This may seem a little contrived but I’ll go on: I was watching Lars & the real girl a few nights ago and started to draw some similarities with the film, and my work in terms of the idea of an object becoming worshipped/misappropriated.

I guess what I was thinking about and became most interested in was the idea that this object is taken out of it’s intended use and context and placed into a new context and a new set of beliefs are built around the object (albeit through a mental disorder). So If a person takes an object from a system which has already been designed; in this case the sex doll, a user, and the context for which this object is used, and then puts it into the context of say christianity it’s meaning transforms as it did in this film. 

I was obviously interested in Lars’ worship of an object, and how in this case, the definition of worshipping came from his falling in love with the object, however it was the love of a ‘person’ to him (which he constructs so convincingly, and interestingly he constructs the morals and so on that he personally holds, along with everything else; so he gets to decide what she says to him etc.). So maybe it is more about attributing human aspects to objects, that enable them to become worshipped. How Jesus is worshipped despite being a man, perhaps the same way that people project their own ideals, morals etc onto a system which they then worship.

I went to see Ben Judd in his studio last Friday. We ended up talking for around two hours about work, which has proven to be incredibly useful; I feel like i have got to a really exciting point now. Thanks very much to Ben for putting so much time aside for me… The sound file is here:

Chat with Ben Judd mp3 

This coincided with an exercise Matt suggested doing last week, which was to map my territory. The conversation i had with Ben has become my map, and here is the super long key: each section has a time with the bullets of what we talked about)

00:29 Objects representing religion

• The problems with objects/idolatry
• Objects act as a metaphor or to remember
• The crucifix stands to represent jesus dying for our sins
• Celebration of inhumane, brutal act
• Comparison to electric chair

02:20 My work

• Technology instructing belief
• Lack of understanding
• How to build and object that informs a belief

02:45 The e-meter

• The object acts as a hook
• Machine that doesn’t work on its own
• Other person builds context
• Interested in how to build these machines
• Allow the machine can build its own context

04:13 My machine

• Plan to put it into a home
• As an object that you use but do not understand
• See if meaning can be attributed to the object
• Can object and readings have meanings attributed through use
• Appears like a scientific experiment
• Does it fool people?
• Not sure i want to fool people
• I am insinuating this though

06:00 You can set up the bare bones of a thing

• And just allude to it
• Without doing it

06:22 Scientology doesn’t have a lot of substance

• Ben met Scientologist
• Allowed to be preached to
• Showed diagrams and videos
• However unimpressive and empty
• Reiteration of other things
• Including psychotherapy
• Taking notions and attributing other meanings to it
• Builds a facade and image
• If image is convincing enough people buy into it

08:09 The con-man

• Scientology 
• Contrasts of information
• The con-man 
• The internet provides a space where to set of contradictory information can sit side by side
• People had conned themselves into believing in L Ron Hubbard and scientology

09:46 Self delusion

• Basis of belief
• Lacking reason
• Completely unprovable
• Absolute unknown aspect
• The grey area between something being concrete and absolutely unbelievable

10:42 I will heal you

• Building a religion and warding people off
• A lot of work to do with groups that had own belief system
• Train-spotters and morris dancers
• Explores relationship with groups as someone who participates with groups however is on the periphery, so observing 
• Felt the need for an object that can validate the system
• Wanted to construct objects that would give a sense of history to movement
• Did performance with white robes
• Had garments made
• Jewelry
• Wrote manifesto
• Simultaneously invited people to join and warded people away
• What were promises of i will heal you?
• Eternal utopian happiness
• But at the same time saying that all of this was a construct, that the objects etc were made purely for show and it doesn’t mean anything at all
• So it was inviting people to invest their belief in these objects
• Was asking the users to do the process of double thinking
• It worked; people believed

14:58 Transforming the Gallery space into a temple

• Very simply
• Lighting and signage
• Subtle changes to space allow for re-interpretation
• People genuinely fooled

15:34 Romantic notion of the artist

• The see-er
• Special powers as a visionary
• Applied self to that positions

16:04 Spirit mediums

• Preaching to the converted

18:29 Putting self in medium position

• Went to class
• Teaching to become a spirit medium
• Stood up and supposedly got in touch with spirits
• Meant to pass on a message
• What’s the difference between being psychic and saying the first thing that comes into your head
• Inevitably someone in the audience stands up and says yes i know who this is.
• Interested in if this is a genuine experience or a constructed one.

19:56 Persinger’s God helmet

• Stimulation of temporal lobe
• Seeing god
• Stimulates images
• Epilepsy stimulating fits 

21:00 Seeing is believing?

• If you see something with technology which you can attribute to science etc. However it still seems to breed belief
• If you see something in your head that can be explained, are beliefs still built around this

23:19 Spirit photography

• Victorian constructs mid 19th century
• Images where people are getting in touch with spirits and being photographed doing it
• At the time it was seen as the ultimate truth- a technology could prove the existence of spirits
• Photography considered something that never lied
• New and had a sense of magic to it
• People could construct belief around that technology.
• From our perspective we can see a badly made hoax
• You know its a construct however can still buy into it, so no matter how shoddily made it is.
• Artists are trying to construct a world that a viewer can believe in
• People are willing to enter it and buy into it
• An agreement

25:42 Art

• By making art works you are creating your own world
• The artist creates a universe around an art work
• Making your own belief system
• Create own rules
• Own individual set of beliefs that you are exploring
• Genuine-ness of a set of beliefs that you put out
• If its convincing and there is enough for the viewer to believe in they will try to believe it
• Even if it is an obvious construction

27:17 The photographers gallery- seeing is believing

• A series of 3d photos
• 3d photography
• Images of floating objects
• Creating scenes of magic
• Floating rocks
• Maybe another technology which attempts to create beliefs around a hoax

31:22 The meter I made

• Very basic
• Attempts to package simple electronics into an object that forces intimidation
• Not scientific
• Attributing meaning to readings that don’t mean anything
• Results?
• Have i got a corresponding key/graph?
• Should i build a context and key or should i allow that to happen
• Not sure if it would happen
• How would it be displayed?
• Might be an object that sits in the home
• Not to give people a meaning to start with
• How do i encourage people to use it
• Why would they?
• What are the interfaces?
• Could be ambiguous
• However needs to be a point of contact
• How do people encounter it?
• Perhaps in a religious context, however problems with the e meter
• In the home context looking at how a user base is formed, and if people will form ideas about it
• Built object to almost create or promote a fear around it
• It looks austere, almost industrial
• Would there be instructions?
• I think there will have to be
• Its not an obvious object
• Though maybe it is a case of me just explaining the object first?

37:05 Pseudo experiments

• Somebody in a room with austere instruments equipped with dials
• And someone in the next room who get electrocuted
• Person in next room is actor
• Tests peoples moral judgment

39:38 Bread

• Want to do interviews with how groups of people respond to a democratic artifact

40:40 Constructions: i will heal you

• Just a question of having a logo and a manifesto
• And it was enough
• Was a religion
• Giving it an identity

41:10 What’s next?

• Put object in a context
• Do the interviews
• Start working on a film for this object and use that to build context for next object

41:59 Keith tyson

• Made work which he said was constructed by a computer
• The computer gave him instructions to make the work
• Showed the work with the computer that he had created
• It emerged that the computer didn’t exist
• Whole thing was a construct
• Play on the idea of control and the idea of how much control the artist has of the work and also the audience
• Using the machines to inform the next machines, and building a series of intelligent machines

43:12 Objects are made by man

• Contemporary belief in objects neglect that fact that objects are made by man
• The idea of magic
• About computers
• Objects being smarter than man and thus believed
• Magic object given by heaven
• The idea of magic in electronic objects
• Lack of understanding
• No idea how computers work and thus become magical
• The car
• Belief made car, and the car established belief around the car
• Belief in building a machine that can make your life better
• In the same way that Christianity promises of a greater life ahead or certain freedom
• The idea of modernism and the promise of utopia in the future through machines we are making
• The inevitable failure of modernism 
• The realisation this perfect world will never happen
• Housewives having own vacuum cleaners but on valium
• However machines still have magic to them and certain sets of beliefs

46:20 You cant see the workings

• I was thinking i might expose some of the circuitry and try to use this to build a lack of understanding; electricity again has a certain lack of understanding
• Exposing circuits is almost daunting and scary
• This object has the wood to give it a sense of history and identity
• Hard to gauge its age
• Maybe from the 60’s or 70’s
• An object that is trying to be futuristic
• 2001 space odyssey type aesthetic
• In some ways it is antiquated, but at the same time is something that is looking to the future
• Try stripping it down
• Might loose the idea of austerity and fear
• The idea of uncertainty and the element of unknown
• If you could see what’s going on would you fear it less
• It could be an even more complicated object

• More dials the better
• Early computers, that used punch cards, and more mechanical
• Something fascinating about this, and the idea of a machine
• The laptop or phone has taken this element away, whereby we don’t think of it as a machine anymore
• It is about more of a physical interaction with the machine, and the idea of your body becoming one with the machine; to be hands on with the machine
• Interesting set of decisions to be made around the object; “I’m going to hold this thing”
• Imagining it as a larger thing; sort of getting into it
• Two people using the machine at the same time
• Perhaps as a way to communicate
• At the moment it is a one way thing
• What happens if it is Person, Machine, Person
• Hiding data from the user, so using another person as a mediator between person and machine
• So the user doesn’t have a control of it
• This might help the object to instruct and construct faith
• So there is a certain belief in it
• In terms of a costume; robe or lab coat maybe

53:51 The modern day Messiah

• Claims he knows who the next messiah is and he talks to him telepathically
• Does these public speeches, relaying information from the messiah
• Saying “The Messiah will come one day soon”
• However he is becoming and has put himself in the position of the Messiah
• Does this in a very subtle way; perhaps clothes and constructed image
• Perhaps the way he is addressing the people, on a raised platform etc.
• People completely believe in him
• Whether or not he is being manipulative or not isn’t really important, he has constructed a belief somehow

56:34 The second coming

• Thinking about how to construct, and convince someone of the second coming
• Developing objects to tell future generations of a different truth and thus construct a fossilized idea of how we are as a society
• We can create objects now that are instruments and objects now that are telling of a different truth or story

57:30 Objects need to feel old to give a sense of truth and allow for belief

• Old electronic objects 
• The 3d viewer, has a sacred feel through it’s aesthetic, and possible attempts to tell of a truth through this aesthetic.

59:07 Time machine/capsule objects

• How would I describe the objects that I thought you would dig up in a thousand years time
• Looking at symbols, and attributing meaning to symbols, so trying to convince someone of a second coming, by creating an identity that can be fossilised
• Ben dressing up in a white robe is almost suggesting a saviour
• Learning to become a psychic is similar, whereby you are suggesting that you have these powers
• Relates back to the romantic vision of the artist; artists putting themselves forward as a saviour/visionary etc
• People buy into that idea; the idea of the artist as creator and outsider

01:01:03 Being in control/taking ownership of the objects

• When you see a piece you think of the persona of the creator
• My relationship to the objects is intrinsic; I need to be able to say what they are etc.
• I am in control of the objects and can claim that they do almost anything; however I need to be aware of this, and in control of it

01:02:30 Exhibition: Strange powers 

• Artists responding to the idea of the supernatural
• *Ask Ben for link*

01:03:07 Ben’s next work 

• Psychics that draw portraits of spirits
• Show you the face of the spirit
• Teaching Ben how to draw these portraits
• There is a lady that does this and then afterwards she sees photographs that people provide her from whom they believe they are of those that have have deceased and there inevitably are resemblances

Looking at the feedback from my territories presentations, and what I am thinking about dong next with this work.

Alex is talking about designing religion through artifacts and the practices involved with these artifacts. And as further research to look at current objects in different religions and see how these are used in everyday lives. 

I think this is kind of where I am going at the moment with the last object/machine that I made, however maybe what I need to do is consider the actual context surrounding the object more, before the object is actually made. He also mentions objects that are used to see into and manipulate the future, I guess in a way this goes back to my box of ‘meaningful stuff’, however there are obviously better examples than this that perhaps need to be probed a little more.

Charlotte also says to explore objects sitting within faiths, and examining how they support these faiths, and systems. 

Matt says: Set a focus (which I really need to do), and Miracle Bread -  Design 10 loaves.

I think the 10 loaves would be an interesting making exercise for me, I was considering this before through my drawing, however I felt that I was not really thinking very interestingly about the bread, and I was also pretty concerned i was not acting upon and drawing from well thought out research. I’m not fully sure of the bread though. I think that the drawings that I did do were mostly irrelevant and quite uninteresting. A lot of them seemed to fall back upon the idea of making it to enforce the idea of transubstantiation. This is all well and good, but the problem is, you don’t need to design for this, bread becoming flesh is a mental construct, and it is not necessary nor interesting to make it more ‘fleshy’.

Jimmy says to look at the process of becoming a Scientologist, Shaman, and an Auditor. I think this is something I have been meaning to do all along, however the Shaman is something new to me that I had not thought about as yet, though I had considered mediums. I assume he means Auditor in terms of a Scientology, this is something I really need to explore, especially with the idea of the con-man.

Also jimmy reinforced my thinking that I need to interview people; I was partly worried that by interviewing i would only gain a few small insights, and thus incorrect data, however I think that this is probably just as, if not more interesting to the work. Each person starts to put their own thinking and build their own context around certain artifacts.

My Scatty notes and slides from the Territories presentation on Monday.

Since last time

• Been looking at objects within belief systems
  • Bread
  • Crucifix
  • E-meter
• The process of these becoming sacred

Found out:

• Problems with idolatry
• Objects cannot act in religion as a savior
  • However statues and symbols etc exist of certain parts of religion
  • E.g. virgin mary

Bread to flesh

• The belief is a mental construct
• Someone/something tells you what object is or becomes
• Like Oak tree try by Michael Craig Martin
• The bread to flesh object at the V&A

Objects must serve as reminders in religion

• Therefore
  • Objects not required to construct belief
  • In the mind
  • Interested in such a democratic artifact- bread becoming holy

Ben Judd

• Started a religion
• Explored his faith and that of others
• Met witches, Scientologists etc.
• Then created his organisation and commissioned designers to brand it etc.

 
Mapping belief

• Quest for meaning results in belief
• A certain promise is made of being saved, or of a greater good
• This gives meaning to people through their beliefs

Objects becoming worshipped

• Objects are manipulated over time- including texts and so on about a belief
• Also built upon
• This means people get to manipulate their beliefs over time, and thus the people who will subscribe to that belief in the future.
• This also means that objects that should not be worshipped or even used become so

How a savior infiltrates society

• Saviors act against common practice
• Disagree with the man
• Solves problems or offers to for a certain group
• Saviors inevitably have to act against what is currently happening in order to establish a following
• This also results in fragments and groups

Objects dictate and demand belief

• Objects are used to manipulate in truth telling
• The truth becomes constructed
• The objects are designed to demand following and belief

Objects become accepted

• This can rise exponentially
• As example:
  • Object makes life better, friend see’s and gets one, and repeats.

Objects also mediate groups of people

• Objects provide group, and act as a thing to bring people onto common ground
• They tell of unity
• Act to advertise to non-subscribers

Belief is a human construct

• almost all objects man believe in are made by man
• However these are often made by people whom are far away in terms of status, time, or space

Objects reassure users

• Objects reassure
• Objects are smarter than us- however are made by us
• Objects are designed to reassure us
• Lack of understanding leads to worship, and placing of object on a pedestal, in the same way we don’t understand miracles

Technology can mediate, (and in examples does) the world for us like belief

• The helmet acts to reassure the user
• It displays pieces of information to the user to give them meaning, for example live pictures of their kids etc.
• It attempts to give meaning through it’s interface, and thus the interaction with the rest of the world.

What does god look like?

• We believe what we see

Persingers helmet

• Persinger created a helmet to stimulate a part of your brain that would make you hallucinate and see god
• Interest in epileptics before a seizure
• It also takes to mean that we have the capacity for belief already built into our brains.
• The machine would not make you see God, it is only stimulating pre conceived ideas of god.

The Brain machine

• If you can provide this mental environment to see god is it believable though; if you saw god would you believe in it?

The other technology

• The e-meter
• It’s not scientific
• Works in a different way
• Uses a machine to open up a part of you that context can then start to manipulate for example the guy sitting across from you can say; this machine says you should join our religion.
• The machine only works through lack of understanding/reason by its subjects, thus belief.

How can I make people believe through machines and technology?

The dreamachine

• The dreamachine is a primitive way of stimulating the brain, and creating hallucinations. 
• I am not saying, or trying to see god, however I am looking at it so see if the way it interacts with your mind, with simple flashing lights can be used to stimulate visions, and if belief can be attributed to such visions

However, machines are not enough

• Machines cannot create belief
• There must be a lack of reason
• Most importantly a context

And anyway how would you know if you saw god

My machine!

• Measures resistance through the body
• Attempts to construct meaning through materiality of object
• gives meaningless value weight with the object
• Can I form a system of belief around object

Next:

I want to put the machine in context

• Allow it build its own context
• Discover how it can be misappropriated by users
• Does meaning become attributed to it

I’m going to look at different systems of belief (obviously not all of the above, I am most concerned with Modernism at the moment.

Map objects that inform Belief systems

I’m looking at how beliefs inform objects and how these then inform beliefs, how this is cyclical and how it relates back to design.

I want to think more about the promise of savior and greater good within the context of design.

Look at the con-man

Read Heidegger

Books i am currently reading…

Continuing from my last post; the goal was to package the electronics to that the object has a certain demandingness to it… The idea was that by using certain types of material; for example the darker wood, polished metal, and certain dials, I could experiment with objects that demand a belief system, and a certain set of feelings about the object and what it does. The object simply measures the resistance through the body, which is a meaningless, but quantifiable value. By introducing an object that allows for this can you develop a set of beliefs around the object?

I am still a little unsure of the context surrounding the object; I am not sure if i need to build this myself and become in control of it, and how the object is responded to, or if it is more interesting to allow a context to build around it. For example will it enter into daily routine, of “oh, i need to check my resistance” indeed if one didn’t know it was the resistance it was measuring would there be speculation around the object and would meaning start to be attributed to it. If for example if someone noticed correlation between when they are stressed and a certain reading would they become aware of this reading and start to understand it in a different way; “Oh it’s gone up to three, that means i’m stressed, thanks to this object I now know when I’m stressed”. 

Well anyway, here it is:

The dark wood.

Building

Positions decided 

 
Dialled 

Almost done. 

Brit has a go

And squeezes harder for a lower reading.

“Will it electrocute me?”

George questioned the science of the object, and asks what the resistance actually means of the body, and also asks if it does anything or if it “just an art piece”- pretty interesting.

Getting different readings.

The Humble, Deptford Market Ohmmeter

 
A reasonably conductive tongue, yes moisture makes it work better… Duh.

 
Lots of fiddling today, a new potentiometer, followed by several feeble attempts to amplify the signal.

 
The conductive grips; they both will be polished (nicely) by tomorrow.

 
Ready to be housed… Awesome.

This is what I am going to be finishing tomorrow… I need a scary looking knob and some mahogany; I think that a darker wood evokes more of a kind of fear than say pine. I think it has a more antiquey feel, like an object you can’t touch, and therefore it becomes more respected and potentially feared… or worshipped?

I had a tutorial with Matt yesterday which has started to inform pretty well…

The main bullets that arose are:

• Look for how constructions of belief are brought about by objects

This is pretty obvious with things like scientology which i have been looking at for a while, whereby the e meter coupled with the book/person talking to you provides a basis for a set of beliefs, and it starts to work in quite a manipulative way. 

However there are less obvious things like how the apple in the story of Adam and Eve becomes an object not necessarily where a belief is formed but a set of morals and thoughts about the human race. I’m not so sure of this and i don’t think it works in as obvious or as interesting ways as machines that are literally the underpinnings for religious beliefs. The apple is just acting as a metaphor.

In other systems of belief, perhaps in capitalism whereby money is the object; though this is a concept rather than a specific object… perhaps the object and the physical form of money is something that acts as a manipulator for belief in this system. The materiality definitely acts to promote this as a system, and the kind of grandeur, form and imagery that is used in money.

• Move into new forms of belief- not just religion

I think religion has started to take over; i guess this is obvious, seeing as I started from ’savior’, however I think I have moved from this into belief’s and how object fabricate beliefs.

I think yesterday helped a lot in terms of talking about how design has the potential to manipulate futures, opinions, the world, and obviously beliefs, however I am finding it pretty hard to get to a point where i can see objects that directly inform and create a belief system; they tend to be accompanied, by thoughts, writings, and so on, rather than acting by themselves.

We also talked about extending to other forms of belief:

• Modernism
• Communism
• Science
  etc etc..

We also talked about how belief is demanded by objects; I think that this comes down to how artifacts are accepted and used, in that an object has to have an element of belief in order for it to work. I was thinking about the car, and how the object required a complex set of beliefs in order for it to be accepted and used. People had to be convinced that it was safe, or that their lives could be improved and made easier by having one of these objects. I guess this was done with complex advertising, and it took a fairly long time for the car to be as accepted as it is now.

In the same way Modernism was a belief in the future which was demanded by a series of beliefs in objects; the idea of stacking people in buildings, came from a belief in this as a lifestyle. Matt talked about this with the elevator, whereby it was demonstrated to be safe and useable; and thus was accepted by the masses, which then started to inform a movement and belief.

It seems that every object that becomes accepted has a conceptual layer surrounding it, which means there is a promise of a savior or greater good that acts upon the objects and the potential consumers. In the same way the religion, or utopian visions of the future, promise of a greater good, higher power, or savior in the future, objects have to have this too; ‘this object will make you’re life better’.

I guess this is starting to relate to what Baudrilliard said that “Postmodernism is a nihilistic epoch”, I take this to mean that, with these advances there comes a pessimism about the future; whereby modernism has failed, and perhaps the belief in these objects is either in ruins or is perhaps just dismissed as it is no longer exciting. I mean it’s obvious to say there isn’t a ‘belief’ in Postmodernism, like with modernism; people don’t think that technology can be a savior, and that everything will be OK the more stuff we make (though I think there is obviously still an element of this, there is now far more pessimism). In the same way that religion promises of problems being solved and of utopia when you are dead, modernism promised to solve problems using technology and objects in the future. Again, Communism promised of a utopian future by using a political system to reach this end goal. I think science is probably in the same vain; the more we find out the better it will be; curing disease and so on. Thus beliefs are established, whereby critical questions about these subjects are dismissed (obviously: belief inherently lacks reason) for example, if we cure all the diseases what will happen? and is this even a good thing?

• V&A religious artifacts

I guess I as a thing to do i need to go and see a little bit of how objects are made into religious artifacts; Matt gave a great example of a piece that has a little holder and a magnifying glass; you place a piece of bread or the wafer in the holder and the magnifying glass projects a beam of light from the sun onto it… Thus making the bread into the flesh of Christ.

It sounds like an interesting object not leaat because it doesn’t use any technology; but uses another thing that is not understood and is worshipped; the sun to turn the bread into flesh.

• The Con-man

Another aspect I need to research a little further is the idea of the con-man; as i was realising with my drawings it is not necessarily the machine or object that constricts belief, but the context and thoughts that are built around it perhaps by a third party. I think I’m going to go get a Hustle box set….

Territories presentation on Monday…Awesome

Ok, this is a long one…

Mapping how objects become worshiped.

Mapping how objects of worship become manipulated over time, and thus become more widely accepted.

Mapping how ‘a savior’ infiltrates a system/society, and how it creates new social groups, as a result of this infiltration, and exploitation of a social group. Also starts to look at the ways people can spread belief, and understanding by acting against already accepted ways of being/acting within a social group.

Objects/machines that talk about truth, and attempt to exploit the truth through lack of understanding.

Mapping how an object becomes accepted by a social group through belief.

Mapping how an object mediates a group of people and tells of groups unity which then acts to spread a message.

Mapping how belief acts outside reason within the context of the outside world.

Drawing how bread becomes flesh.

Belief constructed by man.

Machines to promote fear into belief.

Words: Construction.

Words: Savior.

Words: Belief.

Words: Meaning.

Objects, and machines acting to reassure user.

Bread as: Metaphor, Suicide, Reasons to function, and Proof of God/Reward.

Viewing the world with help from technology. The helmet would display data to the user, which could reassure them of reasons to function within the world, for example viewing their children’s happiness, displaying pictures of loved ones, or reminders of better times.

Prompts by technology to validate life, and provide meaning. This object send a text message to your phone when your child is unhappy or happy to provide a reason, or need to work, continue to live etc. in order to please your children.

What does God look like?

E-Meter

Persingers helmet.

Hallucinogens?

The brain machine; currently set to ‘SEE GOD’.

Selling spiritual experiences?

Obviously machines are not enough to stimulate a vision of god, there has to be a certain context for this to happen in; perhaps a culture which holds certain beliefs about God already. It must also be combined with a belief in the first place, otherwise experiences can be justified by reason; rather than someone saying “I saw god”, they would say “My mind was playing tricks on me”.

How do people know if they saw God anyway…

So to continue on from my last post, and as a rapid making exercise, I’m attempting to see some forms of technology on stimulating visions and potentially beliefs, here is the first incarnation of the dreamachine… 

I had a very quick chat with Jimmy (http://www.auger-loizeau.com/) this morning, especially concerning Persinger’s project about feeling and seeing god; I’m hoping to chat with him properly soon…

For a while now I have been interested in exploring how belief is a construct in the mind, and this project, quite literally produces this belief by stimulating the temporal lobe (please correct me if I am getting this wrong Jimmy!) to produce hallucinations, and feelings which mimic or attempt to at least the feeling and seeing of god. Obviously this is a construct in the mind whereby the stimulation makes the brain build images of a personal perception of god.

Persinger has tickled the temporal lobes of more than 900 people before me and has concluded, among other things, that different subjects label this ghostly perception with the names that their cultures have trained them to use - Elijah, Jesus, the Virgin Mary, Mohammed, the Sky Spirit. Some subjects have emerged with Freudian interpretations - describing the presence as one’s grandfather, for instance - while others, agnostics with more than a passing faith in UFOs, tell something that sounds more like a standard alien-abduction story.

Jack Hitt
(http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.11/persinger.html?pg=1&topic=&topic_set=)

This project seems to have stitched together two of my interests almost perfectly; that of manufacturing belief/saviors, how these beliefs/images/saviors are warped over time, and looking at how a technology can both produce/build, and manipulate belief systems.

It is a slight worry that this is something that has been done before, however I think i’d like to at least see or use this as a research tool, so that I can start to understand how people fabricate belief systems from things that they have seen, or experiences/encounters they feel they have had with God. As the machine does not fabricate or build images it fools a part of your brain into coming up with something, which is then labelled by your mind, perhaps as culture has defined you to perceive god.

This also brings up a number of worries and thoughts, about brainwashing and how people who use certain technologies can start to make systems of belief with technologies (in the same way as Persinger’s machine stimulates the brain and the brain then attaches perception to this stimulation) in order to control and so on. I guess the obvious example is with L Ron Hubbard’s E-Meter. I guess I don’t really need to go into any depth as to how this piece of machinery is manipulative; it simply opens up a a possibility for somebody else to tell you something using the machine as tool to back up what they want to tell you. The machine is really just a crude lie detector, however because of the flicking dials and so, there is a perception perhaps even a fear of the machine, and what it can tell you about yourself.

Oh, how to build and E- Meter: http://www.ralphhilton.org/emeter/Mk4.htm

So, I think I need to look into these objects more, and maybe deconstruct them, physically as well as conceptually. 

These machines offer two different perspectives; the E-meter, creates a layer of belief through a kind of hypnosis/con. In a similar way Persinger’s feeling god machine opens a space in the mind which then alllows for a construction by your mind, perhaps with already pre-conceived ideas of God/savior/heaven/hell and so on. In the same way that a near death experience, quite often when described sounds like a total cliche; because a culture (even things like cartoons/films/writings etc) has had an effect on the way the brain perceives these things.

I guess it seems the major difference is being in a state of mind that will allow you to rationalise an experience, and be able to attribute experiences to science/psychology rather than attributing it to spirit, or higher being etc. For example Scientologists have reached a point where rationality does not seem to work; wherby denial sets