Balancing interval and intensity to optimise novelty.
PFH wrote, in his blog post "Hunger and Satiety":
"
.....
Similarly in music. The statement of the tonic, or of a melodic theme, whets the appetite for its repetition. Music ends when the tonic is stated with sufficient force that we are satiated, and when all themes have been sufficiently repeated.
......"
PFH; Logarithmic
I suggest:
The first time, the stimulus is random.
The second time, it's noteworthy as potentially predictable. We form a theory of pattern and begin to test by observing and waiting for repetition.
The third time, it's confirmation of a pattern - recognition.
The fourth time, it's re-enforcement.
The fifth time, it's a given. Fourth or fifth recurrence is when variations may be introduced to avoid boredom.
The more familiar a musical phrase or story character is, the more predictable and less fraught with possibility they are. Complications must beset the lead characters, or variants of the musical phrase must be introduced to sustain tension and interest. Some characters or musical elements are essentially constant. They serve as medium through or a framework on which we experience more novel occurrences. New flavour varieties for familiar products are classic examples of variant introduction.
As individuals, and as a culture, we deliberately set up rare and novel experiences that we can use to give ourselves pleasure at viable intervals. (Note that pleasures we have ready access to are limited in the duration and frequency with which we can enjoy them. Variety is necessary not only for maintaining intellectual interest but because of our essential physical limitations.) Someone whose intention it is to contrive a situation in which recurrence of recognisable stimuli is optimised to sustain interest will have to use a balance of interval against intensity.
I hold that recognition is pleasurable partly because recognition is a survival advantage.
Recognition Rewarded (old post of mine)
People who can easily achieve and sustain intense pleasure a long period are less likely to strive. Decreased striving is a survival and cultural disadvantage, so it behhoves us to quickly tire of easy pleasure and strive for more intense or novel sensations.
So it's a survival advantage to be a little bit kinky.;-)
"
.....
Similarly in music. The statement of the tonic, or of a melodic theme, whets the appetite for its repetition. Music ends when the tonic is stated with sufficient force that we are satiated, and when all themes have been sufficiently repeated.
......"
PFH; Logarithmic
I suggest:
The first time, the stimulus is random.
The second time, it's noteworthy as potentially predictable. We form a theory of pattern and begin to test by observing and waiting for repetition.
The third time, it's confirmation of a pattern - recognition.
The fourth time, it's re-enforcement.
The fifth time, it's a given. Fourth or fifth recurrence is when variations may be introduced to avoid boredom.
The more familiar a musical phrase or story character is, the more predictable and less fraught with possibility they are. Complications must beset the lead characters, or variants of the musical phrase must be introduced to sustain tension and interest. Some characters or musical elements are essentially constant. They serve as medium through or a framework on which we experience more novel occurrences. New flavour varieties for familiar products are classic examples of variant introduction.
As individuals, and as a culture, we deliberately set up rare and novel experiences that we can use to give ourselves pleasure at viable intervals. (Note that pleasures we have ready access to are limited in the duration and frequency with which we can enjoy them. Variety is necessary not only for maintaining intellectual interest but because of our essential physical limitations.) Someone whose intention it is to contrive a situation in which recurrence of recognisable stimuli is optimised to sustain interest will have to use a balance of interval against intensity.
I hold that recognition is pleasurable partly because recognition is a survival advantage.
Recognition Rewarded (old post of mine)
People who can easily achieve and sustain intense pleasure a long period are less likely to strive. Decreased striving is a survival and cultural disadvantage, so it behhoves us to quickly tire of easy pleasure and strive for more intense or novel sensations.
So it's a survival advantage to be a little bit kinky.;-)
posted by Jac | 10:15 pm
5 Comments:
I think you are totally right with your last reasoning (where do you get all this from?), and the (possibly genetically inherited) “constantly-looking-for-new-sensations” may be one of clues for our species happiness, making it at the same time one of the main forces for our evolution (if not the main one).
It is a coincidence, but just yesterday I read a thought from Krishnamurti where he implied that the path to true happiness was not in achieving goals but in the learning process that leads to them. He seemed to stress the idea of learning as the ultimate goal itself.
... this is an interesting thought, it seems that after all, we are only learning machines..., this new fact made my day!!
I have no evidence that we are more than 'learning machines'. This does not mean that I do not believe that we are 'real'. Is it that what qualifies us to have a soul is our individual perception that we do? Or is a soul a social construct bestowed on us by the perception of others? As a metaphysical thing, it could be formed or shaped by other souls, I suppose.
In any case, soul or no, what we experience is real. I acknowledge the immutability of our physical reality, but I, like everyone, live slightly elsewhere - in my perception of that reality. Joy. Pain. Hope. Fear. All real. All deserving of empathy and compassion.
I appreciate Bhuddist (I think) ideas which suggest that suffering can be alleviated by training ourselves not to want for things we don't have. Minimising suffering whilst still striving for wisely selected objectives is key, I believe.
Your last line about striving resonates with something I have been aware of for some time: I am too prone to be content. I adjust my expectations to whatever my circumstanes may be and as long as I can fulfil basic needs (food, shelter, friendship) I am content with them.
Of course in a biological sense this is fine. But in a sociological sense it puts me well behind in the rat race. I enjoy basic things so much that I lack that ambition for more complex and difficult things.
Almost lunchtime... what fun!
You say you are aware that you are "too prone to be content". Is this something that you feel uneasy about your own self, or a judgement you believe that our culture might cast on you?
If you have energy enough to support yourself and sense enough to make provision for your future, I envy you your serenity. I certainly envy you your ability to be enthused by toast. :-)
A lot of it comes from me assuming concerns my culture may have over how I operate. Some of it however comes from me - I would like to have some of those things I am expected to have or do as a person of my age.
There is also the observation on my part that in the short term my contentedness is advantageous but in the long term it may be disadvantageous.
Lest this message seems to gloomy I should say that I do make incremental improvements in my life but it is a geologically slow process!
Post a Comment
<< Home