The Mind Body Paradox

The body is in the mind, and …
The mind is in the body.

 
#paradox #mindBody

Comments


Yes, one can set up the conditions of an experience such that either of those is what is in focus. True.

In actuality there is the experience happening now, and it is completely valid as it is, and that experience is what is. Everything that makes up the current experience are conditions of perspective. Talking about mind and body are conveniences we use to label perspective with, hence the apparent paradoxes … they don’t really exist.

Then too others do not say that the mind is in the body – only those that are confined to the 5 physical senses do. 
 

Chapter 3 of #GofB begins:

In the view of evolutionary psychology, the mind is a set of information-processing machines that were designed by natural selection to solve adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors. Cosmides & Tooby

3:1 Of necessity our brains developed in ways optimum for survival within our physical and social environments, working with astonishing swiftness to categorize incoming information. The foundation for this ability is not a given, however, but is actually developed as we grow through learning. In this way, we “create” our perceptive-experience, opening the door for much mischief to occur. Such creative ability is a double-edged sword. On the one side, it provides the possibility of inventing powerful tools for learning and change; on the other, it creates the probability of generating fundamentally false perceptions.

Ralston, Peter. The Genius of Being: Contemplating the Profound Intelligence of Existence (Kindle Locations 564-572). North Atlantic Books. Kindle Edition. 



In actuality there is the experience happening now, and it is completely valid as it is, and that experience is what is.

nathan

Well a lot of this paradox is mostly in this language that we must use to think about it. 

It struck me that most people normally talk about  “reality” as “what is” …
but then we agreed that “reality is your experience of it” … see About: A Taste of Mind (comment 78711).

I think we need to make explicit and precise in our statements and definitions what makes the difference between “actuality” (or “what is”)   and “experience”.   It seems clear to me that when we talk of “what is” or “actuality” or “factuality” we are talking about what happens independent of an observer.   When we use the word “experience” then we definitely are talking about what happens dependent on some observer.   Both points of view are valid … yet they can yield radically and dramatically different accounts  … hence the paradox does emerge.
 

Yep, the word reality is mungeful . I rarely use it . One can be #AlreadyAlwaysArguing about “That which is, IS!” if one likes – but in English it is very obvious as is its meaning.

here we are trying to agree on distinctions … not revel on the fact that in the past they were mixed up.

Yep, & I see no paradox.

well do you see that the same happening can be accurately described completely differently when it is described from the point of view of an observer, as opposed to when it is attempted to be described independant of observation ?

For me, they are both exactly the same. What happens independent of an observer does not happen. What happens dependent on an observer is one’s experience of it, or equally “what is”.

It really is that simple. No need to make it more complex. The differences in terms are only placement of perspective.


If it is being described differently, why do you assume it is the same happening? That is not even logical. It is weird how humans have fallen into this illogical way of thinking that there is the whole category of things “out there” that everyone experiences differently and would naturally know to be different, but for some reason, we argue and talk about them and imagine about them and coheres each other until we eventually, at least in part, agree to pretend they are the same things … even though our experience is telling us they are not.

okay that is certainly clear and precise and even simple just as you say null.

i would like to observe that account is based on your belief that “What happens independent of an observer does not happen”.

Me, i can believe that (extreme case) or not and it would make no difference to me one way or another.  

However i do firmly believe that “a vast number of things happen which are never observed by human beings”.  And that does make a big difference to me.

In that you have a built in assumption that a human being is the only valid observer, or only observer you are interested in at least.

Who is to say that all forms of life, and consciousness, even the simple consciousness of a single cell, do not observe? And thus are part of the experience we call reality?

That which IS! is generic – observer/no observer who cares? #IDC

Explain the difference please. Where is the knowledge of that which is, but is not observed or thought about, kept?

Maybe you folks just need to grok the word IS. nullnull
It is one of those words which can’t be pinned down very well like:
NOW, NOTHING, EVERYTHING, INFINITY, BEING ….


Well, nathan,  if you drive along 5 in California around the little town of Weeds on a clear day you will observe #MtShasta just like me and Elaine did earlier this week.  You will be observing the same thing that we observed … albiet at a different time …under different circumstances … and you will doubtlessly describe it differently.

I think It would be illogical, absurd, and wrong for us not to acknowledge the continuity “out there” of #MtShasta itself independent of our having just driven by and watched it.

Oh I am quite happy with my concept of IS.

IS = reality = one’s experience of it

No ambiguity at all. If one is experiencing it, then it is reality, and it is what IS. There is nothing more, and there need be nothing more. That covers all that is known and experienced in every possible way.

#SoYouSay !

#ItIsSo 

well there is your experience, and my experience, and mark’s experience,  etc etc.   each of our experiences is unique, particular, peculiar and usually vastly distinct and different from each other’s.  i think that aspect  needs to be included in such a sweeping concept referred to as “what is”.

Free yourself & get rid of beliefs ! Don't be a BELIEF robot - M.R.

More clear than the above from today’s throw:
Awareness, Attention is the function of the Ego;  Brightness, Brilliance, Luminosity which is measured by Photons increase with Development.
(2462) CONSCIOUSNESS is awareness of the part which self takes in production of a judgment either as cause or effect - cause when I act on another, effect when I act on myself, when my hand touches my head, e.g., "I am a cause - active consciousness;  passive consciousness - I am an effect".  Believe a cause exists without an effect or vice versa if you like to be mystifyied.  The categories of Reality are: number, space, motion, time & judgment;  if it be a thing it must have unity, it must be one, or it does not exist. Also it must have extension, speed, persistence & consciousness;  these cats or essentials are independent but concomitant; the thing is its component essentials; there is no "ding an sich". (thing in itself) 

Found this in storage On the Reality of Higher Worlds  < 36 pages in print.

I do have a representation of Mt. Shasta that I have observed. Is it the same thing you are observing? No, of course not. Even if we stood next to each other, on the same day, and talked into recording devices about what we are observing, someone else listening to what we each recorded would notice many differences. Even if we took pictures side by side, careful examination of the pixels of the pictures would show up more differences than not.

In life, because we have trained ourselves to believe things are the same, we ignore all the differences and focus on the few things we can identify that are similar and then believe we are observing the same thing. The actual evidence would show that you and I do not observe the same Mt. Shasta. The highly processed and filtered evidence that we, as humans, would allow into our shared arena of perception, would show that they are similar, but even then, not exact.

So I ask, why do you assume they are the same? My answer would be “because you have trained yourself to see only that which allows you to believe they are the same”.

Well we are in violent agreement that our representations of #MtShasta will be different … but i do not take that difference as evidence against the continuity of the mountain itself … as you seem to do.   Rather i understand how such differences in representation of the same thing arise.  

But yes, i do just assume that the mountain has its own continuity quite apart from human observation of it,  for if i abandon that belief, then i would have to abandon how i share vast experiences with others in this life.  I would have to start believing that i was living in some kind of science fiction Matrix like story.  But instead,  i rather love null living in and directly sharing the natural firmament with others.  It is my anchor to them.

Well, if you unwrap that train of thought further, you will come to discover that your belief that you would have to abandon how you share vast experiences with others in this life, is also based on a bunch of assumptions. If you actually did abandon those assumptions and lived according to the full truth of what your actual perception, not just your filtered one, is telling you then you will find that you can still share vast experiences with others in this life … and in fact, the sharing will be deeper and more meaningful. It is actually all the work we do to make different things into the resemblance of same things with others that literally creates a vast field of artificial edges between us that we must overcome in order to communicate and share true experience. When we take things as they really are in our experiences (our realities), instead of taking them as separate experiences of the same thing, then we are actually much closer to each other in what we share, literally and conceptually, and the possibility for shared communication, and interaction, increases dramatically.

I know it does not feel that way right now, because of the well trodden pathways of perceptive filtering you are accustomed to. But it is true nevertheless, and you can verify that on your own anytime you authentically desire to.

One does not have to assume anything is the same when interacting with another. One can take everything the other communicates quite literally as their different reality and assume that is fact. Then, when things match, they are a true match, and when they don’t, both can choose to swerve more in the direction of a match, if they want.

When one starts with the assumption that most everything is the same, then one is starting from a place where most everything understood is false … and that is a much larger gap to bridge … we manage nevertheless … we do manage to communicate. But, it can be soooooo much easier than that if we simply assume what others communicate to us is actually their different reality and not try and make it a same external reality seen differently, which it is not.

Start with the assumption that whatever anyone else is communicating is literally the reality they are experiencing, not a variation of your reality, but literally their reality, no matter how much it differs from your own and anyone else’s. If you start from there, a whole new kind of shared interaction will begin to develop in your experience. Your entire world will explode with a shared beauty of actual truth you never knew was there! #ThisIsGood

Conversation forked to thought 24176

well i don’t know about that.   seems to me you are focusing on differences believing that will  increase the agreements.  but i can not remember a time where it worked that way over here. 

over here i notice that my own experience can be falsified through my senses  in relation to others experience.  in such cases if i always assumed that mine was valid and the other was simply in another universe,  we would never get it together. 

There is a place at the throat of the Olympic Peninsula where i made a round about left turn and drove Westerdly over to the coast instead of around the right side of the Olympic Mountains directly North to the Strait of Jaun de Fuca and then to #PortAngelus.   I was following a map i had of the highways  in my mind.   My own map collapsed in favor of  the firmament when i saw a sign that read “Ruby Beach” and Elaine  told to me that Ruby Beach was on the coast.  At that moment logic forced me to choose the common agreement of what was happening over my own internal certainty.   We eventually got home because i did not  “take things as they were repesented in my mind” but rather accepted the signs through my eyes and ears from outside it.   You will not be able to actually visit the universe where the highways were built the way i had them going … that “reality” was just a mistake between my mind and “that which is” independent of my mind.

tag #LoaStory #PortAngelus

You and Elaine worked out vibrationally who’s state of being was stronger. It turned out to be hers and now hers is recorded as fact for both of you.

It could just as easily been yours and at this time both of you would remember those facts.

Because I am open to this kind of occurrence, because I believe in it, I now often experience the actual points of change, and even both paths laid out, as part of my experience and memory. Earlier in my life when I thought reality was “out there and shared” I did not experience these dual paths, converging and selecting … at least not as two experiences, but more as things like deja vu, faulty memory, and other ways people have of labeling and disregarding that which is literally different realities converging and colliding and being selected.

Interesting null.   It is certainly true that “Elaine and i worked out vibrational which state of being” was going to work.   That was the fun part null

But i don’t remember any choice between her #reality or mine.  The tuneing tension was not there between our personal realities.    When we saw the road sign and she told me that Ruby Beach was on the coast i took that as information coming into our senses from the world “out there” … not a clash between our experiential realities.  It was the point at which the territory itself became the map and our internal map was discarded.   We laughed about it … and discarded our internal guidance just like we had to discard our position in the map in the GPS satellite earlier in the trip.

Yes exactly. That pattern you describe is the conventional pattern humans have of resolving the differences between our actually different realities. The actual selection happens vibrationally within our being, it is not felt as tension … just as tuning forks placed near each other all come into sync with the one which has the purest tone. What you describe is the human convention for explaining the vibrationally selected result as a thing happening in a common external world.

If one simply agrees with their own self to take everything anyone else communicates as a literal and valid reality (see Respect the matrix of others), then one will begin to be able to observe vibrational selection as something actually happening, and not just apply a convention of human interaction to it, to cover it over and maintain the illusion of an external shared reality.

well the tuning was happening not between my reality and Elaine’s … but rather between our reality and the actuality “out there”.

If i assume there is only mine and Elaine’s reality, then yes, things would feel like you are descibing … but they did not feel that way to me … have never felt that way … ever … expect when i get caught up in a  Matrix movie type story. 

Well that sure is a lot more complicated isn’t it? There is your reality, and her reality, and reality out there too? Gosh, I don’t know what the math would be like to sync up 3 realities like that. I don’t think the tuning fork model would continue to work.

But I guess all that complexity is required if one wants to keep the outside reality as some other thing, and not just the reflection of what was vibrationally selected between the two of you.

Still not sure what you are getting with all that complexity either. The end result looks the same, feels the same, experiences the same, without the extra camel in the room.  

well i did the math … in this case geometry … above … and it is quite simpler and explains much more cases than assuming that “out there” does not exist.

It only gets complicated when you folks talk about it & talk about it in the abstract! nullnull

There is nothing abstract about my particular example above.  It happened just the way  i described it in “The Mind Body Paradox (comment 79009)” … according to my ability to express such events in language now after the fact.   You can, if you doubt, check with Elaine.  I would love to hear her desciption.   i am quite sure it would be different, but i hope not in a way that would obviate the world outside of  us both. 

See abstract in the Power thesaurus. Drawing a block diagram is the the epitome of abstraction. null

You simply do not understand abstract seth

well mark, is there a possibility that i do understand how to use abstraction  and that the  discrepancy between us is accounted for by you not understanding how to use it?

yep the diagram is a generalized abstract description of the example itself.   so what?   This map can inform as to the continuity of the matter at hand.  The only question is whether the abstract map accurately represents the aspects of the example that are the subject of our inquiry.

Only if you continue to #MakeShitUp & ignore dictionary & thesauruses which previously existed.  I like to repeat the fact that I got A’s in all my formal English classes in all the schools I attended.null
On the positive side it does generate more confusion & helps to prolong the conversation if one wants that to happen.

If one were to ask a stranger what you just said above (The Mind Body Paradox (comment 79022)) – who speaks English very well I suspect all he could come up with is #huh ?  perfect example of abstraction about an abstraction – perhaps nested abstractionism .null

i don’t know what you are saying here.   i am using the dictionary definition of the word “abstract” just like you are … and see no discrepency there between us in that regard.   but you seem to be saying that there is a mistake in my using a abstract map here to express something … and i see no mistake in that here at all.  

Any map is a abstraction of a territory.  But that does not mean that using a map is not necessary.  Had my GPS not suffered a nervous breakdown and had i had accurate access to the map of the Peninsula and had followd it, then  i would have gotten Elaine home to #PortAngelus 7 hours sooner then i did.  Maps are useful … but no so very when they have errors in them or when they are mis-read … the same goes for the maps in our minds relative to the actuality that we call “what is”.

So the only question that we should have between us is whether this map accurately represents the salient aspects of the territory in question.

What is probably true is that you & Elaine drove by Mt. Shasta & each , if you looked, saw it from slightly different points of view – everything else is after the fact talk about that moment.

I don’t know what you mean when you say “things don’t feel that way to me” seth. I don’t know what “that way” would be. Things feel the way they feel to me. I learn to assign a feeling to a map of how I think things are. If I had learned to assign what I feel to the map you are using (and I originally did) then that would be how things feel. If I take the time to learn to assign how things feel to me to any new map then that is how things will feel. Either way, the feelings I have are the same … and I become comfortable attaching those feelings to a particular map.

The map I use are not the feelings. The feelings are always the same.

well okay i can say it differently.    i have toyed with assigning positive feelings to the map that you describe.  but the more i learn to do that, the more i do not like the feeling of it.  so i go back to the tried and true map that everybody i know is using except perhaps your group.   it feels much better to me … it feels true to my being when i believe in  a reliable actuality independant of my experience and that i can share that actuality with others.

I would say, and Abrham says this too, that you probably have not taken the whole journey. As you say, you start out on the journey and run across some bad feelings. It’s like going from L.A. to San Diego … and not long after you start out you run into heavy traffic, then some pot holes, and finally a bank of never ending fog (remember that one ? ) … but if you just keep going, because someone told you that you might like it there in San Diego, you will eventually get through all the traffic, and the pot holes, and the fog, and discover that San Diego is sunny and gorgeous and you will be happy you didn’t turn back when you hit that first pot hole on the road.

As you say, it’s a journey, and one with a lot of new experiences to process. Where you were before is always going to feel easier and safer … until you reach the destination.

I also did the geometry ( Seth & Elaine ) and it is very simple and also explains all cases and without a third actual reality to deal with.

okay it could be like that … the story rings true.   I don’t remember anything that i would call a field of “never ending fog” … more like a field of never ending self referential valuelessness.     there are lots of directions and experiencs i can have … i don’t feel like choosing that one … but don’t stop hailing me about it from across the road null

I was referring to you and Mark and I driving from L.A. to San Diego in 1984 when I came to visit while in the Navy one weekend. We had to drive because the fog was so thick that I could not take the plane back I had come up on. Both airports were closed.

After you dropped me off at my Submarine, the fog started clearing and you and Mark had a lovely morning in San Diego (or so you told me later).

Do you remember?

oh … wow … no i do not remember that trip ...shucks.  i do remember being in SanDiago … but i don’t remember you being there, it was me and Denise, and we went to the Globe Theater in the park.  I remember a Navy base but that was me dropping Mark off … shucks i don’t remember you being there.  Maybe it will come to me later.

are you sure i was there … and it was not just Mark dropping you off?

yeah i saw that … a beautiful and accurate geometry indeed … but it left out the very thing of which we speak.

I don’t get what you mean. All concepts are included. It is intended to be a general map, not an exact one of an exact picture. It was inspired by the story where you thought to go one way and Elaine the other and her vibration ended up being the strongest representation which became the joint reality in the mirror and fully applies to that situation.

What is missing?


actually there never was a time where i thought to go one way, and Elaine the other.   i do understand how that could be expected … but fact is it never happened here.  the vibration when it happened was between us and the road which you left out of your picture.

there was just a bit of that on the other side of the Olympics when Elain was making sure that i did not turn to go to the Ho Rainforest … but that was all absorbtion on my part … i trusted her experience there without question.

I was simply speaking of “There is a place at the throat of the Olympic Peninsula where i made a round about left turn and drove Westerdly ...”.

I reread above and if there is more to that part of the story than a different turn, you don’t seem to have put it down. We were talking about how the map inside you was different than the map inside Elaine and the theoretical outside map. I still maintain that your map could have been the one to choose what we all now see in the mirror … even though at this point you are quite sure there is some real system of roads out there that we are all observing. I say there is not, never is. What is out there is always only showing us, reflecting back to us, what we are representing in “Our reality which is our experience of it” and that can at any moment be anything at all and where joint reality is concerned, the strongest vibration selects what is in the mirror.

… and I get that you and Elaine had a wonderful connected adventure and getting to that adventure is why you went where you went and selected the maps you selected when you did … I am not discounting that at all.

… in fact, it is so that we can take such journeys, more of them, more often, that knowing reality is not fixed out there is so important!



The Witch of Lake Crescent

well there was that aspect of what happened.   A big part of that day was that it was an incrediable #LoaStory and we consciously talked about that.   There seems  be a point to these #LoaStory that is being attracted.   We kept asking what the point of this one was?  Now in retrospect it was the experience itself that we had together … actually the only one for over 40 years.   So that tuneing was definitely the most important spirit of the trip.   Your picture and desciption match with that #LaoStory well …

… er, except for the road, the territory in which the experience took place.  I realize  *you*  don’t believe that exists … and so you leave it out.  But my story includes it an an intrical undeniable part and not a mere reflection of something inside me and Elaine.

Yep. I came up and you and I spent the weekend brainstorming CyberMind. I was to fly back late, around 11pm, but Sunday evening the fog kept rolling in until the airport closed. I would have been AWOL if I did not make it back by the next morning so Mark and you decided to take me down. I actually convinced Mark to let me drive (because Mark was going so slow and I liked driving in fog and we barely had time to make it). Mark sat shotgun and you were in the back seat, and sleeping most of the trip in the fog which is probably why you remember little of it, though I do know you were awake at times, remarking how we were going nearly 60 while not being able to see more than 20 ft in front of the car … I reassured you I was fine and could handle the conditions. The fog was very very thick.

I don’t know what you and Mark actually did after you dropped me off, just that you told me the fog cleared and you had a nice time when I talked to you later. The main reason for you coming, that I remember, was to keep Mark company on the long drive back.


Why would it need to be more than the representation of something inside you and Elaine? It equally serves your purpose and your experience and your memory being just that. And it will never contain your emotions and your thoughts … no matter what, it is not the reality you experienced, it is only, at best, a remaining reflection of it’s sensory content … drifting away in time. Why does it need to be more than that? For just that serves you so well exactly as it is.

yes now i remember being with Mark in San Diago … i remember being excited about seeing SanDiago for a whole day for the first time in my life.

Being a passanger in a car means that you are not nearly as much aware of what is happening outisde of the car.  I think this is the case.  Just like Elaine does not remember the roads or towns you go through any more than i did … she was almost always a passanger on those trips.  Now i can look at the map and even narrow it down to specific turns and signs that we both ignored when we encounterd them  … my map of going up North on the right side of the mountains being so vivid in my mind that i could not conceive that we were actually making the long afeared drive to the coast.   How can you possibly just cast out that terraign as not existing?


Yep for U it is #AlreadyAlwaysArguing & what your own point is. Enjoy!

How about instead of feeling the loss of casting something out, feel the joy of including new things as you experience them? Why does anything need to be there until you include it in your reality experience, in your awareness? Does it really matter if what you are not aware of is there or not?

Enjoy the act of creating … the act of including something in your experience. Be it the first time you include it when you first observe a map of Washing state … or the later time you include it as you traverse it in a car. That IS your experience. That IS reality. What more actually needs to be there for your experience to be complete than what is there as you experience it?

I remember driving N to San Diego in the fog but not with Seth in the car.

and p.s. who’s reality is this anyway? Seth now remembers (The Mind Body Paradox (comment 79051)).

I love how you both demonstrate my points so succinctly. Who’s vibration is strongest? Which reality will win? What will become in the mirror? At this point, it is not a fixed external reality, that’s all I can say. null

In those days I didn’t mind driving long distances alone. Today if you were to want to drive because you thought I was driving too slow in the fog I would have offered to let you get out and hitchhike in the fog!
null

To a dildo all things are about vibrations! nullnullnull

well it does seem to need to be there for Elaine to have gotten back to Lynn and Shallon and Max on Ram’s Hill Road  … and for me to have finally made it to McDonds in #PortAngeles and thence down to Olympia and even not to have to paid the toll on the Narrows bridge … despite my total loss of direction. 


The girl in Clallam Bay did not know of the map in my head drawn there by Lynn which was expecting quit a different T intersection.  No,  she symphathized with me not wanting to go back on the long winding road which never seemed to end … so she very convinceingly and honestly directed me back down to Forks null … which i must admit i explored untill it made no sense.   Then i returned to this intersection and was graced with a real map from the stars … which i followed quite off the Olympic Peninsula null

What was the great loss ? … perhaps my own profound loss of direction.   Left and Right now are independent variables … they are not persistent in my memory.  Bad news for a map maker, … or a follower of direction … eh?


It was there as you experienced it.

The reflection of your experience is in the mirror for the rest of us and we are experiencing that.

well that which i experience is there indeed.  

but i don’t understand your mirrors.  i don’t believe i have them.

You don’t have mirrors, at least I never said that. External reality is a mirror. It does not contain the emotions you feel, or the thoughts you think, does it? It is not your complete experience, is it? Isn’t it only a sensory reflection of a part of your experience? The part of your experience that is easy to share with others because they also have senses so they can view this partial representation of your experience too?

Reality … is your experience. Reality is complete. Your experience is the only thing you know that is so complete, so exact, the thing that contains everything that represents all that you know, is it not? External reality is not like that. It is only there, only accessible, when you are having an experience. When you are experiencing Port Angeles you can access Port Angeles. When you are not experiencing it, you can’t access it. At best, you can only imagine it right? At least, try and access something new about Port Angeles when you are not there and next time you are there, see if that new thing is in your experience. I bet it won’t be. It must have been imagination.

Your reality is your experience of it. Your reality experience travels. As it travels, the external mirror provides your senses with a representation of the reality experience you are having. This way you can experience it as something more than imagination, and as something that others can share with their senses. Wherever your reality experience is not traveling this moment is not in the sensory mirror … you can’t see it there. If you are not in China, you can’t see China, you can only imagine it.

But don’t get lost in all this contemplation. Simply go back to the beginning of this comment, this idea. What is out there is not complete. It does not contain all the elements of reality. It does not contain all the elements of your experience. That alone is enough to recognize what is out there as something less than reality … something like a reflection. It has all the elements a reflection has, and nothing more … at least nothing more that one is not imagining there between the looks they take at it with their senses. What is happening in the mirror out there when we are not looking, we don’t know. No one does. No one is experiencing it … therefore it is not reality. That too is like a mirror. When you are not standing in front of a mirror, you don’t exist in the mirror, do you? You only exist in the mirror when you are looking in the mirror.

Conversation forked to thought 24183