A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by SteveKlinko »



A) Science Has No explanation

It all started one day when I thought it might be fun to figure out how we See.

I read what the Scientists and the Philosophers had to say.

I studied Eye Physiology and Brain Physiology.

I learned exactly how the Eye, Optic Nerve, and Visual Cortex work.

But I was disappointed, because all this understanding did not explain how we See.

After 25 years of study, I had to face the fact that Science had no Explanation for how we See.


B) Think In New Ways

I discovered that the only thing Science knew for sure was that if certain Neurons fire we can have an Experience of Seeing.

It was reasonable to speculate that there must be something about the Neurons that produced this Experience of Seeing.

To test this, Science has Probed, Measured, Scanned, and Mapped the Brain in every conceivable way.

And after a hundred years, HUGE progress was made with understanding the Neural Activity that happens while Seeing.

But after all this time, Science has made exactly ZERO progress with understanding the Conscious Experience of Seeing.

Ironically, the Seeing part of how we See was still a total mystery.

It became clear to me that it was time to start thinking in New Ways.

But it is difficult to teach people to think in New Ways.

And I found that I can only Nudge people in the right direction, with the hope that they will eventually understand the New Ways.


C) Insight From Floating Lights

So here is a Nudge toward New Ways of thinking, in the form of a little story about Floating Lights.

A lot of times I fall asleep on the couch in my Stereo room at night.

I have multiple Preamps, Power Amps, Processors, and Converters with different Colored LED panel Lights.

It relaxes me to think about these Lights when I’m going to sleep.

The LEDs seem to float “Out There” in space as Colored points of Light punching through the darkness.

It’s just Me … the LEDs … and the Darkness.

At first, because I knew the LEDs were across the room, my Experience was that they really were across the room.

Eventually, I realized that I could Experience the Lights as being close to me.

I could even make them seem like they were located directly in front of my face.

I assumed this was just my Imagination.


D) Conscious Space

But after a while, I realized that this might not be my Imagination.

It was, in fact, the first evidence that I might not be Seeing the Physical LEDs, but rather I was Seeing some kind of Conscious Experience in my Mind.

The Illusion has always been that the Lights were “Out There”.

But the reality is that the Lights were never “Out There” in the first place.

I was Seeing what I call Conscious Lights.

These Conscious Lights were created by my Mind and projected in front of my face.

It seemed Logical to speculate that the Conscious Lights existed in some new conceptual place, which I call Conscious Space.

Next, it became Logical to speculate that each individual Conscious Mind might consist of a little chunk of this Conscious Space.

So we each have our own chunk of Conscious Space, and this is where our separate Conscious Experiences happen.


E) Conscious Experience

Let’s think about Seeing Color and especially let’s think about Seeing Red.

Instead of Seeing Red I like to say we Experience Redness.

This helps point attention to the Redness Experience in the Mind, and not to the Red Electromagnetic Wave phenomenon.

The Redness Experience is in Conscious Space and the Red Electromagnetic Wave is in Physical Space.

The argument is similar for any other Color or combination of Colors, including shades of gray from Black to White.

The Visually impaired can consider the Conscious Experience of other things, like the Sound of the Standard A Tone, the Taste of Salt, the Smell of Bleach, or the Touch of a Rough Surface.


F) The Inter Mind

Science has mapped the various Sensory inputs from the Eyes, Ears, Tongue, Nose, and Skin to specific areas of the Cortex.

So, for example we can say:

1 Neural Activity for Red happens in the Cortex.

2 A Redness Experience happens in the Conscious Mind.

But we have a dilemma because this question screams out at us:

How does the Neural Activity produce the Redness Experience?

From a Systems Engineering and Signal Processing point of view there is a missing processing stage between the Neural Activity and the Conscious Experience.

I call the missing processing stage, the Inter Mind, because it is an Interconnecting stage of Mind between the Physical Mind and the Conscious Mind. Note that Physical Mind means the Brain here.

We can now imagine a three stage diagram of Mind that shows the Physical Mind connected to the Inter Mind and the Inter Mind connected to the Conscious Mind.

I call this diagram the Inter Mind Model of Consciousness.

The Inter Mind does the Processing to Translate Neural Activity in the Physical Mind into the Conscious Experience in the Conscious Mind.

The Inter Mind functionality might exist partly in the Physical Mind and partly in the Conscious Mind.

But it might exist only in the Physical Mind or only in the Conscious Mind.

Physicalists will insist it is completely in the Physical Mind.

One thing for sure is that the functionality of an Inter Mind must exist somewhere.


G) Physiology of Seeing

Let’s talk about the Physiology of Seeing.

Physical Light from the External Scene enters the Eye and is focused onto the Retina.

The Energy from the Physical Light activates millions of Light Receptors that send signals to the Visual Cortex.

The Visual Cortex performs processing using a cascading, feedback, network of millions of Activated Neurons.

Since all this Neural Activity is Correlated with the Physical Light, I like to call it, the Neural Light.

But we don’t See this Neural Light.

We See a Conscious Light Scene in the Mind that is Correlated with the Neural Light.

The Conscious Light Scene cannot be found in the Physical Mind.

I like to speculate that the whole Conscious Light Scene is in Conscious Space.


H) Reconstruction and Overlay Processing

But let’s talk about what the Physical Mind is actually doing.

The Physical Mind seems to deconstruct the Scene we are looking at with the goal of detecting features of the Scene like lines, edges, motion, and color.

The highest stages seem to be for image recognition.

The lower stages seem to be for control of eye focus, convergence, and target tracking.

There are some edge enhancement and shading effects that are generated in the lower stages that can be Experienced in the Conscious Light Scene.

If there is a damaged area in the lower stages, then an equivalent blacked out area will appear in the Conscious Light Scene.

If there is damage to the Color areas, then the Color Experience will be impaired.

It seems that the Conscious Light Scene that we See, must consist of an Overlay of all the Visual Cortex processing stages.

The deconstructed Cortex information must be Reconstructed into a Coherent Conscious Light Scene.

Unfortunately, there is no known mechanism in the Physical Mind that does this Overlay and Reconstruction Processing.

This missing Processing is sometimes called the Binding Problem.

Since the purpose of the Inter Mind is to Translate the Neural Activity into the Conscious Light Scene, it is Logical to propose that the Inter Mind must perform the Overlay and Reconstruction processing.


I) Three Types of Light

Let’s think about the three types of Light.

First, there are the Electromagnetic Waves, in Physical Space, which I call Physical Light.

Second, there is the Neural Activity, also in Physical Space, which I call Neural Light.

Third, there is the Conscious Experience, in Conscious Space, which I call Conscious Light.

These different Types of Light exist at different stages in the Seeing process.

We have never Seen the Physical Light or the Neural Light.

We have always only Seen the Conscious Light that is in our Conscious Minds.


J) An Important Realization

Since the Conscious Light is in our Conscious Minds we can say the Light is our own internal personal Light.

Even if you are a Physicalist and believe the Conscious Light is in the Neurons, it is still your own internal personal Light.

Since the Conscious Light is internal to us, we can say the Conscious Light is partly what we are.

We can say: We are that Conscious Light.

Or more simply: We are that Light.

For me, this was the most important Realization I have ever had about my own Mind, Being, and Light.

The website will explain what Conscious Light is, and that it is categorically different from the Electromagnetic Light of Science.


K) Now What?

I will now take the next step and ask the obvious question:

What can be done with this new knowledge about Light?

The answer to that question is a work in progress.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

SteveKlinko wrote: June 20th, 2022, 10:18 am

A) Science Has No explanation

It all started one day when I thought it might be fun to figure out how we See.

I read what the Scientists and the Philosophers had to say.

I studied Eye Physiology and Brain Physiology.

I learned exactly how the Eye, Optic Nerve, and Visual Cortex work.

But I was disappointed, because all this understanding did not explain how we See.

After 25 years of study, I had to face the fact that Science had no Explanation for how we See.


B) Think In New Ways

I discovered that the only thing Science knew for sure was that if certain Neurons fire we can have an Experience of Seeing.

It was reasonable to speculate that there must be something about the Neurons that produced this Experience of Seeing.

To test this, Science has Probed, Measured, Scanned, and Mapped the Brain in every conceivable way.

And after a hundred years, HUGE progress was made with understanding the Neural Activity that happens while Seeing.

But after all this time, Science has made exactly ZERO progress with understanding the Conscious Experience of Seeing.

Ironically, the Seeing part of how we See was still a total mystery.

It became clear to me that it was time to start thinking in New Ways.

But it is difficult to teach people to think in New Ways.

And I found that I can only Nudge people in the right direction, with the hope that they will eventually understand the New Ways.


C) Insight From Floating Lights

So here is a Nudge toward New Ways of thinking, in the form of a little story about Floating Lights.

A lot of times I fall asleep on the couch in my Stereo room at night.

I have multiple Preamps, Power Amps, Processors, and Converters with different Colored LED panel Lights.

It relaxes me to think about these Lights when I’m going to sleep.

The LEDs seem to float “Out There” in space as Colored points of Light punching through the darkness.

It’s just Me … the LEDs … and the Darkness.

At first, because I knew the LEDs were across the room, my Experience was that they really were across the room.

Eventually, I realized that I could Experience the Lights as being close to me.

I could even make them seem like they were located directly in front of my face.

I assumed this was just my Imagination.


D) Conscious Space

But after a while, I realized that this might not be my Imagination.

It was, in fact, the first evidence that I might not be Seeing the Physical LEDs, but rather I was Seeing some kind of Conscious Experience in my Mind.

The Illusion has always been that the Lights were “Out There”.

But the reality is that the Lights were never “Out There” in the first place.

I was Seeing what I call Conscious Lights.

These Conscious Lights were created by my Mind and projected in front of my face.

It seemed Logical to speculate that the Conscious Lights existed in some new conceptual place, which I call Conscious Space.

Next, it became Logical to speculate that each individual Conscious Mind might consist of a little chunk of this Conscious Space.

So we each have our own chunk of Conscious Space, and this is where our separate Conscious Experiences happen.


E) Conscious Experience

Let’s think about Seeing Color and especially let’s think about Seeing Red.

Instead of Seeing Red I like to say we Experience Redness.

This helps point attention to the Redness Experience in the Mind, and not to the Red Electromagnetic Wave phenomenon.

The Redness Experience is in Conscious Space and the Red Electromagnetic Wave is in Physical Space.

The argument is similar for any other Color or combination of Colors, including shades of gray from Black to White.

The Visually impaired can consider the Conscious Experience of other things, like the Sound of the Standard A Tone, the Taste of Salt, the Smell of Bleach, or the Touch of a Rough Surface.


F) The Inter Mind

Science has mapped the various Sensory inputs from the Eyes, Ears, Tongue, Nose, and Skin to specific areas of the Cortex.

So, for example we can say:

1 Neural Activity for Red happens in the Cortex.

2 A Redness Experience happens in the Conscious Mind.

But we have a dilemma because this question screams out at us:

How does the Neural Activity produce the Redness Experience?

From a Systems Engineering and Signal Processing point of view there is a missing processing stage between the Neural Activity and the Conscious Experience.

I call the missing processing stage, the Inter Mind, because it is an Interconnecting stage of Mind between the Physical Mind and the Conscious Mind. Note that Physical Mind means the Brain here.

We can now imagine a three stage diagram of Mind that shows the Physical Mind connected to the Inter Mind and the Inter Mind connected to the Conscious Mind.

I call this diagram the Inter Mind Model of Consciousness.

The Inter Mind does the Processing to Translate Neural Activity in the Physical Mind into the Conscious Experience in the Conscious Mind.

The Inter Mind functionality might exist partly in the Physical Mind and partly in the Conscious Mind.

But it might exist only in the Physical Mind or only in the Conscious Mind.

Physicalists will insist it is completely in the Physical Mind.

One thing for sure is that the functionality of an Inter Mind must exist somewhere.


G) Physiology of Seeing

Let’s talk about the Physiology of Seeing.

Physical Light from the External Scene enters the Eye and is focused onto the Retina.

The Energy from the Physical Light activates millions of Light Receptors that send signals to the Visual Cortex.

The Visual Cortex performs processing using a cascading, feedback, network of millions of Activated Neurons.

Since all this Neural Activity is Correlated with the Physical Light, I like to call it, the Neural Light.

But we don’t See this Neural Light.

We See a Conscious Light Scene in the Mind that is Correlated with the Neural Light.

The Conscious Light Scene cannot be found in the Physical Mind.

I like to speculate that the whole Conscious Light Scene is in Conscious Space.


H) Reconstruction and Overlay Processing

But let’s talk about what the Physical Mind is actually doing.

The Physical Mind seems to deconstruct the Scene we are looking at with the goal of detecting features of the Scene like lines, edges, motion, and color.

The highest stages seem to be for image recognition.

The lower stages seem to be for control of eye focus, convergence, and target tracking.

There are some edge enhancement and shading effects that are generated in the lower stages that can be Experienced in the Conscious Light Scene.

If there is a damaged area in the lower stages, then an equivalent blacked out area will appear in the Conscious Light Scene.

If there is damage to the Color areas, then the Color Experience will be impaired.

It seems that the Conscious Light Scene that we See, must consist of an Overlay of all the Visual Cortex processing stages.

The deconstructed Cortex information must be Reconstructed into a Coherent Conscious Light Scene.

Unfortunately, there is no known mechanism in the Physical Mind that does this Overlay and Reconstruction Processing.

This missing Processing is sometimes called the Binding Problem.

Since the purpose of the Inter Mind is to Translate the Neural Activity into the Conscious Light Scene, it is Logical to propose that the Inter Mind must perform the Overlay and Reconstruction processing.


I) Three Types of Light

Let’s think about the three types of Light.

First, there are the Electromagnetic Waves, in Physical Space, which I call Physical Light.

Second, there is the Neural Activity, also in Physical Space, which I call Neural Light.

Third, there is the Conscious Experience, in Conscious Space, which I call Conscious Light.

These different Types of Light exist at different stages in the Seeing process.

We have never Seen the Physical Light or the Neural Light.

We have always only Seen the Conscious Light that is in our Conscious Minds.


J) An Important Realization

Since the Conscious Light is in our Conscious Minds we can say the Light is our own internal personal Light.

Even if you are a Physicalist and believe the Conscious Light is in the Neurons, it is still your own internal personal Light.

Since the Conscious Light is internal to us, we can say the Conscious Light is partly what we are.

We can say: We are that Conscious Light.

Or more simply: We are that Light.

For me, this was the most important Realization I have ever had about my own Mind, Being, and Light.

The website will explain what Conscious Light is, and that it is categorically different from the Electromagnetic Light of Science.


K) Now What?

I will now take the next step and ask the obvious question:

What can be done with this new knowledge about Light?

The answer to that question is a work in progress.
SK, Nice!

Your Op reminds me of the problem of intentionality (or the Will). Science does not have a clue about this. For example, when I think about moving my arm, and then it suddenly moves, we understand that the physiology includes things like neuro activity, but we don't understand the thinking part of our self-consciousness. Other than genetic coding (biological design/emergence), science does not have a proven model nor certainly a ToE. Similarly, you posit the "redness" experience which we all know is part of that mind-body problem associated with one's quality of consciousness (Qualia) which only serves as proof of the metaphysical experience.

Then of course, you ask question(s) about seeing things. One may ask, can we communicate the qualities of the color red to a blind person? It's very difficult, if not impossible, particularly relative to the typical subject-object dynamic and the quality of something existing in someone's mind rather than the external world.

Metaphysically, science only leaves us wondering about the nature of conscious existence... . Philosophically, the "Journey into Mind", must include the subject-object dichotomy. In that sense, there are subjective truth's, as well as objective truth's; physical and metaphysical, inanimate matter, animate matter, seen and unseen, observed and unobserved, so on and so forth... .
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by SteveKlinko »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 20th, 2022, 1:39 pm
SK, Nice!

Your Op reminds me of the problem of intentionality (or the Will). Science does not have a clue about this. For example, when I think about moving my arm, and then it suddenly moves, we understand that the physiology includes things like neuro activity, but we don't understand the thinking part of our self-consciousness. Other than genetic coding (biological design/emergence), science does not have a proven model nor certainly a ToE. Similarly, you posit the "redness" experience which we all know is part of that mind-body problem associated with one's quality of consciousness (Qualia) which only serves as proof of the metaphysical experience.

Then of course, you ask question(s) about seeing things. One may ask, can we communicate the qualities of the color red to a blind person? It's very difficult, if not impossible, particularly relative to the typical subject-object dynamic and the quality of something existing in someone's mind rather than the external world.

Metaphysically, science only leaves us wondering about the nature of conscious existence... . Philosophically, the "Journey into Mind", must include the subject-object dichotomy. In that sense, there are subjective truth's, as well as objective truth's; physical and metaphysical, inanimate matter, animate matter, seen and unseen, observed and unobserved, so on and so forth... .
Thank You.
Yes we must ask all Questions and Think all Thoughts and Possibilities when it comes to Consciousness.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

SteveKlinko wrote: June 21st, 2022, 8:41 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 20th, 2022, 1:39 pm
SK, Nice!

Your Op reminds me of the problem of intentionality (or the Will). Science does not have a clue about this. For example, when I think about moving my arm, and then it suddenly moves, we understand that the physiology includes things like neuro activity, but we don't understand the thinking part of our self-consciousness. Other than genetic coding (biological design/emergence), science does not have a proven model nor certainly a ToE. Similarly, you posit the "redness" experience which we all know is part of that mind-body problem associated with one's quality of consciousness (Qualia) which only serves as proof of the metaphysical experience.

Then of course, you ask question(s) about seeing things. One may ask, can we communicate the qualities of the color red to a blind person? It's very difficult, if not impossible, particularly relative to the typical subject-object dynamic and the quality of something existing in someone's mind rather than the external world.

Metaphysically, science only leaves us wondering about the nature of conscious existence... . Philosophically, the "Journey into Mind", must include the subject-object dichotomy. In that sense, there are subjective truth's, as well as objective truth's; physical and metaphysical, inanimate matter, animate matter, seen and unseen, observed and unobserved, so on and so forth... .
Thank You.
Yes we must ask all Questions and Think all Thoughts and Possibilities when it comes to Consciousness.
Totally agree!! Not to drop a name here, but Kantian synthetic a priori reasoning rears its head again :D Was there a pun in there somewhere, I wonder(?)
8)
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by SteveKlinko »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 21st, 2022, 9:08 am
SteveKlinko wrote: June 21st, 2022, 8:41 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 20th, 2022, 1:39 pm
SK, Nice!

Your Op reminds me of the problem of intentionality (or the Will). Science does not have a clue about this. For example, when I think about moving my arm, and then it suddenly moves, we understand that the physiology includes things like neuro activity, but we don't understand the thinking part of our self-consciousness. Other than genetic coding (biological design/emergence), science does not have a proven model nor certainly a ToE. Similarly, you posit the "redness" experience which we all know is part of that mind-body problem associated with one's quality of consciousness (Qualia) which only serves as proof of the metaphysical experience.

Then of course, you ask question(s) about seeing things. One may ask, can we communicate the qualities of the color red to a blind person? It's very difficult, if not impossible, particularly relative to the typical subject-object dynamic and the quality of something existing in someone's mind rather than the external world.

Metaphysically, science only leaves us wondering about the nature of conscious existence... . Philosophically, the "Journey into Mind", must include the subject-object dichotomy. In that sense, there are subjective truth's, as well as objective truth's; physical and metaphysical, inanimate matter, animate matter, seen and unseen, observed and unobserved, so on and so forth... .
Thank You.
Yes we must ask all Questions and Think all Thoughts and Possibilities when it comes to Consciousness.
Totally agree!! Not to drop a name here, but Kantian synthetic a priori reasoning rears its head again :D Was there a pun in there somewhere, I wonder(?)
8)
I'm still wondering about the Pun too. Kant assumes there is some Objective way to See an external Object. I don't think there is any Objective view of any Object. The only thing that can be done is to Detect an Object. That is what our Sensory inputs do for us. Also, consider that he makes a big deal out of the a priori Reasoning versus the a posteriori. Both of these require a Conscious Experience and are thus both equally disconnected from any kind of Reality.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

SteveKlinko wrote: June 24th, 2022, 9:56 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 21st, 2022, 9:08 am
SteveKlinko wrote: June 21st, 2022, 8:41 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 20th, 2022, 1:39 pm
SK, Nice!

Your Op reminds me of the problem of intentionality (or the Will). Science does not have a clue about this. For example, when I think about moving my arm, and then it suddenly moves, we understand that the physiology includes things like neuro activity, but we don't understand the thinking part of our self-consciousness. Other than genetic coding (biological design/emergence), science does not have a proven model nor certainly a ToE. Similarly, you posit the "redness" experience which we all know is part of that mind-body problem associated with one's quality of consciousness (Qualia) which only serves as proof of the metaphysical experience.

Then of course, you ask question(s) about seeing things. One may ask, can we communicate the qualities of the color red to a blind person? It's very difficult, if not impossible, particularly relative to the typical subject-object dynamic and the quality of something existing in someone's mind rather than the external world.

Metaphysically, science only leaves us wondering about the nature of conscious existence... . Philosophically, the "Journey into Mind", must include the subject-object dichotomy. In that sense, there are subjective truth's, as well as objective truth's; physical and metaphysical, inanimate matter, animate matter, seen and unseen, observed and unobserved, so on and so forth... .
Thank You.
Yes we must ask all Questions and Think all Thoughts and Possibilities when it comes to Consciousness.
Totally agree!! Not to drop a name here, but Kantian synthetic a priori reasoning rears its head again :D Was there a pun in there somewhere, I wonder(?)
8)
I'm still wondering about the Pun too. Kant assumes there is some Objective way to See an external Object. I don't think there is any Objective view of any Object. The only thing that can be done is to Detect an Object. That is what our Sensory inputs do for us. Also, consider that he makes a big deal out of the a priori Reasoning versus the a posteriori. Both of these require a Conscious Experience and are thus both equally disconnected from any kind of Reality.
SK!

Since I'm in that causation mode here of late, Kant's metaphysics includes the quality of our own intuition as an intrinsic, fixed, a priori thing-in-itself that causes one to not only wonder, but to postulate possibility. It's something we seemingly cannot escape from or help from asking... .For example, when one utters 'all events must have a cause', one should take the time to reflect on why that actually is, and how that comes about.

The one similarity there, towards one's sense of a purely objective reality or truth (to your point), would be our understanding of mathematics. Mathematics is an objective a priori truth that effectively describes (and to a lesser degree) explains the cosmos. But one of the problems at this so-called level of certainty (Objectivity) is that mathematical truth does not change with time. The cosmos does. Hence the paradox between matter and mind, matter and change, a time dependent universe, so on and so forth.

You may be referring to the concept of noumenon where Kant intuited that like causation itself, there must be another realm that breathed fire into those cosmological equation's ala Stephen Hawking. Yes?
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by SteveKlinko »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: June 24th, 2022, 9:56 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 21st, 2022, 9:08 am
SteveKlinko wrote: June 21st, 2022, 8:41 am

Thank You.
Yes we must ask all Questions and Think all Thoughts and Possibilities when it comes to Consciousness.
Totally agree!! Not to drop a name here, but Kantian synthetic a priori reasoning rears its head again :D Was there a pun in there somewhere, I wonder(?)
8)
I'm still wondering about the Pun too. Kant assumes there is some Objective way to See an external Object. I don't think there is any Objective view of any Object. The only thing that can be done is to Detect an Object. That is what our Sensory inputs do for us. Also, consider that he makes a big deal out of the a priori Reasoning versus the a posteriori. Both of these require a Conscious Experience and are thus both equally disconnected from any kind of Reality.
SK!

Since I'm in that causation mode here of late, Kant's metaphysics includes the quality of our own intuition as an intrinsic, fixed, a priori thing-in-itself that causes one to not only wonder, but to postulate possibility. It's something we seemingly cannot escape from or help from asking... .For example, when one utters 'all events must have a cause', one should take the time to reflect on why that actually is, and how that comes about.
I would say that all Events in Physical Space must have a Cause. However, all Events in Conscious Space might not need a Cause.
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm The one similarity there, towards one's sense of a purely objective reality or truth (to your point), would be our understanding of mathematics. Mathematics is an objective a priori truth that effectively describes (and to a lesser degree) explains the cosmos. But one of the problems at this so-called level of certainty (Objectivity) is that mathematical truth does not change with time. The cosmos does. Hence the paradox between matter and mind, matter and change, a time dependent universe, so on and so forth.
The inherent reality of the Cosmos does not change. It is what it is. Science just has better and better ways of understanding it. I think the connection with Mathematics is mostly coincidental. The Mathematics never really completely depicts any Physical Phenomenon. There are always limits and boundaries of validity for any Mathematics with regard to Physical Processes.
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm You may be referring to the concept of noumenon where Kant intuited that like causation itself, there must be another realm that breathed fire into those cosmological equation's ala Stephen Hawking. Yes?
Here's how I would say it: I think that a Conscious Mind can have an effect on a Physical Mind (Brain) which can then cause Events to happen in the Physical World.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

SteveKlinko wrote: June 25th, 2022, 8:35 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: June 24th, 2022, 9:56 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 21st, 2022, 9:08 am

Totally agree!! Not to drop a name here, but Kantian synthetic a priori reasoning rears its head again :D Was there a pun in there somewhere, I wonder(?)
8)
I'm still wondering about the Pun too. Kant assumes there is some Objective way to See an external Object. I don't think there is any Objective view of any Object. The only thing that can be done is to Detect an Object. That is what our Sensory inputs do for us. Also, consider that he makes a big deal out of the a priori Reasoning versus the a posteriori. Both of these require a Conscious Experience and are thus both equally disconnected from any kind of Reality.
SK!

Since I'm in that causation mode here of late, Kant's metaphysics includes the quality of our own intuition as an intrinsic, fixed, a priori thing-in-itself that causes one to not only wonder, but to postulate possibility. It's something we seemingly cannot escape from or help from asking... .For example, when one utters 'all events must have a cause', one should take the time to reflect on why that actually is, and how that comes about.
I would say that all Events in Physical Space must have a Cause. However, all Events in Conscious Space might not need a Cause.
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm The one similarity there, towards one's sense of a purely objective reality or truth (to your point), would be our understanding of mathematics. Mathematics is an objective a priori truth that effectively describes (and to a lesser degree) explains the cosmos. But one of the problems at this so-called level of certainty (Objectivity) is that mathematical truth does not change with time. The cosmos does. Hence the paradox between matter and mind, matter and change, a time dependent universe, so on and so forth.
The inherent reality of the Cosmos does not change. It is what it is. Science just has better and better ways of understanding it. I think the connection with Mathematics is mostly coincidental. The Mathematics never really completely depicts any Physical Phenomenon. There are always limits and boundaries of validity for any Mathematics with regard to Physical Processes.
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm You may be referring to the concept of noumenon where Kant intuited that like causation itself, there must be another realm that breathed fire into those cosmological equation's ala Stephen Hawking. Yes?
Here's how I would say it: I think that a Conscious Mind can have an effect on a Physical Mind (Brain) which can then cause Events to happen in the Physical World.
SK!

Thank you for the reply! Two quick questions.

1. Are you thinking that the cosmos/universe is not time dependent in some ways?

2. Do you have any examples of your idea or thinking about those effects of the conscious mind over the "Physical World"?
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: A Journey Into Mind, Seeing, And Light

Post by SteveKlinko »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 25th, 2022, 11:07 am
SteveKlinko wrote: June 25th, 2022, 8:35 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: June 24th, 2022, 9:56 am
I'm still wondering about the Pun too. Kant assumes there is some Objective way to See an external Object. I don't think there is any Objective view of any Object. The only thing that can be done is to Detect an Object. That is what our Sensory inputs do for us. Also, consider that he makes a big deal out of the a priori Reasoning versus the a posteriori. Both of these require a Conscious Experience and are thus both equally disconnected from any kind of Reality.
SK!

Since I'm in that causation mode here of late, Kant's metaphysics includes the quality of our own intuition as an intrinsic, fixed, a priori thing-in-itself that causes one to not only wonder, but to postulate possibility. It's something we seemingly cannot escape from or help from asking... .For example, when one utters 'all events must have a cause', one should take the time to reflect on why that actually is, and how that comes about.
I would say that all Events in Physical Space must have a Cause. However, all Events in Conscious Space might not need a Cause.
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm The one similarity there, towards one's sense of a purely objective reality or truth (to your point), would be our understanding of mathematics. Mathematics is an objective a priori truth that effectively describes (and to a lesser degree) explains the cosmos. But one of the problems at this so-called level of certainty (Objectivity) is that mathematical truth does not change with time. The cosmos does. Hence the paradox between matter and mind, matter and change, a time dependent universe, so on and so forth.
The inherent reality of the Cosmos does not change. It is what it is. Science just has better and better ways of understanding it. I think the connection with Mathematics is mostly coincidental. The Mathematics never really completely depicts any Physical Phenomenon. There are always limits and boundaries of validity for any Mathematics with regard to Physical Processes.
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:23 pm You may be referring to the concept of noumenon where Kant intuited that like causation itself, there must be another realm that breathed fire into those cosmological equation's ala Stephen Hawking. Yes?
Here's how I would say it: I think that a Conscious Mind can have an effect on a Physical Mind (Brain) which can then cause Events to happen in the Physical World.
SK!

Thank you for the reply! Two quick questions.

1. Are you thinking that the cosmos/universe is not time dependent in some ways?
Yes, and the reason is in this link: https://theintermind.com/#Timelessness
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 25th, 2022, 11:07 am 2. Do you have any examples of your idea or thinking about those effects of the conscious mind over the "Physical World"?
Best answer is in this link: https://theintermind.com/#ConnectionPerspective
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021