All questions and comments please mail to
e-mail :
e-mail to Sergei Matrenin

Sergei Matrenin.

laystall quam
About me.


t is destined for everybody who will have a fate to be interested in this.Texts on pages constitute peculiar sonnets, sketches often not logically connected. However, any page supplements all the others and helps to understand what I have wanted to report.

Any inforvftion reaching a person is very individually transformed and put on thge finished shelves because of his\her emotional condittion, intellectual outfit.More often just the first impression as aperception of something new and as arule,emotionaly accented in connection with this forms or determines that shelf where people put each other in their consciosness. Durability of this view is determined by intensity of the emotion with which new information comes. subsegnet change of the formed reguires consider ably larger information-emotion current.The last haviing a level below some threshold weakly changes the view-shelf.From this pointof view,common view about that the fierst impreession on a person is the most correct,strongly reflecting the gist of a person is very doubtful.A person consciousness is formed for scholastic excess of peculiar programmes of behaviour for the purpose of maximum possible probability of survival in a given place, at a given time underminimum of information.A higher emotional backgraound is from here.Minimum of information about behaviour, properties of a new object, chancec of displayng theseproperties can form radiclly-wrong shelf, and otherwise a plan offorecasting the new object behaviour. Never theles, politicans use just this property of state of mind of a person,ereating their own image-illusion,using technical possibilities and artistically juggling rehearsed verbal and non- verbal means of introduction about themselves.It is absence of clearly imagining that information that came is, as a minimum, accidental, very incomplete, and in some coses, specially misrepresented by outside intellect to please its aims, in addition, misrepresented by interpretations of a brain based on formed outlook.All this leads to negative backgroaund of emotions inside a person, when a reality is essntially different from an expected, forecast one. Irritating people by each other under ccommunication often relates just to this tupe of emotions.
As far words can be perceived not synonymously, youcan see in the example of a plot of some fairy-tales. The main hero- a fine fellow trevels across the world and beats all enemies. He beheads dragons, cheats cunning witches and even knocks Koshchei the deathless(an evil being in the Russian folk-love) to death.And finally, he finds himself in a tower-thamber drinking peacefully tea with a beautiful girl.The girl says that he must hot look there, otherwise he will know something and turn to stone.However, the fine fellow, he beat all, he is fearless, answers - Where must I not look? - and looks there.As a result, he turns to stone.One of interpretation- another finer fellow can be found for every fine fellow.The second- a person can endure not all knowledge, some knowledge can be harmful and even deadly.-Another version- you should believe in people or make your disbelief commensurable, etc. About such a level of diversity of interpretation of words, sometimes to opposite, takes a place during communication of people with each other inside everybody.Therefore, it very often seems to people that they understood all, having taken in perception a closer image had in their «luggage».While forming a personality, his\her outlook, undermotivation of deeds, absorption of information, communication, under any contact with environment all information is interpreted through a prism of instinct of self- preservation. In social communications it revcals itself in complex of interpretation that I would call «Constructor game for an offended».Gist of constists of that oll words, gestures, mimicry, added behaviour of surrounding people and especially a concrete person that is in afieed of attention, all signals from him\her are disigned, fit in such a way that the most offending construction for a personality would be made.However an inter locutor is graciously inclined, any of his\her words is always interpreted into some context most harming a listener self-esteem.Moreover, it happens apart from volition, intellect,outlook of a personality.However, a further movement of this construction is determined by indevidual features of a personality.Depending on force of created emotions, during an act of estimating this construction, a person reacts to environment, inside ideas about the world changed.There is some threshold of emotional tension that leads to reconstruction, change of a personality.This threshold is different for different people, and especially is different for adults and children.Perents being surprised at their children is understendable, because what for adults can be unnoticed, for children can provoke an emotional splash, just these emotional splashes form a personality; his\her morality, outlook form.

Frame of thinking.

A person can take processes that his/her sensors are able to catch directly or through technical devices. A photography imprints a period of time that often creeps in sight sensations not to be observed.(Surprise and even disgust of people to their own images on photographies). A subject, having been in an observer`s sight perception, at an acceleration of gravity of more than 20 g is interpreted by a brain as instantly disappeared, but not gone on a trajectory in any direction. Our perception of environment is from the beginning very muth cut off through our sense organs.In particular, for exampl, for sight - by narrow stripelets of electromagnetic waves. A spectrum cut off as it is, also, is perceived not completely, but in the limits of a certain interval of speed of changing system processes. All this relates to all the sense organs. For what purpose are all these semitechnical excursuses? asks a person trying to understand a logic among different considerations thrown around here. The matter is than the more a perception system is worked out in detail, the more an illusority of our ideas about the world,each other peeps out. For all this, nevertheless, communication between people comes to be. In my idea, perception of environment happens in our brain interpretation through a peculiar net, frame of thinking that consists of images co-ordinated with each other by means of a system of connections. Weight of images, their stability, co-ordination depend on an emotional accompaniment of a moment of forming this frame. As I have mentioned, changes of the trame of perception, thinking are possible only under a certain threshold of an added emotional accompaniment. Motion of the thinking trame happens at different levels of consciosness. Signs of these activities are retraced in the form of involuntary, emotional experiences, inside dialogues, in dreams. So, a person most easily perceives information that is closest to a finished image frame he/she has. Analogues or their combination and enough, emotional information accompaniment absent, information is not taken into consideration even being registered by consciousness, it is thrown away.
Different thinking frames with a different degree of sensitivity to perception are formed for different people because of different physiology, hevedity, social environment traditions, originality of a chain of life situations including language surroundings systems, etc. The more the people thinking frame has common images, the easier people understand each other without depending on motion of the thinhing frame. As a rule, the main mass of people has the pretty hard frame, and one of the main generators of emotional accompaniment is a compex of an offended described above. It is natural, it is a result of influence of outside invironment on us as a concrete structure organization of mattev. While intently studying an aspect of the emotional generators together with the above-mentioned complex, it is possible to note the generation of interest to cognition from the point of view of a possibility of forecasting the future even to the detriment of the former. However, a common denominator of all the variants of interests is a searsh of new sensations. The oftener a person stumbles on negative sensations or old ones, as it seems to him/her, let them be positive, the less aspirations for searching new social environments, new knowledge remain whith him/her. Stabilizations of the thinking frame, getting into a psychological hole of inertness, an original fear of experimenting on his/her own fate take place.
While teaching a personality, it is as if a laying happens of images with finished connections marked out by somebody formerly. Strengthening the thinking frame, its. widening, begin overgrown with new connections between forming images happen through perception-understanding. It is as if sensor signals converted into wordimages synchronize with something similar that the thinking frame of world outlook has. A person constantly accents his/ her attention on certain key words very familiar to him/her, emotionally fixed in consciousness in the form of images. Understanding through laying, connecting other words to be subordinate to a conditional key word is formed in him/her. Perceiving information takes place in original packages whose beating-off happens during original resounding on the closest suitable finished pattern selected in consciousness. It is as if understanding leads to excitation of the thinking frame, thread-connections going to other images being excited, and at this moment cutting off perception of signals from sensors takes place. Coarse filtration happens, a person does not see, hear, he/she has already understood everything. Activization of perception is possible only after exceeding some threshold value of emotional accompaniment thst is higher than excitation of the thinking frame at a given instant of perception.
A system of frame thinkinghas a property of exciting, fragmentarily under ifluence of the emotional generators, or in other conditions of consciousness as, for exampl, hypnosis. It is asif some connections disappear, the main images disappeared. As a result, a personality has fully a sensation of understanding, but its imperfection can be watched only by a detached observed. Motivation of a personality be havior can be as an example of this under hypnosis, distinctive zombing. In reality, it is rather spread, not to say everybody has in a different degree, depending on an emotional conditio as well as other factors. In these cases, itis as if a thinned system of the thinking frame images excites.
If new cloches- images are hung on systems of people thinking, I would distinguish conditional extremities: an academic style of thinking and a dynamic style.An in thinking are rigidly fixed, with no possible revision, with minimum correction, images are coordinated with a sistem of logic connections, but without sensation of some borders of applicability of these connections. This gives a good sense of understanding some types of currents of information. When it is not underctud, it is completely rejected as information not having importance. All perceived is focused as firmness. They are full of common sense. The dynamic one- when images are expense of increasing connections; connections, images transformed. Synchronization under perception is on not contrasting, with touthing some variants of images. It is as if an act of perception is on according to an accumulating scheme of synchronization. As a rule, people have no extreme displays of systems of thinking but an infinite row of combinations of the properties enumerated. I understand as the logic connections above mentioned, connections bitween images, with cause- result signs stably reiterating under concrete conditions.
Circles aspirations.
Social environment forms from birth a personality`s aspirations- needs that determine allsubsequent scheme of his\her intentions. the main schemes of relizing achievment of aims are also taken from encirclement, and it is seldom when somebody invents something new in this, moreover, deviations are more seldom in choice of priorities for achievement that are different from conventional ones. As a rule, a person has nothing especial to be proud of his\her strong distinction from organization of an ant-hill life. Aims, intentions, needs, ways and means of realisation, variants of behaviour, all of this is programmed, crammed into a person head, and only all of this is perceived by him\her as as his\her own freedom-expressions. And only obvious mistakes in organizing this process by individuals are sensed as compulsion, but to compensate these understandings people drive themselves into psychological holes because of their frame thinking, when a person ties himsef\herself through a system of obligations, traditional in a certain social circle or\and imposed by concrete personalities through suggestion of guilt,- obligations are before them. And there their life of aspirations quickly burns.
Only a faith logic lies in sources of people`s understanding. All the logics are made on the faiths in concrete connections between events. A logic as an axiom is crammed into the thinking frame and has an emotional support in the form of sensation of common sense. Just a sensation of common sense puts a condition of condition of straned understanding of new connections between events. As a rule, this straining-tensity is not overcome for many people. But, in principle, possible. I considered the aspects of this process above. Sensation of logicality of processes is infused by social encirclement in early childhood, subsequent methodical teaching. A person has a certain age a formed untouchable sensation of logicality of behaviour of some processes in surroundings, which is confirmed by forecasting, even it is absent.
I shal try to prove how much our logic is not logical through an example of an absolute, irrejectable, abstractive statement that one and one is forever two. This statement has not on the whole confirmation in a world suuounding us. One apple plus one apple is not two, not from the point of view of matter mass, colour, taste sensetions, any others checked by experience of things. Wehave just learnt this abstraction as any logic, foundation separated from a surrounding world. While coming across what is not forecast, persistently makes signals about doubtfulness of a logic, we introduce irrational factors, invent that it is exception, in every way possible overlook that this exception is most likely a rule. THese logics are not harmless, because they prevent understanding conformities to natural laws of behaviour of surrounding. Logics elevated to a rank of common sense are possibly a casual direction determined through frames of people thinking. A crtain stage planned beforehand from the point of view of survival of a species in that environment in which it was formed.
Discreteness of thinking.
A person because of frame thinking, discreteness of perception always aspires to determining a shelf in his\her consciousness for any display of an outside world, filling it with sense to please maximum receiving of positive emotions inside himself\herself. I think this is one of the main motives in social relations of people, coming from more ancient, gregarious relations of creatures we formed from.From the most ancient history a hierarchal construction is seen of relations of people connected with some interrelations. The ancient Indian castes: the brahman, Kshatriya, vaisga, sudra are not very much different from modern castes in science, politics, production, etc.. To get in the next caste of a higher class, fulfilment of certain rules of interrelations is required, but not priority of some individual moral, intellectual properties of a personality. A person who got in «kshatriya» (or placed himself\herself there only in his\her head) can, for example, permit himself\herself to behave more dishonorably with respect to «sudra». Moral priorities of relations sharply change with respect to other «castes».
Technolodgy non cognize.
Person is programmed for expection of a miracle. He\she wants to see something improbable, is hypnotized by anticipation of supernatural. Eyes cling to the book, TVset, a body is paralyzed with expectation of the ending of a movie about life having little in common with daily life. However, if something unusual happens, a person first seeks for explanation in his\her card-index of knowledge, ideas, illusions about a surrounding world, and not having found any he\she sheves it into the dusty cabinet of unexplained phenomena. The subsequent generations invent more or less working hypothesis of this phenomenon or take it as axiom, as standing to reason, not requiring explanations, proveness, and unusualness, inexplicability disappear. However, it is possible that the doors are just here into different volumes, new measurements of unknowness, which can by their flow turn over consciousness of the most deep-rooted materialist, into spaces filled with other relations between people, different knowledge, senses, sensations.

e-mail to Sergei Matrenin