Being a part

Being a typical part-ical, yet particular, particle :
we bounce reflexivital off each other, of a common whole.

Quantom phenomenom is being a particle :
When you notice it, “Woops!?”
Reality is another matter :
You in it, are, of it. A part
of a whole, including the noticing, you, in, are, of, and, and it.

The whole is gone, down the hole,
up the hole, side ways through or into the hole …. out? (also back, black, and singularity holes)
Where !!!! am I? A part to all this?
Must be, but separate! (with other parts and the rest)
Being the part, within a whole.

Holes connect dichotomies – me and you, inside out, conscious matter
and open their ends,
to infinity as witnessed (by which aware)
and to infinitely conscious of;
more than dichotomies then with, by witness aware of, and the conscious conscious of.

What is it? What was that?
Aware of, by witness, What it is.
Conscious of, a part.
Time, distance, parts, more, the rest, a whole, an entirety.
Reality is everything, including beyond inclusion (out) and nothing.

Words, self-referencing conundrum and projection : an overview of “Orientation”

001 W1 9 Jul1709072017 b.jpg

Oroboros : symbolises introspection, eternal return, cyclicality especially in constantly recreating itself.

 

“Words render our representational worlds into
walls
of further representation
we w
ander around and wonder at,
within our reality.”

Beyond words, try “Experience your self”.

Impossible? Images of a dog running around after its tail, or a snake trying to swallow its own tail, may come to mind. It is as if we are a part, of an apparatus for having an experience. Like a camera that cannot turn back on itself …..

……. open to read Words 9Jul17 PDF

A comprehensive overview of “Orientation”. First of a series of three.

Words 2

Word on words, and the self referencing conundrum.

Words themselves are representative, they represent something in our minds. We can talk about the being, happening and doing of things, because that’s what our nouns, adjectives and verbs refer to. Words render our world into representational walls, we wonder around and wonder at, within our reality.
001-w1-4jul1704072017_0003.jpg
It is Plato’s cave,
of the Greek philosopher who’s Forms and Ideas were said to be the basis to what we observe in “our” reality. We, as self or identity, think and talk (with words) about the shadows on the walls of his cave. The shadows themselves are representations of things. Our words then, are representative of representations.

Rather than refer to the thing they represent, words that refer to themselves or “self-reference” can be a problem, in our mind. “This statement is false” is the classic example of the self-referential paradox in a sentence. It carries a contradiction, as most examples usually do, where it can never be true because the sentence says it “is false” which keeps us bound to the sentence, self referencing, rather than from the sentence, referring beyond it.

Self-referencing alone, even without a perplexing contradiction, can still give the same paradox. For example, “This refers to the word, this” or “to you, reading or to me typing, these words”. Left unresolved is, our having engaged with words in the first place. It exposes the expectation that, in communicating and expressing, a sentence should refer to things other than, what is in the sentence. This expectation may vary with cultures, languages and situation, but it may be universal of putting things to words that, sentences should refer to what their words represent.
001 W1 4Jul1704072017_0009a
All our stories can be seen to be circular and self referential : Before paradox, we reflect, what is represented in our reality. Of conscious experience, as self or identity, we are held between incomplete bubbles. Gingerly balanced our inner and outer worlds, their shells we straddle, mush. In dribs and drabs we dabble and dribble, learn to babble and spit out words, and live in them words. A loose twist and loop noose our circularity as one of our many, of many more.”
001-w1-4jul1704072017_00051.jpg
Something of the very nature of our reality is indicated by the paradox of self-referential sentences. The paradox itself penetrates beyond words in our reality, towards our self, if we let it. But sometimes it just hits us. Comedy shares something of this, 3-dimensional, self approaching and exposing complexity and substance, chaos and uncertainty.
001 W1 4Jul1704072017_0008

Some how, we are waiting for more or what’s next, to be woken up to our rest; to more of us, as self or identity, and more of our reality we are reminded from our left field, behind, beyond, within or underneath it all.


Compared to the paradox from words in a sentence, to reference or refer to our self is, a deeper and more immediate concern, for us, aself referencing conundrum” (https://realityhc.wordpress), if I may coin a phrase.

Try for your self, “Experience your self”.

Impossible? Images of a dog running around after its tail, or a snake trying to swallow its own tail, may apply.

We are a part, of an apparatus for having an experience.

Like a camera that cannot turn back on itself to take a picture of itself, and like its film, that in capturing an image, is “reflective” of what is directly in front of the focusing lens, it seems we cannot experience our self – only of “other than self” can we experience or directly reflect or be reflective with.

No problem with entertaining a notion or concept of the self, and experiencing a sense of self. But with our “actual” self however, there’s an inherent resistance to approaching and experiencing our self in the “usual” way we consider “direct”.

001 W1 4Jul1704072017_0009abWe cannot see our self, only others. From where we face the world we may see, and determine, we extend uncertainty all the way, beyond context, down to the emptiness of our alone or existential in depths, or being the one centre of a vague universe at our beginning or solipsistic end. What is self? What is anything? Where am I?

Word 3 – to follow …

the human condition 0026 – when I sit with others

Q001 Cursor May17 29052017 003

When I sit with others, and regard my whole, I manifest thus.

A head in the “cone of silence”,
where I see and understand
what’s and who’s in front of me,
myself unseen and not understood.
Q001 Cursor May17 29052017 004

Core’s the reference,
for our part
other-end’s the clue to our whole being of reality.

From where we’re open above
and floating below,
the other-side and outer-side
to our middle centred right,
connect through other-end
and around.

see also hc 0024 – the cursor is a curse
and 0025 – the “cone of silence”

the human condition 0025 – the “cone of silence”

Q001 Cursor May17 29052017 005The “cone of silence”

Normally between talking heads, gawkin’ and talkin’, or between the TV screen and you.

Either party sees and understand what’s said and seen in front, the other person and the conversation, while not seeing nor understanding the self behind the “cone”.

Vortex-ed behind, centred right, at the base of the skull.

Q001 Cursor May17 29052017 006

Q001 Cursor May17 29052017 002 c23

 

 

see also hc 0024 – the cursor is a curse
and 0026 – when I sit with others

the human condition 0022 23May17 – conscious experience and self witnessed in projected space

 

realityhc

the human condition and reality
– conscious experience and self witnessed, in projected space

Is it about being?
Or is it state of being?

Is it about doing or what we do?
Saying and what is said.

We read,
gawk and talk.

Cognitive conscious experience and self,
our knowing of the world we see
and our seeing when we understand.

With sense of body and the world,
our reality of conscious experience and self is witnessed,
a float within incomplete boundaries and spaces
that open and extend different ways,
in different directions.


Within projection is disassociation that differentiate, displace and locate, into the
the various aspects that make-up or construct our reality.

It is something like the multiplying of cells, as one cell doubles and divides into two cells. Within an organism, cells specialise or differentiate, as particular parts to its whole, and in relation to other parts locate (orientation in space) and in relation with its whole (orientation with whole being).

Our whole includes us, as self or identity, as a part of his or her projected part – we are a part of a projected part of who also has solid body and organ parts, and who is more than the sum of those projected and solid parts.

We are a projected part in a projected reality. It includes as its parts, our inside and outside worlds, our sense of being in them, and the empty spaces that extend between and beyond the disassociated and displaced projected parts.

A whole being of reality
“projects” our reality,
of conscious experience and self
witnessed.

Through the CNS we are displaced,
from whole body and being who is also whole self,

into projection
our placement in space.

Turned inside out, as if it were
from whole body through solid organ,
functioning brain and spine,
to projection
into space projected
disassociated and bundled, twists and loops.

Figure &8
float our bundle through,
corner our realms through levels to depths,
underside, other-side, beyond.

The core is the reference for our upright float
vertical axis to horizons’ float.

The core is the reference for the whole being
and the brain and spine,
CNS’ level and vertical float
an orientation to our projected float.

With sense of axis,
up-righted square with spread
held in Rubix-ed lattice matrix,
captured in space
of lost and bubbled bloat
occupying space.

We present to our whole in referring to his or her core.

Let the hum of nervous activity reach us,
of structure, form, and substance,
the brain’s dome split Left Right,
underside level with horizon,
and vertical spine to nerve roots and tip,
of their float in whole body
as integral organ and part.
(CNS Central Nervous System formerly includes the brain, spine and nerve roots.)

Let us, projected part, be touched
and in our being as projection,
by some thing of our whole maker,
our making and
for being a part.

We are a geometric piece, in our actuality as projection, to an architectural structure, levelled with spread and layered, that is engineered for our piece as part to integrate with its whole, a process of becoming a part.

hc.r Aut3 new moon

tt 23May17
updated 31May17

On hope, and to and fro on the blogg

I tried the reblogg button from Phil’s post t but somehow tripped it.

Here’s my comment :

I cannot place my hope solely on reason, and our “supremacism” there. I have hope in humanity, only in as much as we in our identity may transcend, not just our knowing, but even our feeling, sense of being, and deeper instinctive, intuitive and mystic, indeed our spiritual depths and heights and its sense of being, in being projected parts and being in relation with a whole being, our spirituality, with our whole self, being more than the sum of his/her parts, and with the whole body, in and of reality.

Nothing is denied of our reality. Our wildest dreams but a fragment of his/her imagination. Our deepest sense of being set against not, and others all, opposites, parallels and countenances.

Phil’s grasp for the foundation of reason’s supremacy in, beyond its language and context, a deeper intuition, mysticism and emotion, and the primacy of matter, but as basis of the conscious, has breathed a freshness of humanity through his clear and succinct tour of philosophy for me and I think for his readers.

Here’s the link to his post : http://philipstanfield.com/2015/02/01/reply-to-austin-2/comment-page-1/#comment-5377

and two paragraphs from it. And I add his reply to my unsuccessful reblogg, that has come up on my notification for that reblogged post that doesn’t seem to be there!

“Through the weight of philosophy “We are animals and our brains function holistically. Thoughts – linguistically structured and those from ‘below’ language seamlessly generate emotions which in turn feed back into thoughts. There is no such thing as a thought without an emotion or vice versa.”

“The mystical philosophy that Marx acknowledged he built his own philosophy on, his own method of knowing the world, not only has at its core another way of reasoning – intuition, mysticism’s appreciation of the importance of the emotions to thought and of the complexity in the relations between emotions and thought found expression in the very dialectics Marx positioned at the heart of materialism.”

Hi Tach, thank you very much for your response to my reply to Austin. I do place great store in ‘reason’ but not the ‘reason’ of the dominant patriarchal paradigm – solely linguistic and conceptual (the Man of Reason).
On the one hand Marx correctly argued for dialectical materialism and thereby dialectical reason but on the other he did not recognise (because brain science was only in its infancy) how profoundly dialectical and wholistic our reasoning (i.e. our brains functioning as a unity) is.
As I stated in my post, linguistic reasoning may only be the conscious tip and endpoint (even post-endpoint) of a ‘subterranean’ process – the ‘free will’ debate.
My very best wishes to you for all areas of your creativity. Phil