Return Home
It is currently Tue May 11, 2021 11:57 pm

All times are UTC-06:00

Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 4:04 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Why talk about our Higher Self and our Virtual Reality selves?

Basically because doing so expands the MBT model with some details about the nature and functionality of our individuated beings within AUM/The One Consciousness that appear to improve understanding and in fact appears to be as true as a simple model of such a complex system can be from our limited point of view. But it will not be understandable fully without first having read "Why talk about Indra's Net and the Game of Life?" located here (viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2804&p=4168#p4168). Much has been said about the nature of our existence and functioning in MBT, in these forums, on my own web site and in many books such as Michael Newton's books. The problem with external (to these forums) sources like MBT and my own web site is that more could be said to make the description more complete. The problem with these forums is that we are writing about the Consciousness Reality and AUM with PMR language that describes ideas, experience, and relationships based upon a physical concept of reality and frequently this confuses the issue. Too often the interplay of different persons comments over time, their varied backgrounds and understandings, and the language of PMR results in less than clear statements. The statements in books from outside the concepts of MBT cosmology are very much based on a physical reality used to describe a non physical consciousness based reality experienced by those who have only physical reality language constructs as a basis for their descriptions. This is an attempt to expand the model of MBT by more fully describing some aspects of the nature of our individuated beings. An expansion that explores the nature of the very lowest levels of the model of AUM and Consciousness Evolution (including the reality cell level as the bootstrapping process to consciousness occurred) as well as virtual reality concepts as derived from the Virtual Reality Rendering Engine while eliminating the confusion of being limited to PMR language as much as possible. This is a continuation of the discussion in "Why talk about Indra's Net and the Game of Life?"

This has ended up as a collaboration between myself and Tom Campbell although I have done the original writing and the compilation of the results of both of our contributions. There are so many fragmented and isolated statements regarding our higher self and the other aspects of our beings that I wanted to get it right. So I asked Tom's opinion before posting this. Tom returned comments that offered up a bigger and more accurate picture that challenged the context of my understanding at that point. In the interplay of our continuing comments back and forth to each other, this description has been taken far beyond the extent that I originally contemplated. It is a more clear statement as a result and also a more comprehensive statement, further illuminating the operation of the VRRE in generating our various virtual reality experiences and the nature of our existence and intercommunication as individuated consciousnesses within Indra's Net/AUM.

We exist in (are a subset of) The One Consciousness as individuated beings in Indra's Net as described. We are each a collection of data: rules and content. As such, we are each as one individuated being simultaneously engaged in the PMR VR data stream, the NPMR VR data stream, and in this model, what might be called the Indra's Net data stream, a dialog/communion/interaction/integrated action between all of the individuated beings of Indra's Net linking them/us all as The One Consciousness. We participate in these VRs by our interpretation of and reaction to the appropriate incoming data stream from the VRRE. As individuated beings, there is only one of us, our whole being, our higher self, located in one 'location' in 'mind space'. Not to be confused with a 'physical location' as in PMR. We as one individual are simultaneously aware of all three data streams and much more because we are one whole being engaged in multitasking. We participate in multiple streams of consciousness, simultaneously participating in various aspects of the Reality of The One Consciousness/AUM. We experience ourselves as an individuated being with limited consciousness (a small fractal element) and also participate in, and are a small part of, The One Consciousness (the whole fractal pattern of Consciousness).

The PMR VR data stream awareness is restricted to its rule set and by its communication line to the whole. The NPMR VR data stream awareness is restricted to its rule set and by its communication line to the whole. You can think of everything as a VR or nothing as a VR (and the exact meaning of what is a virtual reality is open to contention, here meaning that the experience is within our minds rather than 'out there' in any sense). You can think of everything as nonphysical or that everything is physical, it is just a matter of how one uses semantics and definitions to describe one's perception within each given rule-set. Just a shift of perspective, the reality remains the same; One Thing/The One Consciousness. Our use of the terms PMR and NPMR as separate places is only a convention and convenience of language that serves our limited ways of thinking and indicates our point of perspective which is from PMR and under the PMR rule set. The only thing that is fundamental is consciousness itself.

All three data streams (PMR, NPMR, Indra's Net) are impinging on just one consciousness, our higher self, one being, simultaneously (see discussion of simultaneous below) connected to three different input data streams and parallel processing its way through existence. The number three is rather arbitrary; certainly there could be more than three independent inputs. We could perhaps experience another experience packet in some other PMR, or several in this one, perhaps also experiencing a couple of distinct NPMR VRs as well. Furthermore, what we are here calling the Indra's Net data stream has been discussed in the associated post, "Why talk about Indra's Net and The Game of Life", and this data stream and its total functionality is in a sense speculative. Perhaps it represents an 'unconscious' or 'hind brain' aspect of The One, perhaps we are acting as specific calculators for specific functions, perhaps we are acting in concert with all of the other individuated beings of Indra's Net as in fact The One Consciousness and alternatively and as most probable, as option d: all the above.

Above I stated this participation in multiple data stream experiences to be simultaneous. Since time is effectively quantized based on changes in the state of the reality cells of the existence field that produce this digital consciousness based reality, and multiple base/reality cell state changes are associated with the different consciousness streams in different proportions, this situation is better described as synchronous. It is analogous to time sharing in a PMR digital computer where some of the code in the operating system and various applications is also shared. While this code is shared, it is only used for one function, one consciousness stream, at a time as the multiple consciousness streams in which an individuated being participates are cycled through the single RWW communication channel one at a time and accumulated/integrated to generate one VR delta t at a time. Many cycles of base state changes are associated with activities of AUM, the Indra's Net consciousness stream (see "Why talk about Indra's Net and The Game of Life"). Another large number of base state cycles of delta t are associated with an NPMR consciousness stream to represent one state change for the NPMR consciousness stream. Another large number of base state cycles of delta t are associated with a PMR consciousness stream to represent one state change for the PMR consciousness stream. Thus, there is a synchronization of these VR and Indra's Net state changes with the result of apparent (conscious) simultaneity while the number of base/reality cell state changes differs between the consciousness streams. Stated another way, our VR experiences are created over many base/reality cell states as an individual VR 'frame' is generated. When that frame is fully constructed, all of the data has been supplied to our minds, some trigger signal enters it into our consciousness and it is experienced as the next delta t of that VR experience. The full aspects of time generation are discussed more fully in MBT.

From the perspective of NPMR, each NPMR experience is continuous and extends over vastly many cycles within which we intermittently experience PMR (past/present) life experiences with breaks in between where there is no PMR experience occurring. These multiple data-stream experiences of PMR VRs do not have to be "reintegrated" into our NPMR self, higher self, whole self, at any time and in any sense, since "they" are all one consciousness experiencing multiple reality systems. They are not "they", but "it", our so called higher self, one being fully integrated all the time. Consider yourself as your higher self participating in a conversation with two other aspects of yourself as if you were functioning as three different people. These three different people are each time sharing your cognitive resources, i.e., not all speaking (or listening) at the same instant of time. But since they are in fact all one person, your higher self, integration occurs on the fly as data comes in. We break these "aspects of our one self" into functional pieces in our minds to be able to think of them and talk of them in terms of our PMR language and thought patterns. Our "higher self" is just our whole self; it only seems separate and higher from the perspective within the constraints of the PMR data stream/VR and PMR language. The "higher self" is a useful model from the PMR point of view, much as the flat earth is a useful model from a surveyor's (laying out building lots) point of view - i.e., a conceptually simplifying useful fiction.

The 'communication lines' between a VR expression of self and the rest of the self are open all the time: lessons learned are absorbed as they are learned, reduction in entropy is felt and incorporated as it happens (or very soon thereafter). All of your apparently separate "selves" are just one being, thus what happens to one's self within one VR experience segment is also a happening of the whole. In fact, the concept of "communication lines" is a PMR language artifact and is non existent in the sense that we are all one being and the VRs subsets are not separate, just being time shared as we cycle through the incoming data streams. Not being separate, there are no 'betweens' for a communication line to bridge. We have talked about what the whole learns from the PMR VR part as a "reintegration of PMR participants back into their NPMR reality" because that language suits our PMR habits of seeing everything else in reality as being separate from us, i.e., our personal VR identity. Just like we speak of PMR and NPMR as separate places rather than different perspectives of one consciousness. Such words communicate more effectively to most people than a more precisely stated truth they cannot relate to. But in fact there is no reintegration after a PMR life/experience packet nor at any time. We are and remain all one integral being at all times. This is one aspect of clarification required to eliminate existing confusions and PMR language limited perspectives.

The 'us' subset of the whole (what we experience in PMR as our selves) has relatively limited information and capabilities. And it must progress in a limited life time from the capabilities of an infant to whatever adult level it can achieve. This apparent change must be achieved somehow by modifications to our virtual being as we develop. This change must include physical (bodily), Intellectual, and spiritual growth in accordance with the PMR rule set as one progresses from an infant to an adult. We start out in potential with the capabilities and properties attributed to 'genetics'. But change over time does and must occur, growing to be able to make use of our potential, gaining access to more of our total being or even developing new capabilities. These developments over time are the result of changes in the very rule sets that define us as VR beings and define our VR experiences. It is these multiple rule sets existing in Consciousness Space that define us as we experience virtual realities rather than our VR bodies, genetics and neurology defining our reality. We change dynamically over time as the very definition of ourselves are subject to change based on how we handle experiences and how we learn from those experiences. Redefining ourselves in this way (self modification in the service of consciousness evolution) has been described already as the reason for the existence of our VR: to provide an opportunity for interactions with other VR participants leading to personal learning/development opportunities that such interactions represent.

It has been stated that there is a deliberate choice of what aspects of a PMR developed personality is retained for future reuse in PMR personalities. For example, RAM (Robert A. Monroe), as stated in his books, was considered by his higher self to be a very effective personality and thus retained from the past and planned for reuse in the next life. In terms of Intent, you get what you get, good or bad as we surely must for Intent to fulfill its purpose. But in terms of choosing whether to incorporate new behavioral strategies into the PMR VR 'subset' being established for a new life, there is a choice. Here we start to introduce the concept of a subset of the whole. You, as your higher self, have to swallow the experience generated by a past PMR experience packet whole as it occurs but get to pick and choose how you approach the next, future, PMR experience packet. You may have to take the developed behavior, but you don't have to use it (i. e. select it as part of the subset for the next PMR life) in any given PMR lifetime. One could also choose to use a dysfunctional personality during the next PMR lifetime in an attempt to improve the quality of its experience by executing a plan to reduce entropy and thus modify its Intent to the point that the undesirable behavior is effectively eliminated or unlearned. That is, we grow to understand a better way to behave, a better way to do things, a better way to interact, a better way to live and are thus changed in our basic being. And we choose aspects of our configuration as a personality into our next PMR experience packet based on our perceived best approach to effective learning.

The individual PMR personality can persist (though it may be refurbished and modified slightly) and be used over again if it represents a successful personal rule-set that defines a profitable integrator and synthesizer of VR experience. Why reinvent the wheel once it rolls well and you like the 'ride' it provides? Your personality or personal identity can be described as an evolving rule-set. A collection of traits, attitudes, approaches, and perspectives (to some extent even basic knowledge and understanding) that are 'hardwired' into your virtual physical system (your body as it exists and is perceived in the PMR VR) in some initial form at or shortly after conception. These personal attributes, expressed in VR flesh, and embodied within the VR CNS, are what you have to work with when you arrive. As with all physicality, these attributes are expressed as fractal levels that are only generated and displayed when they can be observed. They exist, are defined, only within the rule sets that define your PMR existence and experience. Your experience (conscious mind, self, and external environment) is generated by multiple rule sets, one of which exists within your total self as a definition of what aspects, what sub set, of your total self participates within the present PMR experience packet. Another defining rule set exists within the VRRE and defines the specific attributes of your present VR experience such as how tall are you, are you male or female, did you loose a leg in a car accident? Are you supposed to receive high levels of conscious input from the internal processes by which you make decisions and evaluate things so that in your consciousness you constantly worry or second-guess everything as in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder? Or are the choices you make, sub consciously or consciously, clear and 'decisive', unquestioned within your conscious mind once made? These rule-sets defining the initial conditions of the experience packet governing behavior, attitudes, and physical attributes and are encoded in your genetic material as well as your CNS as appropriate when those fractal levels are displayed in some way. Furthermore, they must be consistent with other PMR rule-sets (e.g., must be consistent with the PMR rules defining biological genetic inheritance - appropriate parents must be picked to support chosen attributes.) Not all attributes are handpicked (only those that you have determined will provide you with a useful personal challenge leading to some needed growth opportunity), the rest are left to chance as determined by the random mixing of parental genetic material.

This, coupled with a communication line to the larger reality, the RWW, over which you are nudged, inspired, informed (receive mode), and by which you experience the larger reality (travel, explore, i.e., switch data feeds) rounds out the tools you have to work with. As you grow, you modify the hardwiring (PMR VR body adapts to support your new state of being within your total self) and improve/upgrade the communication line to the larger reality (filters or blocks are removed from the PMR data stream by changes to the rule set in response to your personal growth - but only when such change is significantly more likely to produce entropy reduction than entropy inflation). To the extent that changes occur that represent changes in this PMR VR functionality, changes that might be observed in a PMR medical scan of some kind are generated as a physical manifestation of the new development within the consciousness. As always, consciousness leads and the VR body follows. But these again are fractal levels that need not be generated or displayed in the PMR VR unless it makes a difference to do so, i.e., they can be observed. Your behavioral aspects and externally set parameters related to your VR PMR experience exist as multiple rule sets residing within your total self and within the VRRE that serves to generate this PMR virtual experience. You are and always remain the total self that exists as an individuated consciousness within Indra's Net communicating over the RWW. This does not change except as modified over time with experience within the PMR experience packet, the NPMR experience continuum, and within your total self as you interact directly with the Larger Consciousness, whatever that might mean.

We do start out in potential within PMR with the limitations, capabilities, functionalities and attributes circumscribed by our 'genetics'. But a real development over time does occur, either growing to be able to make use of our potential or developing new capabilities and this development occurs within our larger consciousness and appears as modifications to the rule sets defining our VR experience in PMR as expressed in the input from the VRRE. This modified data coming from the VRRE, among other things, defines a modified physical body that now fully expresses or represents the newly changed state of our consciousness. The 'us' that participates in NPMR operates on a different level of functionality and has access to information unavailable to our PMR self. It's personal growth comes primarily from the experience of our VR PMR being rather than from our experience in NPMR. NPMR is a less interactive environment (NPMR being to NPMR being interaction) with a lower potential for stimulating growth. Most of an individuated consciousness's evolutionary advancement is a direct result of learning from PMR experience generated from the PMR VR subset of our total being and through the integration of that experience into the whole during the process of a PMR VR lifetime. The same goes for our higher self as all that we are. It's capabilities change with time to an extent that we do not know directly since we do not 'now' its direct actions, interactions and functions in Indra's Net with the whole of The One/AUM. It, as our 'super set', accumulates functionality and productive informational content (i.e., it evolves and lowers its entropy) with time as such content is developed by our PMR and NPMR sub sets. Our higher self is a metaphor for the totality of us as we participate directly in the whole of The One/AUM, in whatever role(s) that we actually have there. But each of these VR subsets representing different experience sets (generated by different rule-sets) is part of the whole of our self, existing in one 'place' in Indra's Net. I consider this much to be unavoidable as a conclusion. We are not anything like multiple beings or existing in 'different places'. Mathematically and logically, we, our PMR and NPMR aspects, could be called sub sets of the same super set which is our higher self.

As another point of view explaining these relationships, consider the following. Our higher self is our total self within Indra's Net, the total self that we wish to 'grow' within the developmental system created for our use as NPMR(s) and PMR(s). Our NPMR VR self is in essence a service function within which we provide services to each other in support of our PMR VR selves, serving as guides, teachers and other functions according to our individual capabilities. This is the "cosmic soup kitchen" social worker aspect that we have joked about for the educational system of PMRs created for our development of our beings. Thus the NPMRs are relatively placid virtual environments compared to the intensity of the PMRs. The PMR(s) of this system are the focal point for development. They have food chains, resource limitations and sex drives, leading to many conflicts of free will that must be resolved in and by our interactions. Where the rubber meets the road. Where the passions and the stakes are high. Where the major interactions and intense learning virtual reality experience occurs between the individuated beings of Indra's Net. This constitutes an integrated architecture of interactive virtual realities designed specifically for the development of our individuated beings. There are not separate beings who serve as guides. There are not separate beings who are the students. There is not our higher self that sits aside and presides or judges. There is one of us as an individuated being and there is only the one set of us individuated beings, so we must all take these functions on in relationship to each other, serving in turn as teacher and guide as well as student. Shared out amongst our selves in our VR aspects as we are able, as we individually have the relative maturity as guides and teachers relative to our students.

Because the larger reality appears to be well modeled by a system of digital consciousness, these concepts are most naturally explained and understood in terms of metaphors taken from computer technology. There is some indication that our behavior is based on what could be called subroutines. These subroutines are encoded partly in your PMR VR DNA and chromosomes, i.e., encoded in your genetic material, a part of your virtual physical body; they define the set of personal initial conditions you have to work with. One's genetics are derived from the rule set (defining each physical body's proclivities, abilities and attributes) under which the VRRE must work. Science has yet to discover just how much of us, who and how we are, is genetically driven (and it will turn out to be much more than they presently think). Much behavior and personal dynamics that are attributed to Psychology may be modulated to some extent by the environment but are more fundamentally driven at the root by genetics. Genetics accounts for more than physical form, it includes most of an entities attitudes, personality and behavior. As an entity evolves or grows, the rules defining its physical system are modified accordingly. As we evolve, we reprogram. Before birth, our genetic makeup is to some extent designed to support the goals of the impending experience packet (our future PMR life); parents are chosen to accommodate the plan within the rules defining PMR biology. The mind (consciousness) leads with personal growth and the body follows with whatever physical changes are required to support that personal growth. Thus moral development creates the brain structure to support (and to represent) a development which has occurred within the mind/consciousness.

The previous paragraph is based in PMR language and concepts which we must clarify here. All of these above concepts, genetic material, DNA, chromosomes, physical body, etc. are part of the virtual PMR reality. They show up as physical expressions of VR PMR design probability levels, just as in the recent research showing modified brain structure based on moral development which has been commented on in these forums. (The following link will drop you into the middle of that discussion: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=473&p=1141&hilit=br ... ment#p1141 ) The moral development showed up in brain structure as VR feed back from the actual development within mind/consciousness space, rather than the moral development resulting from brain development as the experimenters explained it. Your genetic material, if it were observed, would be based on the VR design rule sets and rendered by the VRRE based on it's internal rule sets for your VR experience. DNA does not pre exist and drive your actual creation as a virtual PMR body. Your physical body comes from the rule sets as described above and is rendered according to the VRRE to generate productive (and sometimes very specific) growth potential. Just like the lights in the sky that only exist as stars and galaxies when someone is able to observe them as such, driving the VRRE to produce them in the necessary level of fractal detail for conscious observation, your body and all of it's genetics exists only as rule sets and probabilities until observation by a conscious being forces the VRRE to generate the appropriate fractal levels to directly show this information.

The genetic proclivities discussed above may be viewed as behavioral subroutines. Sometimes they produce relatively isolated sets of behavior or attitudes for us to apply in certain situations in our lives. They may also exist as behavioral routines that are applied inappropriately. I recognize in myself getting into an engineering analysis mode where I get relatively pushy and driven by data and results seeking. Some people have dependency modes that they repeat despite feedback in their lives that it is not a good behavior. The same way with accepting abuse and control, a mode of behavior that is all too frequently repeated from relationship to relationship despite repeated bad results. It is very hard for someone outside and not subject to this mode of behavior to understand. These are not totally unlike Tom's functioning as a skeptical scientist driven to generate certain types of understanding of reality. They are subroutines, not all of your being, but modes or proclivities that you can easily get into under the right circumstances. We also have other modes of operation that are relatively isolated from each other including everything from mate seeking activities to parenting skills. We need to be able to combine and change modalities, to learn to be the most effective beings that we can be, an effective experiencer of PMR reality. But these modalities not only seem to exist, but have their own specific areas of application and persist over time. With difficulty and dedication, they can be taught and they can be unlearned. Continuing an earlier example, it is the combination of these kinds of sub routines or functionalities that made RAM an effective personality for productively engaging an experience packet.

These concepts effectively explain a lot of observed behavior in PMR. To set up the next PMR personality for engaging the next experience packet, one selects the appropriate set of sub routines and standardized behavior packages from your existing history as a starting repertoire. These subroutines, constructed with rule sets defining your genetic makeup, are specifically selected for the planned experience. Perhaps one or more subroutines/learned behaviors is targeted for unlearning, growing out of, such as a dependency cycle or abuse victim cycle. If a particular PMR sub set (personality) proves to have superior skills and perhaps regularly invents (through self-modification) new and effective sub routines for behavior and learning, it will be reused for the next experience packet. A successful PMR being configuration may become the standard for that individuated being, automatically engaging the next PMR experience packet. That is one way that we could be eventually differentiated into male and female beings as well.

Though there are many competing models of consciousness that break us into separate pieces with separate functions for the convenience of explaining this or that, we are one single being in fact with no aspects of separation or distinctions other than being sub sets of our total being/higher self specializing in specific VR experience in order to optimize the evolution of the whole. We have no free will conflicts between these sub sets nor is there an us versus them conflict in any form.

I hope that this contributes to understanding this complex and confusing subject as it has developed between multiple sources and over time. Tom and I have stated everything as clearly as we could. I can't warn you too strongly to be conscious of PMR language traps that might confuse your thinking and interfere with understanding. I know this because I have to watch out for it continuously myself. If you still have questions, please ask away.

Ted Vollers

PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 8:20 am 
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:20 am
Posts: 113
Location: Mallorca
I cant wait to read the full book you are writing! I read your posts but inevitabley I miss so much and get interrupted ,disturbed and lose concentration.Also as my intellectual abilities are not honed quite so much as the average on this forum I need time to absorb everything. (It has taken me 5 years to get to grips with MBT and I am still discovering things I missed!)
I truly hope you are able to complete it in the near future. I want one of the first (of what I am sure will be many )reprints.
(Signed personally of course!)
As always there is a wondeful feeling of being privy to real cutting edge breakthroughs here at MBT(speaking of which ,did anything happen when they switched on the LHC? Any black holes? Anti matter appearing anywhere? Time distortions? Or was it that the light bulbs at CERN dimmed slightly...?)
I read and re read your posts and all of a sudden something clicks and it all makes so much sense.I too work on logic and I think this is what I resonate with so much in your writings,(Engineering take on it)I get broad basic concepts and fill in the details later,gradually it all falls into place like a huge not so complicated jigsaw puzzle.I have'nt managed to complete the puzzle yet but have got all the "Edge" pieces and just need to fill in the rest.
Your book would be the type of book I take on holiday.(I hate romances,thrillers,fiction in general. Fact is stranger than fiction)
Well done Ted (Tom) What a team!

PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 9:39 am 
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 2:18 pm
Posts: 284
I had never really considered the use of language as a generator or influencer of thought in this way. I am aware of the conceptual inheritence that can occur with the use of metaphors (particularly if one adopts a new metaphor) and of the pitfalls of dogma, but I wonder; is it truly possible for people to confuse themselves with language use? Certainly, sloppy use of metaphors can let foreign coneptualizations get added to one's thinking, though I must admit that I'm having a difficult time with the idea that language can directly influence thinking unless one is taking some new idea on faith or confusion (again) with metaphors.

The way I perceive my use of language is as a representation of my understanding, which is a sort of holographic representation of my perceptual system. If my use of language is poor, the resulting descriptions are vague and inaccurate, but that doesn't necessarily have any bearing on my understanding of the topic. In such cases, what I say will be easily understandable to someone who can map my use of language to an understanding which is similar to my own. Is this different from how other "see" their use of language?

It isn't difficult to recognize the value of a careful use of language given the complextity of the concepts with which we are playing and that this is the method that works best with the language of mathematics (sloppiness there highly impractical), but mathematical models nearly always come from accurate understanding (though solving them doesn't necessarily require an understanding of the model). When I am thinking, it is rarely done with words, unless I am thinking about some way of talking about something, because thinking with words is so inefficient for me (I have the "if if if if if, what what what what", problem when I think with words). Given this, I would much prefer to communicate my holographic understanding than to have to translate everything into language, but perhaps I'm missing something. Perhaps not everyone thinks this way - perhaps it's why I prefer to mostly remain silent while others seem to enjoy talking so much.

On the flip side, I recognize that there is much misunderstanding about about the more subtle details of MBT and wonder if this could be part of the motivation for this post. In such cases do you tend to see language as the hang-up, or is it understanding? How do you see it in my case? You've indicated before that you find my writing somewhat unclear or difficult to understand. What do you think is the reason for that? I've always been curious about comments you've made to me in the past in regards to this, though you've never indicated to me directly that you felt that I might be confused or have misconception, though I am certainly open to that sort of feedback. Now that I've outed myself as a worrying ninny, I'm off to lunch.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 5:31 pm 
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:13 am
Posts: 173
Location: Boonville, Indiana
Ted: That was a wonderful summary for a complex subject. We as PMR focused subsets have a hard time letting go of the idea of separation in these different aspects. I agree that our language limits us if that is all we use for conscious data storage. I believe that when we reach a certain level of growth, we start storing at a non verbal level and our growth becomes exponential. Communication is still limited to verbal concepts and I think you do a great job.

Cherie: No black holes they know of. If they did destroy the world like children playing with fire, I suspect Our Sytem would just reboot and we'd never know it. As long as it remains profitable, PMR will continue.

MojiDoji: I am pleased to see how someone else uses nonverbal data processing. It is indeed hard to share in words, and so many subtle connections of an idea are lost in translation. I believe that using nonverbal processing consciously is the beginning of accessing higher function. I find your writing clear and concise, as I do Ted's. Everyone's posts reflect their personality, and we can learn much from seeing a bit of the personality mix of the poster as well as the post. It gives a great flavor to the concepts.

always, John

PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:41 pm 
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285

An individual's interaction with reality creates experience. Language bounds both the description of that experience (ability to communicate to others) and the concepts that are available to interpret or make sense of the experience.

The first is a direct limitation of language - the experiencer's language may not allow for an accurate description of the experience. It may be theoretically impossible to avoid gross errors in communicating the experience to someone else.

The second is an indirect limitation of language. Language is generated to describe experience generally known to those who speak the language. Concepts (conceptualizations of reality) that are familiar to those who speak the language are supported by the content, syntax, and structure of the language. Because these concepts (those that are available to interpret or make sense of the experience i.e., relate it to previous experience -- as opposed to those that simply describe the experience) are embodied in the language, thinking exclusively in terms of them becomes habitual. Because the concepts embodied in the experiencer's language support the conceptualization all known common or shared experience, there is no need for any other concepts. Consequently, one assumes out of habit (cultural belief) that the concepts supported by the language form the complete set of possible conceptualizations of reality. Thinking in any other terms (beyond those concepts embodied in the language) becomes extremely difficult (belief trap).

Thus a culture steeped in a given language is practically (though not theoretically) constrained by the conceptualizations of reality that are common to that culture. It becomes somewhere between extremely difficult to impossible for such people to comprehend a bigger picture of reality because all of their words, syntax, and language structure is unable to support the conceptualizations necessary to make sense out of it - to interpret it properly. Thus, the larger reality appears unfathomable or as nonsense to those trapped by the beliefs embodied within their language, and furthermore, a direct experience of this reality cannot be accurately or satisfactorily communicated to others. In a nutshell, this is the difficulty that language brings to any fundamental understanding of a picture of reality that is bigger than the one in which the language was developed.

As John says, one has to transcend the beliefs inherent to verbal language to get a clear look at, and become functional in, the Big Picture.

Tom C

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC-06:00

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited