my dream and fantasy😈🤤🔥✡️😍

Everyone who reblogs this will get a personalized hypnotic erotic GIF based on what I see on your profile.

Recently I stumbled upon an idea I called “dimensions of thinking” which I want to introduce you today.

Although it shouldn’t be seen as something exactly the same as regular physical/ mathematical dimensions, it can offer very many analogue comparisons.

Let me introduce you to some of my ideas in the following part:

Thinking has 3 dimensions:

1st Dim.: Depth of thought, like: How deep am I into the given topic?

2nd Dim.: broad-range of thought,  like: How many fields does my thinking span?/

       How many topics does it cut?

3rd Dim.: “Time” (”velocity”) of thinking,  like: How can the first two dimensions be transformed/ processed?

Whilst depth and broad-range are the frameworks (like space in the spacetime continuum) of the entities (those entities are mainly knowledge, facts, comparing to objects in the “spacetime”) of thinking, the velocity is the execution and transformation thereof (, similar to the time dimension in the spacetime continuum).

At first I declare the words and analogies used:

Depth and broad-range are like space dimensions: They are a basement for the entities that lie within this framework.

Entities are facts, or “knowledge” and are similar to mass and energy in the spacetime continuum. They lie within the basement (the 3 dimensions).

Velocity of thinking is more like the time dimension of the spacetime continuum and can’t be split from the other two dimensions. (They form a continuum just as the spacetime continuum itself!) They are a kind of basement for the entities as well.

Also, “velocity” (We could call it “time dimension of thinking” as well!) could also be declared as the “execution and transformation of the space dimensions”.

I thought further and would even state the following:

“Velocity of thinking” itself can be split into “holistic thinking” (, with less details considered and more focused on the big picture), and “reductionistic thinking” (, with main focus on the details).

Important to know is that both holistic as well as reductionistic thinking are part of the same, just as history and future; Together they shape the “arrow of time” in thinking processes.

Hence, the moment is the point where holistic and reductionistic thinking clash together.

There arises an important question in my head I would like to introduce:

Which philosophy (holsim/ reductionism) could be analogous to which time in the arrow of time (past/future)?

At the current moment I don’t know and have absolutely no single clue about that one…

Perhaps it’s because of the case that it can’t be split as easily as we’d like to!

It is because the entire philosophy behind the “arrow of time” is a bit more complex than imagined on a linear plane.

Hence, time is indeed a vivid interplay of cause and effect and not just a single “This is past and this is future”-thing!

Thus I have to correct myself:

Reductionism and holism are not comparable to past and future, but to cause and effect

And then we escape into a similar question:

Which philosophy (holsim/ reductionism) could be analogous to cause and which to effect?

Again it can’t be put into such a simple notation, for each dimension of thinking needs to be “quantized”, because there needs to be a quantum of thoughts, in this case the “entities” (alias facts,) to exist.

There can’t be just one thought. It needs to be a “package”, a so called “quantum”.