There is no resolution to focal points of view other then dominance or mutual annihilation...decision making requires dominance and thus little selfs like little governments succeed each other, they do exist as they do prevail...over the years some win more then others...there are such things as dominant personality's and behaviours ...decision making requires them...like the Universe, matter and anti matter, or distribution of energy, its not the case that they (the selfs) are all in perfect balance n thus annihilate each other all out of existence...if such was the case you wouldn't get to decide to go out of bed everyday !
I just provided you with the lowest layer...this happens at several levels and layers in thought, it is established ! (its not something new or recent)
Not sure what you are talking about. I certainly agree that some for of Darwinism is at work in mental processes, if only because Darwinism seems to be the ay of the world. The point I was making to Fresco was simply that the brain does not discuss.
Nothing is ever scientifically established, by the way. It's all theories. So take it easy.
Do you know for instance that when you are deciding you have conflicting thoughts that may come out of conflicting full reasoning distinct frames all inside your own mind...is not just like different opinions out there in the social n u get them passively n then the self go on deciding...I mean different drives within you and different conflicting interests all at work competing to emerge on top...
0 Replies
Fil Albuquerque
1
Reply
Thu 13 Jun, 2013 01:08 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Quote:
There is no resolution to focal points of view other then dominance or mutual annihilation..
Again, the whole is more than the sum of its parts There can be resolution of differences through synthesis.
That sentence is out of place we are talking of opposing forces...wholism here requires dominant vectors of energy...actually without dominance you have nothing...the engine doesn't run in any direction !
Note that I did not intend to imply"the brain discusses...", I said the brain is a necessary platform for discussion..."(engages the software if you like) and that brain states affect our experience of "self states". Now according to Ouspensky (et al) it may be the case that "self state transitions" operate largely at a mechanical level, but this does not imply a philosophical reductionism, rather it emphasises the aspects of the illusion of self integrity/control.
...oh dear...you have this tendency of calling full flagged effects, which are legitimate phenomena illusions...in your description one would have to be dead to be a pure self...continuity does not require a pure state of perception...rather from the discussion takes shape a dominant form above the lower forms, another strata...not death.
0 Replies
Frank Apisa
1
Reply
Thu 13 Jun, 2013 01:15 pm
@fresco,
fresco wrote:
Note that I have not said "the brain discusses...", I said the brain is a necessary platform for discussion..." and that brain statrs affect our experience of "self states". Now according to Ouspensky (et al) it may be the case that "self state transitions" operate largely at a mechanical level, but this does not imply a philosophical reductionism, rather it emphasises the aspects of the illusion of self integrity/control.
I have no idea of the true nature of REALITY...so I do not KNOW what the REALTIY is. I cannot rule out that there is "no self"...and I cannot rule out that there is "self." I also cannot suggest that "no self" has to be the case...and I cannot suggest that "self exists" has to be the case.
I am willing to make guesses...so my guess is that you, Fresco, do not know either...and all those words you are using to disguise the fact that you are essentially making a blind guess in one direction...are smoke-screen.
Why not man up and simply acknowledge that you are guessing...and we can all move on.
0 Replies
Olivier5
1
Reply
Thu 13 Jun, 2013 01:16 pm
@fresco,
Well, you did say "Next time it (the brain) engages in an internal dialogue..."
It's a minor point... Glad that you agree the brain does not actually engage in dialogues, but builds a platform which makes them possible.
you better not wonder to much on why he thinks so, you would end up shocked...so it is probably a total different reason from yours...
0 Replies
Olivier5
1
Reply
Thu 13 Jun, 2013 01:27 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
That sentence is out of place we are talking of opposing forces...wholism here requires dominant vectors of energy...actually without dominance you have nothing...the engine doesn't run in any direction !
Think of the muscle metaphor. Our body is capable of a infinite number of complex movements. Most of these are the result of a large number of muscles cooperating with one another to create something that transcends any single muscle force. It's not about one muscle dominating the others. It's not that simple. Similarly, decision making may at times seem as simple as this:
but it's often much more complex, with a resolution of tensions that may go through placing the two (if there are two) competing options within the "big picture" and see how broader considerations affects them, or inventing a third option, or trying to do both.
0 Replies
mikeymojo
1
Reply
Thu 13 Jun, 2013 01:28 pm
@fresco,
One could say that experience and memory of experience causes "the mind" to alter itself through influence. The basic "self" of the individual still knows his/her name, yet their personality and life style may change; as well as any future choices that may be made that would otherwise be taken for granted. Sounds to me there is only one "self" that can be influenced by change just like anything else.
0 Replies
Frank Apisa
1
Reply
Thu 13 Jun, 2013 01:28 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Well, you did say "Next time it (the brain) engages in an internal dialogue..."
It's a minor point... Glad that you agree the brain does not actually engage in dialogues, but builds a platform which makes them possible.
Once again, I wish you had asked about why the issue is gratuitously put in the form of a "dialogue" rather than a "monologue."
I cannot seem to get an answer...so I'm hoping someone else can.
How would you differ squary people from creative minds if you did not distinguished between dialogues and monologues even if all in the same mind ?...
...playing Devil's advocate in my mind is something I like to do a lot although when I come to a conclusion I come with a firmer opinion, so it doesn't show...
To assert the dominance and continuity of a Self you do not need to kill the competition, just to overpower them ! (yes I am guessing my azz off so avoid that bell please)
How would you differ squary people from creative minds if you did not distinguished between dialogues and monologues even if all in the same mind ?...
To assert the dominance and continuity of a Self you do not need to kill the competition, just to overpower them ! (yes I am guessing my azz off so avoid that bell please)
If it is a monologue, Fil...the question answers itself.
Fresco asserts it is a dialogue...in order to make the question appear reasonable.
If it truly is a "dialogue"...then it may simply be a messed up mind at work. If it is what I experience regularly (as I write this response, in fact)...it is reasonable to assume it simply is me thinking through my thoughts before puching the keys on the keyboard.
That is a way to simple jump off the all problem bypass...I rather beat Fresco going from his own assumptions, which are to an extent in resonance with scientific studies on personality...it can be done all the same and its far more fulfilling !
0 Replies
Olivier5
1
Reply
Thu 13 Jun, 2013 01:46 pm
@Frank Apisa,
It doesn't matter, it's in your mind so they are all you, but with different inclinations.
I used to love a series of advertisements for Allianz Insurance, which was set up "inside the head of Claude". Different actors played different character traits like optimism, pessimism, stupidity, cynicism, fear, dynamism, libido, etc. debating in a conference room (=conscience). Charlotte Rampling, playing reason, was always ending the discussion with some sort of decision in favor of going for an Allianz insurance product or another. E.g.:
Joke aside, it works a little bit like that, I think.
Great ad Olivier5 !
...I was thinking next thing Fresco should say there is no dominant Culture because there are several cultures at play in society...but then I remind myself culture and social phenomena are his favourite babies...(he wouldn't kill those)
