“reality is what you make it.”

“it’s not what you know, it’s what you can prove.”

these kind of statements stick with me when I hear them, largely because they’re true. if you can control what people perceive, in a way, you’re controlling their reality.

now, you’re not necessarily changing, like, The Forms or anything like that. rather, you’re tinkering with people senses — what they see, hear, maybe smell and taste — and you’re using that to paint a perceivable experience.

many people may read this and think, “hmm, that sounds awfully manipulative”, and that’s correct. it does sound like that because it is that. it sounds manipulative because it is, in a very literal sense.

but it doesn’t always have to be bad! what if we gaslight people into being a better version of themselves? what if we manipulated the senses in a way that increases the quality of one’s life?

there’s perhaps an argument that could be made that says this is exactly what good art does. it captures attention in the form of sensory allocation and manipulates that attention in a such a way as to provide an artistic experience.

perhaps you add some pepper in a recipe to capture people’s nostrils. or paint a section of canvas with red to draw attention to that piece of the composition. these are both forms of sensory manipulation, yes? but are they necessarily bad? me thinks not so!

how much does intent count? to what degree do means justify the ends? “it depends” we all might say, in relative agreement. and I guess it does. who, what, where, how, why, when, and more.

another question while I’m here: can you take action without judgment? where exactly does judgment fall in the hierarchy of cognitive processes? can you take dispassionate action on something? can you execute without the need to say “this is good!” or “this is bad!”?

I don’t have an answer. think about it.