SEEING with the MIND'S EYE
SEEING WITH THE MIND'S EYE
("getting your mind around it" "seeing into your own seeing"_)
-Perception of communalities in distinct segments (S* strings) of communication. Ex.: 2 + 2 = 4; "Two plus two equal four" is a logically true proposition.
Agreement and difference between visible objects is discerned by physical organs, the eyes; analogously, and by common usage, agreement and difference between what signs communicate* may be said discerned by a mental organ, the mind's eye. The precise overlapping of these two kinds of perception occurs when the physical eyes are seeing print and the (person's) mind's eye is processing communicated content. The comparison persons are draw between words, sentences, maps, and other inscriptions on paper, in terms of what the signs represent, their meaning, are not given by any measurable external magnitude, but only as content of consciousness.
Examples of non-formal comparisons of S* (through the tokens, not the text; by templates, not grammar)
The number proposition above is an example of formal comparison. The relation predicated is identity; the terms predicated of are token-variants (two ways of writing the same text, named "4"). When it is said that "thought brings consciousness to itself by perception of necessary truth", "perception" here referes to what is seen by the mind's eye. This is not a metaphor imported by grammar into the language (pace Ryle and the Ryleans, with their "ghost in the machine" materialism). It is an actual ('empirical', in the broader sense) experience, containing the duality of "mind-body" as given in content of consciousness through external v. internal sign-use. The notion of "seeing", taken psychologically (in relation to consciousness), applies here to a process taking place partly due to occurrences in our brain (known by laws of causation; no oxygen, no carbon ignition), supplying words learned, from actual seeing, to content of a second order actually perceived through what is perceptible by physical eyes. The text for this experience would be "seeing into your own seeing". `
As we communicate, we change not only the subject matter (what it is about) but the type of subject matter. And to the ways "subject matter"'s in general are approached, which is to say mode of conscious orientation. Further analysis shows this includes "position", "state", "clarity", as well as and pervasive feeling-toned alignments. These are commonly called "mood-shifts". The most dramatic cases are "I-" (ego-) splitting, in which entire new personalities emerge, with different memory-access (and 'knowledge'). Signs used apart from grammar (as in the Zodiac, Tunes, Glyphs, Tarot, I Ching, any untranslated script) become tokens of the objects referred to in text. They operate with understandings that come through consciousness, then into thought, rather than vice versa. Their use, like that of religious symbols, calls for the user to orient themselves as conscious beings to what is "channeled" (presented by the unconscious when unconstrained by sanctions to 'get it right'). This silent, inner, "opening" is required to "fix" perceptions of the mind's eye, which otherwise pass through the flux* unretained, or mixed up with other things, as the forms of logical necessity implicit in scientific language once were (before the Greeks began uncovering them). It is pre-verbal consciousness present to itself without thought. Whatever is thought is represented by some particular type of sign-use (having synonyms of association). The systematic array of 7 of these individually specified types of sign-use, ordered by levels of logical types, so that no higher order predicate is predicate of itself, and all, by theoretical reduction, are predicable of the lowest level magnitudes of cell-psyche (neural cathexis to S*, text and token),
constitutes the totality of content of consciousness under sign-use (S*7-1)
SEEING CONSCIOUSNESS AS A WHOLE
This* schema spreads the band-with of consciousness, common to all thought, across seven universes of discourse, specified by type of tokens added one to the next:
First: the lowest phi level: the hypothetical quantity of energy expenditure in the physical anatomical system for a unit of S* -processing (Ex.: the 'jolt' of The Hanged Man, Saddam Hussein's lynching).
Second, the phenomenal, sleep-waking state transition bringing dream content level; bearing the first forms of communication formed within, by nature. The templates in these are generic to higher-level token associations (For instance: "Philosophy", at token type level S*6 (about all predicates), passes over, after apodeictic discernment, to 'myth' = likely symbolic stories, and the forms of Group-fantasy in S*2) (cf. Plato's Timaeus). Early 20th century British Realists (Moore, Russell, Broad, Ayer) called this "the sense-datum language"; the Ideal Language syntax could be theoretically interpreted into a universe of discourse that referred to brain-events as ultimate particulars. This could not be accepted (what explains the brain events that make reason possible?), but it could not be refuted. It constitutes a "level", or "plane" onto which contents of consciousness of successive higher orders, next being the language of physical objects in Newtonian (3-dimensional, Euclidean) space.
Third: the physical object language. This contains all predicates of objects commensurate with the human body, aware of itself as mobile in the three directions: vertical, horizontal, before/behind ("through"). These predicates, shown by Hume, then Russell, to be reducible in application to congeries of qualities,
with concepts including the relations of space and time constructable from formal characteristics of empirical instances, determine the universe of discourse for all objects given in Cartesian x-y coordinate schema.
Fourth Moral Discourse: the language obtained by adding moral predicates -- right vs. wrong -- to language of the Third order. This type of discourse brings "is" under "ought to be" -- or its reversal, "ought not (to be)". The Fourth level spreads consciousness becoming aware of itself as an ego, under a categorical constraint of ALLOWING or PROHIBITING the universe as alternatives affected by body movement. This level of consciousness is self-consciousness of the person as agent. It is the intersection of cause (ruling One-Two-Three) and will (choice of alternatives perceived at the ego-level.
Fifth Existential Ego discourse: Adding the token "I", for individual personal self-reference, (following Kant's "I think" propadeutic of every proposition; "mine" = every content of my consiousness.) The so-called "existentiast" movement in French philosophy, following John Paul Sartre was an anti-philosophical (level S*6) recovery of ego-consciousness, without getting what consciousness was right (no formal analysis of sign-use -- pitch in your oar -- anywhere).
Sixth: Philosophic consciousness: add consciousness of Sign-use, with the Logos each type type, rightly discerned, brings. This is the level of sign-use of all sign-uses, including itself, and "God" -- as hypothetical completing totality of all intellectual perception.
Seventh: Theological Consciousness: the text of the completingn totality, represented by many under a personified form, as if conscious of the universe perceived by humans as individual humans are of their body. Since at no moment could it be dared to say "this is the end; history is complete", whatever sign used by persons from their consciousness to signify can only be a "completing", not "completed" totality. The text of whatever is meant by "God", in this schema of consciousness, is "the completing totality" -- predicating on the experience of the user, by themselves, as a conscious totality completing itself in it.
PERCEPTION* ON THE TOKEN SIDE
FROM the apodeictic, self-evident, undeniable truths of formal analysis; TO the "obvious", "transparent", "evident on the face of it (on first blush)" in ordinary discourse: seeing the process that produced S* (motive, agenda, positionality) clinging to the function of its token (whenever something else would have done the textual job jus as well).
(Informal analysis of Sign-use complexes, using what is known about the S* process in general)
EXAMPLES:
I. "The Miracle in Missouri" was the CNN headline Jan. 14 for the recovery of two early teen boys from an abductor's -- a Michael Devlin --
perception* of agreement between this, as a type of event,
"The servitude of U.S. public to G.W.Bush -- for four years since "the axis of evil" speech. This befouled public discourse at the upper levels probably beyond anything he did. "So that's the way it is." How odd no philosophers or theologians said peep. This showed that the religion-ized ego had taken over the Sixth and Seventh token slots.
Just as "Shawn" bonded to his captor for 4 years, hiding in plain sight, but the gig got blown when Ben Ownby was captured, found and released in 4 days.... so "we," the American public, the thought goes, have bonded to our abuser, Bush for 4 years, hiding the truth in the open.
The triple 4's flash across the moral sphere: "ought not to be".
II. A soldier in Iraq
shown on CNN ( or MSNBC) saying "We can't fail here. If we fail here, we will have to fight them on the streets of America."
The Motive ("spelling it out"): to identify his (the soldier's) "enemy" with the enemy of the American TV audience.
"Support the troops", calling for identification with the soldier sighting down the barrel of a rifle pointed at Arab/Muslim Islamo-Fascists, as opposed to the eye of one sighting down the reverse direction (content: a S*5-S*2 composit -- imaginationof existential situation of mortal danger). If he's on "(Y)our" side over there, he will be the one on "(Y)our" side over here -- standing between "Us" and "the enemy" when he is brought back home.
And the flip side is (rule: "flip the token over on its other side to find the other texts): if you don't support him "over there", he will hare the right to kill you for this mental attitude when he is brought home. It is being put in his mouth, and run through his mind, to kill his own people. For the sake of those who sent him.
This would be the Repube Reptilian caucus.
Further inferences: drawing on Michale Tsarion for background:
The Repubes (incl. neocons, Zionists (right Wing Xian & Ashkanazic) are controlled by the Reptiles, themselves, through inputs directly to the blood chemistry (they think blood: will be found referring reverently to their DNA. like Tim Leary and Abe Foxman). Monstrous escapees from Atlantis surviving by care of humanoid servants (followers of The Flaming Bush), they are at perpetual, unrelenting, cruel war with other, Thoth-led escapees from the ancient (50,000 yr approx.) catastrophic planetary event.
The single driving motive of these -- less malevolent, but not intrinsically benign in re Lemurian humans -- shaping the Form of impulses through the serpentine skeletal trunk we call "spinal cord" (S*1 level) -- vibrations which reach the pool beneath the arches of the Fornix, is TO GET AWAY FROM THIS PLANET AND RETUN TO HOME IN OUTER SPACE. That is where "GOD" must be located, the 8th Ring (globe) of the fixed stars which encircle the 7 orbits of the visible heavenly bodies (5 + Sun and Moon) -- conscious of the Universe as a totality as the person is of their body. But a Stargate installed around the Moon's orbit suck the soul out of any who try, which they are constructing shields and propulsion devices to penetrate. They plan to get away leaving this planet of our Irish Celt Arthurian Grail ancestors destroyed, and us along with it. (Dems cluster under Serpent Sons icons, which include women in Esther roles, if allowed even that that -- mostly anorexic or pulticrudinous.) Wake up, America! They're emerging from the pit!
("getting your mind around it" "seeing into your own seeing"_)
-Perception of communalities in distinct segments (S* strings) of communication. Ex.: 2 + 2 = 4; "Two plus two equal four" is a logically true proposition.
Agreement and difference between visible objects is discerned by physical organs, the eyes; analogously, and by common usage, agreement and difference between what signs communicate* may be said discerned by a mental organ, the mind's eye. The precise overlapping of these two kinds of perception occurs when the physical eyes are seeing print and the (person's) mind's eye is processing communicated content. The comparison persons are draw between words, sentences, maps, and other inscriptions on paper, in terms of what the signs represent, their meaning, are not given by any measurable external magnitude, but only as content of consciousness.
Examples of non-formal comparisons of S* (through the tokens, not the text; by templates, not grammar)
The number proposition above is an example of formal comparison. The relation predicated is identity; the terms predicated of are token-variants (two ways of writing the same text, named "4"). When it is said that "thought brings consciousness to itself by perception of necessary truth", "perception" here referes to what is seen by the mind's eye. This is not a metaphor imported by grammar into the language (pace Ryle and the Ryleans, with their "ghost in the machine" materialism). It is an actual ('empirical', in the broader sense) experience, containing the duality of "mind-body" as given in content of consciousness through external v. internal sign-use. The notion of "seeing", taken psychologically (in relation to consciousness), applies here to a process taking place partly due to occurrences in our brain (known by laws of causation; no oxygen, no carbon ignition), supplying words learned, from actual seeing, to content of a second order actually perceived through what is perceptible by physical eyes. The text for this experience would be "seeing into your own seeing". `
As we communicate, we change not only the subject matter (what it is about) but the type of subject matter. And to the ways "subject matter"'s in general are approached, which is to say mode of conscious orientation. Further analysis shows this includes "position", "state", "clarity", as well as and pervasive feeling-toned alignments. These are commonly called "mood-shifts". The most dramatic cases are "I-" (ego-) splitting, in which entire new personalities emerge, with different memory-access (and 'knowledge'). Signs used apart from grammar (as in the Zodiac, Tunes, Glyphs, Tarot, I Ching, any untranslated script) become tokens of the objects referred to in text. They operate with understandings that come through consciousness, then into thought, rather than vice versa. Their use, like that of religious symbols, calls for the user to orient themselves as conscious beings to what is "channeled" (presented by the unconscious when unconstrained by sanctions to 'get it right'). This silent, inner, "opening" is required to "fix" perceptions of the mind's eye, which otherwise pass through the flux* unretained, or mixed up with other things, as the forms of logical necessity implicit in scientific language once were (before the Greeks began uncovering them). It is pre-verbal consciousness present to itself without thought. Whatever is thought is represented by some particular type of sign-use (having synonyms of association). The systematic array of 7 of these individually specified types of sign-use, ordered by levels of logical types, so that no higher order predicate is predicate of itself, and all, by theoretical reduction, are predicable of the lowest level magnitudes of cell-psyche (neural cathexis to S*, text and token),
constitutes the totality of content of consciousness under sign-use (S*7-1)
SEEING CONSCIOUSNESS AS A WHOLE
This* schema spreads the band-with of consciousness, common to all thought, across seven universes of discourse, specified by type of tokens added one to the next:
First: the lowest phi level: the hypothetical quantity of energy expenditure in the physical anatomical system for a unit of S* -processing (Ex.: the 'jolt' of The Hanged Man, Saddam Hussein's lynching).
Second, the phenomenal, sleep-waking state transition bringing dream content level; bearing the first forms of communication formed within, by nature. The templates in these are generic to higher-level token associations (For instance: "Philosophy", at token type level S*6 (about all predicates), passes over, after apodeictic discernment, to 'myth' = likely symbolic stories, and the forms of Group-fantasy in S*2) (cf. Plato's Timaeus). Early 20th century British Realists (Moore, Russell, Broad, Ayer) called this "the sense-datum language"; the Ideal Language syntax could be theoretically interpreted into a universe of discourse that referred to brain-events as ultimate particulars. This could not be accepted (what explains the brain events that make reason possible?), but it could not be refuted. It constitutes a "level", or "plane" onto which contents of consciousness of successive higher orders, next being the language of physical objects in Newtonian (3-dimensional, Euclidean) space.
Third: the physical object language. This contains all predicates of objects commensurate with the human body, aware of itself as mobile in the three directions: vertical, horizontal, before/behind ("through"). These predicates, shown by Hume, then Russell, to be reducible in application to congeries of qualities,
with concepts including the relations of space and time constructable from formal characteristics of empirical instances, determine the universe of discourse for all objects given in Cartesian x-y coordinate schema.
Fourth Moral Discourse: the language obtained by adding moral predicates -- right vs. wrong -- to language of the Third order. This type of discourse brings "is" under "ought to be" -- or its reversal, "ought not (to be)". The Fourth level spreads consciousness becoming aware of itself as an ego, under a categorical constraint of ALLOWING or PROHIBITING the universe as alternatives affected by body movement. This level of consciousness is self-consciousness of the person as agent. It is the intersection of cause (ruling One-Two-Three) and will (choice of alternatives perceived at the ego-level.
Fifth Existential Ego discourse: Adding the token "I", for individual personal self-reference, (following Kant's "I think" propadeutic of every proposition; "mine" = every content of my consiousness.) The so-called "existentiast" movement in French philosophy, following John Paul Sartre was an anti-philosophical (level S*6) recovery of ego-consciousness, without getting what consciousness was right (no formal analysis of sign-use -- pitch in your oar -- anywhere).
Sixth: Philosophic consciousness: add consciousness of Sign-use, with the Logos each type type, rightly discerned, brings. This is the level of sign-use of all sign-uses, including itself, and "God" -- as hypothetical completing totality of all intellectual perception.
Seventh: Theological Consciousness: the text of the completingn totality, represented by many under a personified form, as if conscious of the universe perceived by humans as individual humans are of their body. Since at no moment could it be dared to say "this is the end; history is complete", whatever sign used by persons from their consciousness to signify can only be a "completing", not "completed" totality. The text of whatever is meant by "God", in this schema of consciousness, is "the completing totality" -- predicating on the experience of the user, by themselves, as a conscious totality completing itself in it.
PERCEPTION* ON THE TOKEN SIDE
FROM the apodeictic, self-evident, undeniable truths of formal analysis; TO the "obvious", "transparent", "evident on the face of it (on first blush)" in ordinary discourse: seeing the process that produced S* (motive, agenda, positionality) clinging to the function of its token (whenever something else would have done the textual job jus as well).
(Informal analysis of Sign-use complexes, using what is known about the S* process in general)
EXAMPLES:
I. "The Miracle in Missouri" was the CNN headline Jan. 14 for the recovery of two early teen boys from an abductor's -- a Michael Devlin --
perception* of agreement between this, as a type of event,
"The servitude of U.S. public to G.W.Bush -- for four years since "the axis of evil" speech. This befouled public discourse at the upper levels probably beyond anything he did. "So that's the way it is." How odd no philosophers or theologians said peep. This showed that the religion-ized ego had taken over the Sixth and Seventh token slots.
Just as "Shawn" bonded to his captor for 4 years, hiding in plain sight, but the gig got blown when Ben Ownby was captured, found and released in 4 days.... so "we," the American public, the thought goes, have bonded to our abuser, Bush for 4 years, hiding the truth in the open.
The triple 4's flash across the moral sphere: "ought not to be".
II. A soldier in Iraq
shown on CNN ( or MSNBC) saying "We can't fail here. If we fail here, we will have to fight them on the streets of America."
The Motive ("spelling it out"): to identify his (the soldier's) "enemy" with the enemy of the American TV audience.
"Support the troops", calling for identification with the soldier sighting down the barrel of a rifle pointed at Arab/Muslim Islamo-Fascists, as opposed to the eye of one sighting down the reverse direction (content: a S*5-S*2 composit -- imaginationof existential situation of mortal danger). If he's on "(Y)our" side over there, he will be the one on "(Y)our" side over here -- standing between "Us" and "the enemy" when he is brought back home.
And the flip side is (rule: "flip the token over on its other side to find the other texts): if you don't support him "over there", he will hare the right to kill you for this mental attitude when he is brought home. It is being put in his mouth, and run through his mind, to kill his own people. For the sake of those who sent him.
This would be the Repube Reptilian caucus.
Further inferences: drawing on Michale Tsarion for background:
The Repubes (incl. neocons, Zionists (right Wing Xian & Ashkanazic) are controlled by the Reptiles, themselves, through inputs directly to the blood chemistry (they think blood: will be found referring reverently to their DNA. like Tim Leary and Abe Foxman). Monstrous escapees from Atlantis surviving by care of humanoid servants (followers of The Flaming Bush), they are at perpetual, unrelenting, cruel war with other, Thoth-led escapees from the ancient (50,000 yr approx.) catastrophic planetary event.
The single driving motive of these -- less malevolent, but not intrinsically benign in re Lemurian humans -- shaping the Form of impulses through the serpentine skeletal trunk we call "spinal cord" (S*1 level) -- vibrations which reach the pool beneath the arches of the Fornix, is TO GET AWAY FROM THIS PLANET AND RETUN TO HOME IN OUTER SPACE. That is where "GOD" must be located, the 8th Ring (globe) of the fixed stars which encircle the 7 orbits of the visible heavenly bodies (5 + Sun and Moon) -- conscious of the Universe as a totality as the person is of their body. But a Stargate installed around the Moon's orbit suck the soul out of any who try, which they are constructing shields and propulsion devices to penetrate. They plan to get away leaving this planet of our Irish Celt Arthurian Grail ancestors destroyed, and us along with it. (Dems cluster under Serpent Sons icons, which include women in Esther roles, if allowed even that that -- mostly anorexic or pulticrudinous.) Wake up, America! They're emerging from the pit!
posted by Sid Thomas | 12:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home