Boring

What causes the mind to feel that an experience is boring?

Why do some individuals find more situations boring, than others?

Pretty much everyone feels it at some times or another, and some people are more inclined to feel it more easily. But why does a lack of significant activity cause such a negative feeling of boredom? Boredom could be described as; the sense of lack of, yet desire for more, entertainment and interest. 

Perhaps a simple explanation is that the mind feels boredom as a negative aspect, because it desires the perception of more positive. If the mind is steered, in a way, by instinct and subconscious, and a major component is neurochemical reinforcement, then it seems to make sense that the mind strives for more positive reinforcement. This striving is likely similar to the concept of addiction (more detail, here; Addiction Affliction), and in some cases, chronic boredom could even be a case of addiction to entertainment. But what would cause some individuals to experience boredom more often, or to a more extreme degree?

Considering addiction as an example, certain individuals would likely have a pre-existing disposition to crave positive reinforcement more often from certain experiences which cause that reinforcement. 1 person might naturally crave positive reinforcement from mental stimulation of interest of learning or understanding, while another person might feel more positive reinforcement from resting, relaxing, or simple sensory perception (such as viewing art/ scenery, or listening to music). By this understanding, certain people would become much more bored than others, depending on their environment and circumstances. 

Overall mental function would likely be another significant factor. Whether a mind functions more on a subconscious or conscious basis, would likely play a large role in which scenarios would cause boredom. In my last post; Static State Stimulate I compared the likely differences between the subconscious and conscious mind at times when the environment is static, with little stimulation. It seems likely that a subconscious mind (such as an animal) can more easily remain in a low neurological activity state, when there is no stimulation (including instinctual drives, such as hunger). 

A conscious mind on the other hand, has much more potential for connections between details in memories, and therein more probability for continued high neural activity. With so many connections between aspects saved in memory, the mind will often continue thinking in a static environment. With ongoing neural activity, perhaps the mind often moves to memories of various past experiences involving positive aspects. If memories involving positive reinforcement are accessed, naturally the individual will desire to experience that again. Even though the thought process is conscious, this can still trigger a subconscious desire (besides conscious desire), if the person is unaware of which aspect of memory triggered the desire. This desire for an experience involving more positive reinforcement than current circumstances are causing, should be a good explanation for common boredom. 

There seems to be a spectrum of probability and degree that an individual will feel bored. This can be based on natural drive to receive positive reinforcement based on certain experiences, but also the basic function of the mind, and the capability or typical process to continue thinking while in a static environment. With continued memory access, may come positive memories and the drive to re-experience something less; Boring. 

Static State Stimulate

What does an animal think about? What stimulates the mind's next thought, when it’s in a static state? 

The answer to this question, may be very different depending on the mind’s function capability at the time. If the mind is conscious (such as an aware person), it can often continue actively thinking, but if subconscious (such as most animals or a low-active-minded person), it will likely stay mostly unchanging until it receives stimulation. 

A brain in a subconscious state functions mainly on reacting to anything which triggers it from its sensory perception. This includes sensing anything in its exterior surroundings, or sensing changes within the body. As a basic function, the subconscious will react to any sensory stimulus based on whatever resembling factor (thing/concept etc) is recognised in memory. Once something is sensed, the brain accesses neurons of something similar, and triggers a reaction to avoid or pursue (if nothing in subconscious memory is similar, it will likely be triggered by instincts). With this function of few factors saved and accessed in memory during perception (more detail in a recent post; Terms of Short-Term Memory), there is no mechanism to continue accessing memories, once in a static state.

For eg, when my dog is laying on the bed in the evening, such as now, he does seem to often lay there while awake, in a nearly mind-blank state, until a sight or sound triggers his subconscious, or until he easily drifts off to sleep. As long as he is fed, exercised etc. his instincts won't trigger him to pursue anything, and his environment won't trigger his subconscious. You can likely achieve a similar experience, when tired and basically not thinking of anything, or perhaps trying to force yourself to think of nothing and go “mind-blank” for a few seconds. On the other hand, in normal conditions, if I sit for a short period with no stimulus, my mind will start to “wonder” as I think of something recently on my mind, or start to actively think of something to keep my mind busy, out of boredom.

A mind with conscious capability can be stimulated by previously saved memories, to continue accessing memories (ie conscious thought). In a recent post; Conscious Memorability, I explored how conscious thought processes cause connections between factors saved in memory, which allows someone to remember recent past experiences much more effectively. This same concept of neural pathway connections between factors, is likely what causes or allows people to continue thinking, despite a lack of sensory stimulus. 

The connections between factors saved in memory, is made from large neural combinations of smaller neural combinations (each representing a factor), as I further explained here; Conscious Neural Combo. These connections between memories of factors allows an exponential increase in capability for thoughts. If a subconscious mind allows the mind to save and access any variable which that brain is capable of recording via sensory input, a conscious mind allows that same number of variables, but in combination. If there is X number of variables, and that same number of variables can be in combination with each other, the total combinations would be X squared. For example, if a subconscious brain could save 1 trillion variables in memory, a conscious brain could save 1 trillion times 1 trillion combinations of those variables. If the subconscious is like a galaxy, conscious thought is like the observable universe, with as many combinations of galaxies as there are stars in each galaxy. 

When the mind is in a state of low stimulation, its function seems to be significantly affected by whether it is capable of conscious thought or not. A subconscious mind basically only works from stimulus, with minimum activity when the environment is in a static state. A conscious capable mind has the potential for exponentially more neural combinations, by way of continuing access to connections between factors saved in memory, as a potential; Static State Stimulate. 

Freedom of Choice

How much freedom of choice should be given at an individual level?

There are many scenarios throughout life of interactions with others, which involve some degree of option to offer others their freedom of choice on something which affects them, or to try to make the decision for them. This would commonly play out when someone assumes they know what is best for someone else, so they make the decision or hide the option from them. What is the most beneficial action to take in such situations? Reducing others' choices can of course be done for self benefit, but as that disregards the benefit of others, I’ll assume that is less beneficial overall as a sum (further hypothesis here; Greater Good). I’ll focus on and question more so, whether allowing others freedom of choice is better for them.

Trying to make a choice or force something on someone usually involves the assumption that the person is ineffective at making the choice themselves. This could be true, but regarding most other people throughout life, it is a big assumption which is very difficult to objectively be confident of. Most people likely believe that they know better than others in any situation, so without objective standards to prove either way, each perspective is subjective, and the most rational assumption is likely to consider a default of all individuals’ decision making ability to be equal. If someone does happen to believe that someone else can make the choice better than themselves, then they should be given that option to choose to allow the other to make or advise on the choice. 

Assuming the choice at hand mainly affects someone else, then by this default perspective, they should be considered equally capable. Besides the estimate of their capability to make the most beneficial choice for something which affects them, that which is considered to be most beneficial is also subjective. Everyone has different perspectives on what is most beneficial, so especially when the choice affects them, they are likely more capable of deciding what is beneficial for their subjective perspective. 

There are some situations where it could perhaps be more obvious that another individual is less capable of making a choice. This would mostly occur with animals, children, and someone mentaly incompasitated by drugs etc. Generally, the individual should have the basic ability to comprehend the factors involved in the decision, as I explained here; Choice. As the change from 1 end of any spectrum to the other is indistinct, there will likely always be individuals on the spectrum of decision making capability, that are difficult to estimate. As I described in this post, a; Best Guess is required for virtually any choice, including determining where an individual lies on the spectrum. 

Some scenarios involve indistinct, unnoticeable, or unobvious methods of choice. These subtle situations of disallowing others to make their own decisions can be well intentioned, but that doesn't mean it's the best option. For eg, white-lying or neglecting to tell someone relevant information in order to spare their feelings, is an assumption that you know what is best for them. It is holding back information which they can use to make a choice, and information that could easily actually be beneficial for them in the long run. More detail on the benefits of offering others full information, despite what might be difficult on their temporary emotions, here; Honing of Honesty.

As these benefits can go beyond the obvious direct effects of a choice, the process of making a choice itself, can also be a potential benefit for learning and building skills, as I further described in a post about governmental and societal aspects of free choice; Free- Be. To aid in their process of choice and potential to learn, suggestions and personal input should be an effective way to give them sufficient information, yet respect their freedom and perspective.

In any scenario of the option to allow someone else to choose something which affects them, or choose for them, giving them the benefit of the doubt to choose for themselves, seems to be an objective and fair method of respect. It’s a way of respecting them to have the ability to be independent and choose what is most beneficial to their subjective perspective. Rather than trying to do what might seem best for someone, perhaps what is best is offering them the; Freedom of Choice. 

Conscious Memorability

How is the ability to remember, affected by conscious thought?

Humans seem to have an exceptional ability to remember recent events and experiences. Comparatively, studies have shown animals seem to have a minimal capability of remembering particular experiences in general. Animals’ short memory likely makes sense based on the subconscious’s basic developed purpose of function; to make a relevant connection between memory of a factor and the reinforcement to cause avoidance or pursuance of that factor. As I explained in my last post; Terms of Short-Term Memory, the short memory span can allow for focus on fewer recent factors before the individual receives neurochemical reinforcement, which increases the probability of those factors being relevant to the cause of experience which triggers the reinforcement. But how does conscious thought affect this short memory ability? 

By “conscious thought” or “consciousness” I’m referring to my understanding of the concept, being; memory access of multiple factors and how the factors interact through cause and effect, causing awareness and comprehension. More detail here; Conscious Comprehension. Assuming humans have this ability, and other animals generally do not, there should be a likely explanation for why the function of conscious thought allows much better recall of recent experiences. 

It’s perhaps a bit unintuitive for humans to understand that animals don't remember experiences which occurred even just a few hours ago. For eg, just a couple hrs ago, my 2 dogs came for a run, while I rollerbladed. While I can remember a lot of particular aspects of the experience, my dogs likely have no clue that they had that experience today. At this moment, they may feel tired and content as a result of the neurochemical reinforcement they received from effective exercise, but they likely don't know from what, don't question why, and couldn't recall what they experienced, even if they had incentive (such as studies have tested). 

The reason conscious thought allows more distinct memory of recent events, likely comes down to the method of memory access and the connections between factors within memory. Since conscious thought makes a neural connection between factors saved in memory, this allows an ease of flow to various neural combinations which represent different factors saved in memory. I explained more of the relevance of neuron combinations, and how they are linked and involved in conscious thought, here; Conscious Neural Combo. Considering any particular thing (factor) which someone perceives in an experience, to be a separate combination of neurons being saved as memory, a connection between that factor and other factors (as a larger neural combo) allows an easier method to access any particular factor in the future. 

Consciousness allows the capability to make the connection of interaction between any object (or individual) and that object existing in its environment. This concept in itself allows a person to be aware of their own existence in this world, giving a reliable connection to remember their own experiences, and how they as an individual interacted with other factors within an experience. 

Without the connection in memory between factors and their interactions, there is no way to access memory of a particular experience, since any experience involves specific factors and their interaction. For eg, I can remember rollerblading quickly down a specific paved pathway hill beside a certain road, and remember the dogs running even faster than me. There are many connections in my memory between factors and their interactions, which my brain saved as a result of being aware and conscious in this scenario. Connections such as; myself moving quickly relative to my surroundings, my rollerblades interacting with the smooth pavement, gravity of the hill causing me to accelerate, the dogs interacting with the ground by way of running, them running faster in relation to me, etc. 

At that time, the dogs were using subconsciousness, without connections between factors and the interactions. Their brains did not have the function or pre-saved neural combinations required to access memories of how these various factors interact, or the factors’ causes and effects relative to 1 another. Since they couldn't make those neural connections at the time of experience, 2 hrs later they have no ability to mentaly access memories of any particular factors, since there are no connections between factors. The dogs subconscious mind function simply saved various vague factors as separate neural combinations. They might be able to recall certain factors within the experience, if recognition is triggered by again perceiving the same or a similar factor, but there will be no connection of that factor to that particular experience. 

The key to exceptional conscious memory of recent experiences, seems to be the nature of the function of conscious thought itself. Making the connection in memory, of a large neural combination of multiple factors (each a smaller neural combination), through their interaction, allows future memory to access different aspects of the experience, through those connections. Without these connections, a subconsciously functioning mind has no connection between factors (which is what describes something to be an experience), and therein no ability to allow such; Conscious Memorability.

Terms of Short-Term Memory

Why does general short-term memory seem to be so… short?

In general, animals seem to have a fairly short time span for active memory of recent experiences. A study of 25 species of animals, found that their average short-term memory was about 27 seconds. Assuming the mind function being used is the subconscious, is there a reason or benefit for this limitation?

The subconscious is a very useful, and perhaps fundamental, function of the mind. It allows vast amounts of memories to be saved, and allows quick access for quick reactions, which are most probable to be beneficial for that individual based on its unique past experiences. By subconscious memory, I’m referring to memory access of any animal, where it is not awarefully or intentionally accessing the memories, or making connections of cause and effect between details of the memory. I further explained my understanding of the subconscious in a post from 4 months ago; Subconscious Subjection. 

The subconscious seems fairly effective, but of course it has limitations, such as detail and quantity of memories. In order for the subconscious to be effective in its function, it has to have focus on certain memories and aspects of memories (as I further explained in a post from 10 months ago; Fundamental Focus). This focus causes a limit on which factors in memory are prioritized, in order to trigger a suitable reaction to those particular factors, by the individual. 

When it comes to any particular experience of an animal, there must be a limit of time leading up to the experience, for the subconscious to save memories of factors connected to that experience. In the circumstances of receiving neurochemical positive or negative reinforcement (more detail in this post; Reinforcement Mechanisms), the subconscious must focus on certain factors within a time frame, which the animal had sensory perception of before the reinforcement. 

For eg, a young rabbit has the experience of being attacked by an eagle, but survives and escapes. Its subconscious will have a time limit on factors which the rabbit perceived before the instance of attack and receiving negative reinforcement via pain and fear. The negative reinforcement it saves in memory, causes the rabbit to avoid various factors (such as the sound or sight of a large bird in the air) which might be relevant to avoid being attacked again. But, it is likely only factors which the rabbit perceived very recently before being attacked, are relevant enough for the subconscious to focus on. If the subconscious linked memory of factors which the rabbit perceived 10 mins prior (such as the smell of berries, or the sound of a tree falling), those factors would likely be unrelated and irrelevant to the cause of being attacked.

Since the subconscious is limited in its connection of cause and effect between factors, as it utilizes conditioning through trial and error, it will save many general factors in memory, leading up to an experience of reinforcement. The factors aren't necessarily relevant or related to the cause of reinforcement, so focus on factors within a shorter time period should increase effectiveness of the function of the process of the subconscious. 

On the other hand, this short memory span can lack effective connection of relevant factors, if some factors of causation occurred too early before the experience. In a typical simple natural environment, it is likely much less common for circumstances to be complex enough for factors which were perceived much time prior to an experience, to be relevant, but it can happen. For eg, in another scenario, the rabbit finds tasty vegetables on an island of a slow river (on the mainland, most food has been eaten by other animals). It took the rabbit 15 mins to find the food on the island, after swimming to it. Even though the cause of finding food is swimming to an island, the subconscious does not link memory of swimming, with the positive reinforcement of the food, as the 15 mins exceeds its short-term memory span. 

A shorter active memory, should cause a narrower range of factors to be focused on in any experience, increasing the probability that the factors which are actually relevant to the cause of experience, are saved in memory and linked with the reinforcement. These aspects of an increase of probability for effectiveness of the subconscious, seem to be some of the; Terms of Short-Term Memory. 

Patience Potential

Is patience really a virtue? What potential advantages does it have? What processes are involved in patience?

Patience is basically willfully waiting. The capacity to wait can be quite beneficial. Simply put, it means if there is a better option which can be gained by waiting, someone with patience will gain, while someone without patience will not. There're many situations throughout life, with some degree of option to wait for something better than would be gained from not waiting. Of course a lot of scenarios have many unknown variables, such as the chance of waiting to actually cause the benefit or not, or the degree of benefit, etc. But on a general basis, with any variant of degree of information known, someone with the ability to wait, is likely to have the advantage, with that extra option, compared to not. For eg, there is a vendor at a market giving free sandwiches as a promo, and the line up is 10 people long. If Hurry Henry has little patience, he will ignore this option, even if he would have considered it better in the end, but Patient Pat has patience, so he at least has the option to get the free sandwich, whether he chooses to or not.

What it takes to have the ability of patience, is another question. 1 major component to increase patience, would be comprehension. An individual needs the capability to comprehend cause and effect, to the degree that they can be aware that waiting a longer time, will cause the effect of a better reward. The concept of awareness of time, is part of this overall capability of comprehension, which allows the benefit of understanding that in the future, circumstances will change. I explained more details of the benefits of this concept in a post from 11 days ago; Time Awareness. 

Without this component of comprehension, an individual can still on occasion, take the option of waiting, in order to gain a benefit, but this behavior would likely have to be developed from being conditioned, subconsciously. This would take many repeated circumstances of very similar factors, in order for the subconscious to develop the connection of positive or negative reinforcement (as further explained in a post from 7 months ago; Reinforcement Mechanisms), with more time passing. 

Besides the downside of the subconscious requiring many repeated scenarios, it is also likely fairly limited in the amount of time which can pass, while still making that connection of reinforcement, with the factors involved in waiting. Subconsciousness seems to show significant priority for immediate reward/ consequences. 

On the other hand, the need for repeated scenarios of the same factors, can be virtually skipped using the process of comprehension. The function of comprehension is gained through conscious thought, with the ability to remember details of cause and effect, as I explained in a hypothesis from 2.5yrs ago; Conscious Comprehension. Being aware of how specific factors cause effects through interaction, allows the ability to apply that knowledge to new circumstances. This includes awareness that waiting a longer time period, will cause factors to change, for a potential benefit. 

Patience seems to be a virtue, in a way that it allows the option for a benefit, which can only be gained from waiting. The process of subconsciousness, mostly works based on instant gratification, voiding the option to wait, while conscious comprehension allows utilizing knowledge of details in situations where waiting will cause more beneficial factors, to be the; Patience Potential. 

Beat Bound Repeat of Sound

Why do humans enjoy the beat of music, but other animals don't?

Pretty much any human seems to enjoy the beat of at least some type of music or another, but when it comes to any other animal, it is very rare from what we know so far. Tests have been done with a few different species of animals, and they can act more calm or more aggressive based on the type of music (including adjusting the pitch and using natural sounds from that species), but this seems different than enjoying a beat and or rhythm. It's likely any species would become more calm or aggressive from hearing sounds which would instinctively be a positive or aggravating sound for it in nature. But enjoying the repeat of sound of a beat, bound,  is un-heard- of in other animals, from what I know. 

Recognizing repetition can be an instinctively appealing aspect, as i further described in a post from 10 months ago; Conscious Recognition. This, combined with sounds which are in themselves instinctively appealing, could be a potential explanation for why people enjoy music so much. But why don't other animals?

The key might be the ability to recognise connected, short-term repetitions of sounds. In order to recognize the repetition of an ongoing beat, the mind has to simultaneously access memory of the current individual segment of beat, as well as the previous beat segments. For simplicity, if each beat segment is considered 1 “factor” (as 1 sound for the memory to store), then multiple beat segments would be multiple factors for the memory to access. Accessing multiple recent beat factors simultaneously in ongoing memory, would be the ability to recognize the connection of repetition, between the factors. This is just the 1st step of a simple regular repeating sound, but once a beat includes multiple pitches and tones repeating, there are more factors for the mind to recognize the repetition of the sequence of sounds. 

Subconscious memory access seems to not be as good at making the required connection between multiple factors. The subconscious can quickly recognize a basic repetition of what it has saved in memory (as I further mentioned in a post from 1.5 months ago; Repetition Recognition), but accessing that factor accurately, along with many additional factors and any connection between them, does not seem to be part of the function of the subconscious. Assuming other animals mostly use subconscious reactions (as I described in a post from 4 months ago; Human Advantage), this could explain why they don't seem to recognize or enjoy the beat of music. This is the general majorative, and as animals evolve, it's likely the most intelligent of them could have occasions of more complex memory functions and the potential for more elements of music.

When the mind uses the ability to access multiple factors in memory, and their connection or interaction, this seems to be the category of conscious memory access. I explained more details of my hypothesis of the function of consciousness in a post from 2.5 yrs ago; Conscious Comprehension. Using the conscious mind, an individual can access memories of multiple beats, as well as multiple factors of sound within each beat. The mind can access the recent memory of the time period of the interaction of repetition between these multiple sounds (factors). 

This may be the fundamental requirement for the mind being capable of acknowledging the basic components of music, and with the complications of the various processes of the mind, this could allow portions of music to then be saved in subconscious memory (kind of like words are saved and accessed in memory). As I described in more detail, in a post from 9 months ago; Subconscious Conscious-Memory Access, this mind function could allow music to be recognized later, even without the same initial degree of consciousness. 

Considering music to involve various segments of multiple factors of sounds, it may be understandable why animals or the subconscious mind does not typically recognize the repetition between multiple segments or beats. Using conscious memory access, humans can more readily make this connection of interaction between factors of beats, and enjoy the Beat Bound Repeat of Sound.