Brain curtains and a confusing list of values

May 18, 2026: 🗓

The interpreter part of the brain supposedly creates narratives out of the spontaneous unstructured thoughts from the Default Mode Network (DMN).

Both the interpreter and DMN work behind the scenes, separated from the person experiencing the narrative they co-create. So none of them know what it’s like to experience each other’s realities. Why are they all separated like that? How do they know who’s behind the curtains? What if there’s multiple people or no people or different people at different times receiving the narratives?

The interpreter receives ambiguous, potentially distorted or twisted input from the DMN, filling in gaps with inaccurate information, making false interpretations and categorizations of DMN behavior just so it can keep up. But why does it have to fill in every gap?

Maybe the interpreter believes if it doesn’t fill all gaps in continuity, something bad will happen. Like if they leave a gap “open” to interpretation, people from the outside world will enter through the gap and desecrate the mindscape or alter memories or emotional ties for some reason.

🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲

Sometimes, the simplest moments hold the deepest wisdom. Let your thoughts settle, and clarity will find you. Use this quote space to share something inspirational or reflective, perfectly aligned with the theme of your article.

May 18, 2026: 🗓

The following values are known:

0️⃣ Let x equal the phrase “believes they’re doing the right thing or the best available option for everyone involved,” or the plural version of this phrase
1️⃣ Let y equal people 
2️⃣ Let q equal guardian 
3️⃣ p equal a subset of y

Everyone x 

4️⃣ q think z not equal x
therefore, q Hyde some reality from z
5️⃣ q hide some reality from y for different reasons 
6️⃣ p hide some reality from p
7️⃣ Therefore, p think z not equal x 
8️⃣ Therefore, p hide some reality from z
9️⃣ z not know anything
🔟 q not know y hide much reality from z
1️⃣1️⃣ y able to infiltrate z
1️⃣2️⃣ q know y able to infiltrate z
1️⃣3️⃣ y not know (q know y able to infiltrate z)

On trial day:
1️⃣4️⃣ y not infiltrate z 
1️⃣5️⃣ z tell q not to sentence y
1️⃣6️⃣ Therefore, q think y infiltrate z. 
1️⃣7️⃣ Therefore, q sentence (z and y) instead of only z, even though everyone x

Here’s an example story: 

Guardian thinks z isn’t doing what z knows is the right for everyone involved. Therefore, guardian hides parts of reality from z; this isn’t to punish z but just to prevent z from negativity influencing others. Guardian also hides parts of reality from y for different reasons (again, not as punishment). 

Meanwhile, a subset of y also hides parts of reality from a subset of y. This unintentionally causes the subset of y to think z is still not acting in the interest of others. There’s no negative consequence of this to others since z has no influence. But still, it’s the principle of the thing. So the subset of y hides even more reality from z. 

Since y doesn’t know the subset hid more reality from z, y interprets z’s behavior as actually having sinister intentions rather than just not really caring about others. Therefore, y hides even more reality from z. This probably iterates a few more times between y and the subset until z basically knows nothing