Schrodinger’s Words Dialogue is Creation, On-chain is Manifestation

Words Dialogue Where Schrodinger's Creation Meets On-Chain Manifestation

Author: Feng Guangneng, Unorthodox Views

Language involves the inheritance of memory and the formation of collective memory. People establish connections with each other through language, and this connection can transcend time and space. For example, we can establish a connection with Heidegger through the language of “The Question Concerning Technology,” as well as with anyone who has read “The Question Concerning Technology.” In addition to establishing connections, language can also be used for free speech or to discuss matters. Sitting around a fireplace and reading books used to be a beautiful way of life, and similarly, discussing matters together, working together, and establishing connections while doing things together is an ancient tradition. However, in the context of globalization brought about by industrialization, both reading as a part of a good life and discussing matters as a part of an existing tradition have gradually been pushed to the edge of oblivion. The inability to speak freely and discuss matters is the biggest crisis that industrialization has brought to civilization.

01 “Exploitation” Narration as an Ideology

• Scroll Talk #1 Scroll and ZK Take the Journey Together
• The Crypto Influencer Drama: Bitmama and the Queen of Crypto
• From team-building vacations to ruthless layoffs Exposing the insider story of Poka’s layoffs, comparable to ‘The Hunger Games

Every grand narrative contains an ideology. According to Adorno, ideology is a “necessary social illusion.” It is a social consciousness that most people consider correct, but is actually incorrect.

Here, three aspects need to be noted: first, ideology is not just ordinary social consciousness, but a necessary social consciousness that is considered correct by most people, but is actually wrong. Second, our discussion and criticism of ideology always takes place within the ideology itself; we cannot escape ideology. What we can do is not to establish a correct ideology, but simply to reduce the errors of ideology, thus achieving improvement in society in this sense. Third, ideology is like the rules on a chessboard. As chess players, every move we make will affect the overall situation of the game, but it will not shake the rules of the chessboard, unless we start to reflect on and speak about the rules, exploring the purpose of the rules, not to overturn the chessboard, but to make the game more fun.

Ideology is diverse and is deposited in various grand narratives. This is the destiny we must bear. Many young people nowadays reject grand narratives and refuse any grand narrative, but this rejection itself is also a grand narrative, such as “all grand narratives are deceiving.”

Among the popular grand narratives today, the ones that need to be reflected on the most are the grand narratives about “exploitation,” which can be traced back to Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” and Marx’s “Capital.” Based on the analysis of the international situation of his time, Adam Smith discovered a simple rule: the more people engage in organized productive labor, the richer the country becomes, and vice versa. The reason is that the labor of non-productive workers (priests, doctors, writers, lawyers, actors, singers, dancers), regardless of their status, is transient and cannot be preserved. For example, once a table is produced, it can be exchanged and traded with others even after many years, but after a speech ends, there is no work left behind. Therefore, Adam Smith established a new value system based on stability, which highlights the value of productive labor and emphasizes the importance of a free market, private enterprise, and division of labor in achieving wealth through hard work and thrift. In this context, the scale of capital reflects the virtue of capitalists.

Karl Marx inherited Adam Smith’s distinction between productive and unproductive labor in “Capital,” but was surprised to find that hard work does not necessarily lead to wealth. The reason is that the wages paid by capitalists are often lower than the actual returns that workers deserve, and the growth of capital depends on the exploitation of labor by capitalists. Therefore, the scale of capital no longer reflects the virtue of capitalists, but rather their original sin.

The grand narrative of “exploitation” as an ideology is dangerous because it assumes the existence of an opposition between “exploiters” and “exploited.” The more it feels in line with reality, the more firmly this assumption is held, making it impossible to reveal many possible relationships. Ultimately, while it reveals the reality of injustice, it also makes reality more miserable.

We cannot understand economic issues in the globalized context with a peasant mindset. In the past, landlords were the typical profiteering class, and it seemed that overthrowing them and redistributing land could solve the problem of unfair distribution. But in fact, it did not. First, the peasant mindset is conservative and does not bring about institutional innovation. If the distribution system remains unchanged, new landlords will still come to power after the old ones are overthrown. Second, the peasant mindset is disconnected from the rapidly changing technological environment. In the past, landlords were visible, but today the flow of capital has become extremely concealed, and ordinary people who passively accept distribution are oblivious to it. However, a critical spirit is still essential. It’s just that our criticism is no longer directed at specific individuals, but rather outdated ideas, which should awaken, make people self-aware, and encourage introspection.

What we need to criticize are backward ideas. Everyone lives in history and has their own historicity, which is first and foremost manifested in the sedimentation of ideas because human behavior is governed by their ideas. Deep in everyone’s intent to the world, there are many sedimented ideas—some are good, capable of inspiring people to manifest their divinity, such as “making people around you feel comfortable,” “respecting others,” “suspending one’s own foresight,” “exercising beneficial to body and mind,” “doing things carefully step by step,” “caring about the demands of people around,” “actively establishing connections with people around,” “need to protect the environment and cherish resources,” “paying attention to details,” “seeking meaning in the world of life”; some are evil and bring out people’s demonic nature, such as “the rule of this world is that a few exploit the majority,” “only by exploiting others can one gain more game chips,” “this society is just an exploitative society, if you don’t exploit others, you will only be exploited by others,” “reality is so cruel, talking about ideals is meaningless”; some ideas are neither good nor evil and belong to the private domain.

In our era, overcapacity has long been an issue. Originally, everyone had the potential to actively explore the possibilities of life, making it more interesting and dignified for all, but due to the existence of these evil ideas, the discussion of a new order has become incredibly difficult. The crucial concept of common sense, which is essential for discussing public affairs, is instead overshadowed by these evil ideas and is almost impossible to be brought up in conversations. For example, “this world can be a place where people love, understand, and inspire each other,” “the trend of the times depends on everyone’s choices,” “liberating our thoughts is the most noble cause,” “making money is not the ultimate goal, but pursuing a better life is,” “many public welfare projects are simply impossible to profit from within the framework of industrial civilization,” “a good society should ensure that everyone can live a happy life”… Some individuals, due to their evil ideas, have even benefited from the current environment and consider these common-sense ideas as nonsense.

However, criticism is extremely difficult. The reason is that people often prefer to display their divinity, speak out about good ideas, and avoid discussing evil ideas, but deep down they strongly believe in them. They may even be indifferent when they hear criticism of these ideas, as long as they don’t express them outwardly. As a result, their own thoughts are shackled by these evil ideas, preventing them from seeing a broader world. In the age of technological advancement, the rules of the game need to constantly change in order to adapt to new environments and to enable everyone to gradually live a better life. Since being together is the basic way of human existence, it is essential to help those around us as much as possible, especially by liberating their thoughts. This is the premise for our own happiness. In ancient Rome, slave owners would spend their days playing with slaves, and eventually, their thoughts and interests became assimilated with the slaves’. On the other hand, at the Royal Society in England, everyone had their own pursuits and engaged in active competition and mutual inspiration, resulting in a large number of immortal scientists.

Due to the difficulty of criticism, evil ideas sometimes become deeply ingrained, leading to the complete dissolution of public life. People who hold evil ideas are unable to sincerely discuss public affairs due to a lack of reflection on their own beliefs. Instead, they constantly hinder discussions about public affairs and even believe that they are doing something remarkable, which is absurd. At the same time, these evil ideas can appear self-evident in a narrow context and spread very quickly, turning society into a battlefield of intrigue. Furthermore, some local government officials may be influenced by these ideas if they have a limited education and a narrow outlook, thereby being unable to see the true path of governance. This not only hinders the development of the region but also worsens the local order.

In the new global context, the harm of the “exploitation” narrative is that it opens up a game of “dodgeball” to avoid the signifier, making people more focused on covering up rather than reflecting on those evil ideas. There is no doubt that the plight of the lower class is visible to all. If the living conditions of the lower class improve, then the middle class does not have to worry about social descent, and social inequalities can be improved, allowing everyone to have more energy and time to explore the meaning of life. As the exploited, it is reasonable for the lower class to make demands to society, but they do not receive substantial responses. Instead, the lower class can only hear all kinds of stories. Whether it is “exploiters,” “capitalists,” “entrepreneurs,” or “politicians,” they actually point to an abstract community, not specific individuals who can take responsibility.

In fact, in modern industrial civilization, it is possible that each person plays the role of the “exploitative class” to some extent within their respective fields, forming a pattern of layer upon layer of exploitation and mutual defense.

In the long run, both the exploitative class and the social lower class are doomed to be forgotten by history, all in vain.

02 An Era Without Public Life

The key to the problem lies in the fact that the context of “exploitation” presupposes the existence of the “exploitative class” in ideas.

In actual situations, according to Adam Smith’s distinction between productive and unproductive labor, anyone who does not engage in productive labor has already become to some extent part of the exploitative class, only that some people benefit more while others benefit less. The exploitative class and the lower class are not only not in opposition but may also have a high degree of overlap. For example, a contractor may be both part of the social lower class and a member of the exploitative class that consumes the profits of his employees, while also being someone who is exploited by their superiors.

If the concept of the exploitative class already exists in the lower class’s understanding and the narrative of “exploitation” becomes the accepted core narrative, then the issue for the exploited is not about reforming the system or accepting a more complex reality but rather trying to become a member of the exploitative class in order to constantly increase their own freedom. Each social class can only accommodate a limited number of people, and if the demand exceeds the supply, and there’s no one making cakes, then the vicious competition of internal competition cannot be avoided. At the same time, the development of human civilization is a process of realizing a possible world that is a common intention. If only a few people think about a better possible world and the majority cannot escape the narrative of exploitation in their ideas, then no matter how beautiful the possible world is, it is difficult to form a consensus among everyone. The reality will continue to maintain the structure of “exploiter-exploited,” which is accompanied by a lot of internal fighting, internal consumption, spinning wheels, and waste, ultimately causing everyone to be in an unhappy state.

In modern society, the absurdity of human plight becomes increasingly apparent. With the continuous development of the industrial revolution, social material production capacity has already exceeded demand. For the entire human civilization, solving necessary tasks has become unprecedentedly easy. However, internal conflicts and idleness within human civilization have also become remarkably prominent. The result is surprisingly tragic for both the profit-seeking class and the laborers: the laborers struggle in the system and then seek stimulation frantically after work, such as watching short videos to decompress; the profit-seeking class, once they attain so-called “freedom,” often do not automatically become speakers and actors. They do not take the initiative to care about public affairs; all they do is skillfully play dodgeball or stop believing in love, while still maintaining a frugal lifestyle. At the same time, they diligently teach future generations in the mindset of doing good for future generations, guiding them to master what they consider to be the game rules and strategies of the profit-seeking class.

On the surface, it seems that everyone is striving for a better life through “struggle.” However, the way of struggling is filled with intrigue, playing games, internal conflicts, calculations against each other, and layer upon layer of exploitation. The result is that every individual is limited by their own thoughts, unable to see new possibilities and find their true pursuit of life’s ideals. They are trapped in the prison of their own thoughts; this is a fundamental dilemma. Moreover, the skill of exploitation (such as telling ghost stories, using the carrot and stick approach, using debt as a driving force…) can perpetually circulate. The more a person manages related skills, the more proficient they become, and the more dependency they develop. They may even gradually feel proud and joyful about their exquisite skills, believing that they have “efficient management.” At the same time, the growth of the exploited is the process of learning related skills. These micro-level skill transmission mechanisms are distributed throughout society like capillaries, slowly making the majority of people in this society both exploiters and the exploited.

The tragic aspect is that limitations on oneself are paralleled by limitations on others. As I impose limitations on others, others also impose limitations on me. If our thoughts are not liberated, then the entire society will be plagued by excessive mutual restraints.

After becoming prosperous, the profit-seeking class seems to be able to buy anything. However, the public domain of human civilization has almost collapsed, while the technological environment becomes increasingly systematized. Industrial civilization is developing in an accelerating yet unsustainable manner. Modern billionaires are able to become gossip headlines, but they can hardly enjoy public life, the joy of discussing public affairs, or the possibility of reversing the era and completing messianic actions. Glory and immortality have become a distant past.

In turn, some intellectuals who are brave enough to voice their opinions, attempt to discuss public affairs, and try to make society better, may not have much money in their pockets and may be labeled with names like “public intellectuals”, “stinky old nine”, or “what do you care about national affairs?”. In this context, if an intellectual has not been scolded or mistreated, then they are definitely not qualified intellectuals.

It can be observed that in the grand narrative of “exploitation”, the privileged class tells ghost stories while playing dodgeball, intellectuals continue to be criticized, and the exploited lower class struggles desperately, but only to improve their social status and become a member of the privileged class. This grand narrative brings about a vicious cycle, which leads to a situation where even though our productivity is already in excess, no one in society is happy, the lower class is still suffering and lacking dignity, the privileged class can only secretly enjoy themselves, unable to attain glory, and intellectuals yearning for recognition continue to be criticized. Despite making significant efforts, their work seems endless, because all narratives about possible worlds are considered irrelevant stories rather than stories waiting to be realized. For example, when discussing public affairs, consensus is often built not on rational discussion, but on the basis of “we are all ‘rule-makers'” in order to gain a sense of trust and security. Conversely, no matter how specific, practical, and wonderful one’s vision is described, if a mechanism to generate profit is not provided, it often becomes a fruitless discussion. Because “wonderful” has become synonymous with “wealthy”.

The narrative of “exploitation” is not only highly exclusive but also destroys the basic trust between people. In the process of conversation, everyone has to worry about whether the other person is trying to deceive them. Once the lower class accepts the narrative of “exploitation”, every rich person and even intellectuals in their eyes become potential exploiters, causing them to inexplicably attack those around them who are living well. This also makes it difficult for them to accept any other narratives and see new possibilities. The reason is that compared to the heavy memories of pain inflicted on the soul and body, the light emanating from the elusive and beautiful life seems too dazzling.

There is no doubt that the memory of “exploitation” has long been deposited in the marrow of many modern people. This painful memory, like maggots in the bone, makes everyone unwilling to mention it yet unable to forget. Therefore, the grand narrative of “exploitation” has unconsciously dominated the behavior of most modern people as an ideology. This actually makes it difficult for modern people to negotiate public affairs, engage in active dialogue, and initiate a new order in the era of excess productivity. In this sense, opening up a new civilization, embracing a new order requires the effort of every modern individual to ferment history into wine and plant flowers on the edge of the cliff.

This effort is first and foremost a mental effort, a verbal effort, requiring us to face the unowned debt and debt dynamics structure that is precipitated in our intended lives, actively embracing the possibilities of existence provided by modern technological conditions, and then learning to accept and forget.

03 Verbalization and Creation

In Heidegger’s view, language is the home of existence. Harari would think that humans are storytelling animals, creating imaginative communities through stories. This actually means that verbal activities have always been creative activities. We create possible worlds through verbalization, and the various civilizations of humanity’s journey to the future are the processes of realizing their respective common possible worlds.

As a creative activity, there is no distinction between true and false intentions in verbalization, but rather a difference between emptiness and fulfillment. If a person says, “I want to read 100 books,” and if he hasn’t read them, this statement is not false but rather empty because he may still fulfill this statement in the future. Even if he says, “I want to read 100 books within a year,” and then he doesn’t complete this task after a year, not even reading a single book, his statement is still not a falsehood but rather empty words, words without fulfillment, and this statement loses the possibility of fulfillment. This means that although he didn’t do the act of reading books, the intention he once expressed, “I want to read 100 books within a year,” is still true, that determination is still true, and this intention may inspire people around him to read books. After a year, the people around him discover that he hasn’t read any books, so they feel that he didn’t keep his promise and no longer trust him, but they have already been inspired by this person to read books. If this person’s initial intention was to arouse the desire for reading in people around him and were prepared to be distrusted, then he is still a genuine person.

The reality of a story is reflected in the fact that the story, as a constantly fulfillable possible world, is open to everyone. For example, Karl Marx’s description of communism (in fact, the translation of “communism” is problematic, it should be translated as “publicism,” making public life the core concern. And “communism” implies a certain concept of “production-oriented” or “production-obsessed,” but in an age of overproduction, people no longer need to produce collectively, production is just one type of public affairs.) society, when everyone has surplus production capacity, they can pursue comprehensive development based on their understanding of the whole world, and such an ideal is neither true nor false, it is simply not yet fulfilled, so it has not been achieved. We can continuously fulfill this ideal through verbalization and action, and in this process, showcase our excellence.

In the narrative of “exploitation,” we find that the structure of events precedes our judgment of conformity and governs our choices, but the structure of events is often unnoticed by people. Many people believe that the narrative of “exploitation” is in line with reality, and this belief allows them to become trapped in the structure of this event. In this structure, the roles they can choose are either the exploited or the exploiters, and they can never transcend it. At the same time, this narrative is so applicable to the actual experiences of modern people, so easy to believe, that it has become a deep-rooted ideology. Consequently, the behavioral choices of the majority of modern people are also governed by this ideology, ultimately reinforcing this ideology and making social innovation increasingly difficult. Because compared to systematically reflecting on the entire era, whether it’s playing dodgeball or working hard to climb a step up, they initially appear to be much easier, much more steadfast. However, if more and more people join the game of dodgeball or become entangled in internal competition, without negotiating public affairs, the crises of the entire civilization accumulate, and the ultimate result is that no one can live an easy life.

So, we discovered the quantum effect of words: as a creation activity, speech can either open up a better world or strengthen the flaws of the old world.

To highlight the importance of this effect, let’s borrow from “Schrodinger’s Cat” and create the concept of “Schrodinger’s words.” In a box containing radium and cyanide, the cat’s state is a superposition of the possibilities of being alive or dead. Only by opening the box can we know whether the cat is alive or dead. Similarly, in any story we try to tell, whether this possible world will guide the real world towards improvement or deterioration is unpredictable.

Of course, the possibilities overlaid in a story are more diverse because each listener responds to the story from their own standpoint and circumstances. Good stories always continue to unfold continuously. This also means that as storytellers, we need to remain humble and learn to take responsibility for our speech, and reflect continuously and deeply on the structure of the story. If the story is told well, we become the gods who illuminate the world; if it is told poorly, we become the demons who confuse people’s minds. Whether god or demon, we can only know after telling the story. This is the duality of god and demon that we have as storytellers.

04 Flower and Dagger

As a digital nomad, I frequently organize book clubs and have slowly gotten to know many new friends. Everyone loves to chat. When I was chatting with Xiao Guo, he shared with me a piece of artwork that he really likes – “Flower and Dagger,” also known as “Washington Flower Girl.” The painting depicts a historical moment on October 21, 1967, when 17-year-old American girl, Jane Rose, used flowers to stand against guns and daggers during an anti-war protest in Washington. It is a very simple picture, but it left a strong and unforgettable impact on me.

Image Source: Wikipedia

In this age of advanced information and news, we have long realized that war is often a means of diverting social contradictions. However, in modern civilization, the cost and uncertainty of starting a war have greatly increased. At the same time, everyone’s hearts feel heavy when confronted with the polarization of wealth, as well as various problems such as financial bubbles, societal rigidity, and populism. When we condemn Keynesianism and condemn companies that run away with money after going public, we feel lost and homeless. It is clear that industrial civilization has already produced excess capacity, yet there is still a plethora of conflicts and oppositions in society, with people guarding against and defending themselves from each other, leaving no room for negotiation on public affairs.

According to Mangford’s point of view, dialogue is the highest form of city life. The reason for this is that we first live in a possible world brought about by dialogue, and in each possible world we play a role of our own, such as a cry of “disgrace”, which brings about a story about a beauty and a pervert. The so-called “real identity” is actually our identity in a world that is most closely coupled with technical environment, and this identity is the lowest because it cannot be further realized. On the other hand, some “ideal identities” such as minstrels, shamans, gods, buddhas, bodhisattvas, immortals, real people, and lovers, are more noble because they bring about completely new possible worlds and can illuminate our “reality”.

The so-called negotiation of public affairs is actually to speak freely about various possible worlds based on the conditions of the present. However, in a repressive social atmosphere, people with leisure time do not automatically take on the responsibility of thinking about possible worlds, and do not actively negotiate public affairs in the process of dialogue because they do not know where to start, instead making the originally repressive mood even more oppressive.

Even so, if we still hope to live a better life, we still need to cherish every opportunity for dialogue, and in the process of dialogue, strive to express our best understanding, express the understanding that has been integrated into our lives, and give “flowers” to every listener. On the other hand, if we are still dominated by “exploitative” narratives, trying to answer questions that are destined to have no answers, we can only fall into long-lasting confusion, because opening the future means realizing possible worlds, so the more “realistic” the story, the more impossible it is to open the future.

Everyone lives in history, and everyone cannot escape their own historicity in their speech. And “exploitative” narratives have long since settled in the depths of our consciousness. It is very likely that we think we are speaking very sincerely, but unconsciously, our speech activities still consolidate the stale order. For example, we living in industrial civilization, we like to focus on operability, efficiency, measurability, evaluability, and the conclusion of dialogue… These actually belong to what Habermas called instrumental rationality. At the same time, because instrumental rationality is most compatible with the logic of work in the industrial era, we often immerse ourselves in instrumental rationality and forget about communicative rationality. In the process of dialogue, even if we have attached importance to cooperation, negotiation, tolerance and other basic principles, the final negotiated solution is still given in accordance with instrumental rationality. If we are not aware that every word we say actually contains very profound intentionality, then we may underestimate the difficulty of liberating our thoughts and overestimate the quality of our speech content.

The reason why I like to start book clubs is because I believe that books are the most beautiful flowers, and the intentionality of texts is the most clear. They are also the most likely resources to break through the “exploitative” narrative. Each book embodies the author’s hard work, especially academic books, such as “Oxford General Reader”, “Sanlian Book Series”, “History Hall Series”, “Oracle Bone Script Series”, “Fifteen Lectures by Famous Scholars”, “Science Classic Series”, “Han Translations of World Academic Classics”…

Undoubtedly, these books may seem specialized and not very interesting to most readers, and even a bit difficult. However, in terms of liberating thinking, establishing sound rationality, and enriching our intentionality, reading these books is the most direct and effective way. Conversely, if we lack the courage to read these books, it will be difficult for us to rise above the heavy history, and the authors’ hard work will be wasted.

05 Will be recorded on the blockchain

Previously, Brother Hao proposed the idea of “recording commitments on the blockchain,” attempting to create a trust mechanism by leveraging the decentralization and immutability features of blockchain, and trying to awaken long-termism through this mechanism. This idea inspired me a lot, and I was thinking, perhaps “recording achievements on the blockchain” can inspire everyone’s enthusiasm for reading academic books.

Clearly, reading academic books, immersing oneself in them, understanding the author’s thoughts, expressing one’s own insights in the public domain, and constantly creating beauty and good conduct is a matter full of glory. It fully demonstrates a person’s wisdom and charm.

And for everyone who is not used to reading academic books, the process of learning to read is an interesting journey. In this process, everyone will experience many “firsts”: the first time reconstructing the argument structure of a paragraph, the first time suspending one’s own preconceptions, the first time carefully reading footnotes and endnotes, the first time grasping the relationship between paragraphs and the main theme of an article, the first time entering an author’s world of thoughts, the first time experiencing the realm of existence, the first time engaging in in-depth dialogue with a distant or even deceased author, the first time debating with friends, the first time exploring public affairs from a perspective of complexity, the first time understanding the relationship between expressing ideas and immortality, the first time having the urge to keep a book, the first time developing a strong curiosity about certain issues, the first time experiencing the freedom of thought, the first time developing the thoughts of predecessors on the basis of their inheritance…

If we seriously read some well-written academic books, it is possible to resonate with the authors’ thoughts and find a sense of belonging and a new perspective on the world in our thoughts. The experience of reading a book together is also beautiful. It allows the participants to establish a dialogue and exchange of ideas at a profound level, forming a deep consensus. Of course, we shouldn’t approach this with the purpose of seeking consensus, as the act of reading together itself is enough as a purpose in life. Coming together, starting from reliable texts, opening up topics, and then freely exchanging ideas, fully showcasing our uniqueness and highlighting our differences, and understanding deeper unity in the process of discussing differences, is in itself a wonderful way of life.

In addition, by replaying, discussing, and recording many things that happen during the reading club process, we can extract some highlights. These highlights can be recorded in writing or can be immortalized through blockchain technology as an unalterable public memory of community development. In this way, offline community development is connected with the online digital city.

The immutability itself is sacred because it means the immortality of reputation, unless the entire community is forgotten. As long as the community continues to attract newcomers and there are people maintaining it, the remarkable achievements of the predecessors will continue to illuminate the future generations, inspiring them to follow and emulate.

We will continue to update Blocking; if you have any questions or suggestions, please contact us!