admiration, making her lie in the farther top end. Or, this act may be driven by the sub conscious construct in mind that one should give back to the society to bring greater balance of justice, which will make her lie in the bottom region of the atheism-optimism quadrant.
Now what about Harry who is an anti-theist? Well, this is a complex point and we need to define another dimension, let's say tolerance-dogmatism. This 3 dimensional Candide hyperspace will have 8 quadrants.
Now here is an interesting situation: What if you do not know anyone who is a pessimist, a theist and a tolerant. Does the model makes sense?
Yup. Just because there is no such person existing in your knowledge doesn't mean that they don't exist altogether (or may not have existed or will not exist).
In some cases the frequency distribution model may show extreme scarcity in a particular quadrant of a Candide hyperspace, which completely fine. In practice such scarce cases are often ignored giving rise to disadvantages for the minorities. When reinforced by majority it becomes a norm or social judgment. Sometimes lack of examples in a certain quadrant often biases us to believe someone is just an exception or delusional.
By adopting Candide hyperspace model one can avoid such deadlocks. One can add as many orthogonal dimensions to her Candide hyperspace until it satisfies her in understanding a sample under inspection.
In addition to all these fundamental properties, there are two additional properties of the Candide hyperspace model.
1: It is important to define a certain point in Candide hyperspace in terms of two fundamental properties:
a) Its mean position in the hyperspace
b) Its shape and size, ie one can exhibit a (continuous) range of a particular dimension rather than restricted as only a point.
It is so because a person or group's opinion or value or attitude or consequence or any such property may not exist as a fixed definite point in the hyperspace but as a flexible function or an approximate around a specific area. Thus the Candide hyperspace has no points or hypercubes but rather hyperclouds similar to the wave mechanics model. This minimizes errors and enriches the model to incorporate more applied meanings. So the person actually has some breathing space to deviate from his behavior every now and then. That is why you can make a near guess about someone's behavior or take on a person but can never exactly extrapolate it based on his past data.
2: I don't know if Kip Thorne will be particularly impressed or not, but there must exist trajectories and wormholes in the Candide hyperspace. So in an event of crisis or temporal experiences, the set of dimensions governing a person's actions may undergo changes. It can be gradual over one's lifetime or faster, can be permanent or can take a reversal path again.
It can also be absolutely sudden. During a calamity a person can exhibit opposite dimensional behavior. Eg. an optimistic person may turn pessimist when her lover dies. Or an optimistic employee in a 2008 Lehman Brothers like organization may exhibit pessimistic characters immediately after a similar meltdown event.
Further I have named that line along which a person transitions gradually from one end of dimension to the other as Highway 61, also the name of a song by Bob Dylan in which someone describes a problem which is resolved on the highway itself.
So in real life practice, it may mean that someone initially had started from a certain part of hyperspace. But with time and learning, to solve her own abstractions she may have to get to the other side of the axis of division, thus the need for her to travel along the Highway 61. Now the journey may be bumpy, and one may even face a gate or a gatekeeper or an obstacle near the axis of division. One may travel slowly or may pause and resume depending on someone's need or enthusiasm or capability etc.
But that is up to the person herself.
Now let us go back to one of the fundamental thing of this model: orthogonal dimensions.
Well, orthogonal dimensions vary from person to person and model to model. One can even form complex dimensions as long as two dimensions are orthogonal or unrelated to each other. Some examples of orthogonal dimensions are:
1: 1 dimensional: Economic left-right
2: 2 dimensional: Liberty-control vs Rationalism-Irrationalism
3: 3 dimensional: Liberalism-Fascism vs Capitalism-Communism vs Feudalism-Egalitarianism
and so on...
Please note the above definitions are quite un-mathematical. You cannot really draw a line when one crosses one boundary and reaches other. So the axis of difference may vary from individual to individual, unless one specifically defines it so. Please note that Candide hyperspace is a framework which you can use as per your problem statement.
One of the interesting use cases in this model is that one can define a complex dimension by roughly combining two properties. Eg instead of breaking every time the hyperspace into optimism-pessimism vs atheism-theism, I sometimes tend to choose a dimension: delusional vs realist. This delusional-realist dimensions can be broken down in multiple ways: optimism-pessimism, atheism-theism, sensitive-resilient, rational-irrational. But since we humans are more comfortable with simpler order of matrix so it is sometimes recommended to deal with two-three dimensions beforehand so as to zero in to your solution or conclusion with a bit of more ease. I always thought of listing down a exhaustive list of dimensions, but then let's be honest that would have been too much already :)
Comments
Post a Comment