the human condition 0023 23May17 – definition 05


the human condition and reality
– definiti

CNS projection 1 consc, mind body sense from spine

Conscious, mind, body sense from spine, projected through the solid organic matter of brain and spine


Central Nervous System or brain, spine and nerve roots

The human condition is a projected part of a whole being of reality, projected through the CNS in projected space.

We are turned inside out from the whole self, as if it were, sput out through nervous activity from the solid organic matter of the brain and spine.


Mind’s spread from above. In our self and with what we experience, we identify with the world in front.

Thus displaced projected from our whole, we disassociate within projection into different aspects.

Further we are isolated from our whole as we identify, in our self and with what we experience, between those disassociated parts.

In our actuality, occupying space as projection, can we refer to our whole as a part.

CNS projection 3, realms levels, above and below

Realms levels, above and below

A text-ed tour

From the exhibition Orientation – the cognitive part.

The depictions indicate the “projected actuality” of our reality, our existence in fact as projection in space.

Aspects of our reality occupy certain places in relation with the whole self, and in certain distributions or “shapes”, as projected by our whole. They are depicted as captures from behind, together with an indication of the whole self, in some.

imgp33171 Cornered across (with vision)” So, with the depictions, “it” is there in you. There is nothing solid about our reality, and we occupy space as projected by our whole through the CNS.

This is our line-up with and where we face in vision the world out there.
This is the self or identity coming across to identify with vision.
The witness is back behind this cornering.

This out-line in grey of the head, neck and shoulders represents the subtle sense of our whole being. He/she is a subtle sense because he/she does not exist in our reality of projection, but gives us more a sense of where we are, centred on his or her right.

The conscious, like coconut palm fronds, reigns from above as if to shed light on our reality. Because we are mainly in the spread across including the self and vision, the conscious itself is more a scooped-out absence.

These lines, around the lower part of the cornering, indicate our front and back, before the witness behind.

Knobbly join” There again is the head, neck and shoulders, indicating the subtle sense of the whole self who is in and of reality and does not exist in projection, but gives us our sense of where we are,

Vision is here.

The wot and the wit stands for the world out there (up, front and to the right, there on you and me) and the world in there (down, behind and snug towards our cosy core, there on you and me), that we may experience.

The circle between the wot and the wit, is the self having an experience. The self is understood to be inseparable from experience itself – “what is experience without self, what is self without experience?”.

Experience itself is separate from what is experienced. What we experience, out there and within, is the object to our self having an experience.

The face (left half of the self circle)) is the identity, determined more by our world and society. Conscious is there again reigning from above, but not as coconut palm fronds but more as its body.

The world out there has an angle, forwards, up and across to the right vs. our inner reality that extends back, under and nuzzles towards the core (mid-line) of the body. You can distinguish your wot and wit, quite readily in your own situation I think. You are the identity in the knobbly join between them.

bass-clefr3 Bass clef (of sound)” There are more recognisable shapes here. The bass clef and the top of the treble clef.

Now again, it is our actuality, a depiction of what is actually there on us. So, the world of sound, this is there on you, and I’ll just take you through it.

The world of sound “comes under and around you on your right, goes over the top and comes in on the left above, but not below”.

So there’s this shape to the projected actuality of our world of sound. It happens to be the symbol used in music notation to indicate the bass rage of notes, the rumbling deep notes that makes us look up and around and determine what it is. It might be a dinosaur, a tank or a jet plane (threatening deep noise), and contrast with the treble notes that can settle us into our cosy core. Our sensitivities there are rumbled by deep bass notes, and we rise to hold our self up in our hard heads to determine friend or foe, within our “base clef”.

We can recognise and depict or describe the shape, but there’s the “where” of it, the “actuality of it being there.

It does not explain the symbols, but I suspect that the symbols of music originate from our actuality. The wide acceptance of them may be because of our actuality being of that shape.

arch-of-language4 “Arch of language” The only one I have used colour in. Japanese vermilion red is used in calligraphy. It contrasts with the dark sumi-e ink, to correct, mark or stand out. It is also the red seen in Shinto shrines; their torii gate ways are painted with it.

I think I have used red because language is such a human quality that marks our cognitive “gawk and talk” reality. I consider the rest, the conscious, mind and the sense of self in the world common to animals. Like humans, they, whole living “animal” beings, function in the real world through their self functioning in “its” projected experience of the world.

Compared to the actuality of our realm of sound (bass clef), this is a narrower, tighter realm of language, which is also sound but special or particular sound. It dips under the conscious, domes over mind and lands on the right shoulder.

Our depths extend under it. So, cognitive, emotive and somatic (of body) sense are marked in their three letter abbreviations. LInghter lines under them indicate our deeper instinctive and intuitive sense of others and the world. Our cosy core is towards the mid-line of the whole self.

Our consciousness extends down towards subconscious depths, but on the “other side”, the subconscious begins right next to us.

Carried” on the Arch of language are aspects of our linguistic cognitive reality, namely our Infinitism, Circularity and Foundationalism.

Infinitism means it goes on and on for ever, and together with Circularity and Foundationalism, they are the nature of our conscious mind, recognised in philosophy in those terms .

In order to be certain about something we think about or sense, we can try to find a proof for what it is. The proof must come from outside what you are trying to prove, so as to help support it. But then, that proof needs a another proof from outside it, to support it … and so, it goes on for ever – Infinitism, just as the conscious goes on and on (till off?).

And it is easy to go around in circles in our mind, Circularity, which is formerly described as when the thing you want to prove is in a subsequent proof. The train of logic forms a circle. Though there are separate steps we do not get outside of the initial statement.

And Foundationalism is the assumption that is not questioned or challenged, a fundamental belief.

These qualities of the cognitive mind are called in philosophy “Munchausen’s trilemma”, the unsatisfactory nature of certainty in our mind (see Note 3).

Just as music symbols take the shape of our actuality, the three aspects of our cognition have their place in their actuality on our “Arch of language”. It dips under the conscious, on and on Infinitism, circles over the mind’s reach, Circularity, and lands on the emotive level on the right shoulder, for Foundationalism.

Orientation – the cognitive part 1

First entry for a hand-out prepared for the exhibition “Orientation – the cognitive part”



Our reality is split
inside outside,
conscious experience
self and witness.

Contexts within which we determine,
this and that,
good/bad right/wrong true/false,
themselves separate
superficial and deep.

More or less before nothing
positive or negative either side of naught (zero)
but for us there’s the “other side”, the subconscious to our conscious,
and the unconscious beyond.

What is more and beyond
goes on and on
without our whole.

Beyond our work and play,
our lives and generations,
sense of self and others,
there is our whole
who encompass our numbers and our all.

He or she, as the case or gender may be,
enacts embodied, does and is,
and encounters the rest of creation, in reality
while creating our reality as his or her part including
our sense of being and what we get up to,
and the world that we can think we rise to and are in.

Our whole is in and of reality,
touched by the rest of creation
as an indispensable part,
permanently present in reality’s present/presence (time/space, here/now).

Our sense of independence and freedom that is our embodiment,
sense of will and destiny, our endorsement
sense of life, our enticement
our sense of others and engagement,
are parts easily split without our whole
validated as parts only by our whole.


Our realities are separate from our whole in being projected through the CNS (Central Nervous System) by our creator, our whole self. We are further isolated from our whole being in being identified in our self and with what we experience.

Within projection we are displaced and disassociated between the various aspects of our reality, split between conscious experience self and witness, and further with contexts and what is determined through them, as paraphrased in the piece above. This is why our identification between these ”split” parts are exclusive of our whole and isolating.

A part is invalid without its whole.

However, we may know that we are a projected part, approach our “actuality” as projection, and be in relation with our whole. We must understand, practice, and enact this; it is our contemplation of being a part, connection through projection and communion with our maker, a godly being of creation who, in his or her being, consciousness, and substance, is inclusive of our self and all that we may be, all that we may experience, our conscious and witness.

The point, a line, perspective and context

The projected actuality of our cognitive part is depicted including perspective and context.

Depictions of our actuality can feed back our own actuality, our existence in fact as projected by our whole being. You will find nothing solid about our reality, because we are projection, projected by our whole self.

In our actuality, we may be in relation with our whole being, who for us as an identity is a subtle sense, again because we are in projection. The giff in the previous post ( includes an indication of the whole self who for us gives more a sense of where we are, in relation to our whole, on his or her right side.

For more on our actuality, the cognitive part and relation with our whole, see


Held up

cog, mind132b


“Held up” : brush and ink on “rice” paper – the wrinkling effect is from shrinkage caused by the drying ink.


The conscious is depicted held up in its float over the depths of our reality (through cognitive, emotive, somatic, instinctive and intuitive realms). They rest upon and ripple the mystic platform that is our “other end”. This, our basis, is itself a cosmic float, and can clarify the layered barriers of the various realms and their differing perspectives.

Here is the framework for our actuality where
“the core is the reference
the other end the clue to
our destiny and salvation
in becoming a part of our whole”.

Our cognitive cornering

cognitive cornering

Here is our cognitive cornering depicted with depth of field.

Orientate and try it on your own situation.


This is a flatter two dimensional version of the same cognitive part, but placed on the whole self, captured from behind as most of these depictions are.

“I” and “am”, labels.

I am soul's reach and st'ry tel'n fellaThe “I” extends out from mind’s identity, loops under the dome of the “arch of language” (circularity) over mind’s spread, and strikes down straight between body sense from spine and inside of soul’s reach. “am” fits either side of the arch onto right shoulder, pinching the “story tell’n fella” (Arch of language;  Cornered across, “I am”. I am

We are branded with bare letters, the text symbols of our language. As with the “Bass clef”, and “labeling” in general, this association in our actuality is fundamental (makes it), direct (what it is) and knowing (recognisable), for actuality being our truth as projection.


Various parts to our reality may be determined in space, occupying a certain place and distribution in their actuality as projection, and depicted. They are also recognised for what they are and “labelled” or named.

cornered across

cornered across and lined-up in vision

waiting Jan14 2

Bass clef

Knobbly join 1b texted 2 ed

Knobbly join

Depictions and labelling include our immediate aspects; the conscious, mind’s identity and the worlds outside and within (“Knobbly join”), of vision (“Cornered and lined-up in vision”) and of sound (“Bass clef”).

Ascending assertion

Ascending assertion

Philosophical concepts of infinitism, circularity and foundationalism (Munchausen’s trilemma), are placed where they exist or cornered off bigoccur in their actuality on our “Arch of language”; as are the psychological terms of repression, suppression, denial and resistance placed where they are, displaced from the “cornered settings” of our “Ascending assertion”.

I am not and eye of HorisSymbols (hieroglyphics), characters and letters self-reference onto us, and where they are and originate from (“I am not and eye of Horis). The commonality of these symbols suggest something fundamental of humanity.

We can ponder at this, but also consider our actuality.

The labels do not intend directly to encourage thought or discussion about the aspects of our reality. They come from a direct or innate recognition of our make-up, as they are or exist. The aspects of our reality are more fundamental as projection than, what we may determine and grasp as sense and notion. The innate recognition or knowing of our actuality comes before language and our usual cognitive knowing. Labelling should not necessarily take us away from our actuality. In and as actuality we may refer to our whole to be in relation with our whole self.

The depictions indicate “where” and their labelling point at “what” the various aspects of our projected reality are, in space amongst other parts, and in relation with the whole self. They mean to draw us to actuality and signpost our relation with our whole.

“Munchausen’s trilemma on the Arch of language”, am I?”

Munchausen’s trilemma   

dilemma – a situation in which a difficult choice has to be made between
two or more alternatives, especially ones that are equally undesirable.”

What we determine depends on context. We question or scrutinise what we are convinced of, to be more certain. There are the issues of perception and perspective, context, and language.

Further more, proof needs support from something other than itself that can back-it-up, another proof for the previous, which in turn needs another proof to support it, and so it goes, on and on. It is regression ad infinitum towards a broader and more fundamental or basic basis.

The unsatisfactory and incomplete nature of certainty is described in Munchausen’s trilemma. Trilemma refers to the three possible inconclusive and unsatisfactory scenarios to sceptic pursuit:
1) Infinitism – regression of proof needing further proof goes on forever;

2) Circularity – original statement to prove is included in subsequent proofs;

3) Foundationalism – what stands because it is not questioned, where an assumption can be used as proof if it is unchallenged or agreed.d



“On” the Arch of language as projected actuality

Those philosophical concepts termed as numbered, 1)Infinitism; 2)Circularity; and 3)Foundationalism, are there to be recognised in their actuality, projected in space, as they occur and manifest in our projected reality.

arch lang c2The Arch of language crowns our linguistic realm, and carries the trilemmas that bound our certainty in the mind. Parts of our make-up in their actuality, and including our own self as actuality, to be in relation with our whole self.

See previous Blog : Cornered across, “I am”
And next Blog : “I” and “am”, labels

“I” hangs under the dome of the Arch of language

We rise to and make a stand under the dome of the Arch of language. Introduce spread to vertical sense and depth by including your own self as actuality, again to further consider our whole, more and more apart from or more a part of and more of a part of, or apart from and less.