# What symbols are Symbols are [value](values.md) patterns we've connected across our perceptions. They don't exist in [reality](reality.md), but [feel](mind-feelings.md) more real than what the symbol references. When we process [facts](reality.md), we use symbols to track patterns that create the [stories](stories.md) we eventually encode into our [memories](mind-memory.md). Symbols are inherently [emotional](mind-feelings.md), and they resonate *much* more loudly in our [minds](humanity.md) than [perceptions](image.md) or [language](language.md) alone. We send and store ideas with symbols. The more elaborate and complicated the idea, the more symbols we need. We don't have enough words to 100% describe what we wish to convey, so we [try our best](results.md) to grab the best possible arrangement of symbols. We then [trust](trust.md) the other person or our future self will [understand](understanding.md) by filling in the parts we *didn't* say. Naturally, with deeply sophisticated things like [physics and engines](engineering.md), technical writers don't trust much to others' understanding. Because of its emotional nature, a symbol represents many elements a person will associate with an object. Some of the most commonplace symbols in society include [language](language.md), [branded logos](marketing.md), and many [design concepts](engineering-design.md). APPLICATION: Symbols resonate with feelings, and our eyes determine a *lot* of our perception, which is why a picture says a thousand words. People frequently associate a symbol with a [social group](groups-member.md). The symbols *themselves* reproduce very similar patterns across people, and the [social conflict](people-conflicts.md) typically comes through the [feelings](mind-feelings.md) they associate toward that group. Skill in [communication](people-conversation.md) allows us to use fewer symbols to say the same things. Expert writers can say more in three sentences than an awful writer can in ten pages. ## Power Symbols are powerful. As an example, here's a quote from *The Matrix* movie: > *Do you want to know what IT is? The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.* The visuals around the quote are merely two attractive guys in lots of leather in a poorly lit room. However, pondering the words or hearing it in the movie creates a profound thoughtful consideration. You visualize your routine and the implications of that statement, using details ([work](success-4_routine.md), [church](religion.md), [taxes](money-accounting.md)). If we analyze further, the quote draws us into the perpetual [uncertainty](trust.md) we live with and a possible answer to that vagueness that would allude to finding [meaning](meaning.md). We extrapolate an idea automatically from that quote because our [stories](stories.md) (and, more technically, [our memories](mind-memory.md)) are using constant symbols. Parsing further, certain [language](language.md) elements like sentence pacing and how nouns connect with each other can add even *more* symbolism. ## Types We generally create symbols all around us, but have a few types that we *heavily* emphasize. We associate heavily to human-like characteristics. This includes giving more human-like qualities to animals (especially [pets](fun-pets.md)) and inanimate objects (like plants) than [reality](reality.md). To that end, it makes intuitive sense when expert [creators](creations.md) set those qualities to animation. But, even further, we're attaching human-like qualities that aren't human (anthropomorphism). We'll even give our *[deities](religion.md)* human-like qualities, even though whatever exists beyond us definitely can't be precisely [human](humanity.md). We'll also assume the inhumane behavior by people performing [evil](morality-evil.md) deserves more grace through sympathetic qualities that we find familiar. Beyond that, we tend to attach value to specific parts of the body, especially the face. Often, a covered face is a "dehumanizing" thing, and [groups](groups-small.md) can inspire [organizational evil](mgmt-badsystems.md) by having all the members wear a matching and facially obscuring clothing item. We associate tasks to visual images of human-like depictions. The head associates to [authority or control](power.md). The hands symbolize action or [doing](results.md). The waist symbolizes [fertility](people-family.md) or [sex](gender.md). The feet imply traveling. We can layer on the imagery to adapt to the situation (e.g., a gloved hand represents unfeeling action). Most [language](language.md) involving gestures are reproducing those associations. In the case of lewd or vulgar gestures, they're frequently reproducing the action itself. ## Reconstruction Symbols rebuild themselves rapidly in our mind when we recall them. A clear depiction of the instant rebuild comes through a popular story of six words: [For sale - baby shoes, never worn](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_sale:_baby_shoes,_never_worn). While it generally evokes a feeling of sadness, more events happen when we take it apart: First, we hear the story to get 3 major data points: 1. For sale - 2. baby shoes, 3. never worn. Then, we attach all the connections built into our memories from before we heard those ideas: 1. "For sale -" is referring to an [advertisement](marketing.md), likely a classified or personal ad. 2. Baby shoes are used for one purpose: [newborn babies](parenting-babies.md). 3. Something that was never worn is obviously new, which reflects on the "for sale" part. We then ask questions about the entire thing, answering some of them along the way: 1. Why is it for sale? Well, clearly because someone doesn't need it. 2. Why don't these shoes have a price? Is it because they're getting sold for another reason? 3. Why would someone take the time to make this ad? Naturally, we conclude a truth of the story. That truth then alludes to other things: - A baby must have died. Infant mortality is tragic. - Why do innocent babies have to die? - Death is inevitable, but we disregard it. Why is that? - If someone is selling baby shoes, they're probably trying to pay for the funeral. Generally, though, our conscious minds don't take it that far. Instead, we let the subconscious do the heavy lifting and take our [interpretation of others' media](people-conversation.md) for granted as we experience the [feelings](mind-feelings.md). The volatility of our symbolic associations shows itself when we rebuild the same story and adapt one word: - "For sale - baby shoes, well-worn." - "Not for sale - baby shoes, stop asking." - "For sale - running shoes, never worn." ## Risks We create symbols from literally everything, so we have no other way to understand the world. It's usually reliable, but people who desire [power](power.md) will [distort how something looks](image-distortion.md) for their purposes. APPLICATION: Don't fall for symbolic association enough that your ability to perceive the [facts](reality.md) of anything becomes clouded. Beyond [religious iconography](religion.md), everyone creates symbolic associations and patterns *somewhere*. These represent through [emotional associations](mind-feelings.md) to unspoken [subconscious](unknown.md) things, and [trigger](habits.md) at weird and [unpredictable](imagination.md) times. Most efforts to distort appearances are [designed](purpose.md) to rebuild the symbols to fit a different [story](stories.md), and it usually comes through a few possible methods: 1. Portray untrue ideas as if they were [true](reality.md). 2. Portray true ideas as if they were untrue. 3. Rearrange the symbols to portray a different [feeling](mind-feelings.md) behind them. APPLICATION: Using symbols to gain [power](power.md) isn't morally good or bad, but it drifts into [evil](morality-evil.md) when it's evoking enough [feelings](mind-feelings.md) to make people change their [decision](people-decisions.md) they otherwise would have made while they were [perfectly rational](logic.md). FURTHER APPLICATION: Don't waste too much time trying to [influence](influence.md) others' ideas without approaching the symbols. Typically, you'll need symbols of your own to make a difference. Either way, a firm [understanding](understanding.md) of [reality](reality.md) will deter most false [stories](stories.md). But, to the people who want to [believe](understanding-certainty.md) those stories, it'll *always* seem perfectly [reasonable](logic.md). APPLICATION: Watch for patterns you may trigger in a [culture](people-culture.md) that's not your own. For example, the implication of breaking [rules](people-rules.md) is [taboo](morality-taboo.md) for lawyers, but honoring rules is taboo for most [lower-income urban dwellers](classes.md).