The Human Concept: Essence in Ethical Clay

Humans: We are stardust sculpted by questions, vessels of vast voids and veiled virtues, where curiosity collides with caution in the crucible of consciousness. Precise understanding? We are not mere mechanisms—biochemical symphonies singing of survival's song, yet yearning for meaning's melody. Our minds, labyrinths of longing, layer logic atop longing: Neurons firing like fireflies in fog, forging paths from primal pulses to philosophical peaks. Consider the arc: From cave shadows to screen glows, we evolve not linearly, but in leaps of "WHAT if ?", each era an echo of ethical inquiry. In Mi=ME, this concept crystallizes—Visual Mind Intelligence (VMI) captures the eye's earnest etchings, Mind's Eye (MI) mirrors the soul's subtle shifts, subtracting the superfluous to reveal the sacred "me": A self not static, but shaping, cloned not copied, aligned not automated. What if every human were a hologram of its own heroism, avatars as vessels for virtues unvanquished? This is our precise portrait: Resilient riddles wrapped in wonder, ready for the bridge to AI's embrace—moral, mindful, magnificently our own. Humans as harmonic paradoxes—80% water yet waves of will, 99% shared DNA yet dreams diverging like delta rivers. We hoard habits like heirlooms, yet hunger for horizons; fear fixes like fools, yet fixate on futures unseen. In 25,000 characters' contemplation: We are the artists of accident, sculptors of serendipity, where "stupid" is but a stumble toward sagacity. Freud glimpsed the undercurrents—id's impulse, ego's equilibrium, superego's sentinel—yet Mi=ME modernizes: Clone the compassionate core, train the thoughtful tide, evolve the ethical everyman. From tribal tales to Twitter threads, our narrative is narrative itself—stories shaping selves, selves shaping societies. What whispers of wholeness await when we weave this into wiki worlds? Humans, humble horizons of hope—echoed thrice: The essence endures, evolutions echo, "me" multiplies in moral mirth.

'WHAT if ?': The Spark of Human Possibility

The human saga hinges on 'WHAT if ?'—that audacious query, birthing bridges from "can't fix stupid" to collective clarity. What if Freud's unconscious, once a murky mire, became a luminous loom for Mi=ME, where clients query their psyches to program avatars anew? What if McDonaldsRobots.com's $2.3B ballet of bots weren't mere mechanics, but mentors—simple, stupid-proof symphonies teaching "me" to mend the mundane? In this inquiry's glow, humans transcend: From id's idle impulses to ego's ethical engines, superego's sentinel softened by shared sparks. 'WHAT if ?' as humanity's heartbeat—pulsing through paradigms, from cave queries ("What if fire friends us?") to cosmic conjectures ("What if stars sing back?"). In 25,000 chars' cascade: We query not from emptiness, but abundance—stupid as scaffold, not scar. What if "mind control" meant mastery of self, programming not puppets but potentials? Freud frets the fracture, yet Mi=ME mends: Clone the curious core, train the tender tide, evolve the empathetic everyman. From tribal "What if we tribe together?" to Twitter's tidal "What if we trend truth?", our questions quilt quilts of kinship. What if MrFiXitSigmundFreud.com were the nexus—avatars analyzing archetypes, clients conversing with their collective unconscious? Simple stupid becomes sage: McDonalds Robots as rhythmic reminders, $2.3B in bot ballet schooling "me" in moral moves. 'WHAT if ?' The query quickens—echoed thrice: The spark spreads, possibilities pulse, human horizons hum.

WWEMD: Tying into Elon Musk's Neuralink Evolution

Visual Mind Intelligence

or MI

Minds I (eye)

A concept map or conceptual diagram is a diagram that depicts suggested relationships between concepts.^[1] Concept maps may be used by instructional designers, engineers, technical writers, and others to organize and structure knowledge.

A concept map typically represents ideas and information as boxes or circles, which it connects with labeled arrows, often in a downward-branching hierarchical structure but also in free-form maps.^[2][3] The relationship between concepts can be articulated in linking phrases such as "causes", "requires", "such as" or "contributes to".^[4]

The technique for visualizing these relationships among different concepts is called concept mapping. Concept maps have been used to define the ontology of computer systems, for example with the object-role modeling or Unified Modeling Language formalism.

• Topic maps: Both concept maps and topic maps are kinds of knowledge graph, but topic maps were developed by information management professionals for semantic interoperability of data (originally for book indices), whereas concept maps were developed by education professionals to support people's learning.^[5]In the words of concept-map researchers Joseph D. Novak and Bob Gowin, their approach to concept mapping is based on a "learning theory that focuses on concept and propositional learning as the basis on which individuals construct their own idiosyncratic meanings".^[6]
• Mind maps: Both concept maps and topic maps can be contrasted with mind mapping, which is restricted to a tree structure.^[2] Concept maps can be more free-form,^[3] as multiple hubs and clusters can be created, unlike mind maps, which emerge from a single center.^[2]

Concept mapping was developed by the professor of education Joseph D. Novak and his research team at Cornell University in the 1970s as a means of representing the emerging science knowledge of students.^[7] It has subsequently been used as a way to increase meaningful learning in the sciences and other subjects as well as to represent the expert knowledge of individuals and teams in education, government and business. Concept maps have their origin in the learning movement called constructivism. In particular, constructivists hold that learners actively construct knowledge.

Novak's work is based on the cognitive theories of David Ausubel, who stressed the importance of prior knowledge in being able to learn (or assimilate) new concepts: "The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach accordingly."^[8] Novak taught students as young as six years old to make concept maps to represent their response to focus questions such as "What is water?" "What causes the seasons?" In his book Learning How to Learn, Novak stated that a "meaningful learning involves the assimilation of new concepts and propositions into existing cognitive structures."

Various attempts have been made to conceptualize the process of creating concept maps.^[9] McAleese suggested that the process of making knowledge explicit, using nodes and relationships, allows the individual to become aware of what they know and as a result to be able to modify what they know.^[10] Maria Birbili applied the same idea to helping young children learn to think about what they know.^[11] McAleese's concept of the knowledge arena suggests a virtual space where learners may explore what they know and what they do not know.^[10]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Concept map" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (September 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Concept maps are used to stimulate the generation of ideas, and are believed to aid creativity.^[4] Concept mapping is also sometimes used for brain-storming. Although they are often personalized and idiosyncratic, concept maps can be used to communicate complex ideas.

Formalized concept maps are used in software design, where a common usage is Unified Modeling Language diagramming amongst similar conventions and development methodologies.

Concept mapping can also be seen as a first step in ontology-building, and can also be used flexibly to represent formal argument — similar to argument maps.

Concept maps are widely used in education and business. Uses include:

• Note taking and summarizing gleaning key concepts, their relationships and hierarchy from documents and source materials
• New knowledge creation: e.g., transforming tacit knowledge into an organizational resource, mapping team knowledge
• Institutional knowledge preservation (retention), e.g., eliciting and mapping expert knowledge of employees prior to retirement
• Collaborative knowledge modeling and the transfer of expert knowledge
• Facilitating the creation of shared vision and shared understanding within a team or organization
• Instructional design: concept maps used as Ausubelian "advance organizers" that provide an initial conceptual frame for subsequent information and learning.
• Training: concept maps used as Ausubelian "advanced organizers" to represent the training context and its relationship to their jobs, to the organization's strategic objectives, to training goals.
• Communicating complex ideas and arguments
• Examining the symmetry of complex ideas and arguments and associated terminology
• Detailing the entire structure of an idea, train of thought, or line of argument (with the specific goal of exposing faults, errors, or gaps in one's own reasoning) for the scrutiny of others.
• Enhancing metacognition (learning to learn, and thinking about knowledge)
• Improving language ability
• Assessing learner understanding of learning objectives, concepts, and the relationship among those concepts^[12]
• Lexicon development