Axioms
There are certain key words that any rational person would agree about the association with IS or IT. For example, the word ‘be’ is obviously associated with ‘IS’, not ‘IT’. They are both forms of the same verb. Likewise, the word ‘that’ would certainly be associated with ‘IT’, not ‘IS’. They’re synonymous.
Once a rational person has established this, other keywords fall inexorably into place.
- Active (the essence of a verb) ⩭ IS
- Passive (the opposite of active) ⩭ IT
- Dynamic (synonymous with active) ⩭ IS
- Static (the opposite of dynamic) ⩭ IT
When a person makes the correct association in the game, they will be presented with a congratulatory message and score points. They’ll also see that association show up on a list of established associations that includes the percentage of people who agree with each mapping. In the early stages of the game, those percentages will be 100% for the obvious answers.
Polls on which there is 100% agreement among all members of the project are established as Axioms. In the early stages of the game (i.e. at the abstract level), the consensus answers should have unanimous agreement. Simple syllogisms like ‘verb is to IS as Noun is to IT’ should not be subject to debate.
Undoubtedly there will be some ignorant or careless people who will get even these most obvious associations wrong. And this brings us to an intriguing dynamic. If someone can’t or won’t get the answers right for the obvious ones, we kick them out of the game. Seriously! We will do it nicely, but we will explain that this game is for people who genuinely seek Awareness, and they don’t appear to be ready for that. Thus, we will maintain the integrity of our system, while also developing a sense of exclusivity that can make access even more attractive for some people.
A key objective of the project will be to establish a substrate of axioms upon which the ISITAS membership can agree. We will accomplish this by starting with the clearly defined IS/IT Duality, and by restricting our membership to those people who can clearly see the pattern. With a foundational set of Axioms established, we can then extend the model to progressively less abstract / more concrete objects and events.
The question is: How many Axioms can be established? And how many people can we get to agree on them?
That’s where the game gets really interesting. At some point, we will run out of clearly obvious dualities. But at what point does that happen? Imagine there are 100 people who have gone through the ISIT Game, and all of them have 100% agreement on the first 100 words/concepts. That’s cool! Where else are you going to find that kind of complete agreement on anything? Players will come to realize that this isn’t just a single player game where the goal is to rack up points and rewards; it’s a multi-player collaborative game to see how far we can take this 100% agreement about the model.
So players keep going through the ISIT Game, concept by concept, until sooner or later, somebody is going to break that 100% agreement streak. What will that word/concept be that finally breaks the 100% agreement streak? And who will the member be who breaks it?
We will have to wait for others to discover ISITAS and get the ISIT Game built to learn the answers to these questions.
