Hyperreality is Thinning Out:

For decades, we’ve lived in a world that is less and less rooted in reality and more in layers of hyperreality—constructed narratives and illusions carefully pieced together by media, corporations, and political forces. But now, in an age where every person carries a camera in their pocket and can broadcast the world’s raw, unsanitized messiness in real-time, that illusion is starting to crack. The precise phrase for this phenomenon is “hyperreality is thinning out.” It’s not an abrupt collapse, but a slow unraveling—a diminishment of the once all-encompassing power of the constructed narratives that shaped our understanding of reality.

The Rise of Hyperreality

It began innocuously enough. News outlets, driven by ratings and the need to capture attention, began to simplify complex global issues into digestible, emotionally charged sound bites. Politicians, marketers, and corporate interests understood this well and saw an opportunity—if they could control these narratives, they could control public perception. They could sell us wars, ideologies, products, and even our very identities.

Reality became secondary. What mattered was the story, the image, the spectacle. We lived inside a machine of illusions, fed daily doses of neatly packaged narratives designed to keep us pacified, anxious, or outraged—whatever best suited those in power. These stories shaped not just what we believed was happening, but more importantly, what we thought should be happening.

The world of hyperreality emerged: a place where images replaced truth, where simulations replaced experience. The news stopped reflecting reality and started constructing it. Elections, conflicts, and disasters were distilled into simple, binary narratives that could fit into a few headlines or a thirty-second video clip. Every story became a piece in a puzzle meant to elicit a specific response—a version of reality created for you, polished, simplified, and pre-approved for mass consumption.

The Invasion of “The Real”

But something happened along the way that no one anticipated. The very technology that the media and corporations had used to spread their simplified realities started to turn against them. The iPhone, with its ubiquitous camera, and social media platforms became weapons in the hands of ordinary people. Suddenly, everyone had the power to document reality as it was—not as it was supposed to be. And this reality didn’t fit the polished narratives we had been fed for years.

In the past, if there was a protest, a riot, or a political scandal, you saw what the media wanted you to see. Now, raw, unfiltered footage floods social media, showing moments of chaos, violence, or injustice that the news often reframes, downplays, or distorts. No longer could hyperreality suppress the real world so easily. The more we saw these cracks in the narrative, the more fragile the entire construct became.

The impact of this was immense. In one instance, a carefully curated news report on a protest framed it as a violent uprising against law and order. But then videos, taken on the ground, from multiple angles, emerged online. They showed something different—a protest mostly peaceful, except for a few isolated incidents, and often those incidents weren’t even instigated by protesters, but by police. The story shattered before our eyes. The hyperreal construct couldn’t withstand the weight of firsthand evidence.

The Collapse of Trust

What happens when people stop believing in the stories they’ve been told? The thinning of hyperreality is leading to the collapse of a crucial element that held it all together: trust. For years, we trusted that the media, for all its flaws, still presented something resembling the truth. But when you can hold reality in your hand, when you can record it yourself and compare it against the official narrative, that trust dissolves.

The institutions we once relied on to tell us the truth are now scrambling to maintain their credibility. Governments, media outlets, corporations—they all sense the shift. They double down on their narratives, desperate to maintain control over the stories they’ve built, but the more they try to hold onto their authority, the more the cracks widen. The footage on our phones shows something far more complex, far more real than the simplistic binaries we’ve been fed.

The thinning of hyperreality is not just about the media. It’s about the entire structure of how power operates in the modern world. When people stop trusting the stories they are told, they start asking uncomfortable questions: Who benefits from this narrative? Why are we only hearing one side of the story? Why are certain stories amplified while others are ignored?

Hyperreality Loses its Grip

As hyperreality thins out, we see a return to chaos. Not the chaos of destruction, but the chaos of uncertainty. Without a singular narrative to latch onto, without the clean, coherent stories that told us what we should believe, people are left grappling with multiple versions of reality. It’s disorienting. It’s messy. And it’s more real than anything we’ve experienced in decades.

The iPhone, in many ways, is a perfect symbol of this shift. It’s the device that both created and is now dismantling hyperreality. At first, it was part of the spectacle, a tool for consuming endless streams of curated content. But now, it’s the very thing that exposes the cracks in the illusion. Each unfiltered video, each firsthand account, chips away at the carefully constructed narratives that once seemed so unshakeable.

The Ozone Layer of Illusions

Hyperreality is thinning out like the ozone layer—a once-impenetrable shield, now riddled with holes. For decades, this layer, made up of carefully crafted narratives, protected us from the full force of the real world. It insulated us from complexity, ambiguity, and truth. But like the ozone, hyperreality’s protective membrane is wearing thin, exposing us to harsh realities we were once shielded from. And what’s causing this thinning? Ironically, it’s the very devices we carry in our pockets—the iPhones, the smartphones—that we once thought would reinforce these illusions. But instead, they’re turning into magnifying glasses, focusing the light of reality and setting fire to the ants scurrying beneath the surface.

The metaphor is stark. These phones, which were initially tools to consume hyperreality, are now instruments of destruction, burning through the simulacra that have shaped our perceptions for so long. Like a child holding a magnifying glass to the sun, our phones capture reality in all its unfiltered, uncomfortable intensity. And the hyperreal ants, running in circles, once content in their controlled, manufactured world, are now catching fire.

The Ozone Layer of Illusions

Think of the hyperreal as the ozone layer. Just as the actual ozone layer protects us from the sun’s ultraviolet rays, hyperreality protects us from the unmediated real. It filters, refracts, and diffuses the harshness of the world into something palatable, something we can consume without being overwhelmed. For years, it kept the uncomfortable truths at bay, allowing us to live inside a reality that was softened, smoothed over, and simplified. The news was part of this, of course, but so were entertainment, politics, advertising—all of it working together to build a coherent story that made sense of a world that often didn’t.

The holes in the ozone started small. A viral video here, a piece of leaked footage there. At first, these breaches in hyperreality were dismissed, framed as anomalies, easily ignored. But over time, the gaps widened. The flood of iPhone footage—the protests, the police brutality, the wars, the disasters—began to burn through the surface. It wasn’t just that people were seeing something different from the mainstream narrative. It was that they were seeing it for themselves.

The Magnifying Glass Effect

Phones, those sleek little devices designed to distract us from reality, have become magnifying glasses, focusing the light of truth into beams that burn through the paper-thin layers of illusion. The ants in this metaphor—the media, the corporations, the politicians—scurry to put out the fires, but they can’t keep up. The more they try to maintain control over the narrative, the faster the fires spread.

Think of the protest videos that emerge on social media. In the past, a protest could be framed by the news as either a noble cause or a dangerous riot, depending on the agenda of the broadcaster. The hyperreal story was all we had. But now, thousands of videos captured by ordinary people—raw, unedited, unfiltered—are uploaded in real-time. No amount of narrative control can contain the chaotic truth that these videos reveal. They magnify the reality on the ground, making it impossible to ignore the inconsistencies, the lies, the oversimplifications that the hyperreal version of events had once sold us.

The Destruction of Simulacra

This process is setting the simulacra on fire. The polished, constructed realities that we were once content to accept are being scorched by the glare of real evidence. Politicians who once spoke in soundbites crafted by PR teams now face live, unfiltered scrutiny. A speech that is carefully framed on the evening news can be undone by a single video clip taken from a different angle, showing the messy truth that was conveniently left out. The hyperreal image collapses under the weight of the real footage, and the ants keep burning.

The same is true for corporations, whose carefully constructed brand identities can be torn apart by a single viral video of factory conditions, environmental destruction, or employee mistreatment. The once carefully managed image, built over decades of hyperreal advertising, goes up in flames in a matter of minutes. The magnifying glass effect is relentless, and no amount of damage control can fully extinguish the fire.

The Death of Coherence

What’s truly unsettling about this process is that it doesn’t lead to a simple, new truth. It doesn’t replace one story with another. Instead, it reveals the messiness, the chaos, the uncontrollable nature of reality. Hyperreality, for all its faults, gave us a sense of coherence. It told us what was happening, what should be happening, and how we should feel about it. But now, with the ozone layer of illusions thinning out, we’re left with multiple, conflicting realities, none of which fit neatly into the prepackaged narratives we’ve grown used to.

This is why it feels like the world is becoming more chaotic. It’s not that the world itself is necessarily more unstable; it’s that the stories that once made sense of it are falling apart. The iPhone footage, the unfiltered evidence, is showing us a world that doesn’t fit the hyperreal mold. We’re seeing the complexity, the ambiguity, the contradictions that hyperreality once smoothed over.

Hyperreality is Thinning Out: The Ozone Layer of Illusions

But what’s really gone is the illusion of control and separateness. For years, we were fed the comforting belief that our lives, our societies, could be neatly divided into separate spheres—public and private, local and global, online and offline. The news itself reinforced these boundaries, creating the sense that we could observe the world from a distance, from the safety of our homes, and that the stories on the screen were happening “out there,” somewhere beyond our immediate experience. It was a form of control, not just over the narrative, but over our sense of place in the world.

Now, that illusion is shattering. The thinning of hyperreality has revealed not just the chaos and contradictions of the real world, but the deep entanglement that connects everything. There is no “out there” anymore. The iPhone footage, the constant flood of firsthand evidence, has collapsed the distance between observer and event. We’re no longer just spectators of the world’s dramas; we are entangled in them, woven into the same fabric as the events we once thought we were merely watching.

Enter Entanglement

The rise of entanglement is perhaps the most unsettling aspect of hyperreality’s decline. It’s not just that we’re seeing more of reality; it’s that we are implicated in it. The neat boundaries between “us” and “them,” between the safe domestic sphere and the dangerous outside world, are dissolving. The phone in your hand, the same device that connects you to the stories of distant wars, protests, and disasters, is also a tool of participation. When you record a moment, when you upload it to social media, you become part of the story. You can no longer pretend that what happens on the screen has no bearing on your life or your choices.

This entanglement goes far deeper than just sharing or witnessing. It’s about how the systems that govern our lives are interconnected in ways that hyperreality always tried to hide. Climate change, global capitalism, social inequality—these are not separate, distant problems happening to other people. They are the threads that tie us all together, and the more we see of the real world, the more we are forced to confront the fact that we are part of these systems, whether we like it or not.

The smartphone footage of a protest in a distant city doesn’t just inform us; it reminds us that the same forces driving that protest are present in our own lives. The exploitation of labor that fuels a factory collapse in one part of the world is linked to the products we use every day. The illusion of separateness, the comforting belief that we can observe these events from a safe distance, is gone. We are all entangled in the same global web of cause and effect.

The Illusion of Control

The thinning of hyperreality is also exposing the myth of control. For years, media and technology worked together to reinforce the idea that we were in control of our realities. We could curate our news feeds, choose which stories to follow, and craft our own online personas, all while maintaining a sense of personal agency and autonomy. But as the hyperreal narratives crumble, it’s becoming clear that this sense of control was always an illusion.

The world is not a carefully managed simulation that we can adjust to our liking. It’s a chaotic, interconnected system where events in one part of the globe can trigger consequences in another, where the actions of corporations, governments, and individuals are inextricably linked. And as we witness these connections more clearly, through the lens of iPhone footage and citizen journalism, the comforting fiction of control starts to unravel.

The phone in your hand, the very device that once made you feel like a sovereign consumer, now reveals just how little control you really have. It’s not just that you’re seeing reality more clearly—it’s that reality is pushing back, reminding you that you are part of a system that operates far beyond your control. The climate crisis, the economic instability, the social unrest—these are not things you can manage by simply choosing the right news sources or staying informed. They are forces that entangle you, whether you’re aware of it or not.

The Collapse of Individuality

This entanglement is leading to the collapse of another cherished illusion: individuality. For years, hyperreality sold us the idea that we were all unique, self-contained individuals, able to shape our own destinies. But the thinning of hyperreality is revealing the deep interconnectedness of everything, and with it, the uncomfortable truth that individuality itself is a fiction.

In a world where every action is connected to countless others, where the choices we make are shaped by forces far beyond our control, the idea that we are autonomous individuals making free choices starts to seem absurd. The iPhone footage of distant tragedies and protests doesn’t just show us the world—it shows us our place in it. We are not outside observers, free to craft our own narratives; we are part of the same tangled web of causes and effects, caught up in a system that is far larger than any of us.

The collapse of individuality is unsettling, but it’s also liberating. In a world where hyperreality once imposed rigid narratives and controlled perceptions, the thinning of those layers offers a chance to see things as they really are. The world is messy, interconnected, and chaotic, and we are all part of it. There’s no escape into the neat, curated worlds of hyperreality anymore. But in this entanglement, there is also a kind of freedom—the freedom to acknowledge the complexity of the world and to find new ways of being within it.

The Future of Entanglement

As hyperreality continues to thin out, the future will be defined by this entanglement. The illusion of separateness and control is gone, but that doesn’t mean we are powerless. In fact, the thinning of hyperreality opens up new possibilities for action. As the real world becomes more visible, as the connections between us become clearer, we have the chance to reimagine how we relate to one another and to the systems that shape our lives.

The iPhone, the very device that once seemed like a tool of distraction, is now a tool of entanglement. It connects us to the world, not just as consumers of information but as participants in the unfolding reality. The question now is whether we will continue to burn in the magnified light of this new reality or whether we will find new ways to navigate the complexity, to embrace the messiness of the real, and to build a future that acknowledges our deep, inescapable connections to one another.

In this new landscape, the hyperreal narratives that once made sense of the world are gone. But in their place, there is a chance to build something new—something more honest, more connected, and perhaps even more hopeful.

Bounded Rationality and the Noble Lie

Bounded rationality becomes an expression of the implosion of meaning. Individuals, caught in the web of late capitalism, consumerism, and media saturation, no longer make decisions based on concrete, objective facts or even limited rationality. Instead, decisions are filtered through the endless series of simulacra—images and signs that represent nothing beyond themselves. We live in a strange and haunted age, where the thin veil of rationality barely hides the howling chaos underneath.

Politicians, CEOs, and your neighbor who swears he knows how to fix the country, all cling to their fragile belief that they can “figure it out.” But here’s the kicker—they can’t. They’re locked in a cell of their own limitations. In the grand theater of human existence, they pretend to know more than they do, acting out a high-stakes drama where the noble lie takes center stage.In this sense, bounded rationality is not just the result of human cognitive limitations, but the inevitable consequence of existing in a world where information is no longer tethered to any reality.

Bounded rationality and the noble lie are mutually reinforcing elements that contribute to the ultimate loss of the real. Decisions are made not in relation to real-world constraints or truths, but within a self-referential system of simulations that generates its own reality. Bounded rationality becomes not a limitation of human cognition, but a feature of the system itself—a system that only allows for decisions based on symbols and representations, not on any underlying truth.

Bounded rationality. A term so sanitized it could be sold in the clean-up aisle of a Walmart, promising clarity like some kind of intellectual Lysol. It’s the idea that humans, with our walnut-sized brains, can’t access the full landscape of reality, so we settle for a partial view. Instead of using pure reason, we make decisions based on what’s around us—limited information, knee-jerk instincts, and our precarious sanity. Our brains are understaffed, working overtime, and yet we expect them to map the world like some supercomputer with caffeine jitters.

The combination of bounded rationality and the noble lie unfolds within the hyperreal matrix of contemporary society—a society dominated not by reality, but by its simulations and symbols. Baudrillard’s view of the postmodern world is one where the distinction between the real and the simulated has collapsed, leaving us floating in a sea of signs that no longer refer to anything concrete. Bounded rationality and the noble lie are crucial components in this hyperreality, where meaning is manufactured and sustained by systems of power, yet detached from any genuine truth.

The decision-making process isn’t a sleek operating system; it’s a jury-rigged patchwork of bad wiring, human error, and the madness of crowds. People buy into “good enough” solutions because the alternative—trying to achieve omniscience—is an absurdity. Imagine a mob of sleep-deprived office workers trying to solve world hunger on their lunch break.

People, swamped by this excess of signs and symbols, can only make sense of the world through approximations. They no longer seek truth but settle for simulacra of truth—“good enough” solutions that don’t aim to penetrate the real because, in Baudrillard’s world, the real itself is an illusion. Every decision is a half-measure, not because of limited information in the traditional sense, but because all information is already a simulation.

THE NOBLE LIE

This isn’t some penny-ante fib your grandmother tells about Santa Claus. No, this is a full-on, balls-to-the-wall fabrication sold to the masses for their own supposed good. Plato, in all his philosophical arrogance, gave us the blueprint: the noble lie is a myth concocted by the elites to keep society in check. It’s the placebo that keeps the mob from burning down the statehouse.

The noble lie, in Baudrillard’s view, would not merely be a myth told to maintain social harmony (as in Plato’s original conception), but a hyperreal construct—an illusion that pretends to serve as the foundation for social order while concealing the fact that no such foundation exists. In the world of hyperreality, the noble lie isn’t a protective fabrication based on bounded rationality; it is a simulation that functions to maintain the appearance of a stable, coherent society when, in fact, society is an intricate game of shifting signs and images with no ultimate grounding in reality.

Let’s not kid ourselves—this noble lie is everywhere. It’s not just in dusty philosophy books; it’s in your phone, your TV, your government press releases. Politicians package it up like a hot product, some shiny bullshit that’ll make you feel safe while they pull the strings behind the curtain. They tell you, “We’ve got it under control,” knowing full well that their decisions are stitched together from half-baked data and the thinnest of compromises. They’re making it up as they go along, same as the rest of us, but they have the audacity to act like they know what they’re doing.

In this context, leaders, politicians, and elites don’t lie with the conscious intention of maintaining social order in the face of limited rational capacity. Instead, they participate in a simulation of truth-telling, one that sustains the illusion that their decisions are based on reason, evidence, or a concern for the collective good. The noble lie, then, is not even “noble”—it’s simply another simulation in a world where all pretense of the real has been obliterated. It’s a mask worn to convince the masses that their bounded rationality matters, that their decisions have meaning, even as they float in a void of endless representations.

The noble lie serves as a psychological Band-Aid, keeping society from unraveling at the seams. When the President tells you, “Everything is fine,” or that insane CEO grins like a Cheshire cat on TV, promising that the company is “poised for growth,” you can almost hear the lie rattling in their teeth. But hell, who’s complaining? We need the lie. Without it, people start seeing the cracks in the system, the fallibility of their leaders, and the limits of human reason. And once you start down that road, it’s only a matter of time before you’re storming the gates with pitchforks and torches.

The noble lie, as a construct, doesn’t conceal the truth of society’s workings—it creates a simulation of society, an illusion of coherence and order. The lie is no longer about safeguarding society’s stability, but about sustaining the illusion that there is something stable to safeguard. The truth is irrelevant in Baudrillard’s hyperreal world, because the simulation of truth is all that remains. Bounded rationality operates within this framework, not as a constraint but as an inevitable byproduct of hyperreality, where decisions are made based on representations that no longer reflect any deeper reality.

But here’s the truth, the one they won’t admit: nobody’s in control. Not fully, not ever. Society is a carnival of bounded rationality and noble lies, spinning its wheels and careening toward the future. We’re all improvising, just hoping to avoid the worst outcomes. The elites are as clueless as the rest of us; they’re just better at pretending. They put on the costumes, recite their lines, and perform the grand illusion.

The noble lie is the ultimate stage production, with world leaders as the directors and the masses as the audience, clutching their programs and clapping on cue. But we—the people trapped in this theater—are both actors and audience, participants in this charade. We need the lie to believe there’s any order in the universe, even if we suspect it’s all smoke and mirrors. We play along because, deep down, we know the truth would be too much to bear.

In the end, what do we have? A fragile system of flawed decision-makers, running a world built on comforting falsehoods. The only rational response is to embrace the absurdity. Understand that no one is pulling the strings—not really. We’re all in this theater together, writing the script as we go, patching up the holes with noble lies and praying the curtain doesn’t fall too soon.

And when it does, we’ll face the truth at last: we were never in control.

Baudrillard’s idea of the precession of simulacra—where representations precede and shape reality rather than the other way around—applies both to bounded rationality and the noble lie. In traditional theory, bounded rationality suggests that individuals approximate the best decisions they can, based on incomplete information. But in Baudrillard’s hyperreal world, this “information” is already part of the simulacra. It’s not incomplete in the sense that it lacks full content—it’s over-saturated with content that has lost any connection to reality.

The noble lie, meanwhile, is not a lie that conceals an uncomfortable truth. It’s a simulacrum that creates a new, hyperreal truth, preceding any authentic reality. The masses are not just deceived; they are participants in the simulation, consuming the lie as if it were the truth because, in hyperreality, there is no longer any distinction between the two.

Bounded rationality and the noble lie are not separate phenomena, but parts of the same hyperreal system. Bounded rationality is a function of living in a world where decisions are based on simulations that no longer refer to any concrete reality. The noble lie, rather than being a useful myth to maintain social order, is part of the simulation that sustains the illusion of a coherent society in a world where all that remains are signs detached from the real. Together, they form the theater of the hyperreal, a grand illusion in which both rulers and ruled are actors, trapped in a system of endless representations, where the real has already vanished.

THE SACRED AND THE PROFANE & SUPERNORMAL STIMULI: STREAMING MAKES ME WANNA SMOKE CRACK

Go to the profile of Ric Amurrio

Ric Amurrio Jul 1

MUSIC IN PHASE SPACE EPISODE 36

(Rollin..)

MTV makes me wanna smoke crack
Fall out of the window and I’m never comin’ back
MTV makes me wanna get high
Can’t get a ride no matter how I try
And everything’s perfect and everything’s bright
And everyone’s perky and everyone’s uptight
I love those videos I watch ’em all day…….

Beck

Put a mirror on the side of a beta fighting fish’s aquarium and a male will beat itself against the glass attacking the perceived intruder. A hen lays eggs day after day as a farmer removes them for human breakfasts — 30,000 in a lifetime without one chick hatching but she never gives up trying.

Nobel laureate Niko Tinbergen studied birds that lay small, pale blue eggs speckled with grey. He constructed plaster eggs to see which a bird preferred to sit on, finding that they would select those that were larger, had more defined markings, or more saturated color over the bird’s own pale, dappled eggs. The essence of the supernormal stimulus is that the imitation can exert a stronger pull than the real thing.

He found that territorial male stickleback fish would attack a wooden fish model more vigorously than a real male if its underside was redder. The healthiest, largest male chickadees have the highest crests on their heads and they are sought after as mates. When researchers outfit runt males with little pointed caps females line up to mate with them, forsaking the naturally fitter, hatless males.

Tinbergen was able to influence the behavior of these animals with a new “super” stimulus that was a detriment to their livelihood because they simply couldn’t say no to the fake stimulus. Much of Tinbergen’s work is beautifully captured by Harvard psychologist Deirdre Barrett in the book Supernormal Stimuli.

There’s a jolt of recognition: just how different are our endless wars, our modern health woes, our melodramatic romantic and sexual lives candy, pornography, huge-eyed stuffed animals, diatribes about menacing enemies.

Human instincts were designed for hunting and gathering on the savannahs of Africa 10,000 years ago. Our present world is incompatible with these instincts because of radical increases in population densities, technological inventions, and pollution. Instincts arose to call our attention to rare necessities but now we use them to produce ubiquitous attention-grabbers.

Humans have a giant brain capable of overriding simpler instincts when they lead us astray. Evolution’s inability to keep pace with such rapid change plays a role in most of our modern problems. But we must recognize and understand what is going on before we will make this crucial switch in strategy

Junk food

It could be argued that for a large span of time humans had a relatively stable palette. A candy bar matches taste buds that evolved in a hunter-gatherer environment, but it matches those taste buds much more strongly than anything that actually existed in the hunter-gatherer environment. The signal that once reliably correlated to healthy food has been hijacked. Tastiness, formerly representing the evolutionarily identified correlates of healthiness, has been reverse-engineered and perfectly matched with an artificial substance.

The problem with junk food is due to the fact that it is a “super stimulating” version of a natural reward we are supposed to pursue. the reason we are drawn to sickly desserts is because they are sweeter than any naturally-occurring fruit.

Some studies have suggested that foods like processed grain came about far too quickly and are doing quite a number on your mind and body. Junk food is addictive. Food is being engineered specifically to be more appealing than its natural counterparts.

HYPERREALITY: TV & video games

Awareness that watching television activates the primitive ‘orienting response’, keeping our eyes drawn to the moving pictures as if it were predator or prey. Awareness that liking ‘cute’ characters comes from a biological urge to protect and nurture our young

If people have the right to play video games — and it’s hard to imagine a more fundamental right — then the market is going to respond by supplying the most engaging video games that can be sold.

and if you can make your game 5% more hypereal, you may be able to steal 50% of your competitor’s customers. You can see how this problem could get a lot worse. A video game can be so much more engaging than mere reality. Challenges poised at the critical point between ease and impossibility, intermittent reinforcement, feedback showing an ever-increasing score, social involvement in massively multiplayer games.

Is there a limit to the market incentive to make video games more engaging? You might hope there’d be no incentive past the point where the players lose their jobs; after all, they must be able to pay their subscription fee. This would imply a “sweet spot” for the addictiveness of games, where the mode of the bell curve is having fun.

Pornography

There’s a passage from a Kurt Vonnegut novel where a man shows another man a photograph of a woman in a bikini and asks, “Like that Harry? That girl there.” The man’s response is, “That’s not a girl. That’s a piece of paper.” Those who warn of porn’s addictive nature always emphasize that it is not a sexual addiction, it’s a technological one.

It’s been suggested that pornography messes up the “reward circuitry” in human sexuality — why bother trying to pursue and impress a potential mate if you can just go home and look at porn? Novelty is always a click a way, and novelty is closely tied to the highly addictive nature of dopamine.

the neurotransmitter dopamine does not cause people to experience pleasure, but rather causes a seeking behavior. want, desire, seek search,” she wrote. It is the opioid system that causes one to feel pleasure. Yet, “the dopamine system is stronger than the opioid system. We seekmore than we are saare satisfied

Actual women are killing themselves (e.g. supermodels using cocaine to keep their weight down) in the construction of another superstimulus transformed by makeup, careful photography, and finally extensive Photoshopping, into a billboard model — a beauty impossible, unmatchable by human women in the unretouched real world.

The Internet & Fomo

Social media has been shown to make some people depressed — they see the highlight reel of others, and may feel worse about their own life. These pruned and often misleading looks into others lives was never available before the web. In spite of this, people can’t stop checking them, thinking that they might be missing out on something.

The quick bursts of entertainment that the internet provides, and the fact that information is always a click away, may cause a decrease in conceptual and critical thinking as well as chronic distraction that slowly eats away at your patience and ability to think and work on things for extended periods of time.

What should you do? Deciding what’s normal

Only those who try to resist temptation know how strong it is.

CS Lewis

Evolution seems to have struck a compromise, or perhaps just aggregated new systems on top of old. Homo sapiens are still tempted by food, but our oversized prefrontal cortices give us a limited ability to resist temptation. Not unlimited ability — our ancestors with too much willpower probably starved themselves to sacrifice to the gods, or failed to commit adultery one too many times.

Our limited willpower evolved to deal with ancestral temptations; it may not operate well against enticements beyond anything known to hunter-gatherers. Even where we successfully resist a superstimulus, it seems plausible that the effort required would deplete willpower much faster than resisting ancestral temptations.

MUSIC

When I am listening to certain pieces of music I feel a reverence creeping over me, an awe that has a spiritual quality. I do not see any contradiction between my agnosticism and my emotional reverence. I am a biological being subject to the same emotions and affinities as others

When I listen to music Something else happens. In the deep logic of the music, I sense a presence. My brain generates a mind state, a persona, and attributes it to the music. Not the mind of Mozart the man, but a kind of soul that invests that particular piece. The piece has a persona. It has a palpable spirit, and I feel as though I can have a personal relationship to that spirit.

The social, interpersonal, emotional machinery of my brain has been recruited. My brain is treating the music like a universe of complexity and investing that universe with its own deity, for whom I feel some measure of awe and reverence. My relationship to the music is, in the most fundamental sense, the same as a religious relationship to the real world.

In complexity, the human brain tends to see intentionality. We are after all social animals. We evolved to be social beings — to look at the complex pattern of behavior of others and infer a mind state, a personality, a persona. When we encounter complexity, the social machinery in the brain is engaged. It generates hypothetical mind states and intentions and attributes them to the complex entity. It is an automatic reaction. We can’t help the impulse.

MUSIC AND SHAMANISM

One of the most common shamanistic themes is the shaman’s supposed death and resurrection. This occurs in particular during his initiation. Often, the procedure is supposed to be performed by spirits who dismember the shaman and strip the flesh from his bones, then put him back together and revive him. In more than one way, this death and resurrection represents the shaman’s elevation above human nature.

First, the shaman dies so that he can rise above human nature on a quite literal level. After he has been dismembered by the initiatory spirits, they often replace his old organs with new, magical ones (the shaman dies to his profane self so that he can rise again as a new, sanctified, being). Second, by being reduced to his bones, the shaman experiences rebirth on a more symbolic level: in many hunting and herding societies, the bone represents the source of life, so reduction to a skeleton “is equivalent to re-entering the womb of this primordial life, that is, to a complete renewal, a mystical rebirth”.

Third, the shamanistic phenomenon of repeated death and resurrection also represents a transfiguration in other ways. The shaman dies not once but many times: having died during initiation and risen again with new powers, the shaman can send his spirit out of his body on errands; thus, his whole career consists of repeated deaths and resurrections. The shaman’s new ability to die and return to life shows that he is no longer bound by the laws of the super stimulus , particularly the law of death: “the ability to ‘die’ and come to life again […] denotes that [the shaman] has surpassed the human condition”.

Having risen above the human condition, the shaman is not bound by the flow of history. Therefore, he enjoys the conditions of the mythical age. In many myths, humans can speak with animals; and, after their initiations, many shamans claim to be able to communicate with animals. According to Eliade, this is one manifestation of the shaman’s return to “the illud tempus described to us by the paradisiac myths”. The shaman can descend to the underworld or ascend to heaven, often by climbing the World Tree, the cosmic pillar, the sacred ladder, or some other form of the axis mundi.

Often, the shaman will ascend to heaven to speak with the High God. Because the gods (particularly the High God, according to Eliade’s deus otiosus concept) were closer to humans during the mythical age, the shaman’s easy communication with the High God represents an abolition of history and a return to the mythical age . Because of his ability to communicate with the gods and descend to the land of the dead, the shaman frequently functions as a psychopomp and a medicine man.

The general nature of religion

Eliade is known for his attempt to find broad, cross-cultural parallels and unities in religion, particularly in myths.

In his discussion of sacred space, the author notes that sacred space is always considered the “really” real part of the universe, while non-sacred space is ambiguous and without structure. That is to say, the sacred is the solid, fixed point from which all else is oriented, while the non-sacred is a formless expanse without essence.

Given these descriptions, super stimulus is unlivable. It does not provide a context within which anything can be accomplished, because, as Eliade rightly notes, “

Nothing can begin, nothing can be done, without a previous orientation — and any orientation implies a fixed point”. As such, one never finds man living a completely existence only with superstimuli

The ephemeral super stimulus does not encompass and account for the totality of phase space. On the other hand the eternal can encompass and account for the superstimuli. If ultimate reality (the “really real” part of our existence) is sacred, it makes sense that profane aspects could also exist.

Eliade shows that sacred space is understood as a place where the eternal meets the temporal, where the divine dwells with the merely human.

Rather, sacred spaces are built on the model of the gods. In building a sacred place, man is emulated the creation of the world by the divine. This act is motivated by a desire to “take up his bode in objective reality” and escape the illusion and relativity of profane life.

Mankind is not making up creation stories with the construction of sacred spaces, we are emulating creation stories. In other words, our creation myths do not present a god who is the result of time and space; rather time and space are the result of creation. “The sacred reveals absolute reality and at the same time makes orientation possible; hence it founds the world in the sense that it fixes the limits and establishes the order of the world.” The profane simply cannot do this.

The sacred does not provide an escape from reality; it provides a return to reality. It is a door to the beginning of time, when man and gods lived together in peace and perfection. In entering the sacred, man longs to recover “the strong, fresh, pure world that existed in illo tempore” .

This existence is the really real and everything since the fall from the state has lacked its substance. We now live in the shadowlands, to quote Lewis again. As such, religious devotion is not an escape or an avoidance of reality, as Kant would have us believe, but rather the bold acceptance of reality. To enter into the sacred is to face the facts as they are. On the other hand, to try to live as if the world is only profane can much more rightly be called an avoidance of reality. It is the man who refuses to face the sacred who is the one trying to escape from what is really real.

Origin myths and sacred time: THE DREAMTiME

Eternal return and “Terror of history”

Eliade argues that traditional man attributes no value to the linear march of historical events: only the events of the mythical age have value. To give his own life value, traditional man performs myths and rituals. Because the Sacred’s essence lies only in the mythical age, only in the Sacred’s first appearance, any later appearance is actually the first appearance; by recounting or re-enacting mythical events, myths and rituals “re-actualize” those events. Eliade often uses the term “archetypes” to refer to the mythical models established by the Sacred, although Eliade’s use of the term should be distinguished from the use of the term in Jungian psychology.

Thus, argues Eliade, religious behavior does not only commemorate, but also participates in, sacred events:

In imitating the exemplary acts of a god or of a mythical hero, or simply by recounting their adventures, the man of an archaic society detaches himself from profane time and magically re-enters the Great Time, the sacred time.

TURN ME ON I’M A RADIO: RESONANCe

Music often transport us to where we first heard them or to a phase of life when they held an important place. Old feelings, old relationships, old situations are resurrected and made present through sound. As long as we continue to hear those songs — and each time we do — that bygone period is restored to vibrant immediacy.

music also serves as an intergenerational pathway, promoting a real or imagined sense of continuity between past and present. Songs known (or thought) to be deeply woven into the societal fabric bring us face to face with long-dead ancestors and with a world we did not inhabit but feel viscerally connected to.

And it bears reiterating that these musical sensations are not experienced simply as emotional memories, but as the past made present once more. On a practical level, this explains the regularity with which recurring repertoires are affixed to communal rituals, both religious and secular. Such music helps tie participants to the activity itself and to the flow of history in which similar activities have already occurred and will occur again.

Although this discussion of return implies endlessness, it is not a static process. As we have learned from countless time travel tales of popular fiction, inserting ourselves into events that have already taken place invariably introduces new elements and causes new variations, subtle and not-so-subtle. So it is with time relived on the pages of comic books, retold in rituals and contained in repeated songs. Each of us is a constantly changing accumulation of thoughts, feelings and experiences, and every time we return to the familiar — the eternal — we approach it from a different vantage point.

Far from discrediting the notion of timelessness, the changes precipitated when our current selves encounter the perpetual past can be understood as the dynamic anatomy of eternity. Without this potential for freshness, the eternal return would hardly be longed for.

Go to the profile of Ric Amurrio

Ric Amurrio

www.bravojohnson.com