[en/framement]

the [enframement problem] is a dangerous knowledge gap that often creates an [illusion of context] even when none is available to be perceived, e.g, the [unframing] of [content] is what creates magic tricks, if the slight of hand moves precisely as the [frame] changes around the [content] the [illusionary context] provides us with a [frame] that is not actually there, and the human brain must create it's own [frame] in order to process and give [contextual] meaning to what just happened. The danger of [enframement] is that outside the [frame] of a magic show, [illusionary context] is sometimes malicious.

Our human commodification of Tell-Lie-Vision & Social Media have made [illusionary context] popular as entertainment, the [enframement problem] is tricky to solve because, we often enjoy spending our time watching [frames], who have [context] artificially created and explained to us by the magician, developer, movie director, streamer, artist, designer, or politician.

Without tactful sanitization, the danger of potential [illusionary context] has more shadows to move through, more potential vectors to appear through them, and sink into our minds, as the danger is within us, we become threats to our own reality and the unconscious ability to construct [context], pattern completion becomes a weakness, in both reality, and especially more so in the digital world, where the extensions of these gaps are [enframed] and proliferated, yet translucent, and embedded aside symbols, stories, politics, authority, people, and trust.

Each time we blindly trust the [frame] more than our own discernment of [illusionary context], maladaptive day-dreams have room to festers and split the [frame] of our own identity, disrupting who we truly are.

"What's dangerous is not alien technology. There is no evil inside technology, daemons have been running in the background since inception, the danger lies in the gap of perception, the blank that the human mind fills in with it's available context. Enframing is creating a destiny and danger of some context of thing before it is begun, and that in itself is more dangerous, because it contains the worst fears and actions possible." - O.R.B.

• Frame: the boundary of (perceivable) and observable reality.

• Context: the background information used to translate frame to meaning.

The [frame] is a both a phenomena and a tool, and through programmable hypnotic frequency we are whisked into a future that's been subtly [enframed] despite it not.

The educational system teaches us to communicate things like — safety, danger, right, honor, ethics, wrong. Education itself is only an [enframement] of a governing body.

The [enframement] of the educational grading system provides limitations on student body's behavior, polarizing the march towards a large student body, and because of our constantly busy schedules, organizing and questioning this [frame] is usually much later down the line of developed consciousness, because knowledge that is economically beneficial for us, is sequestered. There are some [frames] we are not allowed to go to, or know about... not because we are inferior, but because the policies surround thing the frames have deemed that they not be available for public consumption.

Any bit of [context] and [enframement] is constantly nudging our ability to perceive true reality, and as we grow, so do our laws and color-coded boxes.

i.e., Book-leveling applied carefully, in consideration to the student's reading level. Still has it's disadvantages. By [Enframement] of a student's progress through grade-level.

If potential geniuses of a classroom are stifled by the categorization of materials, there is very little growth and a lot more limitations placed on the child, further stunting growth.

Leveling is not neutral. It is a governance mechanism that seeks to optimize control at the expense of the potential of long-term identity shaping. The "little danger" in the [enframement] of leveling is something that shapes us forever, a concept that imposes a lifelong acceptance of a barrier between self, and an imaginary [frame] of "next level".

This isn't just something unique to elementary school either, higher-education, college, and academia all face similar issues and versions of the same problem, where the incentives of degrees, certificates, honor's socieites, are all governed and enframement by institutional goals, that are not feasibly measurable by the eye, yet attempt to regulate and control.

In this [enframement], learning becomes second to the student's goal.

Which defeats the entire purpose of the education system.

...unless [illusion of context] was it's purpose.

The overton window, is a spectrum of ideas on public policy and social issues considered acceptable by the general public at a given time. It is the "street governance" of widely accepted ideologies, themes, trends, and tones in society. The overton window's frame, contains two things:
✰ Policy which is determined as policy through governmental systems.
✰ Popularity, which is determined by society as a whole.
Everything else are considered more radical and unthinkable opinions as you brand out on either the republican side or the democratic side, In America, the overton window is also constantly shifting, things that are popular and policy one year may be removed the next, things once thought as radical such as agentic governmental systems may be popular tomorrow. Presidents, policies, people's opinions change. Curriculums shift depending on who's on the board of education, neighborhoods get destroyed, rebuilt, and all the people shift around after whatever happens just like the context in the middle of the [frame]. Slavery was once popular, it was a sensible and acceptable thing that actually happened and reshaped the country. But not everyone during slavery times was pro-slavery, many abolitionists directly challenged the Atlantic Slave Trade and gathered support to raise the issue that what the Americans were doing was wrong. During the end of slavery violent and humanely cruel ideas shifted from being acceptable, to radical. As work for slaves began to die down it made no sense to keep slaves anymore, which created a new imaginary [enframement] for abolitionists it was the end of cruelty, for the enslaves, it was seen as an inevitable punishment, retribution against themselves. This is the [frame] of policy that people fought for in the civil war, and after the sensible things shifted into policy, and the popularity of cruelty began making its march towards radical, but it was a long march. Within this [frame] of thought, human beings became commodities, and no longer were their bodies or minds their own, but seen as things to be managed and controlled and this is where many of our issues today stem from, the evidence is in our obscure tipping culture and healthcare; after slavery was abolished, pro-slavery whites may have lost, but they would refuse to pay a form of taxes that supported the once-enslaved african race. It stems from this [

Home-field advantage is beneficial. Fact: nearly 54-70% of home games are won in their home field. War is similar, if a cyborg with metal armor and heat-seeking missiles catches your biometric data lacking in the mall, you're toast. But even if you were naked and weaponless in the [enframement] of your own home, you already have about 5-6 different escape routes, make-shift weapons, corners, hiding spots, all planned in your muscle memory. Home-field advantage gives can give an edge where none seem to be.Ethereum was made as an upgrade to Bitcoin, founder Vitalik Buterin and Gavin Wood came together and made a more programmable version, using programmable smart contracts, digital contracts where "code is law". Ethereum uses three (3) popular types of Smart Contracts: ERC-20 Contract (Memecoins, Tokens) ERC-721 Contract (NFTs, Unique Singular Art) ERC-1155 Contract (Digital Art W/ Multiple Editions) But as we said earlier, these contracts are programmable, and like all contracts, the people with the ability to read them and write them are usually professionals, computer scientists or autodiadacts who've dedicated a lot time to learning them. In 2016, an experiment called "The DAO" was prematurely deployed onchain, on the Ethereum network. 'The DAO' raised $150 million in cryptocurrency through a token sale, only to be exploited by a vulnerability in its code. To remedy the theft, the Ethereum development community used home-field advantage to enact a hard fork which effectively [split] the entire Ethereum network into two coins; Ethereum (New) & Ethereum Classic to revert the $150 million lose onchain that was exploited in the contract, and even though this was "good" it was controversial. Ethereum became popular through marketing itself as a trustless bank, like Bitcoin, immutable, and unable to changed. Yet when big money lost the game, the ethereum community effectively destroyed the game and rewrote the rules. The DAO hack wasn't just a technical failure. It was a collective governmental decision to privlege institutional continuity over the ideology of an immutability, meaning that the popular "code is law" was still conditional depending on who was getting hacked.

The failure of Web3 was not technological—it was psychological. During the post-COVID migration into digital life, NFTs did not arrive merely as files on a blockchain. They were enframed as identity, belonging, and access. What was sold was not art, but membership. Not technology, but proximity to power. Projects like Bored Ape Yacht Club did not succeed because of their aesthetic merit or technical novelty. They succeeded because they were delivered inside a carefully constructed frame: exclusivity, celebrity validation, and social proof. Ownership was presented as a passport into culture, relevance, and future wealth. The frame did the work before any individual context could be questioned. This is where the danger of [enframement] becomes visible. In an environment defined by isolation, excess liquidity, and algorithmic amplification, trust was assumed rather than earned. Parasocial relationships collapsed the distance between celebrities and audiences, while transparent wallets replaced credentials as symbols of legitimacy. The result was a market where confidence was mistaken for competence, and visibility for truth. Two individuals could occupy the same digital space, view the same assets, and participate in the same conversations—yet live inside entirely different realities. One understood the technology as experimental infrastructure. The other experienced it as a shortcut to identity and belonging.

The tragedy was not that people believed in Web3. It was that the loudest frames were the least honest. Identity was sold without accountability. Community was promised without governance. Wealth was implied without disclosure of risk. In this way, NFTs became a case study in illusionary context: a technology still under development, delivered inside a frame of certainty, success, and inevitability.

As technology becomes more embedded in daily life—mediating trust, value, identity, and governance—the risk is not that machines will overpower us. The risk is that humans will stop interrogating the frames they are placed inside. When context is pre-selected and perception is guided, discernment quietly atrophies. This is not a future problem. It is a present condition. Sanitizing context is not censorship. It is a form of cognitive governance—an ethical responsibility to ensure that systems do not exploit human pattern completion, social hunger, or the desire for certainty. Without this, enframement becomes infrastructure, and illusionary context becomes policy.

At Mental Wealth Academy, our work begins here.

We study parasocial dynamics, cyber-culture, quantitative user experience research, human-computer interaction, governance systems, and on-chain frameworks not to reject technology—but to design it with epistemic humility. Our goal is not to eliminate frames, but to make them legible, negotiable, and accountable. A decentralized future built on opaque perception. Grounded in education, empathy, and tools that respect human cognition rather than exploit it.

The work ahead is not to escape the frame—but to learn how to see it.

Works Cited

https://www2.hawaii.edu/~freeman/courses/phil394/The%20Question%20Concerning%20Technology.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

https://jmphil.org/article/id/2505/#:~:text=Other%20recent%20work%20has%20pointed,in%20rejecting%20the%20plantation%20system.

How the Brain Completes Sentences - Neuroscience News

Researchers uncover how when we hear only a fraction of what is said, but are familiar with the context, we automatically are able to fill in the missing information.

https://neurosciencenews.com

[en/framement]

the [enframement problem] is a dangerous knowledge gap that often creates an [illusion of context] even when none is available to be perceived, e.g, the [unframing] of [content] is what creates magic tricks, if the slight of hand moves precisely as the [frame] changes around the [content] the [illusionary context] provides us with a [frame] that is not actually there, and the human brain must create it's own [frame] in order to process and give [contextual] meaning to what just happened. The danger of [enframement] is that outside the [frame] of a magic show, [illusionary context] is sometimes malicious.

Our human commodification of Tell-Lie-Vision & Social Media have made [illusionary context] popular as entertainment, the [enframement problem] is tricky to solve because, we often enjoy spending our time watching [frames], who have [context] artificially created and explained to us by the magician, developer, movie director, streamer, artist, designer, or politician.

Without tactful sanitization, the danger of potential [illusionary context] has more shadows to move through, more potential vectors to appear through them, and sink into our minds, as the danger is within us, we become threats to our own reality and the unconscious ability to construct [context], pattern completion becomes a weakness, in both reality, and especially more so in the digital world, where the extensions of these gaps are [enframed] and proliferated, yet translucent, and embedded aside symbols, stories, politics, authority, people, and trust.

Each time we blindly trust the [frame] more than our own discernment of [illusionary context], maladaptive day-dreams have room to festers and split the [frame] of our own identity, disrupting who we truly are.

"What's dangerous is not alien technology. There is no evil inside technology, daemons have been running in the background since inception, the danger lies in the gap of perception, the blank that the human mind fills in with it's available context. Enframing is creating a destiny and danger of some context of thing before it is begun, and that in itself is more dangerous, because it contains the worst fears and actions possible." - O.R.B.

• Frame: the boundary of (perceivable) and observable reality.

• Context: the background information used to translate frame to meaning.

The [frame] is a both a phenomena and a tool, and through programmable hypnotic frequency we are whisked into a future that's been subtly [enframed] despite it not.

The educational system teaches us to communicate things like — safety, danger, right, honor, ethics, wrong. Education itself is only an [enframement] of a governing body.

The [enframement] of the educational grading system provides limitations on student body's behavior, polarizing the march towards a large student body, and because of our constantly busy schedules, organizing and questioning this [frame] is usually much later down the line of developed consciousness, because knowledge that is economically beneficial for us, is sequestered. There are some [frames] we are not allowed to go to, or know about... not because we are inferior, but because the policies surround thing the frames have deemed that they not be available for public consumption.

Any bit of [context] and [enframement] is constantly nudging our ability to perceive true reality, and as we grow, so do our laws and color-coded boxes.

i.e., Book-leveling applied carefully, in consideration to the student's reading level. Still has it's disadvantages. By [Enframement] of a student's progress through grade-level.

If potential geniuses of a classroom are stifled by the categorization of materials, there is very little growth and a lot more limitations placed on the child, further stunting growth.

Leveling is not neutral. It is a governance mechanism that seeks to optimize control at the expense of the potential of long-term identity shaping. The "little danger" in the [enframement] of leveling is something that shapes us forever, a concept that imposes a lifelong acceptance of a barrier between self, and an imaginary [frame] of "next level".

This isn't just something unique to elementary school either, higher-education, college, and academia all face similar issues and versions of the same problem, where the incentives of degrees, certificates, honor's socieites, are all governed and enframement by institutional goals, that are not feasibly measurable by the eye, yet attempt to regulate and control.

In this [enframement], learning becomes second to the student's goal.

Which defeats the entire purpose of the education system.

...unless [illusion of context] was it's purpose.

The overton window, is a spectrum of ideas on public policy and social issues considered acceptable by the general public at a given time. It is the "street governance" of widely accepted ideologies, themes, trends, and tones in society. The overton window's frame, contains two things:
✰ Policy which is determined as policy through governmental systems.
✰ Popularity, which is determined by society as a whole.
Everything else are considered more radical and unthinkable opinions as you brand out on either the republican side or the democratic side, In America, the overton window is also constantly shifting, things that are popular and policy one year may be removed the next, things once thought as radical such as agentic governmental systems may be popular tomorrow. Presidents, policies, people's opinions change. Curriculums shift depending on who's on the board of education, neighborhoods get destroyed, rebuilt, and all the people shift around after whatever happens just like the context in the middle of the [frame]. Slavery was once popular, it was a sensible and acceptable thing that actually happened and reshaped the country. But not everyone during slavery times was pro-slavery, many abolitionists directly challenged the Atlantic Slave Trade and gathered support to raise the issue that what the Americans were doing was wrong. During the end of slavery violent and humanely cruel ideas shifted from being acceptable, to radical. As work for slaves began to die down it made no sense to keep slaves anymore, which created a new imaginary [enframement] for abolitionists it was the end of cruelty, for the enslaves, it was seen as an inevitable punishment, retribution against themselves. This is the [frame] of policy that people fought for in the civil war, and after the sensible things shifted into policy, and the popularity of cruelty began making its march towards radical, but it was a long march. Within this [frame] of thought, human beings became commodities, and no longer were their bodies or minds their own, but seen as things to be managed and controlled and this is where many of our issues today stem from, the evidence is in our obscure tipping culture and healthcare; after slavery was abolished, pro-slavery whites may have lost, but they would refuse to pay a form of taxes that supported the once-enslaved african race. It stems from this [

Home-field advantage is beneficial. Fact: nearly 54-70% of home games are won in their home field. War is similar, if a cyborg with metal armor and heat-seeking missiles catches your biometric data lacking in the mall, you're toast. But even if you were naked and weaponless in the [enframement] of your own home, you already have about 5-6 different escape routes, make-shift weapons, corners, hiding spots, all planned in your muscle memory. Home-field advantage gives can give an edge where none seem to be.Ethereum was made as an upgrade to Bitcoin, founder Vitalik Buterin and Gavin Wood came together and made a more programmable version, using programmable smart contracts, digital contracts where "code is law". Ethereum uses three (3) popular types of Smart Contracts: ERC-20 Contract (Memecoins, Tokens) ERC-721 Contract (NFTs, Unique Singular Art) ERC-1155 Contract (Digital Art W/ Multiple Editions) But as we said earlier, these contracts are programmable, and like all contracts, the people with the ability to read them and write them are usually professionals, computer scientists or autodiadacts who've dedicated a lot time to learning them. In 2016, an experiment called "The DAO" was prematurely deployed onchain, on the Ethereum network. 'The DAO' raised $150 million in cryptocurrency through a token sale, only to be exploited by a vulnerability in its code. To remedy the theft, the Ethereum development community used home-field advantage to enact a hard fork which effectively [split] the entire Ethereum network into two coins; Ethereum (New) & Ethereum Classic to revert the $150 million lose onchain that was exploited in the contract, and even though this was "good" it was controversial. Ethereum became popular through marketing itself as a trustless bank, like Bitcoin, immutable, and unable to changed. Yet when big money lost the game, the ethereum community effectively destroyed the game and rewrote the rules. The DAO hack wasn't just a technical failure. It was a collective governmental decision to privlege institutional continuity over the ideology of an immutability, meaning that the popular "code is law" was still conditional depending on who was getting hacked.

The failure of Web3 was not technological—it was psychological. During the post-COVID migration into digital life, NFTs did not arrive merely as files on a blockchain. They were enframed as identity, belonging, and access. What was sold was not art, but membership. Not technology, but proximity to power. Projects like Bored Ape Yacht Club did not succeed because of their aesthetic merit or technical novelty. They succeeded because they were delivered inside a carefully constructed frame: exclusivity, celebrity validation, and social proof. Ownership was presented as a passport into culture, relevance, and future wealth. The frame did the work before any individual context could be questioned. This is where the danger of [enframement] becomes visible. In an environment defined by isolation, excess liquidity, and algorithmic amplification, trust was assumed rather than earned. Parasocial relationships collapsed the distance between celebrities and audiences, while transparent wallets replaced credentials as symbols of legitimacy. The result was a market where confidence was mistaken for competence, and visibility for truth. Two individuals could occupy the same digital space, view the same assets, and participate in the same conversations—yet live inside entirely different realities. One understood the technology as experimental infrastructure. The other experienced it as a shortcut to identity and belonging.

The tragedy was not that people believed in Web3. It was that the loudest frames were the least honest. Identity was sold without accountability. Community was promised without governance. Wealth was implied without disclosure of risk. In this way, NFTs became a case study in illusionary context: a technology still under development, delivered inside a frame of certainty, success, and inevitability.

As technology becomes more embedded in daily life—mediating trust, value, identity, and governance—the risk is not that machines will overpower us. The risk is that humans will stop interrogating the frames they are placed inside. When context is pre-selected and perception is guided, discernment quietly atrophies. This is not a future problem. It is a present condition. Sanitizing context is not censorship. It is a form of cognitive governance—an ethical responsibility to ensure that systems do not exploit human pattern completion, social hunger, or the desire for certainty. Without this, enframement becomes infrastructure, and illusionary context becomes policy.

At Mental Wealth Academy, our work begins here.

We study parasocial dynamics, cyber-culture, quantitative user experience research, human-computer interaction, governance systems, and on-chain frameworks not to reject technology—but to design it with epistemic humility. Our goal is not to eliminate frames, but to make them legible, negotiable, and accountable. A decentralized future built on opaque perception. Grounded in education, empathy, and tools that respect human cognition rather than exploit it.

The work ahead is not to escape the frame—but to learn how to see it.

Works Cited

https://www2.hawaii.edu/~freeman/courses/phil394/The%20Question%20Concerning%20Technology.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

https://jmphil.org/article/id/2505/#:~:text=Other%20recent%20work%20has%20pointed,in%20rejecting%20the%20plantation%20system.

How the Brain Completes Sentences - Neuroscience News

Researchers uncover how when we hear only a fraction of what is said, but are familiar with the context, we automatically are able to fill in the missing information.

https://neurosciencenews.com