Section Four

4. Orientation: Affordance, Invitation & Metaphor

The organism’s environment is the sense it makes of the world. This environment is a place of significance and valence, as a result of the global action of the organism.

— Evan Thompson

States are addressed in this section. Modes are addressed in the next.

  • States: Source and target conditions.

The Orientation of Source and Target Conditions:

Orientation has a specific role in each quadranym. It identifies the source condition that is necessary before any target condition can be engaged.

  • Fine tuning a text involves mapping it to source and target conditions.
  • In the schema, the source is like an affordance and its utility is the target.  
  • The term affordance is borrowed to refer the system’s spatial-temporal units.

(Note: Affordances show agents the actions they can take. Agents perceive affordances without having to consider how to use them. e.g., a teacup holds fluids or may be utilized as a cookie cutter. (The source affords target variables.))

The source condition is also called the subjective sense. It can be thought of as the unattended state and anchor. The target is always the attended state.

  • Source and target conditions are internal features of quadranym units.
  • Textual elements map to the condition features situated in each unit.

In the schema, a source condition is a factor intrinsically occurrent in the context. A target condition is a factor changing or modifying in the context.

  • Example: {<I, will, know, as_soon, as_I, walk, through, the door>}
  • Source: Space {through}, Time {as soon, as_I}, Agent {I}.
  • Target: Space {door}, Time {will), Mental {know}, Locomotion {walk}.

  • Sorted String Sets: Target Condition Source Condition

A Global System Model of the Occurrent Context Layers:

Orientation has a specific role in global layers, it sets the hierarchical order.

Contextual Layers: General to relevant spatial-temporal invitation system.

  • Example: I will know as soon as I walk through the door.

Contextual Ecosystem (Onion)

Layers of Target Potentials (environmental adaptors):

  1. Space: the_door
  2. Time/Locomotion: will
  3. Time/Locomotion: walk
  4. Agent/Mental: know

 Layers of Source Actuals (responsive anchors):

  1. Space: through
  2. Time/Locomotion: as_soon
  3. Time/Locomotion: as_I
  4. Agent/Mental: I

Sorted States: [Space S, Time T, Locomotion L, Agent A, Mental M]

  1. S: Source state: void {through}  ⊇ target state: between {the_door}.
  2. T/L: Source state: present/position {as_soon}target state: event/place {will}.
  3. T/L: Source state: present/position {as_I}target state: event/place {walk}.
  4. A/M: Source state: self/knower  {I}target state: goal/knowable {know}.

Spatial-Temporal Affordance & Invitation Layers:

Keep in mind that through of the first layer has little to do with the agent. It  doesn’t describe what the agent is doing, rather, it describes what the agent is invited to do i.e., Invitation systems form the hierarchies that nest affordances.

  • The same basic sequential dynamic in each unit (cycle) occur in the layers.
  • Last Unit: Knower is the source condition. Knowable is the target condition.
  • Layers: Void begins the general realm. Knowable ends the relevant realm.

(Note: The distinction between agent and environment is local and temporal.)

Invitation Layers & Contextual Artifacts:

(Note: A contextual artifact is dynamically actual and situationally potential.)  

Spatial orientation space_void {through}, is the most general layer in this Invitation System. It is the primary invitation to the environmental space. It is the invitation that anchors for the targets on each more relevant layer.

  • Each layer is a sequence (cycle), FROM source condition TO target condition.

Each quadranym has a source i.e., an idiosyncratic method of orientation. For instance, layer 2 orientation sources {as_soon} as the actual position of the present state i.e., present position orients to event {will} as the temporal target.

  • Layer 2: subjective source {as_soon} orients the objective variable {will}.

(Note: as_soon is during the time of being before event. Will is that event. In the normal understanding of the term here, will expresses the future inevitability of the event. In this system the expression itself is the event i.e.,  as_soonwill.)

Each layer is an invitation for the next layer to proceed.

  • Layer 3: subjective source{as_I} orients the objective variable {walk}.

(Note: as_I is during the time of being for event. Walk is that event.)

Layers 1,2,3 provide invitation for layer 4. These layers can serve as a system for other relevancies such as, door → leave instead of door → know.

  • Original 4: Source state: self/position  {I}target state: goal/place {know}.
  • Alternative 4: Source state: self/position  {I}target state: goal/place {leave}.

In the example, the invitation layers amounts to …

  • Spatial orientation invites door to invite locomotion to invite knowing.

System Layers & Metaphorical Mapping:

(Note: Metaphor requires a dedicated article. Overview below)

On a metaphorical level, a door can be a transition to nearly anything.

  • The doors of our mind.
  • The doors to other worlds.
  • The doors of opportunity.
  • The doors of knowledge.

Consider our standard example:

  • I will know as soon as I walk through the door.

As anyone might imagine, will_know can be replaced by seemingly endless other relevancies such as,  will_have_opportunitywill_changewill_start,  will_go etc…

Metaphorical Target Realm Examples:

  • Addressing obstacles.
  • New opportunities. 
  • Ending or starting. 
  • Transitioning.
  • Learning.

In our approach, a metaphor is the relationship between the dynamical context and the situational context.  Two different systems of context.

Consider the sentence example below:

  • The news of the merger hit them all like a brick.
       A virtual space where all the members are located (in the void of this space).

Contextual Layers: General to relevant spatial-temporal invitation system.

Layered State Orientations: (Example)

  1. Space: Source state: void{…} target state: between{…}.
  2. News/Feel: Source state: info/aware{…}target state: receive/contact{…}.
  3. News/Feel: Source state: info/aware{…}target state: receive/contact{…}.
  4. Agent/Impact: Source state: self/force{…}target state: goal/contact{…}.

Sorted State Elements: (Example)

  1. Source state: void {all}target state: between {the_news}.
  2. Source state: info/aware {of_the}target state: receive/contact {merger}.
  3. Source state: info/aware {Like_a}target state: receive/contact {brick}.
  4. Source state: self/force  {them}target state: goal/contact {hit}.

The situational context is about the merger and how they all felt about it. Humans know brick is a metaphor expressing the emotional impact. Brick is not about the situation. It is about the dynamical context in response to the situation i.e, a distinction between a dynamic sense and the actual situation.

How does an agent know the difference?

  1. The situational context represents objective sense.
  2. The dynamical context represents subjective sense.

(Note: Some inspiration for this distinction is with the efferent copy (neurology). Situational contexts represent actual situations. Dynamical contexts represent responses that can occur in those situations.  Stability requires their distinction.)

The dynamical context presents intentional spaces. That is, intended responses. The situational context allows a space within its apt constraints.

  • Situational contexts allow temporal-spatial units to be figurative or literal.

(Note: The situation context must recognize the difference between figurative or literal meaning. The dynamical context job is to essentially couple to meaning.)

A reciprocal relationship between a dynamical context and a situational context renders apt virtual orientation for the responsiveness to a meaning.

  1. Situational Context: Representational: What hit them? {< news, hit, them>}.
  2. Source state: feel {them_all}target state: react {the_news}<find> topic

The word (or posit) brick is being repurposed from the situational context position. From the dynamical context position it is simply a viewpoint layer.

  1. Dynamical Context: Procedural: How did it hit them? {like_a_brick}.
  2. Source state: motion {hit}target state: matter {brick}<find> topic 

A word is on a layer subjected to the nested orientations of other layers. The situational context filters invitations between layers to prove the logic.

  • Brick is positioned to successful predictive layers of the dynamical context.

(Note: Modes add measure to state attributes such as, more heavy or more small)

There is no need to go into all the properties of a brick.

Below are possible word orientation topic inference examples…

  • hit: Source state: force {from}target state: contact {to}
  • Brick: Source state: block {heavy}target state: build {solid}
  • Energy: Source state: motion {hit}target state: matter {brick}
  • Emotion: Source state: feel {them_all}target state: react {the_news).

Brick invites energy (size/weight modes of measure).

(Note: Source-target conditions pull inferences form textual elements and default states.  Impact felt: hit/brick relation:  physically, psychologically or emotionally.)

The dynamical context copies the situational context within its own system paradigms. The result are various kinds of viewpoints. Some viewpoints apply and some don’t as they are inferred, filtered, measured and balanced.

  • The situational context works to preserve an objective perception.
  • The dynamical context works to apply responses to the perception.

(Note: With word-sensibility analysis there are no initial concrete ontological foundations except for basic responses and motivations. Instead, dynamical contexts and situational contexts develop on the same continuum where they become more distinct over time and continuously form and reform each other.)

Dynamic sense is about systems of source and target layers and mapping those systems and layers to each other to aptly target objective conditions.

  • The situational context analysis is about the truth conditions.
  • The dynamical context analysis is about the dynamic sense.

Dynamical contexts are by default virtual rationalizing systems when acting without objective conditions of the situational context. When coupled to objective conditions, its function is to simultaneously preserve reliable objective perspectives and its dynamic sense. It is generally healthy when the coupling is highly predictive to the potential conditions of its environment.

  • Dynamical context references prior successful couplings to justify a response.

Dynamical context units virtually seek to interface with real conditions to assimilate a vast and pervading objective field (i.e., the environment) into its system. The reward and benefit is that once attached to viable conditions, the system naturally functions to increase the tractability of its objective field.

  • Dynamical Context: source conditions anchor for objective condition targets.

Although beyond the scope of this article, there is filtering such as inhibiting and debugging processes that control relational dynamics between systems.

  • The meaning is in the text. The dynamical context responds to the meaning.

In this approach, metaphor is an example of dynamic sense responding to the situational context and we suggest that disambiguation processes utilize a very similar structure.  We’ll touch on disambiguation in the next section.

  •  Dynamical context units are about finding ways to adapt to environments.

Orientational layers can be added, subtracted or rearranged. Next, spatial orientation adjusts its spatial region coordinates to the situational context.

  • Quadranym reference frames operate like units of homeostasis.

(Note: The idea of orientation as illustrated above is one example or way to think about layers of virtual orientation. Sentential methods of orientational analysis may at times require grammatical assistance. Grammatical analysis primarily pertains to the situational context. The goal is to model the relations between the situational context and the dynamical context systems. Also, orientation may summarize chunks of text e.g., an entire sentence may be a source or a target. The distinction spans between the word-topics and the theme topics of a text. Still, orientation as we are presenting it is chiefly about the ability to abstract the human experience of contextual expectation by building up from the word level.)


Model

next