not, as yet, quite intelligent enough

[lightofreason]

thanks --- and now back to normal viewing....

I agree with you about stupidity of the position; but is what you are saying everytime you say the most important thing in your aproach of IC is human as specie.

Thanks all for the positive comments etc (but no more wires - we are now all wireless! ;-802.11 a,b,g)) and glad you found my mother's site enjoyable.

All of that said, here I must return to Yang mode....

Jesed - every possible thought/category you have/make comes out of your brain either in the form of some 'new' idea derived from the activities of your imagination, or as response through resonance of your neurology to some received communication.

Even if you believe 'god' talks to you, your audition areas of your brain will light-up since the basic brain does no differentiate the imagined from the real. For an interesting read about the past experiences of this see the book "The Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_Consciousness_in_the_Breakdown_of_the_Bicameral_Mind

In Schizophrenia etc the 'voices' will dominate - and in temporal lobe 'thunderstorms' images and voices are VERY strong but these are issues of electromagnetic stimulation of brain areas outside of the norm that consciousness, having no idea of the physiology etc, tries to interpret. (recall my page on a rabbi discussing 'angels' as a consequence of consciousness experiencing context pushing primate instincts)

Out of Body experiences can be traced to electrical anomolies sourced in the right hemisphere of your brain. There is a whole weather system 'in here' that will affect the description of experiences etc and so allow for the creation of an imagined world - in the every day we call it, and sell it by the bucketful, as fiction. Hollywood loves it.

BUT all of the perceptions will fall within our sensory experiences - we will see things, hear things, smell things, feel things, taste things that are all imagined.

The power of imagination comes out of OUR neurology in that it requires complex development to set down a context that can support it.

As commented on in previous emails - monkeys can use mirror neurons to copy behaviours etc and so develop social skills etc quickly but what they cannot do is detect mime - IOW they have issues with the use of imagination.

The development of imagination allows for pre-empting of contexts and so we can adapt to contexts before we ever experience them (and so can learn Klingon!) The issues are in that imagination has no training in basic Physics such that people will jump from tall buildings believing they can fly! IOW the issue here is confusion of the imagined with the real - this is often associated with Guerrilla Ontology - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_ontology

where the introduction of 'new' material can done by intertwining with current/old material to make a seamless 'whole' that the experiencer then needs to figure out! -where is the fiction, where is the fact? what IS? If it is all well woven so 'dissonance' is experienced and from that dynamic, from the oscillations across the fact/fiction dichotomy can emerge new understandings. (this reflects an advantage of 'competativeness' in that it can elicit creativity.)

All of our ontologies are in fact metaphors, specialisations trying to describe 'all there is' but incapable from doing so other than through metaphor/analogy that can often be taken literally (common in children and fundamentalists!)

WHATEVER we describe as 'out there' will be done so in a manner understandable by others of OUR species and POSSIBLY other species who have developed neurology.

Anything OUTSIDE of our sensory/neurological experience will be interpreted from WITHIN that experience and so elicit what we call "paradox" - but paradox can also be elicited by confusion in differentiating (as covered in my parardox page) and as such is a product of consciousness, not speciesness.

So -- there is no association of use being the centre of the universe but there is an association of all meaning being derived by us and so sourced in us - the method used to derive meaning determines 'all there is' (and so self-referencing yin/yang gives us the IC)

To think that there are no others is stupid; but to try and imagine what they would be like will always bring you back to expressions of differentiating/integrating and so fall within our filter or 'oscillate' across our categories, unable stay put on any one.

IOW it does not matter if there are others 'outside' of us - we can only interpret them from WITHIN our capabilities and as such our meaning is centered in the species. period ;-)

Chris.

 

[martin]

Out of Body experiences can be traced to electrical anomolies sourced in the right hemisphere of your brain.

Yes and no. Some of them can no doubt be explained by anomalies, but there is no reason to assume that that is true for ALL of them.
When it comes to 'mystical' experiences (OBE's, voices, meetings with 'angelic' beings, and so on) 'rational' researchers tend to jump to conclusions that are in fact not supported by their research.

There is also a strong tendency - among researchers as well as psychologists and psychiatrists - to pathologize such experiences. Consequently many people are talked into believing that something is wrong with them and allow themselves to be treated for illnesses they don't have. Which usually does them no good at all, of course.

When something odd happens in their brain people may see a bright light, for example. Okay, but you cannot turn it around and conclude that therefore EVERY experience of bright light is an illusion that is caused by a neurological anomalie.
That should be obvious. It always amazes me that researchers who are otherwise very thoughtful suddenly start to make elementary logical mistakes when it comes to phenomena that don't fit in their box.

 

[getojack]

Yes and no. Some of them can no doubt be explained by anomalies, but there is no reason to assume that that is true for ALL of them.

When it comes to 'mystical' experiences (OBE's, voices, meetings with 'angelic' beings, and so on) 'rational' researchers tend to jump to conclusions that are in fact not supported by their research.

Agreeing with Martin, here. When "rational" scientists are faced with something outside of their box, they often try to force it into the box, crushing and mangling it to make it fit, rather than actually using their brains to think about what it means for thier pet theories.

Out of Body experiences can be traced to electrical anomolies sourced in the right hemisphere of your brain.

Indeed some, perhaps most OBEs can be explained in this way, but there are others that don't fit this theory. If you read any of the "parapsychological" literature on OBEs and NDEs, you'll find that sometimes people have experiences of floating up out of their body to the ceiling of the hospital room and can relate facts about what was happening while they were "clinically dead" in the case of NDEs. Sometimes they tell the doctors what they saw and it is verified afterwards.

For example, I seem to recall reading a case study in which one person saw figures on a hospital room monitor while out-of-body... a monitor which was facing in the wrong direction to read while lying in a hospital bed. What they saw was later shown to be truly displayed on the monitor at that time. How can this be explained by an anomaly in the right hemisphere of the brain?

 

[martin]

As to 'angelic' beings, I have met them many times. Do I suffer from brain damage or some kind of multiple personality disorder? Are these hallucinations? Am I nuts?

I have a scientific mind and I was trained as a psychologist, so I'm well aware of the standard explanations for such phenomena. And because these meetings happened so often I had the opportunity to observe it all very carefully and with a critical mind.
And that is what I did.

Conclusion? If these beings are not real I could as well start to doubt the reality of this keyboard on which I'm typing now or the computer screen before me. Or the reality of myself.
And what to think of all those entities that post on this forum, entities that I never met in real life?

Angels are real. Period!

 

[bruce_g]

Chris, welcome back to yangsville.

I have no idea whether the subtle voices I hear are another entity or a division of personalities within my own consciousness. Working with the Yi creates awareness that we are more than one singular personality, but rather a complex of parts which make up a whole. So is that an angel I hear and/or see, or a reflection of my own consciousness? Is the Yi a separate entity, or is it the collective whole speaking to the individual part, the one I call “me”? And, is there really a difference? From the collective whole, I don’t think so.

 

[jesed]

IOW it does not matter if there are others 'outside' of us - we can only interpret them from WITHIN our capabilities and as such our meaning is centered in the species. period ;-)

And the concrete name of this "vague universal" in the context of philosophy is...... antropocentrism (not an exclusive 21th Century's idea... it is older as the biblical myth of Adam naming the animals... no matter if the animals existed before Adam´s, they became meaningful only when he named them)

Thanks for confirm my previous comment

Best wishes

 

[martin]

Hi Bruce,

They clearly manifest as independent 'others' in my case. Much like the 'others' that I meet in physical life that are evidently 'not me'.
And they show great respect for individual free will.
But they once made it clear that on their level the 'I' as we know it doesn't exist. It's all 'we', peace.

Communating with them is like communicating with a civilisation that is far ahead of us. And our science is child's play compared to theirs.

 

[nicky_p]

If these beings are not real I could as well start to doubt the reality of this keyboard on which I'm typing now or the computer screen before me. Or the reality of myself.
And what to think of all those entities that post on this forum, entities that I never met in real life?

My sister once told me I was a figment of her imagination. She must have a real sick and twisted imagination!!

 

[martin]

I sometimes suspect I'm a figment of my own imagination. How twisted is that?

 

[nicky_p]

Cool!! Have you given yourself super powers yet?! LOL!

 

[bruce_g]

I sometimes suspect I'm a figment of my own imagination.

I couldn't have said it better.

 

[bruce_g]

Martin,

And I think that’s why it’s important to have grounding. That yang thing left to itself drives itself insane. For me, animals and earth do that grounding. I can look at them, relate to them, be one with them. “They” keep me here.

 

[nicky_p]

Re: I/we, inside/outside consciousness

I think I know what you mean.There are sometimes when I've had an argument or something with a friend. We go our seperate huffy ways and later on it's like I'll have a conversation with them in my head. I'll ask the Yi for a progress report and sometimes get 45. The next time I see or speak to them things seem to have eased a little and we're back on form.

It could be that my subconscious (or higher not quite sure ) has had a get together with their relative conscious part and hashed it out. Or... it could be that we've both gone away, realised that we were both right and both wrong and that the argument didn't really matter much in the big scheme of things anyhow.

Not sure which is easiest to believe

 

[bruce_g]

I think I know what you mean.There are sometimes when I've had an argument or something with a friend. We go our seperate huffy ways and later on it's like I'll have a conversation with them in my head. I'll ask the Yi for a progress report and sometimes get 45. The next time I see or speak to them things seem to have eased a little and we're back on form.

Yep. All I’m quite sure of is that, everything inside manifests outside, eventually: the good, bad, beautiful, ugly, kind, cruel.. you name it. So that what we harbor inside ought to be our chief concern.

 

[philippa]

Yep. All I’m quite sure of is that, everything inside manifests outside, eventually: the good, bad, beautiful, ugly, kind, cruel.. you name it. So that what we harbor inside ought to be our chief concern.

This is a relatively scary notion, if not at all unimaginable, especially if you look at the extreme ends of the spectrum.

 

[bruce_g]

This is a relatively scary notion, if not at all unimaginable, especially if you look at the extreme ends of the spectrum.

In my view, it puts the responsibility squarely on us for our entire reality. But we are not alone. There are helpers, helpers who aren’t separate when seen from the whole. So then, who is really responsible? Us. We. Because, my reality isn’t mine alone. I interact with other realities, I effect them and they effect me. That can really stir up the hornet’s nest inside, and it can also bring great joy. Each are helpers, helping in different ways. Even, or perhaps especially, adversity is a helper. The responsibility which falls upon the individual belongs to them, and the individual’s responsibility is to cooperate with the whole.

 

[martin]

And I think that’s why it’s important to have grounding. That yang thing left to itself drives itself insane. For me, animals and earth do that grounding. I can look at them, relate to them, be one with them. “They” keep me here.

I agree Bruce, grounding is very important. And animals and earth, yes, I feel the same.
But I'm not sure what 'that yang thing' refers to. To the thought that one might be a figment of ones own imagination? Or to angelic beings?

If it refers to these beings, I can only say that when it comes to grounding and finding a dynamic balance between yin and yang, I have probably learned more from them than from any human being that I have met on the physical plane.
Finetuning that balance seems to be part of their art or science.

I feel much more grounded and at home on this planet since I met them. And more at home with myself, more intimate.
Perhaps that is the difference between what is real and what is hallucination. Hallucinations can easily drive us nuts but what is real ... drives us sane.

 

[bruce_g]

Martin,

I respect that. Most people think of angels as ethereal. If you, however, having a grounding relationship with them, who am I to say? It’s the balance that matters.

However, I’m using pretty standard referred meanings to yang; call it “mind” or “spirit” or “dragon” or what have you. Grounding: I’m using the standard Yi archetype of earth. Also the same ones electricians use.

 

[rosada]

Would love to hear more about your angelic visitors, if you care to share a few stories, Martin.

 

[lightofreason]

Yes and no. Some of them can no doubt be explained by anomalies, but there is no reason to assume that that is true for ALL of them.
When it comes to 'mystical' experiences (OBE's, voices, meetings with 'angelic' beings, and so on) 'rational' researchers tend to jump to conclusions that are in fact not supported by their research.

There is a lot supported by the research but at a PARTICULAR level and so focused on comparisons across species-members. The psychic element emerges in the realm of the SINGULAR and so beyond compare. From a scientific position we are working with statistics and one cannot have statistics on ONE, you need at least TWO. This is the difference between differentiating and integrating and so reflects issues of precision but also issues of part-whole dynamics - we get confused between metonymy and metaphor.

Behaviourally, the increase in 'yangness' covers a movement to high energy expenditure to assert a context and this leads to binary thinking that, if pushed, can elicit 'transcendence'. The problem is that this transcendence can be to a psychotic state.

Here we find the border of creativity/insanity in that the act of creation stems from, is a property of, mediation dynamics (and so the successes that come out of competitive relationships - e.g. in the IC Wings we find "[He] battles in the sign of the Creative")

The affect of fundamentalism on expression is covered in such collective dynamics as Wako, JonesTown, Heaven's Gate etc where mass suicide is 'reasoned' to be the 'logical' path. Charismatic types dominate the leadership of fundamentalist groups and in doing so reflect their 'yang' nature (be they male or female) and so borderline position that can 'infect' the followers and so the collective overall into taking actions that do not reflect or suite the 'preservation of the species' - or more so the encapsulation of the collective personalises the collective and in so doing all within it lose their identity to the collective and its spokesperson and that person's preservation of the self includes suicide etc and the collective is drawn-in (A long term model is that of Hitler where the collective surrendered their identity to National Socialism and sacrifice to the party was considered honourable etc - if Hitler could have done it, he would have gotten the whole of Germany to commit suicide! - Note in all of this the 'yang' element in extreme mode, competitive, fundamentalist, oscillating across sanity/insanity - also note the focus on REPLACEMENT and erradication of other collectives such as jews, gypsies, the insane etc and so a focus on PURITY)

Neurologically, we as as species have moved, are still moving, to an ever increasing fragmentation of the species into a focus on self-regulation, autonomous behaviours and so 'fundamentalist' focus. In so doing we find the psychotic/neurotic conditions increase due to lack of understanding of what is happening.

The issues with psychosis are that those who suffer the experience do not function 'properly' as members of the species - their particular nature is surrendered to their singular nature and they create their 'own little world' and so cut themselves off from their species - IOW a loss of connection to position, to syntax, elicits a cancer of the mind as does a loss of position of a cell leads to it becoming cancerous.

That said, there is evidence (fringe at present) that cancer cells, due to their loss of specialisation, reflect an ability to communicate across all cells that have the same origins. This brings us to issues of purity (a common theme in fundamentalism). As I have covered before on the list, there are corellations of behaviours indicative of 'sharing the same space' in:

(1) identicial twin research
(2) Cancer cell research
(3) radio crystal research (old form, not manufactured form)
(4) Sheldrake's lab rats (and general focus on 'morphic' resonance)
(5) Basic quantum mechanics models of EPR etc

ALL of these have one thing in common - a focus on purity and so of one 'thing' being in more than one place at the same time (the Pauli Exclusion Principle covers TWO things in the ONE place and that is for fermions; bosons allow for superpositions etc and as such the concepts map to issues of light. Our brains have adapted to light and so superposition notions can 'seed' our thinking)

Chris.

 

[lightofreason]

BTW - in the context of grounding, one can ground oneself in one's own context (and so yang) or in the existing context (yin). The latter, in the context of yangness focus, is covered in the trigram/hexagram of mountain (52) where the inner activity of consciousness, and so of bonding, sharing space but 'inside', presents an external element of 'keeping still'. (the discernment element comes out of turning the reactive nature of blocking/stopping into a proactive form where we utilise the trait to our advantage by developing discernment, quality control, from blocking/stopping.)


22-ness of 52 (outside look):

101001
001001
--------
100000 = 24 (with/from enlightenment comes total trust in another/others aka dualmindedness)

47-ness (inside look)

010110
001001
---------
011111 = 44 (with/from cultivation comes singlemindedness) - in THIS context of inner and so mind, to be crass for a moment, we are dealing with a mind f#ck. (and so the fun of Buddhism etc! ;-))

Chris.

 

[lightofreason]

He's NOT human. He's a Borg and any resistance is futile. Beware! A big giveaway is having the keyboard wired to his brain and the giveaway for that is how much he can write in 5 minutes while still holding firmly to his thought.... LOL!!

;-)

I thought you might find the following of interest:

Rewiring The Mammalian Brain: Neurons Make Fickle Friends

A discovery by researchers at the Brain Mind Institute of the EPFL (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) shows that the brain rewires itself following an experience. The research further shows that this process of creation, testing, and reconfiguring of brain circuits takes place on a scale of just hours, suggesting that the brain is evolving considerably even during the course of a single day.

Scientists know that the strength of the connections between neurons changes to shape memories. They also know that the developing brain has a high level of plasticity as neurons forge connections with other neurons. This new research, published in the August 7, 2006 early online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, goes further, investigating how neurons choose their connections with neighboring neurons. Researchers Henry Markram and Jean-Vincent Le Bé found that connections between neurons switch rapidly on and off, leading to a form of adaptive rewiring in which the brain is engaged in a continuous process of changing, strengthening and pruning its circuitry.

Studying neuron clusters from the neocortex of neonatal rats, Markram and Le Bé found that instead of growing preferentially towards specific receivers, neurons actually have no particular affinity for any other neuron, but instead remain in a state of perpetual readiness to reconfigure circuits. They found that over the course of just a few hours, connections are formed and re-formed many times.

"The circuitry of the brain is like a social network where neurons are like people, directly linked to only a few other people," explains Markram. "This finding indicates that the brain is constantly switching alliances and linking with new circles of "friends" to better process information."

In their samples, the rewiring process was occurring continuously at a slow pace. By exciting the sample with glutamate, they found that the rate increased markedly. This suggests that with a strong new experience, the brain accelerates its reconfiguration process, allowing new connections to be made, tested, and strengthened, and weaker ones removed so that the brain is quickly better adapted to the new situation.

"This continual rewiring of the microcircuitry of the brain is like a Darwinian evolutionary process," notes Markram, "where a new experience triggers a burst of new connections between neurons, and only the fittest connections survive."

Markram emphasizes that these findings may have important implications for brain research, even at a practical level. "This discovery opens up a whole new frontier for researchers as we now try to understand the evolutionary process that sets the brain on a particular course. Perhaps it could even reveal ways to steer the brain around particular circuitry pathologies such as epilepsy."

Source: Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/08/060814133621.htm

and note my comments in the past re our SINGULAR nature acting as a 'random seed'...

Chris.

 

[nicky_p]

Hi Chris,

I know you have an interest in neuropsychology. There is a condidtion known as synaesthesia where a person is born or suffers after an accident where their senses are 'cross-wired' and so they can see sounds and smell colours. Certain things like 'psychic or mystical experiences' or 'psychoses' can be explained by this phenomenon. It makes me wonder about people who can see auras as the body is emitting different smells when emotions are present and things like that. Which for a lot of people is very helpful and is finding its place within society today.

If it is the case that a couple of years ago people who would have claimed to see sounds etc would have been described as insane or suffering a 'psychosis' has been scientifically investigated and is now accepted as a helpful gift in some societies, could it not be possible that things thought of as 'irrational' such as angels or other 'beings' beyond us (or even fragmentations of our own consciousness) be commonly and perhaps scientifically accepted in years to come? After all - it is widely accepted that we don't use the full potential of our brains - what if we do but we just don't have the capacity to be aware of it yet?

Nicky

 

[bruce_g]

Great article, Chris.

"The circuitry of the brain is like a social network where neurons are like people, directly linked to only a few other people," explains Markram. "This finding indicates that the brain is constantly switching alliances and linking with new circles of "friends" to better process information."

Helpers/changes. What this doesn't mention is that the friends (helpers) could also be in the form of others, literally, and that these helpers can interchange between what we view as inside and outside.

 

[getojack]

Chris,

I take it by your silence that you don't have an answer to the question I posed at the end of post #93...

For example, I seem to recall reading a case study in which one person saw figures on a hospital room monitor while out-of-body... a monitor which was facing in the wrong direction to read while lying in a hospital bed. What they saw was later shown to be truly displayed on the monitor at that time. How can this be explained by an anomaly in the right hemisphere of the brain?

 

[lightofreason]

Hi Nicky...

Hi Chris,

I know you have an interest in neuropsychology. There is a condidtion known as synaesthesia ....Nicky

I am in fact well-versed in the concept - see my 1995 website page:

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/synth.html

In my research I discovered that my mother experienced synesthesia in her singing - she could not focus on auditory harmonics and so substituted with visual harmonics - colours. As a teacher she would get her singing students to PAINT a song; as the sounds came out so they translated to colours.

The correlation here is on sensory HARMONICS and their tight association with emotional responses. Chords are harmonics of audition and colours are harmonics of vision. It is emotion that allows us to translate one sense experience into another, as well as make a superposition of all of the different senses feeding the overall perspective of a moment - thus reality as experienced is based on constructive/destructive interference patterns (also shown as present in the IC - see my pages on wave interpretations etc - note that our neurology deals with frequencies, wavelengths, and amplitudes and so a 'wave' bias out of which comes pulses and so the experience of the 'discrete')

As I mention in the above web page - the infant is born with all sensory channels open as potentials but undifferentiated. With differentiation an infant will no longer turn their whole body to a stimulus, they will respond 'in kind' such that an auditory stimulus (a spoken word/sentence) will elicit an auditory response and not necessarly any other.

This differentiation will vary based on social dynamics and genetic diversity and as the child grows so the differentiated are then re-integrated into the whole being.

Children will lose any synesthesia shown at an early age (e.g. "this tastes RED") as the senses become differentiated and so serve the actualisation of their potentials as specialist sources of information. BUT genetic diversity or even nurture can present some 'anomoly' in interpretations that can be a hinderance or an asset.

(e.g. blue-green colour blindness can be a hinderance but people with this colour blindness usest to be used as photo-recon picture analysts in that they could see camouflage! - their 'problem' appears to be spectrum shift and so green is seen as blue etc or total colour failure - all they see is grey)

That is why the IDM material is not sense-specific - the qualities/categories derived in the recursion (and so, by association, the hexagrams etc of the IC) are universals and so shared by all senses. THEN comes local context and the colouring etc.

The development of neurosciences over the last few decades has given us major insights into what is going on 'in here' and the IDM material (and so IC+) focuses on the derivation of meaning from the research. With IDM we can now map meaning from the dynamics of the neuron to the expression in the form of metaphors such as the IC or Mathematics or Physics or Astrology etc etc

Thus in any synesthetic, the mixing of the senses will still focus on patterns of blending, bonding, bounding, and binding - and people once considered 'nuts' are shown to be 'sane' from the sensory system perspective.

The issue with intense 'yangness' is that the issues relate to basic neurological functioning that elicit behaviours threatening to the individual or to their surroundings. This threat is perceived from the social position, as far as the person is concerned "all is FINE in here! - except for all of the voices!"

We can ground these conditions into:

(1) hardware problems (anomolies in wiring)
(2) firmware problems (hormone extremes - e.g. imbalance in electrolytes can elicit hallucinations etc)
(3) software problems (nurture leads to some 'anomolies' in associations etc)

One or all three of these can contribute to one's unique perspective upon reality.

Chris.

 

[lightofreason]

Great article, Chris.

"The circuitry of the brain is like a social network where neurons are like people, directly linked to only a few other people," explains Markram. "This finding indicates that the brain is constantly switching alliances and linking with new circles of "friends" to better process information."

Helpers/changes. What this doesn't mention is that the friends (helpers) could also be in the form of others, literally, and that these helpers can interchange between what we view as inside and outside.

What is not covered is the self-referencing and so formal elicitation of 'types' and of 'purpose' - be the types neurons or individuals (and so the MBTI categories are isomorphic to IC hexagrams and they are both isomorphic to blend, bond, bound, bind dynamics. Our nature as individuals reflects the dynamics of the neurology - recruitment dynamics of the neuron work to increase bandwidth to process some complex/new information - and this is repeated at the level of our consciousness. IOW It is differentiating/integrating all the way 'up' and 'down' - and so the ease in which the IC can map 'all there is'.

Chris.

 

[lightofreason]

Chris,

I take it by your silence that you don't have an answer to the question I posed at the end of post #93...

LOL! - no, the silence is due to my working at the same time as responding to you all! - I am emersed in investigating SharePoint Server 2007 beta 2 ;-)

This new list format does not send all of the emails to a list - it just sends those directly responding to my original email - IOW If somone responds to me and you just click to add as response, it will go to them, not me - and so I have to read through all of the emails on the list server to see who has replied or not. For example, the only reply I got in my email box today was from Martin. When I got to the list I found a heap of posts I knew nothing about - the old list would send all emails to me the moment I got involved with the list and I had a rule set up to feed them into a clarity folder for processing. This new model is better for the admin but less easy to use for the user (I dont want bells n whistles, just good email! ;-))

As for what you reported - a SINGULAR event and so would need detailed investigation or else it is just an 'urban legend'.

Chris.

 

[lightofreason]

And the concrete name of this "vague universal" in the context of philosophy is...... antropocentrism (not an exclusive 21th Century's idea... it is older as the biblical myth of Adam naming the animals... no matter if the animals existed before Adam´s, they became meaningful only when he named them)

Thanks for confirm my previous comment

Best wishes

Lets try this in a different format - evolution.

We have adapted (or more so the neuron has) to the environment through internalisation of its basic properties/methods. In other words, as above, so below.
We have a micro universe in our heads and use that as our filter where there is a 'cut' between our singular nature and 'out there'.

The internalisation of SPACE is manifest strongly in our 'reptillian' brain at the base of our skull. This realm is mechanical - if it is too hot, move. if it is too cold, move.

The internalisation of TIME together with the REFINEMENT of Space is manifest in our 'mamallian' brains where we find our main biological clocks and the ability to learn, be context sensitive etc. This realm is more biochemical - if it is too hot, sweat, if it is too cold, shiver.

The internalisation of SPACE-TIME is further refined through the internalisation of the characteristics of EVOLUTION - in our neo-mammallian brains we build reverse-cycle air-conditioning - and so natural selection gives way to conscious selection.

IOW what has been internalised as agents of protection has then been recruited and used for externalisation and development of the species. ALL life forms have gone through this to varying degrees - reptiles have brains like us other than being underdeveloped in frontal lobes, limbic systems etc etc. When it gets to us so we 'transcend' our primate nature through consciousness and in that transcendence move into label creation and the rich use of analogy/metaphor.

To NAME something, to LABEL it, gives you power over it. Without naming one is operating in the realm of aspectual analysis - implications, innuendos, court politics etc etc but we still have a species-nature that is pre any name and that is our particular nature sharing space with all the other creatures.

Consciousness comes along as our singular nature and its lack of initial understanding made it consider itself the centre of the universe - a common trait in children until they hit the 'terrible twos' ;-)

Chris.

 

[bruce_g]

The internalisation of SPACE is manifest strongly in our 'reptillian' brain at the base of our skull. This realm is mechanical - if it is too hot, move. if it is too cold, move.
Chris.

Not your main point, I know, but this is exactly what I observe lizards doing all the time. They constantly adjust to accomodate body temperature. They'll even do 'push ups' on a hot rock - hot to cold to hot etc - to fine tune their body heat.

(taken recently)
View attachment 61