Exploring The Human Conscious Light Screen

[SteveKlinko]

We do not See things in the external World, but rather we Detect things by using internal Conscious processes that we are born with. We all have a personal Conscious Light Screen (CLS) that we use to detect what is happening in the external World. All the Conscious Light of your Visual Experience is painted onto that Screen. If we try to describe where this CLS is located it seems to be embedded in the front of our faces in some way. The CLS is vaguely horizontally rectangular with ambiguous edges that are hard to locate exactly. The screen seems to fade into nonexistence (not even Blackness) beyond the borders. But wherever you look, that screen is there showing you with Conscious Light what is in the scene you are looking at.

To understand this better close your eyes and observe what you See. At first there may be various After Images that represent remnants of what you were looking at, but eventually these fade away. What is left is not totally black. Note that you might have to put your hand over your eyes if you are in a bright place in order to cut off external Light from leaking through your eyelids. Most people will notice a background that has a vague grainy noise almost like the video snow noise that appeared on old analog TVs. However, this Noise is less distinct and appears to be changing much more slowly than the TV Noise. This Noise is referred to as the Visual Dark Noise when Retinal and Cortical Activity are measured using instrumentation. It is due to random Retinal and Cortical firings. But we are not making Physical Measurements, instead we are being aware of our Correlated Conscious Experience of the Visual Dark Noise. We are Experiencing the Conscious Light which is on the Dark background. Let's call this Conscious Light Experience, the Conscious Light Noise (CLN). CLN really is the background noise in your Visual detection system. Most people easily perceive that this CLN, and possible After Images, are close to the front of their faces. If you move your head around, you will See the CLN and After Images move around with your head, which keeps them in front of your face. If you move your eyes up, down, left, or right, the CLN and After Images will seem to be displaced a little in those directions, but will still basically be located in front of your face. It is interesting to note that After Images will always look close, even if the scene element that caused the After Image is far away. Now you know where your CLS is located. Of course this is probably only an apparent Location because the CLS is a Conscious Mind phenomenon and is not constructed from any Physical Material that can be Located anywhere. However, it sure seems to be Embedded in the front of our faces.

When you open your eyes the scene that you are looking at is painted onto your CLS and it is harder to perceive that the Conscious Light making up the image is still close to your face. Your Visual system tries to give you the illusion that there are things that are far away and things that are close. If you look through only one eye the depth illusion is less pronounced. But the Conscious Light that the scene is painted with is actually still located close to your face and is at the same distance as the CLN. The illusion of distance is absolutely necessary for moving around in the World.

It should be mentioned that the things and scenes you See while Dreaming are painted onto your CLS. If you try to imagine some object, you will see a grainy, hazy, version of that object painted onto your CLS. If you rub your eyes, the Lights that you might See are painted onto your CLS.

The CLS is a general purpose Visual Display Device for all Conscious beings, whether Human or Animal. The Light that is painted onto your CLS is your Light. We walk around all day long looking at our CLSs which are embedded in the front of our faces. We cannot See the CLSs of other people but if we could it would be as if everyone was wearing Virtual Reality goggles. But instead of goggles it would be Conscious Light Screens. We think we are Seeing the external World directly but we (our Conscious Minds) are always just looking (in some Conscious way) at our own CLSs.

[Count Lucanor]

You're just giving a fancy name to the visual field, which is the way one sees things in the world.

[SteveKlinko]

You're just giving a fancy name to the visual field, which is the way one sees things in the world.

It's not just a new name for it. It is a deeper description of it.

[Count Lucanor]

You're just giving a fancy name to the visual field, which is the way one sees things in the world.

It's not just a new name for it. It is a deeper description of it.

Deeper? How can the functions of a well-known system of perception be described "deeper"? The description can be more or less complex, but "deeper"?

[SteveKlinko]

You're just giving a fancy name to the visual field, which is the way one sees things in the world.

It's not just a new name for it. It is a deeper description of it.

Deeper? How can the functions of a well-known system of perception be described "deeper"? The description can be more or less complex, but "deeper"?

Your characterization of it as a Well Known System of Perception shows that you have not thought Deeper about how you See. The fact is that not only is the Conscious Visual Experience, Not well known, but Science has Zero Explanation for it. I do mean Zero. When you think Deeper about it you will understand this.

[Count Lucanor]

You're just giving a fancy name to the visual field, which is the way one sees things in the world.

It's not just a new name for it. It is a deeper description of it.

Deeper? How can the functions of a well-known system of perception be described "deeper"? The description can be more or less complex, but "deeper"?

Your characterization of it as a Well Known System of Perception shows that you have not thought Deeper about how you See. The fact is that not only is the Conscious Visual Experience, Not well known, but Science has Zero Explanation for it. I do mean Zero. When you think Deeper about it you will understand this.

I have done more than just "thinking deep", whatever that means to you: I have also read a lot of the extensive literature in neuropsychology that backs up my understanding of our well-known system of perception.

[SteveKlinko]

It's not just a new name for it. It is a deeper description of it.

Deeper? How can the functions of a well-known system of perception be described "deeper"? The description can be more or less complex, but "deeper"?

Your characterization of it as a Well Known System of Perception shows that you have not thought Deeper about how you See. The fact is that not only is the Conscious Visual Experience, Not well known, but Science has Zero Explanation for it. I do mean Zero. When you think Deeper about it you will understand this.

I have done more than just "thinking deep", whatever that means to you: I have also read a lot of the extensive literature in neuropsychology that backs up my understanding of our well-known system of perception.

And after studying all that Neurophysiology, how does all the Neural Activity result in for example an Experience of Redness or an Experience of the Standard A Tone in your Mind?

[Count Lucanor]

Deeper? How can the functions of a well-known system of perception be described "deeper"? The description can be more or less complex, but "deeper"?

Your characterization of it as a Well Known System of Perception shows that you have not thought Deeper about how you See. The fact is that not only is the Conscious Visual Experience, Not well known, but Science has Zero Explanation for it. I do mean Zero. When you think Deeper about it you will understand this.

I have done more than just "thinking deep", whatever that means to you: I have also read a lot of the extensive literature in neuropsychology that backs up my understanding of our well-known system of perception.

And after studying all that Neurophysiology, how does all the Neural Activity result in for example an Experience of Redness or an Experience of the Standard A Tone in your Mind?

There's no mystery in it. We have perception, we have memory and understanding, all of which are explainable in terms of functions of the central nervous system. What is exactly that you find "mysterious"?

[SteveKlinko]

Your characterization of it as a Well Known System of Perception shows that you have not thought Deeper about how you See. The fact is that not only is the Conscious Visual Experience, Not well known, but Science has Zero Explanation for it. I do mean Zero. When you think Deeper about it you will understand this.

I have done more than just "thinking deep", whatever that means to you: I have also read a lot of the extensive literature in neuropsychology that backs up my understanding of our well-known system of perception.

And after studying all that Neurophysiology, how does all the Neural Activity result in for example an Experience of Redness or an Experience of the Standard A Tone in your Mind?

There's no mystery in it. We have perception, we have memory and understanding, all of which are explainable in terms of functions of the central nervous system. What is exactly that you find "mysterious"?

The mystery to me is that you don't think the Conscious Visual Experience is Mysterious. You say it isn't Mysterious but you have no Explanation for what it is. I suppose you are another Physicalist who thinks it is sufficient to say the Neurons ARE the Visual Experience. That is not an Explanation. Since you don't have an Explanation then the Visual Experience must remain Mysterious until it can be Explained with a clear Chain of Logic that starts with Neurons Firing and ends with an Understanding of the Visual Experience that is always embedded in the front of your face. You've got some Explaining to do.

[Consul]

I have done more than just "thinking deep", whatever that means to you: I have also read a lot of the extensive literature in neuropsychology that backs up my understanding of our well-known system of perception.

Science has a lot to say about vision and colors.

[SteveKlinko]

I have done more than just "thinking deep", whatever that means to you: I have also read a lot of the extensive literature in neuropsychology that backs up my understanding of our well-known system of perception.

Science has a lot to say about vision and colors.

Science has a lot to say about the Neural Correlates of Vision and Colors. Science has exactly Zero to say about the Conscious Visual Experience of Colors.

[Count Lucanor]

You've got some Explaining to do.

No, I don't. Get your basic course on the science of vision and then come back to talk about "mysteries".

[Vita]

SteveKlinko, I think this would be better phrased as an argument about consciousness in general rather than the “conscious light screen” because there is no use arguing about something we “know nothing about”.

[stevie]

We do not See things in the external World, but rather we Detect things by using ...

Oh dear. Better to rely on scientific evidence instead of fabricating useless ideas.

[SteveKlinko]

You've got some Explaining to do.

No, I don't. Get your basic course on the science of vision and then come back to talk about "mysteries".

Standby.