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 self referencing conundrum

Definition :

An inherent difficulty and resistance to approaching the actuality of our self or identity, as if to maintain the necessary displacement for having an experience between the identity having the experience and what is experienced.
tt4r

See also
“self referencing conundrum” google search
Epimenides paradox  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epimenides_paradox
self referencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-reference

Being rational with reality and realism

Certainty is in the mind and what is in the mind ambiguous and uncertain.

We can be rational and logical in the mind and what is irrational is what leaves us perplexed in the mind, even after addressing the inconsistencies, contradictions, conflicts, and hypocrisies, the so called paradoxes and conundrums of philosophy and science.

“Our world” is ambiguous, self-evident only as the self is. Is it rational to believe in something rather than nothing, or in nothing at all?

Science and philosophy can only get closer to being correct about reality – with models and theories of “what’s happening” and “what it’s like”. They, as with our minds, are about what we can sense and correctly infer with models and theories of our projected world – of what is actual for us, there in our projected reality, but not real.

Yet their theories are plausible and the models applicable. This can be, because “the world” is projected individually but by a common human whole body in reality – we can empathise and identify with our ideas that can also be shared and appreciated – and “the world” is an indication of reality – we can formulate models that work within known or tested conditions. The magnifiers and extensions that amplify what we can sense and observe, or what we can do in our physical being in the real world, strap on to the whole body. Through the whole body in reality, we experience something of reality including the whole body, in our mind and deeper being and form notions about them in our mind.

The whole body is in reality, and is a special entity in the “real world” – for we as self and “our world”, though the world seems separate from us to us, are both projected parts, created and placed by the whole body’s Central Nervous System. Every other entity in reality can only exist as a projected indication in our world as object to us as the experiencing self or subject.

Realism (a philosophical stand for one reality) must go beyond our phenomenal world, of our world that appears to our senses and we form ideas about, in order to determine a definitive and true one reality. Otherwise realism is confined in a projected reality of many perspectives and situations in contradiction to its one reality. And here is our containment in our reality; our circularity is with an uncertain sense that we form notions of, and with notions that we cannot prove of themselves except through what we sense. Reality must include the splits in our reality – our inside and out, our self as subject of experience and its object or what we experience, the conscious and our being, the mind and our sense of matter.

Within our projected reality are many realities and truths, worlds and entities. The whole body in reality surrounds, encompasses and impregnates all projected realities pertaining to our self, and aspects of the self including our mind (rational and irrational), the conscious, our deeper being , the self , what we experience and the witness. Each one whole being projects “the world” and a self that may “experience” that world. We think or presume we sense and form notions, but a whole body projects the world from what he or she senses, and “we” as self and “our” notions too, come from beyond our reality, and ultimately from the whole body. In our relation as part with our whole is our truth, freedom, will and destiny.

We are reflective and we project (as described in psychology), we identify with the world and others but also with our self, we are intentional and express. And we may relate with the whole body, of whom we as self are a part – while the Earth supports life, and a whole body lives to support us. I place my hope in this for the world, the repercussions of which are unforseen, not just as of the uncertainty of our reality but of an unfactored Truth of the whole body and our part. Am I right to think it arouses our human curiosity and need for salvation, validation as well as destiny that has laid dormant forever from Truth, and from our particular truths laid down exhausted through the development of the self, destruction of dogma and disappearing future that culminated in modernity?