justifying what i said 2014-03-06 22:14:00


  1. Assume human beings have insides and outsides as discussed here.
  2. When i affect you, while you are conscious, i will almost certainly affect your insides.
  3. When you affect me, while i am conscious, you will almost certainly affect my insides. 
  4. Therefore when we affect each other, called "interacting", our insides are interacting. 
  5. That interacting happens regardless of what we imagine is happening inside the other.  That interacting exists, is so, is factual regardless of our interpretations.

How does that inform our model of walled gardens?

 


tag #InsideOutside 

Tags

  1. stokenphobia
  2. insides
  3. binocular dialogue
  4. walled garden
  5. InsideOutside

Comments


Seth says
Einai 2014-03-07 07:57:16 17147
BTW, I have no fear of circles or squares or even pentagrams.


nor do i.

bear in mind that the circles are just a illustration.  but the circle is a metaphor that i have used in the past for a fear of the walled garden we have been discussing. 

some people do fear these walled gardens we have going here ... and in the past i have experienced that same fear ... or more like a dred.  i think i told you about that one day in the warehouse.  Do you remember the day i cam to you all disterbed about it?  Probably you don't ... you may have just supposed that i was babbling about something crazy.

Seth says
Einai 2014-03-07 07:53:53 17147
It all kinda depends upon some value or what you mean by using the word affect.
It seems like a nebulous word that could mean anything even the stuff that ER talks about.




I'm talking here about affecting any kind of effect at all.  If i affect you, then you react to that effect and affect me back, etc, i call that interacting.  For example if i jam my finger in your nostril and you punch me out, then we are in fact interacting.  The point is that this interaction happens between our insides quite independent of our so called walled gardens ... er, quite independent of how we are always listening, quite independent of our guesses and imagination of what is happening outside of our selves in the other person.

Mark de LA says
seth 2014-03-07 13:15:20 17147
Einai 2014-03-07 10:40:32 17147 
When in a walled garden one can't separate oneself from the story one tells oneself which disputes your claim that it is not about you.


Well, when one can't separate oneself from some story one tells oneself which disputes the claim that the story itself is about oneself, then clearly one will just continue to believe that the story is about them.  I presume that is what you are saying.  In other words i believe there is a boundary between my experience and yours because i believe the story i told myself that the boundary exists.

Now this is a common knowledge story, which is prevalent in the science, philosophy and literature of our time .... nor is there contrafactual evidence to dispute it.  Nevertheless we certainly can tell ourselves stories which would dispute it.  Two come to mind.  One is that some of us are clairvoint, or have other special powers, and can experience others experiences where others cannot.  I'm going to personally pass on that story as i have no such special powers and so cannot reasonably believe the story myself.  

The other major story is that separate people are like separate fingers of the same hand where each finger does not experience what the other finger experiences, but there is a centeral consciousness which does.  That story doesn't actually dispute the claims of my story, it just adds an additonal barrier between the finger and the centeral consciousness.  I actually favor such a story myself (see binocular vision).

Which story are you telling?  Or do you have some contrafactual evidence to dispute mine? Or something else?

Incidentally should we ever be able to get past these surfacy doubts, me thinks there might just be some more interesting awarenesses to gestalt. 
I prefer the neither approach not putting limits anywhere, but then I have already explained myself.
It is interesting that recorded history is only a few thousand years at most & before that we have little else other than mythology for our origins. Times & consciousness is certainly different for those days - maybe even our bodies etc. Earth Age is around 9 billion years or so if we accept science which assumes rate of change of everything to be static.   Our current language is only around 600 years so one has to consider how that plays into describing our thoughts.  Some goes back a little farther. Language plays a large portion in how we clothe experience in words for communication. I have 4 years at UCLA taking chemistry & mathematics, 2 years of physics, 1 year of zoology, psychology & economics  & find nothing that contradicts nor motivates putting up the walls.
It is also interesting that I encountered this page for today which describes near the bottom a method for transcending the senses. Your entreaty for "some more interesting awarenesses to gestalt"  will be tempered in my listenings by your future responses to the above.


Seth says
Einai 2014-03-07 10:40:32 17147 
When in a walled garden one can't separate oneself from the story one tells oneself which disputes your claim that it is not about you.


Well, when one can't separate oneself from some story one tells oneself which disputes the claim that the story itself is about oneself, then clearly one will just continue to believe that the story is about them.  I presume that is what you are saying.  In other words i believe there is a boundary between my experience and yours because i believe the story i told myself that the boundary exists.

Now this is a common knowledge story, which is prevalent in the science, philosophy and literature of our time .... nor is there contrafactual evidence to dispute it.  Nevertheless we certainly can tell ourselves stories which would dispute it.  Two come to mind.  One is that some of us are clairvoint, or have other special powers, and can experience others experiences where others cannot.  I'm going to personally pass on that story as i have no such special powers and so cannot reasonably believe the story myself.  

The other major story is that separate people are like separate fingers of the same hand where each finger does not experience what the other finger experiences, but there is a centeral consciousness which does.  That story doesn't actually dispute the claims of my story, it just adds an additonal barrier between the finger and the centeral consciousness.  I actually favor such a story myself (see binocular vision).

Which story are you telling?  Or do you have some contrafactual evidence to dispute mine? Or something else?

Incidentally should we ever be able to get past these surfacy doubts, me thinks there might just be some more interesting awarenesses to gestalt. 

Mark de LA says
Maybe describe your fear or that incident, eh?
pah

Mark de LA says
seth 2014-03-07 08:27:56 17147
Einai 2014-03-07 07:53:53 17147
It all kinda depends upon some value or what you mean by using the word affect.
It seems like a nebulous word that could mean anything even the stuff that ER talks about.




I'm talking here about affecting any kind of effect at all.  If i affect you, then you react to that effect and affect me back, etc, i call that interacting.  For example if i jam my finger in your nostril and you punch me out, then we are in fact interacting.  The point is that this interaction happens between our insides quite independent of our so called walled gardens ... er, quite independent of how we are always listening, quite independent of our guesses and imagination of what is happening outside of our selves in the other person.

So you say or maybe not?



Seth says
Einai 2014-03-07 08:48:35 17147
not much to describe really.  it is just the dread of being isolated from every other human.  the realization that there is a boundary between me and others.  a boundary which in fact is not easy to cross and in some sense is impossible to cross. 

i think i made some drawings back then, perhaps though just in my mind, and they expressed the predicament in circles ... really the same circles that i drew here for the purposes of logical interpersonal analysis.

Mark de LA says
i.e. how would you know if you are in a walled garden? (**).. or the country of the blind? or wrapped up in a catch-22 ?
(**) said to be a place where the tryst of Cupid & Psyche had their tryst.


Mark de LA says
seth 2014-03-07 10:36:55 17147
Einai 2014-03-07 10:15:07 17147
seth 2014-03-07 10:07:15 17147
Einai 2014-03-07 09:25:38 17147
seth 2014-03-07 09:12:27 17147
source: mark
So you say or maybe not?
... how can my description possibly not apply?  I cannot imagine it.  It seems quite necessary to me.  Can you tell me where you doubt my description?
As you can tell I presume no hard & fixed walled garden.  Why limit yourself or your experience by a story except perhaps to protect a Self (BofNK part II)? There is no need for the limit for one can hang out in not knowing & just explore anyway.


Well if you can actually experience what i experience, then for you there is no natural limit here.  Otherwise, me thinks, you are just in denial.
I appreciate, respect & acknowledge that you may be stuck in your story here:
(dam stuck metaphor may apply or maybe not)

bon voyage .. good sailing
if you ever get out.


Well this is not about me and my story.  It is about whether there exists a natural boundary between human experience or not.  Sans some kind of spiritual clairvoyance, or some kind of ability to experience across minds, i hear nothing but just denial,  avoidance, and change of subject from you.  It does not inform my query.   

Did you enjoy your reaction as much as it disappointed my inquiry?
When in a walled garden one can't separate oneself from the story one tells oneself which disputes your claim that it is not about you.


Seth says
Einai 2014-03-07 10:15:07 17147
seth 2014-03-07 10:07:15 17147
Einai 2014-03-07 09:25:38 17147
seth 2014-03-07 09:12:27 17147
source: mark
So you say or maybe not?
... how can my description possibly not apply?  I cannot imagine it.  It seems quite necessary to me.  Can you tell me where you doubt my description?
As you can tell I presume no hard & fixed walled garden.  Why limit yourself or your experience by a story except perhaps to protect a Self (BofNK part II)? There is no need for the limit for one can hang out in not knowing & just explore anyway.


Well if you can actually experience what i experience, then for you there is no natural limit here.  Otherwise, me thinks, you are just in denial.
I appreciate, respect & acknowledge that you may be stuck in your story here:
(dam stuck metaphor may apply or maybe not)

bon voyage .. good sailing
if you ever get out.


Well this is not about me and my story.  It is about whether there exists a natural boundary between human experience or not.  Sans some kind of spiritual clairvoyance, or some kind of ability to experience across minds, i hear nothing but just denial,  avoidance, and change of subject from you.  It does not inform my query.   

Did you enjoy your reaction as much as it disappointed my inquiry?

Mark de LA says
Maybe this one would be a better picture for you. I enjoyed this movie as well.


Mark de LA says
seth 2014-03-07 10:50:50 17147
  Incidentally...
source: mark
WOW! I don't have any fear of walled gardens either; although the maze in the Shining was freaky - mostly Jack Nicholson's fault:

I don't remember your incident. I do remember coming home from work in response to a call from somebody in PJ2 who was concerned about you.

... i do not remember the substance of walled gardens being dealt with at all in the Shining ... just crazy stuff.  The maze there was just a maze ... it was not, at least in my mind, associated to a mental maze in one's mind that cannot be escaped.  This was not the time you came home in response to some concern in P2.  Rather it was when i visited you in the evening when you were stoned in your space.

This is not insanity shit that i am talking about here.  If you try not to listen for that in your mind you may just be able to hear what i am saying. 

Sorry you took this too personally.  The maze in the movie was in fact a walled garden with bushes as a wall.  The maze was quite a clever metaphor for the whole story.  The only reason I brought it up was I saw that movie float by in one of the program listings the other night & showed a bit of it to T who has not seen the whole thing.
You still have not called to mind whatever your conversation was at P2, nor explained it since. So your reference went & perhaps still is an unresolved pointer.


Mark de LA says
Recorded History only goes back to around 3500 B.C. Lots of doubt exists with stories abundant about what happened before that. RS & GW fill in those gaps a bit. Maybe stories, maybe not.


Seth says
source: mark
I prefer the neither approach not putting limits anywhere, but then I have already explained myself.
Well yes, , the natural separation between human individuals need not imply any limits.  Thanks for pointing that out.   In fact there are mostly advantages gained from this tendency of life to divide, separate, and differentiate.  Look at the thumb opposed to the fingers of a hand ... that those move independent and from different directions is why we can grasp with our hands.  Witness how two people can lift a long heavey object using their separate bodies, or even how you and i can approach a topic from different views and arrive at better whole. 

I see no limitations imposed by a story that recognizes the natural division between human individuals and does not shrink from any of the consequences of that division ... be they temporarily, or locally, experienced as pain or ecstasy.

Seth says
source: mark
natural division (where is that decided?) is just your protective wall?
hmmm ... i have been trying to figure out how i would think or feel that my natural division from humanity was protecting me. 

I sure can see how it contributes to my freedom.  I can also see how retreating behind it and becoming oblivious to the otherness outside allows me to think and feel and  even do watever, and build my own private castles within.  That is, in fact, how this so called "wall" between my insides and my outsides can function.  I could judge some of that to be the good of it ... and from another perspective some of it to be the bad of it.  Above at several points i have pointed out some of the positive aspects of this feature.  You yourself have also pointed out and demonstrated some bad aspect of it. 

So what? 

Where is it decided?  Well i don't decide it, i experience it.  I recognize it just as certainly as i recognize the sun as it comes up every day on the Eastern horizon.  It is that kind of fact.   Me thinks it is high time for you to recognize the fact also and stop accusing me of not wishing it away.

Mark de LA says
Walled garden complete!

Seth says
source: mark
What happens some day when you discover that what's so nested in bullshit of natural division (where is that decided?) is just your protective wall?

 Yes i can certainly imagine us being and moving as one being with no division of intent or knowledge or wisdom.   The story i mentioned above was, me thinks, quite a vivid metaphorical expression of that ...
source: seth above
The other major story is that separate people are like separate fingers of the same hand where each finger does not experience what the other finger experiences, but there is a central consciousness which does.  That story doesn't actually dispute the claims of my story, it just adds an additional barrier between the finger and the central consciousness.  I actually favor such a story myself (see binocular vision).

... That actually is kind of my favorite thingeys to imagine.  Kind of what i am doing here, eh?  Yet the separation of my being from your being  is a fact that has consequences for what happens here.  Gestalting the separation away does not change anything. 

Seth says
Einai 2014-03-08 10:34:11 17147
seth 2014-03-08 10:26:55 17147
Einai 2014-03-07 15:46:26 17147
Recorded History only goes back to around 3500 B.C. Lots of doubt exists with stories abundant about what happened before that. RS & GW fill in those gaps a bit. Maybe stories, maybe not.


I don't understand your significance in switching focus from the predicament of our lives in the here and now to what allegidly happend in the distant past or the distant future.  Certtainly things change, perhaps even our very human predicament ... but we are right here in our lives and so is everybody else who is living in early 21th century and our situation is what it is today ... our consciousness is what it is today ... and we interact as we do today.  From here we can certainly imagine our consciousness changing into the future and for others who will follow.  I have no doubt that in a millenia humans will be conscious quite differently than we are today.  My intention here is to realize, say, and do today that which will enhance a consciousness which follows.
I acknowledge, appreciate & respect that you do not understand it!
It lends perspective upon what YOU think is the human condition ..
BUT, maybe not.


Yep, certainly history informs our understanding of humanity and helps us predict the future.   I, however, was not informed by your waving at history and citing stories of the future.  In other words, please by all means bring something specific into our inquiry here which will bear on our understanding of our human perdicament now or how it might or must change!

Seth says
Einai 2014-03-08 10:38:59 17147
seth 2014-03-08 10:32:03 17147
Einai 2014-03-08 10:09:47 17147
seth 2014-03-08 10:01:25 17147
Einai 2014-03-07 16:24:27 17147
Sometimes Art is a portal, sometimes not.

Yes, absolutely!   How individual human beings cooperate to become conscious is how we soar!
Where does art show up as "human beings cooperating" ?

well in the movie you linked above for one place. 

every time author and reader, artist and listener, cooperate to communicate and become conscious to name a few more.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder - someone said.  The cooperation, as our own communication illustrates, may or not be involved.


well yes certainly "", for there we have it.  Beauty being in the eye of the beholder is certainly a consequence of our natural separation.   Yet we do communicate ... yet we are conscious ... did you think that was just you, no cooperation involved?

The funny strange part is when one works against that, withholding cooperation, switching references and contexts to obstruct communication for some private reason .

See Also

  1. Thought The psychology of Inside Outside Story with 413 viewings related by tag "insides".
  2. Thought Outside/Inside VS Belief/Facts with 222 viewings related by tag "insides".
  3. Thought Sensing ... with 169 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  4. Thought Hillary and Uma Aberdeen with 158 viewings related by tag "insides".
  5. Thought about: Unhacking Wars with 90 viewings related by tag "insides".
  6. Thought #LoaSwim with 32 viewings related by tag "insides".
  7. Thought #InsideOutside with 13 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  8. Thought How to see an elephant with multi-person binocular vision. with 9 viewings related by tag "binocular dialogue".
  9. Thought about: My Inside, My Soul, My Spirit - comment 59016 with 8 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  10. Thought title tbd with 6 viewings related by tag "binocular dialogue".
  11. Thought WE EACH OF US HAVE AN INSIDE AND AN OUTSIDE ... ACCEPT IT AND MOVE ON! with 4 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  12. Thought The wisdom of the natural seperating of being with 3 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  13. Thought Humanity with 3 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  14. Thought Bozos Discovery with 3 viewings related by tag "insides".
  15. Thought Thoughts about ego: The view from inside versus, the view from outside with 2 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  16. Thought Cooperate vs Fight (and/or) Love vs Death with 2 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  17. Thought Lies with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  18. Thought [title (17491)] with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  19. Thought about: People piss me off: so damn glad I am not a people. with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  20. Thought Gaia Breathing with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  21. Thought Get a Life ! aka The Medium IS The Message with 1 viewings related by tag "walled garden".
  22. Thought Binocular Dialogue with 1 viewings related by tag "binocular dialogue".
  23. Thought Where our experiences meet ... with 1 viewings related by tag "insides".
  24. Thought My Inside, My Soul, My Spirit with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  25. Thought Meyers-Briggs Personality Types with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  26. Thought What is ego? with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  27. Thought about: the greening of the self: the most important development of modern times with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  28. Thought An Awful Trick with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  29. Thought about: Alister Crowley speaking in The Equinox with 1 viewings related by tag "InsideOutside".
  30. Thought Bringing down the walls with 0 viewings related by tag "walled garden".
  31. Thought Examples of Mental Topography with 0 viewings related by tag "walled garden".
  32. Thought Attention Economy with 0 viewings related by tag "binocular dialogue".
  33. Thought Insides and Outsides with 0 viewings related by tag "insides".
  34. Thought Hiding inside walls with 0 viewings related by tag "walled garden".
  35. Thought about: this is the attitude i grew up with towards people who did not matriculate in GWs brand of the esoteric. with 0 viewings related by tag "walled garden".