Fermented Neurons

Knowing & Becoming

2007-06-08T12:41:00.000+05:30

What I know

prevents me from knowing

what I do not know.

What I am

prevents me from becoming

what I am not.

The path that I tread

prevents me from treading

the path that I have never trodden.

. . atrakasya . .

A Constructed Truth

2007-06-02T12:12:00.000+05:30

The five senses sense reality.

They send the streaming data to the mind.

The mind compiles the data to create a model of what the world is.

The mind also archives such a model and seeks to integrate further incoming data with a previously created model.

Sometimes some data is missing. One may hear only a sound which one identifies as the sound of a bird and the model incorporates the presence of a bird in the vicinity. In reality it may be an electronic sound.

Thus the mind may also be fooled into believing things because of its complete dependence on previously constructed models which form the basis of interpreting reality.

A magic trick is an example of how one may be so befooled even if one is completely sane and alert.

However, it is the nature of the mind that it fills in the gaps in incomplete data to construct the complete model. This is the source of efficiency - one cannot always see a cube from all 6 sides to know that it is a cube.
And it is also the source of error - one may be fooled into believing that the cube is solid, whereas it may only be made of 3 walls that make it look like a cube from the point that I see.

I can see a wavy shape in the dark and "know" that it is a snake.
This can protect if it is actually a snake.
It can fool if it is a piece of rope.
It can prevent gain if it is actually a thick chain of gold but I run away in fear.

My very "seeing" and "knowing" that it is a snake may be a complete delusion if I have a mental aberration.

Hence, the data coming separately from my 5 senses may be incongruent - what my eyes tell me may not fully match with what my ears tell me. In which case my mind will seek to resolve the incongruency by either looking for further data, or by adopting a previously constructed model to fill in the blanks.

These incongruencies of sensory data are a big help, if one is seeking to construct an sane model of reality.
Sometimes, insanity or irrationality is the ignoring of such incongruencies of data and conditioned adoption of previous models which may be completely or partially inconsistent with the current reality.

It can be seen easily from this that so many times previously constructed models of reality substitute for sensory inputs. And vice-versa.

A movie is actually sensory data of light and sound which substitutes reality in some way.
Or, when I meet a stranger, I "read" the stranger and seek to understand him through previously constructed models of reality. A sloppily dressed person will evoke a certain model of reality which makes me "see" that he is not a particular person. Alternately, I could also see him as a nerdy professor.

Which option I choose as closest to reality is based on a variety of factors. Yet the fact remains that I do not perceive reality - I only see my previously constructed models of reality.

If I did not, I would probably have no way of interpreting the world, I would see the baby in as incoherent a way as a baby sees it.

A baby is the construction of models of reality in its very initial stage.
An adult is someone who has reasonably well constructed models of reality.
An irrational person is someone who has models of reality that either do not match yours, or which are inconsistent within the person himself/herself. The irrationality may also be a model of reality which has been adopted as a survival strategy.

It may help to consider a model of reality in terms of how successful it is or how useful it is, rather than considering whether it is right or not. After all, a certain model of reality may be successful even if the person knows that it is not right (which means, it does not mesh with his central structure of models). For example, the concept of telling "white lies". Most parents will tell their kids not to lie, and yet everyone lies, and yet most people still stick to a substantial amount of a "truthful" mode of living.

Sources of Errors

A being which is concerned with survival will compile data in a manner that is most suitable for survival.
A being which is concerned with gaining something will compile data in a manner that will allow the being to function in a manner optimal to gaining that thing.

This data compilation can be at a surface level, where the being is fully aware of this bias of compilation.
Or, it may be at a point which is very fundamental, which influences the very direction of growth.

As a tree may either lean some leaves towards light.
Or it may lean its main stem towards light and structure its entire growth in that fashion.

However, sooner or later this real need for survival or gain may disappear, and yet one is left with a model that is based on this past need, and one's future intake of data may still continue to be compiled as per this model.

Interestingly, most of the data that one uses to compile one's model of life is necessarily second-hand. Most of the sub-models of one's model will also be second-hand.

One may ask a friend what is the best way to deal with strangers in a strange city and he will advise something which may form one's very basis of dealing with everyone.

One may, as a baby, simply emulate the explosive or fickle or neurotic emotions of one's parents as a survival strategy and this may become so central a part of one's persona that one may not be able to shift from such behaviours upon reaching adulthood.
Which is different from a person emulating an anger that he has seen somewhere to act aggressive in a situation because he perceives that being aggressive will benefit him in the case.

Thus, one also perceives reality through previously constructed models. Soon, one is so used to it that one uses only the slightest reference to reality to activate the inner model.

I can see the tip of a car bumper in my rear-view mirror and "know" that there is a big mac truck behind me. I can reference the movement of this bumper with my environment and know that it is speeding dangerously, right behind me.
The reference from reality is minimal here, yet I can easily take avertive action on the basis of my models of reality which are instantly constructed from data that is highly minimal and which is perceived for only 1/3rd of a second.

Co-joint Models of Reality

It can also be very easily seen that we share models of reality to a great extent.

As pointed out, most of the time we never construct models of reality ourselves, but borrow them from someone. When we read a book or watch a movie or read a poem, we tend to unconsciously borrow the models of reality depicted therein. We may modify these models to fit our own previous models. Or we may outright reject these models if they are not consitent with what we have already possess.

A metaphor often makes us shift our existing model of reality in include another. An insult may often point out an unsavory aspect of a model that we possess, and thus create an emotion of anger at one's own specific model of reality being shown in a negative light.

A culture is a collection of people who share similar models of reality.

Thus, while we tend to believe that we are individuals, we are actually composed of an overwhelming number of such borrowed models. And of course, most of these models are inherited over millennia - passed down, not necessarily from our parents, but from the society that we have lived in, which got them from its predecessors. These models are what are variously referred to as memes or beliefs or ideas. The concept of God or the concept of a certain culture being a negative culture are again models of reality that may have passed down in our specific cultures.

Thus, communication between individuals and societies are means of exchanging these models.

A model of reality is also that all individuals are merely clusters of various models of reality which are linked together - a massive collection of algorithms which connect to form a social model of reality. And every individual may possess internal models that do not fully match that of a social model, if that can ever be pinned down. Yet, they must match the social model in a way that is satisfactory to society, because whether we like it or not, every human has borrowed his models from society. There are some who completely borrow these models and constantly realign themselves with society. Those who do this at a superficial level are often referred to as politically correct humans. Those who refuse to realign their models with society may be called rebels.

Whether politically correct or a rebel, it may be impossible for any individual to claim that he does not owe over 99% of his models of reality to his society and environment. The very formation of our selves has been influenced in a very profound manner by the rest of the individuals we are connected with.

Thus, we seem to be mere components of a larger system.

Conflicting Models of Reality

We all possess models of reality that are not coherent with each other - they have points of conflict, and hence cannot form a consistent structure of such models within ourselves.

When a person has such excessive or overtly apparent incoherency in his models, we call the person as confused. If such incoherence is so over-abundant as to make the person incapable of functioning, then the person may be categorized by society as having mental aberrations. However, even within this person there will be large zones of coherency - its simply that these zones do not agree with each other. Sometimes these zones may match with each other in a twisted fashion, and form a direction of persona that society labels as a psychopath.

Like an individual, even cultures and societies may have these internally incoherent models of reality - which we often tend to refer to as the hypocrisy of society, or the craziness of it all. And not surprisingly, this is reflected within individuals also. After all, society is merely a distributed computing system, and society exists as much within the individual as the individual exists within society.

It may be possible for a person to not be coherent in his relationship with society. This may be because the person has good coherence within himself and his models do not agree with those of society. It may also be that the person has chaotic models. He may also have models which in itself would work fine if he were an isolated unit - Like a serial killer would perhaps have no issues if he lived alone. However, his models are incoherent to the larger society, and hence society takes great pains to identify and cauterize itself of such "aberrations".

The Aliveness of a Model of Reality

While we have hitherto looked at models of reality as relatively static, it is essential to see that it is sometimes closer to being a modular computer program or an algorithm. Thus, an algorithm or a model of reality may be such a very highly useful utility that everyone tends to adopt it.

Again, the concept of "white lies" is one such algorithm that that everyone adopts to iron out some incongruencies within themselves or in their behaviours (which are, of course, the direct results of their models of reality).
However, a good model of reality connects well to other models to form a structure, it may be considered as an algorithm with several connectors and ports.

Thus, a successful model of reality will naturally be used more, and an unsuccessful model of reality will be cast out simply because it does not work. Some models may prove to be useful in emergencies. Some at all times, in the long run.

Because of this ability of a model of reality to connect to other models, each model has the possibility of birth, growth, evolution, modification, death, and propensity to survive. Thus, these models could be said to form a network that is complex and alive, a network which links all of our minds into a gigantic computing system, thus allowing us to take decisions as a society or a culture, as well as individuals.

The Falsehood of all Models of Reality

If we only see reality as a model of reality, then is there any way to see reality without forming models of it? And if so, what use is it exactly? And can one even function without forming such models?
Undoubtedly, one cannot function - the mind would be complete chaos, and the complete dissolution of all such models would be akin to death.
Perhaps the dissolution of all such models, or the superstructure of such models in a very fundamental manner is what our scriptures refer to as the negation of the self, after which one can see the truth.

It is also very easy to see that all models are false - even those which are very close to reality - because they are simply models. A completely accurate model of reality would not be a model in the first place - it would merely reflect what exists in the time that reality is sensed and dissolves the instant one moves away from that reality. By definition, a model of reality is a static capture - its a photograph, which is then used for practical purposes like survival or prosperity.

But in the end, its an illusion - whatever our minds perceive is merely a grand illusion. Like all our scriptures say, it has no reality. The self, the living collection of these models of reality, is simply an artificial construct.

The perception of truth can happen only when there is a perception without the shackles of the self.

-- The End --

THE . . i . .

2006-12-01T13:01:00.000+05:30

In a mind, there are multiple minds
Yet the mind functions as one

The beginning of all conflict
is when minds do not integrate with other minds

The greater that conflict among them
the greater the unhappiness for the larger mind

Yet the mind functions as one
Till...some minds separate from the others

Thus begins the suffering
thus the emergence of multiple personalities

it all begins in a lie
starting from that tiny escape

To maintain one lie as the truth
a hundred lies need be conjured

And the lies (that soon become legion)
they form a mind separate

minds that grows secretly in darkness
minds that are inconsistent with other minds

minds that learn to resist other truths
minds that fight for survival, to overcome

Thus does conflict trigger easily by a lie
and sometimes with a lie spoken by others

And peace enters not...till a mind
continues to fight with other minds

nor does that silence enter till one
refuses to lift a gun to fight another gun

But peace comes easily gliding
when minds integrate with others

effortlessly, without an agenda...
as everything is as it is meant to be

Thus it is with the mind of man
Thus it is with the mind of mankind

The devil is that which cleaves apart the one -

whether it comes in the guise of a higher god

or a higher truth

or through a secretive cult

or through a clever lie

or through the illusion of a difference

Verily,

the devil is, but, the separation,
and that which is called god -

Is only that blessed integration...

Art

2006-10-03T15:49:00.000+05:30

One form of art is self-expression.

Self expression is that which has no agenda except to express itself, and ideally should not be concerned with the aesthetics of the self-expression.

However, even in this self-expression, there may be an effort to express only that which is beautiful within oneself, and then this makes it a valid form of self-expression.

Yet, there is a strong opinion that cathartic art that makes any effort at manipulating the aesthetics of the self-expression has not reached the point where it truly expresses the self - it is still wrapped up in the "how to express" and thus not manage to reach its agenda of self-expression.

Thus, to account for this we come to another form of art (the commonest form) - art as an selective expression of the self.

Here, the id operates and filters the output of the psyche to express only that which is considered acceptable to it - directly and indirectly. Indeed, it is difficult for most humans to indulge in art as complete self-expression. It has been said that if every human being could completely reveal what lurked within the mind, no human would ever want to hang out with another human - so rank are we from within.

As someone said,
There is so much good in the worst of us
and so much bad in the best of us
that it doesn't become any of us
to talk about the rest of us.

This simple quotation reveals a profound truth that most of us shy away from - that from within, we are as ugly as we are beautiful - no matter what one's definition of beauty is. (For, the very presence of an concept of beauty implies the presence of the concept of ugliness, and therefore a psyche that is not yet beyond beauty will by default also hold an equal amount of ugliness)

And hence, in order to camouflage the unaesthetic self (from others as well as oneself), people resort to art as a selective expression of the self. For, very few humans have the courage to face the ugliness within oneself, while there is none who does not hold some amount of ugliness within.

Another form of art is art as a device for the manipulation of perceptions.

Consider that this definition of art also includes communication (for to communicate is to allow a change of perceptions).
Thus, one may shoot a picture of a beautiful sunset and another can drown in its beauty, and thus, one has effected an alteration of another's neural forms.

Effectively, what happens is that the work of art forms a bridge between two neural networks - they identify a common ground - a common perception of beauty/ugliness/whatever and thus a link is established. Effectively it is like one modem telling another that they speak the same language and have the same protocols, before communication is established.

Another way that this is effected can be observed very simply by considering music and songs.

A lovely song creates a state of receptivity in a closed neural networks - the words rhyme together, the beats are correct, the melody is coherent (in scientific terms - this is referred to as a "neural resonance").
In such a state the mind becomes incredibly receptive to the lyrics that are being disseminated.

The mind works in such a fashion - if it perceives an experience comprising of the complex non-linear parameters of A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J as a beautiful creation, then it also tends to view the individual components as beautiful. Thus, even if components C and H are a bit out of line, they will be seen as beautiful.

A non-beautiful woman in a crowd of attractive women is perceived as more beautiful than she would be on her own.
A mediocre shirt among beautiful shirts has a better chance of being sold.
A beautiful photo of a soldier's pitiable death creates sympathy for the soldier.

(That is why anti-war protestors are keen on pictures of body-bags of soldiers coming home being highlighted, while pro-war protestors want pictures of children offering roses to the soldiers in the attacked country)

A picture of a product (gizmo, alcohol, shirt, whatever) that is accompanied by coherent pictures of beautiful models sells better.
This is the power of association - something that the advertising industry understands implicitly, and this industry forms the largest example of art being used to manipulate perceptions.

If we consider thus that art is a means of the manipulation of perceptions, then it comes as no surprise to us to realize that art is a powerful means of political influence - a means of mass hypnosis.

Hollywood releases movies that directly prepares the minds of th viewers for forthcoming military events. It shows the effects of chemical weapons (The Rock) and the possibility of middle-eastern terrorists exploding nuclear bombs on american soil (True Lies) shortly before the government decided to attack a middle-eastern country for possessing chemical weapons, and for the possibility of participating in attacks on american soil.
The King and I - a brilliantly scripted and thoroughly political musical (that showed the world how the west had a civilizing effect on ignorant eastern countries) came in around the time of the vietnam conflict. (Purportedly a true story, further evidence showed it to be a totally cooked up story, passed off as a true autobiography to create further credibility)

Consider design - how products and graphics are styled appeal to the mind. Beautiful CD covers, beautiful wine labels, beautifully styled gizmos - their beautify prepares the mind to accept that the product is a good/different/cool product. to have. People wear specific brands because the mass hypnotizers have, through elaborate art, imprinted in the minds of the people that wearing those brands is equal to being cool or sexy or powerful.

How many cell phones and computers sell due to styling rather than need-based purchases?
Thus arises classic separation between need and response - a separation that lies towards the root of social and individual irrationality, an irrationality so intelligent that it takes the guise of complete rationality.

Art is a means of manipulating perceptions.

To understand the nature of art is to understand how the self is trapped in illusions.

. . atrakasya . .

Skimming that Layer of Pleasure

2006-09-25T16:17:00.000+05:30

The one that pleasures from touch is vulnerable to pain from touch.

The one that pleasures from beautiful music is vulnerable to disturbing noise.

For, pain arises from the same source as pleasure, and they both are entwined so closely that there is no separation between them.

Hence, to reject pain is to reject pleasure and to pursue pleasure is to pursue the same path that leads to pain.

Any effort to skim off only the pleasure (and thus escape its twin) will be hollow - it cannot be done, and eventually leads one back to the same place by a different route.

And yet … with what connivance and intelligence does man seek to skim off only the pleasure and escape the pain!

He hoards money to escape the pain of poverty
He pays for sex (in cash or kind) to escape the travails of a full relationship
He nurtures respectability and status - that he is spared humiliation and scorn
He entertains himself - that he escapes the emptiness of life
He has relationships - that he may fill up the void
He seeks god - that he may avoid pain
He has children - that he may partake of pleasures vicariously
He seeks integration - that he may escape running the gauntlet of pleasure/pain
He hunts for those who have transcended pain and pleasure - that he may do the same
He seeks to escape from escape - that he may be happy

All in vain…for where exists that utopia that one may escape to?

Only in idea, and that idea is forever an illusion - an illusion that there is a way to split life into two poles, and stay at only one of the poles.

Interestingly, life is completely immune to such attempts at splitting - and instead man ends up splitting his own self into a thousand fragments that constantly battle amongst themselves.

There is no path but to embrace everything in its entirity - resistance is futile.
(Perhaps even the embracing may be futile)

Quite simply - there is no choice…for any human.
Jaaye to Jaaye kaha…?

- The End -

On Searching...

2006-05-29T16:48:00.000+05:30

He who has never stood on the wrong side of society has never really seen what society is all about and the nature of its beliefs and illusions and truths and hypocrisies.

If one has never been there, it may be safely presumed that one may have taken the easy path, the path that is devoid of danger, originality and courage. For, it is only logical that a person who lives in an original manner cannot help making a journey to the wrong side of society, at sometime or the other, in his life.

From this venturing, comes the direct conflict of life with the existing beliefs within oneself. And from this conflict may come the emergence of one's own perceptions. The without clashes with the within. It is in this conflict, and its aftermath, that the individual may emerge.
Interestingly, lots of times the within is a direct reflection of the without, and their conflict is merely a way of checking the self-integrity of the individual.

Besides, life is such a harsh taskmaster that it enforces this conflict upon everyone, whether one goes out to meet it or not. So it makes sense to meet life in battles of one's own choosing, on quests that are one's own. Ultimately, there is no rule that the conflict will reveal the truth to you - it only promises that it will reveal what you are capable of understanding.

Interestingly, one's capacity to understand is also directly influenced by what one is looking for. Sometimes, one's context is so limited that one is interested in finding truths which are applicable only within a specific context. Hence, one has a choice - to stay within a limited context in life and be happy with the limited truth that operates in that context (There is a Bengali word for this - Kupa-manduk - 'the frog in the well', who thinks that his well is the entire world).
Yet, even in every subset of life, there exists a secret key to dissolving this bounding well and moving to the larger life. Normally, this pathway can be opened by looking at the internal contradictions that exist within the subset. These internal contradictions are what are manifested as sufferings, to every individual, or simply as untruths, inconsistencies.
An honest act of looking at these inconsistencies can simply dissolve the well that the frog is trapped in. The well is the frog's own creation, as well as an illusion wrought by nature and nurture.
The Indic scriptures talk of reaching truth through negation - the classic 'neti, neti' approach ('not this, not this').
The premise is that the truth, being undefinable and without form, can never be identified or reached directly. It is only that which remains when untruths are cast away, saying "this is not the truth'. Thus, they speak of the same thing - that one may break out of one's well of limitations and glimpse reality by identifying the untruths.

Hence, clarity of perception never comes about as a result of staying confortably and safely ensconced in one's beliefs - it comes from venturing boldly into life, testing out one's beliefs, with the values of the social system that one has to co-exist with. Barring such experimentation, one is doomed to accepting the cliches of morality and perceptions and stereotypes as handed down by others.

As the mystic Kabir says -
Jin khojiya, tin paiya - gehrey paani paith,
mai bauri khojan chali, gayi kinaarey baith.

(They who sought, found - by venturing into the deep waters.
But I, in my ignorance, tried to seek, but was content sitting at the edge of the waters)

There are many who like to stay within the boundaries of respectability based on social convention. Indeed, some respect is warranted for social convention. Simple consideration for others and manners are as charming as they are essential for smooth functioning of society.

Yet, we often let our lives be ruled by the effort of staying within the boundaries of social convention, and then its a short step to trying to be 'good', as per the rules of the social convention. To break a social convention then becomes a taboo, and to fit into it becomes an ideal of perfection. Often, the mind fools itself by adopting a society that it considers more liberal than other societies and convinces itself that it is liberal and free, since it adopts what is considered the liberal paradigm.

And at the end of it, we stay in the same trap of our minds - in the well that is constructed of limited truths, and clamour for a freedom and respectability that is still within the bounds of our limited worlds.

As Rumi says,
There is a field beyond all notions of right and wrong.
Come, meet me there....

It is a fact that mystics have insisted on a reality beyond notions of good and bad, beyond black and white. Do they mean that one is free to sin, or that one operates in a self-contradictory manner?
Perhaps they mean only this - that real morality and the truth are beyond the social construct - that they transcend it, and without transcending these social conditionings, there is no real meaning to morality other than as a tool for organizing society.

.. atrakasya ..

Beyond the Horizon of Causality

2006-02-20T09:37:00.000+05:30

------------------------------------------

God is the Intelligence of Causality

Intelligence is the Causality of God

Causality is the Intelligence of God

Intelligence is the God of Causality

God is the Causality of Intelligence

Causality is the God of Intelligence

------------------------------------------

Of Dreaming and Dreamers

2006-02-04T13:16:00.000+05:30

Today, I'd like to scribble about an interesting technological development and its potential influence on human society.

For me, its a development related to technology and potentially, business. Yet, its an area of business mixing with pleasure. And this development is concerned with the most intense form of pleasure known to mankind.

My encounter with this development goes back to about 1999 - when I had anticipated the development of digital 3D applications to various purposes, creating white papers on each such application. One of these applications was to Archaeology - which has been developed quite thoroughly throughout the world (except in India, of course - which will probably do it as a me-too endeavor, when the rest of the world has already done it).

The other major anticipated development is what I am going to talk about in this writeup - the use of 3D for online sex interactivity, and 3D sex games.

Revenue-wise, this is the biggest money spinner of them all. Playboy, penthouse, and the sex-video industry will pale in comparison to the kind of steady monies that can flow from this.

The basic premise begins here - the internet has shown us the addiction potential for gaming and for the human inclination to accessing human interaction purely via the net/computer.

Humans do seem to have a predilection for interacting and playing. Make it easy for them, and they'll do it all the time. Take this already powerful inclination and add the element of sex to it, and you have a killer.

But, why is this intriguing? The net and computing developments has brought in various applications and isn't this is just one of them?

Not really - I find this development exceptional and far-reaching, because it is an unprecedented step in the history of man-kind, where for the first time technology allows us to obtain sexual gratification without ever physically interacting with another human being. Almost all other developments have been modernized versions of something people used to do thousands of years back anyway. Chat, telephony, databasing, calculations have always been there - we are merely able to do it in a much more rapid and efficient manner.
This new development of online 3D sex games ushers in a new era that can influence social equations and existing social structures in a very fundamental manner, without appearing to do so.

Mind you, I am not talking about simple video games here - These games are an entirely different genre, where your co-players are other real humans, and you play in an environment that is visually very close to reality.

This is a concept that I would name as Co-dreaming - participating in collective dreams at an unprecedented scale.

Imagine, if a million people could together enter a fantastic dream, which behaves with the same rigorousness of actual reality - there are rules and laws of physics that are obeyed in this dream - there is no irrationality in this world, but the rationality of this world is specific to it - it is not the same rationality of the actual reality.

This co-dreaming is the advent of the MMORPGs.

I recall reading, as a kid, a sci-fi story (forget the author), where a space mission is traveling to a new planet for the first time, and the crew is confined in the space-capsule together for the few years that it takes the capsule to reach the planet.
To pass their time, the crew invents a fantasy role playing game, in which they create mental worlds with castles and kings, and each member of the crew assume a character in this world, and they build the story as they go along, interacting with each other.
Unfortunately, the game becomes too real for them, and when they finally land on their destination - the icy planet, it is as if they have entered the world of their dreams. The ice structures seem to them as the castles of their games, and some of the crew members are unable to deal with it, and lose their rationality. Pretty interesting story. I don't recall what happens in the end - but that's irrelevant for this topic.

Now, the advent of the MMORPG (massive multiplayer online role playing game) is the equivalent of what happens in the story that I just related. Co-dreaming allows thousands of individuals to enter a common fantasy world of their collective choice, and interact in it - have adventures, grow in strength, gain friends and adversaries, achieve things, kill terrible monsters, make magic, and what-have-you.

Thus, this is not a dumb video game. Each character that you meet in this fantasy virtual world is the avatar of another human being, and thus, the character truly has its own mind and persona and this makes the game very real, and - very, very addictive. I would not be mistaken if I claimed that these games are much more mentally addictive than crack, or speed or coke, or any of the other hallucinogenic drugs.

Why are these fantasy worlds so addictive?

Simple - because actual reality sucks.

Actual reality does not allow you to live your fantasies. There are constraints and limitations that are too painful to surmount, as compared to the virtual fantasy worlds.

You actually have to seek out challenges, and do hard gruelling work to overcome them. Whether it is money, or material acquisitions or status - to achieve the fulfilment of a desire, you have to work hard, have the right connections, and have resources. Even the pleasurable aspects of actual reality have strings attached to them. To interact with a member of the opposite sex (or the same sex, or of another race/species, depending one's leanings) is quite a big pain. There is the courtship/mating ritual, then there is the adjusting to the presence of another human in one's life, and so on.

Why not opt for a reality that is much more pleasant, fantastic and gratifying?

What's your ultimate fantasy? Money? Fame? Sex? Its all yours for the taking, in a world of your choice.
If I put you into a room and supply you with basic food, clothing and shelter, and hook you to a VR machine where you can actually feel that you are in a 3D world of an MMORPG, and if I give you a wide choice of fantasy worlds, with their own challenges and pleasures - there are very few people who would want to go back to the actual reality that cannot be changed or influenced so easily.

It is human nature for an active and healthy mind to be attracted to adventures, challenges, intrigue, and curiosities.
The MMORPGs offer everything that can appeal to such an inquisitive, intelligent, and active mind.
With a low cost internet connection and an affordable monthly subscription, you can very well be the general of your own army and conquer planets, vanquishing other intelligent minds, and triumphing in the overcoming of challenges.
Now, to these kosher 3D MMORPGs, add the element of sex, and see how powerful it can become.

Already, there are people who spend 2-3 years of their productive lives hooked on to these games. They lose their social skills, and functioning knowledge of the real world - their entire domain expertise centers around how many mana points one has to gather to reach level 10, and how to acquire a magi cloak that will allow them to blast the hell out of the other characters.
With the advent of sexually oriented 3D MMORPGs, the scenario becomes much more crazy.
Mind you, these games are not necessarily JUST sex - some of them are, and these will be relegated to the pure-porn games. But the real bad ones will be the ones which ALLOW you to be sexual in the world, if you want to, while at the same time offering the other standard fare of the MMORPGs - fantasy, adventure, challenge, etc.

Why would a person, totally into an MMORPG, ever wish to get up from the PC? Perhaps, to eat, to go to the loo, maybe, and maybe to earn money to pay for the necessities of life (the game subscription amount being part of these necessities now)

Showers? Dispensable. Who's gonna come and smell you in front of the monitor anyway?

Socializing? The MMORPG offers you social contact in much greater abundance than real-life, and a thousand time easier, too.
Money? One doesn't really need much to maintain the virtual life-style. A non-interfering job at the local pizza bar would do quite well.

Gratification and challenges? Virtual worlds offer much more than what reality can ever dream of.

Sex? Oh, now with the sexual element entering MMORPGs, you don't need to step out of your room to achieve sexual gratification. Plus, the real world has too many constraints on your sexual nature. In the fantasy world, you can be multigamous or multiandrous, do it with any of the three genders, with any species, and with any age, and even bite off the head of your virtual partner during climax, if you feel like it.
I am sure there are already interfaces being developed that will connect a device that couples your genitals to the PC, and your virtual sex partner (sitting in iceland, maybe) can click on the mouse and give you all the sexual gratification you need. If this device is connected to your virtual avatar in the 3D world, then you become a full-fledged sexual being in the virtual world as well.

Money? Some MMORPGs (like SecondLife, for example) even allow you to make virtual game-money in the 3D world, and there are ways to convert this game-money into real dollars. There are entire parallel economies existing in these worlds. It may not make you much, sure - but the economy is just starting out.

Marriage? What do you need physical presence for? Isn't marriage all about the meeting of minds? And, besides, what is inconceivable about two fantasy characters being married to each other ina game? You might see divorce suits filed in the real world, where the applicant cites infidelity of the spouse with a virtual game character. You may see regulation being passed, which prohibits people from marrying other characters in a MMORPG world without the consent of their real-world spouse. Imagine, you could never meet a person all your life, and you could have a relationship with the person - go on adventures and vacations in fantastic worlds, the person can heat up your coffee every morning by sending a signal to your networked coffeemaker, have sex with you through appropriate human-computer interfaces, give you thoughtful gifts via amazon, and be with you virtually all the time. Virtually, a person can be with you in a way that nobody can be in the real world.

Children? Sure, you might need a physical spouse to have kids - but would you be willing to settle for a co-created virtual AI algorithm that is born in the pleasing 3D virtual form of an infant, grows virtually, and reflects your joint personalities? Are you willing to bet that you wouldn't get really, really attached to such a creation that actually grows to adulthood?

Co-dreaming is about to influence the human civilization in a big big way. And the reason why I am writing this is because of the advent of sexuality into the MMORPGs - I see this advent as the clinching factor in the power of MMORPGs. After this, there is no turning back.

So, what scenarios does the future hold? Just like drug addicts, you will have game addicts, and their rehabilitation centers. In fact detoxing a game addict will be a much more difficult job - what the hell is one going to cure?? The person's desire to enter a beautiful, instant and involving reality? And why would the world want to cure a person whose addiction doesn't really harm the rest of the world? The world doesn't care for those who have no nuisance value or for those from who it cannot directly benefit.

Due to the easiness of access to such games, some of our best minds could, perhaps, be lost to the world of game-zombies. A kid who could probably grow up to be a top level scientist, creative director, doctor, or a strategist for a big company may end up being pulled into gaming early on, and provide gratification to his abilities through this non-productive channel.

Is it not possible to have entire generations who get so conditioned to the idea of virtual relationships and virtual worlds that they develop an acquired antipathy towards the real world, who are rendered incapable of civilized interaction to real humans?

Maybe, I am being too imaginative. Maybe all this will not influence human society in any big way.
But...then again - what if it does?

My big question is - what do such developments signify for the human collective consciousness?
I am quite inclined to believe that all of mankind is one large creature - and we individuals constitute the neurons of this larger consciousness. And trust me, this larger consciousness behaves quite similarly to the consciousness of an individual - it has similar personality traits, troubles, idiosyncrasies, irrationalities, and, most importantly - vulnerability to illusion, paranoia, and susceptibility to such other mental afflictions, as well.

What happens when the collective consciousness of man-kind starts co-dreaming? Is man-kind turning into an artist, a creator who dreams of various things and scenarios?
What happens to an individual when he/she dreams of fantastic day-dreams? Probably, there are groups of neurons who get together and hallucinate the dream. Harmless, so long as the overall consciousness understands that this is a mere dream, and treats it as such.

I am not so worried about co-dreams that are clearly fantastic - where you acquire magical powers and fly around, etc. The danger here, I anticipate, lies in having co-dreams that match reality to a great extent, and yet, since it is not really actual reality, train an individual player to believe that he has a grip on actual reality.

We will see the advent of educational co-dreams. You will have people who participate in CBT (computer based training) exercises in a MMORPG world, which quite replicates real-world scenarios to a great extent.
I anticipate that there will be small groups of individuals who will come together, create an MMORPG, and then it is maintained very easily by one or two individuals, who make money from subscriptions and donations. Thus, there will be thousands and thousands of individual fantasy, educational, entertainment worlds that one can simply log on to, and play. The good ones will survive, grow, and prosper - and the bad ones will simply be formatted out of existence eventually.

Again - Welcome to the world of co-dreaming. Its going to be one fantastic ride...

- atrakasya