4 minute read

[2022-04-14 Thu 14:47] - 8018

Over the past few days, I’ve gradually decided that I will be pursuing rhetoric as well in a considerably organic manner. This involves really testing out the dogmas for myself and not falling prey to any rules of thumb, adopting them only if I truly understand them.

I have recently (right now) restructured my creation strategy for YouTube and my blog to a more cohesive one: both elevate both : the combination of the two is greater than their individual sum.

Consequently, I chanced upon the idea of not proclaiming my ideas before hand but rather developing some context around it and then presenting the “word”.

Hitherto, my video titles have words that have other mental signs that they convey and irrespective of my intentions, that manipulates the viewer’s mindset even before getting to the crux of my video.

I believe that, now, I’m venturing into methods of presenting information in a certain way: it’s not just writing or making videos. Instead, I’m learning how humans interact with content in general.

This, I believe has been possible because I refuse to use pictures and videos in my content creation pursuit. That allows me to really understand what I’m generating and how people react to it. In the other case, people would react in ways that I could not attribute my efforts to. This is where social media falters - it allows us to share via a medium that we only really vaguely understand - the content inheriting this characteristic.

This is the difference between a self-portrait and a selfie. Semantically, they’re the same. In terms of the intent and effort needed to get there though - not so much.

I feel like I’m finally getting into a generic domain that hasn’t been formalized before. It is the intersection of many a subjects and I’m really getting into the unexpressed details of the same. Unexpressed mind you, not unexperienced1.

This also fits in well with my new approach to rhetoric: present the abstraction before naming it.

In all my observations, a few aspects are “givens” : empiricism, perspectivism, and the likes.

I have already initialized a stream of The Theory of Agnostic Perspectivism (the TAP, henceforth) and that will be my base domain : the one that all draw upon - the given, the obvious, the redundant.

Therefore, as much as I wish to insert these etymological roots into the neologisms I coin, for the sake of succinctness I declare them to be a sub-domain of the TAP.

Now that I’m done with the meta-updates: Neosociosophy2 is the novel societal wisdom obtained by interacting with people and society in general, observing them and having a good time with them. I’m currently reading “The Crowd” by Gustave Le Bon and have noticed that some base wisdom about the crowd stays the same over the years but a lot of it is very dynamic and adapts to the current scenario. While observing the crowd over a large period of time is good for drawing generic - albeit static - insight, one also needs to be able to adapt their wisdom according to a vast array of current scenarios.

If you feel like this post shouldn’t have been named so, I’d like to let you know that this exact experienced - but unexpressed - abstraction led me to ditch the conventional approach to rhetoric and try and find my own style regarding the same.

Note that neosociosophy not just wisdom about the crowds but also the dynamic insight it offers when interacted with - it is also about the wisdom of the crowds.

I feel like I’ve found my way of presenting what goes on in my mind, and I’m enjoying it.

  1. FIOAN : inexperienced refers to the lack of experiences of the one experiencing stuff but unexperienced refers to a particular experience not being experienced by the one experiencing stuff. 

  2. FIOAN 

Leave a comment