Posted by RoTtEn ApPlE on March 27, 2001 at 17:04:19:
In Reply to: Re: Visual Types for ^(oo)^ posted by isaactheblue on March 27, 2001 at 16:36:11:
: : You raise an interesting question to me: Which "geometrical figures" (Platonic "absolute forms?") representing the nature of a type are universal (though slightly fortifiable, I suppose, in consideration of individuality)? My current view: probably none of them, though the majority of them should apply in order for one to be referred to as a particular type
: : : O.K.... so no, I can't imagine there is an ABSOLUTE or simple shape/form for type... but I do think there are visual-spatial themes for each type.
: this is one of those situations where the thing you're ascribing to the type has at least as much to do with your perception of the abstraction as it has to do with the type. ie, a beanbag chair seems to fit with type 9 because you associate it with 9ish things. it may be that most people make that association, sure, but if we were to try to explain that to people who use slightly smaller heavier beanbag chairs as weapons, they'd be quite befuddled. now that i'm re-reading what i quoted, it looks like we might agree, since you specifically mentioned that there is no absolute. :)
I was using the beanbag chair as a simile for the non-symbolic impression in my mind. Don't tell me you're a left-brained thinker, Isaac? Most the abstractions in my mind ARE sense oriented and grow out of physical properties such as mass, weight, motion, density... they are suggestive and indefinite... and only communicate a SENSE of the PURE abstraction that can't be understood or communicated without some kind of reference to reality. Ha! I just had a thought cascade... something for later.
: it's neat to do this sort of thing arbitrarily, and bend your mind into new associations. imagine we ascribed colors to each number...
: 1 violet
: 2 magenta
: 3 red
: 4 deep purple
: 5 blue
: 6 green
: 7 yellow
: 8 cyan
: 9 black
: and, instead of numbers, we just used these colors to specify the types. it might not seem that some of these colors don't fit, and others do. however, if you just started using these colors, then suddenly blue things would take on a 5ish characteristic in your mind. if someone were to start talking about color associations and egram types, and it was a different system, then there'd be a tendency for us to call him "wrong," when really it's completely arbitrary.
Yeah, ofcourse... people frequently mistake the symbol for the concept and vice versa. Color is particularly part of the cultural context which makes communication of abstractions particularly difficult. Language has the same limitations. Not to mention the fact that not everyone has a good, old fashioned compartmentalized mind!
I think the key to communicating visual abstractions is to use a symbol system that's universal to the human experience... which would be PHYSICS.