THE NAKED ANGEL MANIFESTO (PROJ.)

Sections: Intro. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Conclusion | Notes

There really is no value to this project unless its results are evaluated in some fashion. By evaluation, I mean a process in which the visual recordings are validated by the testimonies of others to having seen, or been in, similar experiences. In this situation, it is only the voice of many that can affirm an experience as a definition. Had this been a project with the intentions of proving mathematical theorems, the results would have such a quality to stand as it's own evidence. But this project is so different in that its results are not immediately available upon calculation, and thus, merits antithetic methods of provability. This section describes how I plan to do such a thing.

I plan to evaluate the results of this project by validating my visual experiences with the feedback 23 of participating parties. When the process of developing artwork is completed and presented for evaluation, participating parties will communicate either, (1) "Yes, this is what I've seen myself," (a positive remark) or, (2) "No, I do not recognize that imagery at all," (a negative remark). A positive remark is deemed a validation.

4.1.1 Qualifying Validations

I think it may be a bit unreasonable to expect total agreement, or validation of an image from a project such as this. One problem in acquiring 100% agreement is that the memory has a fleeting nature. What a person remembers 5 or 10 years ago may most certainly differ from what is immediately presented before her or him. Another problem to contend with is the group factor - where several members of a group observe the same thing, yet describe them differently at a later time. And there is always the event that I may experience something that others simply have not. Opportunities to address these discrepancies will be made available upon such an evaluation.

4.1.2 Qualifying Invalidations

Following the same evaluation method as described above, I have determined the best way to invalidate an image is to quantify the number of negative remarks it receives. Again, there may be problems with identifying an image being absolutely non-existent simply because no one (other than myself) has experienced it. Therefore, I will assign an image as "not validated - with the possibility that the image may indeed exist." Should it become painfully obvious that an image, or set of images receives a number of negative remarks, the image or set of images will be labeled as non-existent. Should it become painfully obvious that a set of images receiving a number of negative remarks outnumbers the number of positive remarks, then the entire project is placed in jeopardy and prone to become mere mind matter.

4.1.3 Quantifying Both

The process in quantifying feedback is based upon the number of participants and the percentage of their remarks. For example, if 50 people out of 100 participants validate an image, the artwork and its message and/or experience is then 50% validated. The importance of percentage values rests in the hands of the viewers of the artwork. I would remain satisfied with a much lower percentage due to the discrepancies illustrated above.

The Evaluators of the Naked Angel Project are those who provide feedback (positive or negative remarks). There are no requirements to participate in the project as an evaluator, and I have made provisions to contribute a remark from my physical and online portfolio.

Feedback received is viewable from the artwork's documentation in both my physical and online portfolio.

The Importance Of Definitions
Biased Interpretation
Separation Vs Unity
Brewing Even More Ambiguity
Angelic Ambiguity Vs The Naked Angel Project

Interaction

An Invitation
The Project's Longevity

Project Benefits
Skill, Objectivity, and Artistry

Demanding Skill
Demanding Objectivity
Demanding Artistry
Independent Artwork

Signs Of Success

Activities

Acquiring The Images
Producing The Drawings

Reasons For Activities

Meditation/Remote Viewing Over Anything Else
Art vs. Written Material

Sequence Of Activities

Evaluation Plan

Qualifying Validations
Qualifying Invalidations
Quantifying Both

The Evaluators
Data Processing