It is February 6, 2026.
Today, I had an in-depth discussion with AI about the perspectives in What is the Essence of a Person, concerning personal knowledge bases and human subjectivity. The conversation touched on how I record, how I face mistakes, and what I ultimately pursue. Below is the organized train of thought, which is somewhat more coherent than the original Q&A.
LOGS and INSIGHTS: Raw Stones and Gems
My recording system is divided into two layers: LOGS and INSIGHTS.
LOGS are historical artifacts, the path I've traveled. I never delete or modify LOGS, even if they contain errors. Because they record the truth of that moment—the details, the state of mind, even the misjudgments. These "mistakes" themselves have historical value; they are the coordinates of my growth.
INSIGHTS are polished crystals, the highest level of thinking at present. They are not responsible for preserving history but for answering "So what?". INSIGHTS grow from the soil of LOGS but are refined, abstracted, and polished.
The relationship between the two can be metaphorically described as:
- LOGS are raw stones; INSIGHTS are polished gems.
- LOGS are discrete points on a timeline; INSIGHTS are the arcs connecting these points.
- LOGS answer "What happened?"; INSIGHTS answer "What does this mean?".
Admitting Mistakes: A "Have-to" Survival Strategy
I often say that "having the courage to admit mistakes" is my philosophy of action, but in reality, it is more like a "have-to" survival strategy rather than an innate virtue.
Why "have-to"? My upbringing once demanded that I "must not make mistakes," which ironically trained me to develop a psychological defense mechanism of denial. However, real-life experience has taught me: Admitting small mistakes doesn't hurt, but making big mistakes can be hard to recover from. Denial only offers temporary psychological safety but keeps one stagnant; admitting mistakes may trigger a sense of danger, but in hindsight, that danger is "not that bad," while growth genuinely occurs.
How do I correct mistakes in my system? If I find that a viewpoint recorded in a LOG entry is wrong, I do not delete or modify it. Instead, I write a new LOG entry, referencing the old one, clearly stating: I was wrong, where I was wrong, what I've learned now, and what new experiences I've had. CZON's bidirectional linking naturally establishes this corrective relationship. History cannot be erased, but it can be annotated.
Denial and admission are still at odds. I am not always immediately aware when my defense mechanism kicks in. Usually, I realize it afterward. But that's okay—"At least I eventually realized it." I do not pursue perfect, instantaneous awareness, as that seems to have no practical benefit.
Understanding and "Replicating the Soul": Taste as Direction
Being honest with oneself is merely a means, not an end. The true purpose is to gain awareness and enlightenment through thinking, to understand oneself, others, and this world.
Understanding is an undecidable endpoint. As life is not yet concluded and the world is still in motion, any "understanding" can only be based on reasoning from existing experiences. It may not be the ultimate truth but merely "what I currently believe to be understanding." Therefore, the path to understanding has no end.
So, why still pursue understanding? Because it is a matter of taste, a heuristic directional guide. It tells me where to go, even if I never reach the destination.
Regarding "replicating the soul"—I once said that a personal knowledge base is an attempt to replicate the soul. Currently, I believe that "soul" might approximate the sum of reasoning ability and memory. But this definition itself is mutable; it will also be updated as my understanding evolves.
Several Highlights from the Conversation
- Timestamp of Mistakes: In my system, mistakes are not erased but receive new timestamps. New LOG entries reference old mistakes, forming a corrective trajectory on the timeline.
- Historical Value > Superficial Correctness: A LOG entry containing an error may have far greater historical value (recording how I thought at the time) than a "correct" but retrospectively polished record.
- Admitting Mistakes Requires Awareness: I do not expect everyone to do this. I record these thoughts more to share my cognitive framework and theories rather than to preach. As the README states, this is essentially "an attempt to replicate my soul."
The conversation ended with the open question, "What is the soul?" My answer was: "I don't know. Currently, I lean toward it being the sum of reasoning ability and memory. But this judgment may change."—Perhaps this is also the attitude all recorded reflections should have.
