The 4-fold Ontological Vortex of ME

I have destroyed time!

"IN" the 4-fold Ontological Vortex of ME there is no time. There is change & there are changes. Time is brought by clocks, internets, computers, cell phones & the likes - a feeble attempt to quantify change down to a fraction of nanosecond. Did they find NOW yet? It is an abstraction of change, Is it the 4th dimension? I doubt it. Change is always. Human time? - not so much.

Comments

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-07 14:38:07 17059

anyway enough about you and me ... back to the subject at hand:

any thing has characteristics and/or properties and edges and has relationships with the other things in the universe. we could also say it is those properties and those relationships and exists restrained by its edges. i think that also applies to what we call consciousness ... although it is super complex and interconnected with our own subjective awareness of the thing itself. so it is a hard thing to talk about.

You say: "You are NOT aware of my consciousness ...You are aware that I have consciousness".

I say: "Yes, I am aware that you have consciousness ... but i do not experience it as you experience it". er, else i would be you.

I know you have consciousness because i sense it in your behavior ... yet that behavior is not your consciousness ... rather it is a manifestation of it. I'm just calling the outward manifestations of this thingey its outside. So i still think that when you say "I am NOT aware of my consciousness" even though "I am aware that you have consciousness" your mind is being consistent with mine whebn i say "I experience your consciousness from outside of it, and you experience your consciousness from inside of it".

To be honest with you i still don't see any contradiction here at all ... just different usage of English to describe something that we both know.

Thanks for sharing. This is mostly off topic. If you choose please continue it somewhere else.
BTW, just for amusement consult hex 6 for today - at least here in Paradise - I will be doing so & not resume the contention.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-04 08:21:09 17059

where in your vortex are your emotions?
... your intentions?
... your will or your actions?

Personalizing existence, like a vortex in it, contains everything of existence which I pull into it. Vortex is just a metaphor. Such is probably not just 3 dimensional, but infinite.
Intentions are certainly in the mind & body the latter carrying out such stuff into the external world (& sometimes the other two). I kept this simple; not wanting to use the whole tree of language & ontology to conflate & argue about my simplifying epiphany.

Mark de LA says

     The first 3 components of me came to me in analyzing the question what is NOW? What is that now-component ontologically look like; being present in the razor sharp viewpoint of myself & whatever I am contemplating.
     The first is an external world that which is outside my body of that I am aware even in total darkness, but I have ears, nose, tongue & so forth. The world of the senses reveals also that my body is in an external world as I can see it etc.
     The second component of me is my body - revealed internally - through touch, as I sit, feel warm or cold, feel my breath & my heart beating.
     The 3rd, a really noisy one, is my mind. I am not sure of the preposition here, but in my mind occurs memories, after images of my senses, ideas, concepts, language before I speak & write it, & a lot of stuff which nobody else can "see" unless I use language; fMRIs & electronics only seeing electro chemical effects in their instruments.
      What is the 4th component,?
      I say it is my "I" - that unifier of experience, perhaps described externally like a bag of consciousness - all mine - which gives ME a stake in the game & personalizes existence.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-04 08:54:05 17059

i like your description of your I as giving you a stake in the game & personalizes your existence. It does for me too. For me it is like a moving unique special pattern or gestalt ... it changes, yet it persists as a singular continuity. like a shape recognized in a cloud in the sky that is strangely sill there after all the wind an rain of all those years. thing is i can see yours too almost as persistent as mine ... though, of course, i don't see yours from your inside view.

My I defies description because I am the describer. How can I get outside myself & look? All else is metaphor; loosely fitting. The vortex here is for the purpose of presencing myself for contemplation & meditation. It is more useful to these latter processes than chasing NOW.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-06 13:54:37 17059

M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:23:46 17059

seth 2014-02-04 08:54:05 17059

it does not follow for me that I cannot describe myself because it would be me describing it. What i find true is that I cannot describe myself from the outside, just because as you say, "i cannot get outside of myself and look". thing is, i claim consciousness has an inside and an outside ... and certainly does not look the same from both perspectives.

Consciousness has no sides, it just IS! Consciousness has focus.

Seth says

M1g0r 2014-02-04 09:23:46 17059

seth 2014-02-04 08:54:05 17059

Mark de LA says

Maybe consciousness doesn't even have focus.
It is more like the human having consciousness has the focus
or can focus his consciousness.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-07 07:56:32 17059

source: mark
Consciousness has no sides, it just IS! Consciousness has focus.

... well i am aware of your consciousness. every time i parse and try to comprehend one of your sentences here i am trying to experience your consciousness ... but i am not there focusing exactly as you did when you wrote it and cannot be aware of what you were aware of ... even some of your references are yet total mysteries to me. the only way i know how to describe that situation in English is to say i become aware of your consciousness from outside of it. i'm not saying that it is totally like a box with a side inside and a side outside ... that of course is just a metaphor. but to presume that consciousness is so isolated from that which it is not .... that we cannot view it happening and yet not be it happening, ... me thinks, is to misunderstand it.

You are NOT aware of my consciousness ...
You are aware that I have consciousness
Rest is a munge
You are aware of what you think I am writing about or saying out loud ...
But probably never get out of your walled garden

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-07 08:52:04 17059

M1g0r 2014-02-07 08:45:21 17059

seth 2014-02-07 07:56:32 17059

source: mark
Consciousness has no sides, it just IS! Consciousness has focus.

You are NOT aware of my consciousness ...
You are aware that I have consciousness
Rest is a munge
You are aware of what you think I am writing about or saying out loud ...
But probably never get out of your walled garden

i think to be aware that somebody is conscious VS to be ware that they have consiousness is perhaps just the very same distinction that i drawn between inside and outside. <<=========MUNGE
i have no idea what you think i have munged ... can you please be specific?
yes i am only aware of what i think you are writing and remain within my own walled garden of conceptions and expectations ... that is the situtation that prevails ... i do think we are in agreement on that.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-07 10:02:16 17059

i think to be aware that somebody is conscious VS to be ware that they have consiousness is perhaps just the very same distinction that i drawn between inside and outside. <<=========MUNGE

... Why is that a mung? You are making a distinction between "is" and "has" ... i do believe that is the same distinction that i am making between "inside" and "outside". Yet we are pointing to the very same things that are or have ... or are viewed from inside or outside. Within the limitations of English we may well be thinking the same thought ... but mayby not ... i don't know ... but i still think it is worth your consideration. Thing is you may be able to use my words descibing the situation to perchance inform your thought. Worth a try at least, eh?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=munge
My observation is that I will make distinctions and put them here in fastblogit & ...
For some reason you will take them & munge them back together as if the distinction I make was a waste of time for you
because of your walled garden? - who knows?
for your use of words has some other purpose here?
Often I will make a distinction & you munge it back together with it's exact opposite
as well as some stuff from your walled garden.
Such behavior turns most of my time ..
Looking at stuff from back in 2005 & forward
into waste
SSDD?

Seth says

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-02-07 14:10:33 17059

M1g0r 2014-02-07 10:29:59 17059

seth 2014-02-07 10:02:16 17059

i think to be aware that somebody is conscious VS to be ware that they have consiousness is perhaps just the very same distinction that i drawn between inside and outside. <<=========MUNGE

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=munge

.... well yes that is pretty much what i thought you were saying. My assumption, however, is that the things about which we draw these distinctions are in and of themselves the same things ... er, else we have confusion in just the words we are using. Our task in talking about them is to drill down and focus into the things and discover why they are connected in your mind differently than they are connected in mine. I know of no way to do that except that both of us share what we have in our minds with each other.

My observation is that I will make distinctions and put them here in fastblogit & ...
For some reason you will take them & munge them back together as if the distinction I make was a waste of time for you
because of your walled garden? - who knows?

... that means that i need to share my distinctions with you ... especially where i don't totally grock the ones you have made.

please rest assured that i am listening very carefully to your distinctions and what i hear of them i accept as a honest reflection of how your mind thinks. they are in no way a waste of my time. please, please put that anticipation totally out of your mind ... nothing, i assure you, could be further from the truth.

The trick here with honest communication of good will is for both of us to breach the walls of our respective gardens.

Often I will make a distinction & you munge it back together with it's exact opposite
as well as some stuff from your walled garden.

... That we think quite differently about the same thing is why we need to use binocular vision to look at it and not just one eye's point of view. It's like the proverbial elephant. Are you touching the trunk and me the ear?

Such behavior turns most of my time ..
Looking at stuff from back in 2005 & forward
into wast
SSDD?

... well true communication does not necessarily come easy but me thinks if there is good will on both sides and honest focus it will happen.

Thanks for sharing

Mark de LA says

M1g0r 2014-02-04 07:47:19 17059

A fifth component is where thoughts come from. Just passing them off as mind stuff doesn't do justice to their rare if ever revelation of their origin or the I's ability to control them. I hold them outside the I although the I participates as an observer & listener. Try having a new thought never encountered before without stimilation from outside senses nor memories on purpose & see how far one gets.

The 4-fold Ontological Vortex of ME

Tags

Comments

See Also