Tad Fibonacci wrote:
A fictional world, or arguably reality if you'd choose to live in it is created by either you or someone else correct?
While I'm sure it's fun to create to your hearts desires and experience your creation first hand, would it be a healthy and beneficial world to live in?
Art can be boiled down to imitations of reality, but would it have any meaning if it's a separate reality of its own?
I would argue that because they're not real, art is beautiful.
A fictional world is only interesting when it is fictional.
Think of a fictional world that you know, and imagine you existing in it, and the world would exist regardless of your existence, it doesn't care about you.
Suddenly said fictional world is no longer that interesting.
Provided that such a fictional world would be as trivial and simplistic as that. You're about as limited as your imagination, if you can create something by matter of simply envisioning it, you can alter even this, to be similar to life as it is, but improve on sections of it to make it more enjoyable while not quite a catering service. It's somewhat like Minecraft's Creative mode, but real-world-esque AI and people with depth, should you imagine such.
A universe that exists and does its own thing regardless of what i do and have the ability to do, is actually pretty interesting to me.
I mean, I'm looking at the differences here, comparisons, all that:
1) If I've got a universe that gives no shits unless I choose to alter it somehow by conception, that's fucking great. Aside from my ability to alter things, it's not all that different than reality as it currently is. How is that any less interesting than life already is?
2) What's "real" to you? Is it beautiful because the world that a piece of art depicts is fictional? Why would it be any less beautiful if it were real, whether as an alternative to or in correspondence to reality as it is? It only makes for more interactive potential and something else to explore. You can interpret a fictional reality to essentially be a modified copy of our own. I see quite a lot of potential in that, and find such a concept to be beautiful.
- - -
Tad Fibonacci wrote:
Even if by design that world is created to cater to your own needs, what do you do once you've ran out of ideas? Out of things to do? Places to explore?
Create more of them?
How long are you going to keep it up? What if you'd grow tired of it all?
Who else is there to experience your creation? To validate what you do?
Who are you doing all of this for? If it's yourself then is it really beneficial to your self improvement? If said world were to be reset, will you sit through creating everything that you've created again without doing anything different?
1) The comparison's what is important. Though you can get bored of creating so much, by then, you'd have experienced exponentially, and theoretically, infinitely more than you would've otherwise seen in reality as it is.
2) The people in such a creation can interpret that creation however I choose for them to. Ideally, I'd like to have them be just like us, interpreting and meandering through life. If you seek validation, eh, go for it, but I'd prefer to just create my damn world and live in it, enjoy it.
3) Again, self-improvement is subjective and arbitrary here, as it hardly matters aside from what's self-imposed and how you interpret others' reactions to you within your work. But, feel free to mess around and create a world in which you can work towards these things-- make a world that you think may provide you the experiences you need to come to satisfying conclusions and to see yourself grow to the ideal that you propose for yourself to become.
4) I'd gladly start over. Though, this is more or less a hypothetical case of create-what-you-want-when-you-want. It can be the same world, something different, or just whatever the hell you'd like. If your imagination can conceive of something new, go for it.
- - -
Tad Fibonacci wrote:
Limiting yourself to your own world means you'll have no contradicting ideas, you can't experience other people's creations, you cannot imitate anything since there's nothing to imitate.
Fiction is beautiful because there's a reality.
If fiction is reality, it won't be beautiful anymore. It will become the norm, become mediocre.
1) That's actually a fair point, to some extent. If you're perceiving this as a matter of micro-/macro-managing the consciousness of an individual, then you'd be right, but if you were to conceive of a carbon-copy human from your own original reality, you would still have people with varied ideas, just as ideas reside in you or anyone else in this reality as it is. You can, then, imitate the ideas you hear from others.
2) Actually, how'd that work if there was, in this new reality, more fiction? Again, considering that people here would be of similar capacity in intelligence in the sense that we are already, we'd have these people create their own realities through their art and music, and various forms of entertainment and introspection. For as long as you have a new dream, you have something beautiful. And through all this, still, by comparison, even considering the most dreadful of realizations in the wake of the lack of new dreams, you'd have experienced so, so much more. You can then choose to simply no longer exist, and create a reality where someone else has the chance to work through their own imagination, and so much more.
- - -
Achromatism wrote:
live in a fictional world of your own, or live life as is?
