A part in our mind

message 35.jpg

Reach deep
and it is in your mind,
where you speak;
in your mind
and out, with words.

Fishing line cast
to self,
before witness;
aware of what
the witness witnesses.

message 01I am reflective before you,
Whole being of Reality,
everything of me and my reality be you.
Displaced transcendent from me, in me being a part, of you
immanent, in me, in me being, your part.

The conscious and feeling,
deeper being and self,
aspects of us and the world are projected;
constructed (make-up) is our reality,
“ours” as self or identity.

images 001 labelledBe a part.
It is what we,
as self or identity, are;
a part of our whole.

Through our whole, we
are immanent of,
pervaded by the presence and truth of,
Reality, for our whole being of Reality,
Entirety, one and only whole,
All-Creation-god.

omega 140omega 100omega 120aomega-120d.jpg

 

 

Our reality and Reality

Our reality and Reality was blogged 12Sept17. It has been edited and new section added, to emphasise the message of the immanence in us of Reality, that is an Entirety.

The art you find throughout my blog is diagrammatic of our “actuality”. Our reality is conscious experience and includes our sense of self. I want to point out how “it” is a part of our whole being.

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.De carte

Neuroscience has established “what we experience” as taking place in the brain. It has become a part of our general understanding and world view, but “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.

But 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, but in asking such questions, we should first understand 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?”, takes us directly to try refer to the actual self, a problem which I call the “self referencing conundrum” (https://realityhc. wordpress.com/=self +referencing+ conundrum& =Search). It comes of the make-up or apparatus for having an experience.

As self or identity, “we” are a part of it, the “apparatus for having an experience”. Set in this make-up, we are like a camera trying to take a picture of its self, when we try to experience our self in the usual direct manner of experiencing things. It is impossible to experience our self. We cannot bend the “apparatus for having an experience”, to experience, our “having an experience” self !, even while we are our self.

To help examine our reality, a distinction can be make within our conscious reality, between the subjective and the objective ends to “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 the functioning-s 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 any thing else. In contrast to the “easy” and objective, they are the “hard aspects of conscious experience” by Chalmers. He suggests we consider the subjective as fundamental or irreducible, to help approach them (subjective aspects) differently than the linear reductive way we usually try to grasp and understand things in our mind. 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 There is a new impetus to examine subjectivity, with the developments AI (artificial intelligence) and its encroachment on so much of human activity. And they are active 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. While we do need a different approach to study or say something about our self, rather than as fundamental per se, 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 Eienstein, 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 in approaching our actual self, again we cannot be direct, in referring to our whole, because he or she is transcendent of or beyond our part. We must “turn and tune” into our actuality, to be a part, of our whole.

 

message 01As 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.images 001 labelled


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. In our whole self being (a part) of Reality, it means we, as self or identity, are a part of Reality.

However, our tendency to be identified, in our self and with what we experience, isolates us in “the having an experience part of” our reality. There is also the conscious that is conscious of, and a witness by which we are aware of, our self and our experience.

We must be our actual self, in the spirit of “Every thing of you and your experience, is a part of your whole” and open, turn and tune, to the immanence of our whole and Reality, in our self.

The transcendence and immanence of the creator is a mystic and theological consideration about the nature of, and our relation with, the divine. But we, as self or identity, must “wear” this mystery; Reality and our whole is inherent in us, in being one of their parts.

It is not an egotistical, or self emulating, because in our actuality is also a relation with a whole being and reality that are, as wholes, more than the sum of their parts – and we are considering our part in them.

Our reality and Reality

The concept of “projection”

All that we are, as self or identity, and all that we may experience, 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.

Consider vision as an example of projection 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 other sense organs of the body, is put together in the CNS to form the parts of our reality to do with the outside world. Our reality includes an accurate indication of the world, with a “functional” and effective sense of our being in the world, which allows us, as an identity or self, to seemingly do things and be there.

What about the “self” ? – the subjective aspects of our realityDe carte

Science has established “what we experience” as being made by the brain. Modern philosophy has embraced this; it is a part of our general understanding and world view, that the brain is the site for what we experience. In fact, there’s a famous diagram of Descartes’ (father of modern philosophy – “I think, there for I am”), from as far back as the mid-1600’s, of how vision is generated, as I outlined above.

But what about the self? With our sense of independence, will and separation from what we experience, including others, how can we be a product of the brain, secondary to an organ? What about our consciousness, life and deeper being? Where do they fit or come from?

These are important questions in understanding “projection”, and our part.

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. While sentences that refer to themselves or “self reference” creates  in some cases difficulties, described in philosophy as a paradox, the question “What is the self?” takes us directly to the problem of trying to refer to the actual self, that I call the “self referencing conundrum” (https://realityhc. wordpress.com/=self+referencing+ conundrum& =Search). The difficulty comes of “us”, as self or identity, being a part of the make-up or apparatus for having an experience. So that, trying to approach our self in the usual manner of determining things is impossible, like a camera trying to take a picture of its own film or digital sensor, even while we are our self !

To help proceed in examining our reality, we can make a distinction between the subjective and objective aspects of our conscious reality. Objective are those parts “easy” to explain and understand as produced by the brain (Chalmers 1986, Australian philosopher). Vision that I have mentioned and other experiences according to the senses belong to this group. Also included are the linear mechanical or computer-like functioning of the mind, such as filing, retrieving and analysing.

The subjective aspects on the other hand, include the self, consciousness, the experience itself (rather than what is experienced), deeper being, and the witness. In contrast to the “easy” and objective, Chalmers refers to the subjective aspects of our reality as the “hard aspects of conscious experience”, because it is hard to explain their existence and nature, as produced by the brain or some other thing. He suggests we consider those “hard” and subjective parts as fundamental or irreducible, so as to approach the subjective aspect differently than our linear reductive way that we usually try to grasp and understand things with our mind.i

The self as a part.

We cannot determine our self. This is because we are the self, and while we need a different setting to study or say something about our self (not how we feel or what we think but our actual self), rather than as fundamental, we can understand our conscious self 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 as projection. Not as a product of the CNS, but of our whole. Projected through, and not by, the CNS.

In our “actuality”, our existence in fact, we occupy space as projection. And as such we may refer to our whole, and be in relation with him or her. It is a relation that, again, is not direct because our whole is beyond our reality.

images 001 labelled

Our part displaces its whole.

While to be our actual self is unfamiliar, as is to refer to our transcendent whole, as a part from within our whole, it is not impossible as referring to our self, in the direct determining way that we usually relate to the things we experience. Our reality of conscious experience and self displaces our whole, so that there is the rest of our whole that surrounds our reality. 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.

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, the one and only whole. I consider it All-Creation-God. In our whole being a part means we, as self or identity, are a part of Reality. However, our tendency to be identified with our self and with what we experience, isolates us in this part of our reality that also consists of a conscious that is conscious of, and a witness by which we are aware of, our self and our experience.

We must be our actual self, in the spirit of “Every thing of you and your experience, is a part of your whole” and open to the immanence of our whole and Reality, in our self.

The transcendence and immanence of the creator is a mystic and theological consideration about the nature of, and our relation with, the divine. But we, as self or identity, must “wear” this mystery; Reality and our whole is inherent in us, as one of their parts.

It is not an egotistical, or self emulating, because in our actuality is also a relation with a whole being and reality that are, as wholes, more than the sum of their parts – and we are considering our part in them.
___________________

i There is a new impetus to examine subjectivity, with the advent of AI (artificial intelligence) and its encroachment on so much of human activity with drones, un-manned vehicles, and language generation. 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?

Being a part

Reality cannot be directly experienced. It does not exist in “our” reality.

What we do experience of the world is an indication (phenomenal world). It can never be reality because it is our experience. It comes from beyond us, from our whole, who is in Reality.

Information about the real world and our whole self, from sense organs such as the eyes, ears, and sensors for tension and length, in tendons and muscles, is carried by nerves to the brain from which, we are given a sense of the world and of being in it. Our reality is constructed” in the brain, and placed or “projected” in space through the CNS (Central Nervous System), by our whole.

With this “Orientation”, we can regard the part we are, in relation with our whole.

All that we experience, all that we are and feel, and our deepest being, everything that is of our self, is a part of our whole. It is not for us to become the whole; we are a part, as self or identity, within “our” reality of conscious experience and self witnessed i. We can get to places, gain things, such as realisations, feelings, understandings and knowledge, and we can change in our self, but look beyond these experiences and states of being, to a relation with our whole.

In this relation is the immanence of Reality in us, as a projected part.

Poem Straight up JUn17 (5).jpg

_______________

i “Our” reality, of conscious experience and self witnessed.
Our reality refers to the one we are in, as self or identity. “Our” is to distinguish Reality from “our”
reality, of conscious experience and self witnessed. The witness is a part of our reality, though we recognise it as transcendent. It is transcendent of experience and self, and impossible to experience in our usual direct way. Rather, we are aware of what the witness witnesses. Thus we are aware of what we experience, but we can also be aware of our self ie., self aware. By inference of being self aware, we can know that there must be a witness; “how can we be self aware, if not for a witness”.
Here we may
go on to capture its “actuality”, as projected in space (behind from where we line-up and face the world we experience, and extending below). We can not just know it is there, or shift to its transcendence and be the witness, but connect through the various parts of our reality (in the experience, having an experience, witness) in our “actuality” as projection, and refer to our whole as a part, to be in relation with him or her.
T
raditionally the witness is a place we go to, to disengage and allow our various parts (including the self and experience) to fall into place passively or with some particular focus (which may be a chant, work, sleep, hobbie, relationship, or what ever we get into). All conscious experience is before the witness.
It is not ambition or cleverness that makes us involve the witness. Rather in is a necessary consequence of
referring our reality to our whole, which includes both the conscious (by which we are conscious of, what we are conscious of, ie, our self and what we experience), and our witness.

Be a part

Mereology, the study of parts and wholes, when applied to us, infers the immanence in us of All-Creation-God.

images 001 labelled.jpg

A part displaces the whole.

Be a part.

Everything of you
is a part of your whole,
including the words
you see and read,
everything you experience,
your feelings and being.

There’s a Whole body, in Reality;
Whole self, more than the sum of parts;
Whole being alive, of Creation, on Earth;
one whole of whom you are a part,
one amongst and next to,
many wholes.
_______

images 001b

There are many self-s within our whole.

Our part displace
our whole, in being a part.

Our whole, transcendent of,
displaced from, our reality.
We, as a part,
apart from our whole.
Yet we, in being a part,
infused by our whole.

In being a part
of our whole,
who intern is a part of Reality,
we are a part of, and
permeated by, it
– an Entirety.

Reality is an Entirety.
The One and only includes everything,

images 003 looped twisted twine C

Twisted twine, like tangled fishing line, form loops that open different fields of self and experience.

including what we, in our minds,
contemplate, outside of its inclusion;
all wholes and dichotomies are
in and of Entirety.

Immanent in
transcendent of
us
is
All-Creation-God who is
Reality that is an Entirety.

Partake and inherit
this inherent ache,
God is immanent in all
parts and wholes;
seek what is transcendent
but is immanent in the meek.

images 002 labelled

Within our reality are inner and outer worlds.

Become a part.
Open to your whole,
who encompass your all,
inside and outside, others and the world.
Through your whole is
your part in Reality.

Be a part, of your whole.

________

 

Definitions : Witness

How can we be self aware, if not for a witness by which we are aware?

realityhc

The witness is a void, disassociation itself, by which we are aware of our self, and what we experience. It is the displaced complement to the manifestant parts of our reality, namely the self and its experience, but also the conscious and deeper aspects of our being.

We may be aware of what the witness witnesses.

View original post