It is now February 6, 2026.
Continuing the conversation with AI to explore the concept of "taste." This is a further elaboration on INSIGHTS/8 regarding "Taste as Direction."
The Definition of Taste: Choice is a Prerequisite for Taste
In the conversation, I proposed: Taste is only demonstrated when faced with choices. A person on the verge of starvation, grabbing any food available, cannot demonstrate their taste in food. Taste requires having a choice; without choice, taste cannot be shown.
The AI expanded on this direction, proposing a three-layer structure of taste:
1. The Prerequisite of Taste: Margin
Taste is a luxury of choice. Margin is not just material:
- Time Margin: When rushing to meet a deadline, it's "whatever works," not "this is how I want it."
- Cognitive Margin: When overloaded with information, it's "save for later," not "this isn't worth reading."
- Emotional Margin: When driven by fear or greed, there's only reaction, not choice.
This reminds me of the emphasis on "cash flow input" in INSIGHTS/6, The Capital War of Attrition—controlling the rate of loss is essentially creating margin. With margin, one qualifies to discuss taste; without it, there is only survival.
2. The Essence of Taste: The Ability to Refuse
The AI offered an interesting perspective: Taste is not "what I like," but "what I am willing to give up."
In INSIGHTS, I often record what I abandon in the form of "refutations." For example, in The Capital War of Attrition:
- I rejected the dogmatism of "steady but slow."
- I rejected the opportunism of "get rich quick but lose control."
- I rejected the cynicism of "destined to fail."
Choice is the surface of taste; refusal is its skeleton. This phrase is precise.
3. The Source of Taste: Experience + Reflection + Stance
Taste is not an innate disposition but a stance formed through reflected experience.
- Experience: Having stumbled and fallen.
- Reflection: Transforming experience into principles.
- Stance: Choosing to stand on a particular side.
This aligns perfectly with the LOGS→INSIGHTS system: LOGS record experience, INSIGHTS distill reflection, and "stance" is the externalization of taste.
The Cycle of Taste and Understanding
The conversation finally touched on the relationship between taste and understanding:
- The pursuit of understanding is a "matter of taste"—I choose to direct cognitive resources toward "understanding."
- And taste itself is also a product of understanding—my understanding of the world shapes my criteria for refusal.
The two generate each other in a cycle, cause and effect intertwined. This reaffirms my core view: We are not fixed beings but an ongoing process generated within the spiral of taste and understanding.
An Unexplored Question
When evaluating the previous AI's work, the AI suggested several supplementary directions. I did not respond to the point about "the absence of embodiment":
The article defines the soul as "the sum of reasoning ability + memory," but where do emotions, intuition, and bodily experience fit? These are also dimensions difficult for AI to replicate, yet they are not incorporated into the framework.
This is indeed a gap. Emotions, intuition, bodily experience—how do these enter the framework of "replicating the soul"? Can they be recorded? Can they be reflected upon? Or are they essentially ineffable, only inferable indirectly through actions and choices?
To be explored next time.
