Final edit 16 Sept 2017
The concept of “projection”
All that we are, as self or identity, and all that we may experience, our reality is “projected” or placed in space, through the Central Nervous System (CNS), by our whole being. The CNS is a part of our whole, as is our reality that is projected through the CNS.
“Actuality” here refers to the existence in fact and in space, of our reality as projection, and as a projected part of our whole. And we’ll look at vision as an example of projection, through the CNS, by our whole being.
Light bouncing off real things in the real world focuses upside down inside at the back of the eyes, stimulates the receptors (cones and rods) there at the retina that converts the focused images into nerve impulses. These travel through the optic nerves and reach the brain where vision is created and placed in space for us to have the experience of vision in a 3-dimensional space.
In similar ways, information from various sense organs of the body, is put together, “through” the CNS (by our whole), to form the outside world part, of our reality. It is an accurate indication of the world, including a “functional” and effective perspective, in our sense of being in the world; we can jump, point and shoot, front up and throw. We are allowed this, our reality where, as self or identity, we seemingly do things, being there in the world, when it is our whole who is in and of Reality, and does things, including the things we think we do.
Our actual “self” and the subjective aspects of our reality.
Neuroscience has established “what we experience” as taking place in the brain. It has become a part of our general understanding and world view. Yet “modern” philosophy had embraced this, as far back as the mid-1600’s, from when there’s a famous diagram of Descartes’ (father of modern philosophy – “I think, there for I am”), of how vision is generated, as outlined above, and eye hand co-ordination.
However, what about the self? How can we be a product of the brain? With our sense of independence, will, and separation from what we experience, are we made by, and secondary to, an organ? What about our consciousness, our life, others, and deeper being? Where do they fit or come from, in the scheme of things?
These are necessary questions about our self and the world that remain unanswered, because we have failed to appreciate being a part of our whole, and of Reality.
I pre-empt my point, that there is no brain without a whole being, whole self or the whole body. We are a part of our whole, “projected” through and not by the CNS.
The self is a problem.
The self is difficult to determine. Sentences that refer to themselves or “self reference” create difficulties in many cases, recognised in philosophy as the “self referencing paradox”. However, the question “What is the self?”, brings the referrential difficulty directly to us, involving our actual self in a problem which I call the “self referencing conundrum” (https://realityhc. wordpress.com/=self +referencing+ conundrum& =Search). It comes of us, as the self or identity, in the “apparatus for having an experience”.
Set in this make-up “for having an experience”, it is like a camera trying to take a picture of itself, when we try to experience our self in the usual direct manner of experiencing things. It is impossible to experience our self directly. We cannot bend the “apparatus for having an experience”, to experience, our “having an experience” self !
To help examine our reality, a distinction can be made between the subjective and objective ends of “having an experience”. Objective are those parts “easy” to explain and understand, as produced by the brain (Chalmers 1986, Australian philosopher). Vision (as I out-lined previously) and other experiences according to the senses, belong to this group. Also included are functions of the mind that can be broken down to linear mechanical or computer-like (computational) processes, “easily” attributed to the computer-like brain, such as determining, filing, retrieving and analysing.
The subjective aspects on the other hand, include the self, consciousness, the experience itself (different from what is experienced that is an object of experience), deeper being, and the witness. Their existence and nature are “hard” to explain, as produced by the brain or anything else. In contrast to the “easy” and objective, they have been termed the “hard aspects of conscious experience” by Chalmers. He suggests we consider the subjective aspects as fundamental or irreducible, to help approach them (subjective aspects) differently than the linear reductive way we usually try to grasp and understand things directly in our minds. The development of AI (artificial intelligence) has intensified this boundary, between our computer–like mind (easy and objective) and the conscious self (hard and subjective) i.
i Just when through modernity, we’ve gotten used to the self, we’re loosing it into the technological media. Who’s there, in charge?
There is a new impetus to examine subjectivity, with the developments in AI (artificial intelligence) and its encroachment on so much of human activity. And they are actively applied in reality, in drones, un-manned buses, language generation, face recognition. Their moral consequence is “us” the subject, put on the spot. What is it, to be human? Who or what is the true self? Is there free will? Is it a predetermined destiny where we have no choice, but to enact our human programmes? In thus just reacting to our environment, what difference is there from AI?
The self as a part.
We cannot determine our self, when we are the self. And while we do need a different approach to our conscious self, I reject Chalmers categorisation of our subjective aspects as fundamental. Rather, we can understand our reality of conscious self and experience, as a part of our whole being.
Both our self and what we experience, the subjective and the objective aspects of our reality, can then be considered projection. As space, time, matter and gravity was reduced to a more fundamental space-time by Einstein, all aspects of our reality are reduced, to the fundamental of being projected parts of our whole. Not a product of the CNS, but of our whole. Projected through, and not by, the CNS.
In our “actuality”, our existence in fact as projection, we may refer to our whole and be in relation with him or her, as a part.
We cannot be direct however, in approaching our actual self, because we are set within the “apparatus for having an experience” and, in referring to our whole, because he or she is transcendent of or beyond our part.
As a part within our whole, our reality displaces the whole, so that there’s just the “rest of our whole” that surrounds our reality, and our whole is transcendent of our self and experience. Yet as a part of our whole, he or she permeates or is immanent in us. Our whole also, encompasses our part.
Reality, an entirety, and All-Creation.
Furthermore, our whole is a part of Reality, an Entirety that is more than the sum of all wholes and parts. It is the one and only whole, I consider All-Creation-God. Our whole self being (a part) of Reality, means we, as self or identity, are also a part of Reality and immanent of it, in becoming a part of our whole.
Diag. 2 “Our reality of conscious experience and self (witnessed) as a part within our whole.”
As a part, we should at least consider our whole. Normally however, we have a strong tendency to be identified, in our self and with what we experience, which isolates us from our whole on the “apparatus for having an experience”.
To be in relation with our whole, we must first approach our “actuality”, the existence of our reality including our self as a projected part. For this we can “turn in” on our self and capture our self in the space we occupy as projection, and “tune in” to our actuality that is immanent of our whole being and Reality.
In our actuality, we can consider and introduce our whole by referring to our sense of his or her mid-line or core. Other ways to refer to our whole include :- the whole is touched by the rest of creation; is present in the present; is alive; must be there (for us to be); is transcendent of us; is in and of Reality; is Nothingness, absent from our projected reality.
In our actuality, we can consider and introduce our whole by referring to our sense of his or her mid-line or core. Other ways to refer to our whole include :- the whole is touched by the rest of creation; is present in the present; is alive; must be there (for us to be); is transcendent of us; is in and of Reality; is Nothingness, absent from our projected reality.
Various ways may be used, to approach our actuality and refer to our whole, to initiate our relation with our whole on different stages and occasions. It is a process of integration for both our projected part and our whole, underpinned by the immanence of Reality, in everything.
I call the approach “Orientation” – in space of our actuality, and with our whole being of Reality. It establishes the fundamental nature of our reality as a projected part, and introduces our transcendent whole being of Reality as the universal basis for our existence and process. The essence of all human endeavours and practices is delivered, and Orientation may also be applied to further them.
Lastly, Orientation may be reduced to words, in a message you can tell your self, and annowncw within your reality. It indirectly refers to your self and your whole self.
“Every thing, of you and your reality, is a part of your whole.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
not for us to experience and get,
Empirical your part
Immanent your part
Consider your relation with your whole.
In collapsing the displacement within our reality, we may become a part. As a part we are perfused by our whole, and because our whole is of Reality, the one and only whole is immanent in us. A process of integration ensues in this relation as a part with our whole, for both the part that we are and our whole. Also in our self becoming a part, the immanence of Reality realises in all parts and wholes in Reality.
Our reality, occupies space. As a part within a geometric piece, set in our human condition, we are held within “projected” structures. Of realms, shapes, levels and layers, all of our self and what we experience, is enmeshed in our projected reality, and manifests within it. It is projected through the CNS (Central Nervous System), by our whole: Projection is fundamental of our – “conscious self and experience witnessed” – reality.
I am reflective before you,
Be a part.
realityhc 