Return Home
It is currently Fri Aug 07, 2020 6:44 pm

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:07 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
Below is some text taken directly from my Austin workshop notes. I thought it would be useful to post it here to help readers better understand the nature of experiencing NPMR.

To make rational sense out of (and to be able to communicate) your personal NPMR experience you turn that experience into metaphors and symbols that have specific meaning to you (relate to your experience database). So, much of what you see, hear, smell, feel and taste while in NPMR (interpretations in terms of PMR physical senses that have no applicability in NPMR) is created by yourself as the closest pattern match you can make, to bridge between what you experience and what is in your personal experiential database. The more you probe, explore, make connections, and gain understanding, the greater and more capable that personal experiential database becomes in its ability to interpret NPMR experience with a minimum of distortion.

It should be clear why skepticism is so critical, why you must learn to live with uncertainty (reality anywhere is more probable than certain) and why just zipping around experiencing whatever, is not very productive compared to a systematic probing and collecting of data in order to assess what is fundamental and outside of you from what is not. It should also be clear why those who do just zip around experiencing whatever without skepticism or deliberate logical probing, come back with lots of exciting fanticiful tales to tell that, for the most part, mean nothing in a literal-detail sense and typically agree only with the observations of others who share similar cultural beliefs. While the details are different, these stories are most similar in terms of the generalities that carry the actual significance of the NPMR experience in terms of shared metaphors and symbols. Also there is agreement when shared beliefs and expectations lead to using similar metaphors and symbols to interpret one's experience (unintentional leading the witness toward a specific generally acceptable conclusion). All these stories only fuel the expectations and beliefs of their listeners and make real understanding that much more difficult. Now we must drag ourselves out of the jaws of a deeply ingrained belief trap before getting a glimpse of the bigger picture that Is not severely warped by the limitations of a host of explorers who mean well and are doing the very best they can to interpret accurately but who do not understand the nature of reality and are content to believe that what you see is what is out there.

This is the most difficult concept for people to get. Almost no one actually gets it at a fundamental level. That is why we talk of NPMR as a "place" with dimension where we have bodies and use our physical senses to describe what we see, hear, etc. Of course that is all oxymoronic - you don't have a body or physical senses in NPMR, but we speak that way and use additional metaphors (like "the mind's eye" or OOBE) to cover the inconsistencies that such assumptions generate in order to communicate to people who cannot conceive of any other way of interacting. ---- A simplistic way of speaking in order to communicate anything at all. Sort of like atoms being basket balls with BBs flying around them in circular orbits. A Complete fiction but far more understandable than the truth.

For these reason, the Hindus see 7 very specific chakras, while the Zen Buddhists and shaman do not. Why? chakras, are only metaphors and not fundamental. The beams of intense white light that light-workers use to heal are just tools/metaphors. Light is only a metaphor. Energy is only a metaphor. The various energy bodies (auras) we see around people are metaphors for the data we receive about those people - data that answers our intent when we connect with people at a level deeper than the physical. People travel through tunnels or go through doors or fly about in NPMR because they believe that you have to move to go somewhere. Early astral travelers were connected to their bodies by silver cords because they believed the physical body was fundamental and the astral body was derivative. People have to sit up or roll or do something physical to get OOB when only a shift of perspective is necessary because they believe you have to do something physical before anything can happen. People talk to (interact with) their dead relatives who appear in familiar looking bodies wearing typical clothes because that is more natural, comfortable and believable than interacting with data. Ever wonder why all those non physical entities are humanoid in form (if they are good guys) and are always wearing PMR clothes - have you noticed that robes are always in style for strangers in NPMR. All is nothing but data moving back and forth and we dress it up in human PMR form and function from our past experience because that is what we are used to, that is what we believe and the way we think - so that is the way we interpret the data.

Explorers report what they see with their own eyes. However, eyes exist only in PMR -- seeing is a physical concept. In NPMR we don't see, we interpret what we experience (the content of the data) in terms of physical sense data because that is our habit -- the only way we know how to express/communicate information. Being skeptical, having no expectations, and not having any biases or beliefs is critical to getting a good pattern match metaphor that captures the essence of the NPMR experience.

In any reality frame, One must strive to become aware of one's abilities and limitations and discover the operational causality of the immediate environment.

Because of the nature of consciousness (units of bounded organized data, sharing bits), everything is subjective, only consistent well planned probing and a statistical analysis of the results of that probing -- i.e. carefully considered experience, can give you a sense of what the objective reality behind the data is like.

Mostly NPMR experience is relationship centered (about interaction with others) as opposed observing the set. PMRs have sets (a stage and props) while NPMR mostly has just actors and ideas (data).

Picking up a rock in PMR has no direct analog in NPMR. People know that either you can pick up a rock or you cannot. If you say you can pick up a 100 lb rock then that is easy to test conclusively. If you say you do remote viewing or OOB, people expect you to describe the painting hanging in the next room - and do so just as if you physically walked into that room. Maybe can, maybe can't - there are many variables.

What is "objective here" and what is "objective there" are as different as rocks and data. This misunderstanding accounts for much difficulty for psi researchers and the public in general. They believe that operating in the non physical must be similar to operating in the physical. Either you can do it, or you are as bogus as a 3 dollar bill. There are real physical and mental issues of attaining and maintaining precise altered states - and even more difficult: remaining perfectly detached. No doubt these conditions can be exceedingly difficult to consistently achieve on demand. But that is not what I am talking about here. These individual problems are in addition to issues that are fundamental to the nature of consciousness

The process of perception is the same in all reality frames (objective source with a subjective interpretation) but the mechanics in PMR and NPMR are very different. One might ask: If our Physical world is really subjective why does it appear to be objective - the same to everyone? Answer: Because we all have nearly identical physiology (sensors). And, to a lesser extent, very similar cultures. Lets explore the differences: What if some people could only see Visible, or UV or infrared light? Different perceptions produce different realities. Have you ever experienced not being able to find something that is right in front of you - that is usually a belief issue. The key concept is: NPMR is experienced through your consciousness - your consciousness represents an awareness limited by what you come in with (physiology, personality, and consciousness quality) and the PMR experiences you have after you get here - all of which influences how you interpret those experiences through a complex iterative process of choices generated by feedback. In NPMR, You experience through your consciousness, not through your senses. Do we all have nearly identical personalities, beliefs, and experiences like we do sensory equipment? Do we all interpret the same experience in the same way? 5 people viewing the same accident from the same corner give 5 different stories - why? Then why would one expect that we would all perceive the same reality in NPMR when our sensing mechanism (consciousness receiving data) is so dramatically individual?

The language of consciousness within the less constrained virtual realities (what we call the nonphysical) is about the choices, the intents, the web of interaction, about learning potential -- People and relationship -- not about the details of the set or on the petty ego needs of the players. The details of the set are peculiar to your PMR experience and personal in how they relate to you -- but have no intrinsic value or importance. They are often not saved in the databases in high fidelity detail - you may, in your remote view of the historical database, notice a picture on the wall but the details of the picture are not recorded or displayed unless there is some big picture need to do so (some meaning or significance or some connection to someone's growing up). Insignificant data is not tracked or stored. Ever notice things that you have seen 100 times but never recorded? Neighbor's green shutters ; a comic book store. The finite resources of the larger consciousness system are not wasted on recording and displaying things that are not relevant to the purpose of the system.

"What you experience (data received) does have an objective source within the reality frame you are in. but how you experience it is subjective." Here, in PMR that subjective component is in the margins (5 people all see an accident from the same corner) - in NPMR - data exchanges between very fundamentally different interpretive consciousnesses -- the difference is not in the margins - it is primary.

Data from NPMR: Try to describe the room you are in both conceptually and linearly. The conceptual lacks detail but captures ambience and significance while the linear is a descriptive list of items. For those in PMR it is the linear detail ( the facts) that constitutes "proof" of an NPMR vision because PMR residents extrapolate their sense of an "objective" physical reality to their expectations of NPMR. However, NPMR bandwidth is not wasted on insignificant PMR details.


Let's explore the idea that you interpret the data you receive from NPMR in terms of metaphors and symbols that mean something to you - that are relevant to your experience data base.
For example: You experience a NPMR being of great knowledge teaching or helping others on a grand scale. As a result, you interpret: Saint, angel, Jesus / Ancestor, guru, Master / Advanced Being, guide, helper depending on your beliefs and culture. If You have a deep fear - insecurity - that you are small and out of your element when in NPMR, you may get a monster, an evil being as a metaphor or symbol of that fear.

Another example: You are asked to remote view and describe a picture on the wall. The picture is of horses jumping over a hedgerow on a sunny day with onlookers -- a picture of an Old English Fox hunting scene. You get the fundamental nature of the picture - a sense of jumping animals, lots of commotion and excitement, a mix of people and critters - staged drama, something impending, an uncertain ending. Because you are not at all familiar with the experience of fox hunts, but have been to many circuses, you interpret this data as a circus act - horses or other animals jumping - multiple animals, lots of commotion and excitement, a mix of people and critters - staged drama, something impending, an uncertain ending. So you say: "It's a picture of a circus act involving people and animals doing tricks - with the ambiance of a bright, fun, and expectant holiday outing atmosphere ... except, you say, there is this overtone of violence that just doesn't fit. if you are NOT a practiced observer, you might add in some clowns and elephants just to make your circus metaphor more complete. The little red hats the fox hunters are wearing are entirely missing from your received data because they carry no value or significance in NPMR terms. They are meaningless details of the PMR set not worth recording. Though you get a 100% as far as receiving the NPMR data describing the picture accurately, your metaphor is wrong and much detail of the setting (e.g., red hats, woods, etc) is missing - from the PMR view (where the physical setting detail is the most important thing - a literal, linear list of the stuff in the picture) you failed miserably and get a zero. Point: when your intent says: "what is that picture about, what does it look like", you should not expect to receive a photographic image of the picture. You will get only data that captures the significance of the picture from an NPMR perspective and you will have to interpret that data according to your experience base.

Fear, Belief, and Inexperience are the primary constraints that keep you from experiencing what is actually there (the full content of the data). Not from experiencing at all, but from experiencing what is actually intended by the larger consciousness system to answer your specific intended query.

Tom C


Top
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:48 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:13 am
Posts: 173
Location: Boonville, Indiana
Good stuff Tom. This clearly outlines the subjective nature of NPMR. The person who described the picture I think would recognize the familiarity of events on seeing it in PMR. It would have meaning to him\her if they looked objectively at the similarities in data. Other people would not because they did not experience the subjective view and thus the psi uncertainty principle is easily invoked by our individual subjective experience and interpretation of what is the same data. Does this show how simply the psi uncertainty principle works? Indeed food for thought. Elegant and simple as it should be, not mysterious at all.

_________________
always, John


Top
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:50 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Yeah, what Tom said ;)

Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:19 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

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

Good observation. That is one of the major ways that psi uncertainty works -- you know the significance and validity of what you have experienced but no one else does -- worse, no one else CAN -- because consciousness is necessarily subjective and personal.

Another is that one does not bring new technological breakthrough back from NPMR bacausr NPMR does not deal in physical detail. It deals in meaning, relationship, significance, ideas. You are more likely to bring back insight or creative synthesis.

Tom C


Top
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:51 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:16 pm
Posts: 133
This is something I have been tossing around alot recently.

There's ALOT of material out there written by other explorers of NPMR. After reading various books and religious texts, there's ALOT of paralells between them all in describing NPMR experience. But I have noticed that EVERY description has it's own interpritation of the experience. So when others read these books, they get confused because people are looking for an objective way to believe. I think that this is why there is so much mainstream distaste for "new age" material. The "sights" match up, but no one bothers to mention that it's relative to the observer. So people constantly look for a common interpritation, but fail because of a simple belief trap that there MUST be an objective view.

Tom, I think you do a good in making this clear in your books. But I think for most people who are new to spiritual ideas, it's a completly foreign concept. Even to the religious types, it's such a hard concept to get through to them because they trust their senses so much find alot of comfort in knowing others smell and see they same things.

There's ALOT of pressure in society to follow known beliefs. And anyone who strays from common ideas, are crazy and have lost it. That pressure mixed with being forced to reconcile your beliefs with your personal experience, provides the most intense growing structure I have ever experienced.

Stepping "out there" is honestly difficult. When it finally clicks that the foundations of our lives are built on hollow ground, it's sobering. Once the concepts in MBT sink in, you reallly start to get belief vertigo. It's a reality check for sure. For people looking for comfort and soothing ego strokes in the MBT books, please stick to your favorite TV series.

I'm sure you understand, Tom...I really don't find much comfort in your books. But I wouldnt want it any other way. :)


Top
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:18 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:57 pm
Posts: 29
Location: Estonia
TobyH, I agree with you totally. Also I think New Age is good for some type of people to start with. I wouldn´t have found MBT if there wasn`t New Age. And their overall message is good. I think people who are into New Age, get out of the belief system more easily than other religious people. It hasn`t got that many restrictions.

Stepping out is definitely difficult. There`s so many times that I felt that I had to say something but could calm myself down and say to myself that this would become a pointless arguing (colliding with other belief system with too different ideas). Some people are not ready to hear this. They lack open mindedness and they haven`t got the skepticism for their own beliefs. I have always been open minded (perhaps too open minded) and now found the skepticism to balance it out. There are only few people that I can talk about these kind of things. I am a little bit ashamed what I have said to them over the years, because my beliefs have changed so much and things get confusing for them altogether, like what am I saying then. Now I`m just saying , not only to them but to everybody, to be open minded and skeptic. I personally assume that everything is possible and you rule out things with skepticism and personal experience and experiments in them.


Excuse me for my English, it`s not my native language. Very often I can`t express myself correctly. (If there wasn`t a speller on, it would be horrible)

_________________
On the vast canvas of the Self the picture of manifold worlds is painted by the Self itself. And that Supreme Self, seeing but itself, enjoys great delight.- Adi Shankara


Top
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:36 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
Hi Quantum
I totally agree with you about stepping out. As I grow and change what I exchange with others has changed too, and I am better able to recognize when my thoughts will not find a place to rest in an other so I don't force it. I also have been open minded with a foundation of everything being possible, as you are. New Age is so 20th century ;), but then Neo New Age is redundant so maybe what we are experiencing can be considered Neo Age. I find the point of New Age to be non-religious, but then never really got into it that much so could be wrong. The Age of Consciousness, that's where I hope we are.

Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:13 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 2088
Hi Tom,

it helps to see why it can be very difficult or sometimes impassible to share our thoughts with other people and find understanding. If there are no similar experiences or believes that can connect us, we may talk about the same thing and never understand each other. I know it is a common knowledge and it was mentioned everywhere time and again. There is a saying in Russian - repetition is a mother of knowledge.

I have a question. For instance, I have no relevant experience or knowledge about something. Does it mean I would not be able to experience or become aware of this data at all, since I am not able to interpret it in PMR terms? Or will I collect this data, but not remember it until I'll gain some experience or knowledge on a subject?

Thank you,
Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:52 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
Lena: I have a question. For instance, I have no relevant experience or knowledge about something. Does it mean I would not be able to experience or become aware of this data at all, since I am not able to interpret it in PMR terms? Or will I collect this data, but not remember it until I'll gain some experience or knowledge on a subject?

Tom: I think both. It does mean you would not be able to experience or become aware of this data at all NOW, since you are not able to interpret it in PMR terms NOW. However, if you gain some experience or knowledge on a subject, having seen things dealing with this subject before helps you understand more quickly. Past association, even if inexpressible, can facilitate future learning. Sometimes the inexpressible shows itself in related areas as hunches or intuition. Sometimes it hangs out accumulating, waiting for its ah ha moment. Sometimes it just evaporates from your awareness for lack of a connection to bring it into your reality. Digital systems that receive potentially useful data have no reason to delete it unless they are running out of storage room.

Tom C


Top
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:25 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 2088
Thank you, Tom. It is very helpful.

I have another question.

In your book, in this forum and other places it has been emphasized many times that a learning process should be slow and gradual. Several times in last seven years I had ah-ha moments. They were triggered by reading a book, talking with somebody or would happen without any outside influences, just happened. Each time right after ah-ha I had a flu-like case, or I'd rather say I had no energy, barely was able to get up and go to a bathroom. No appetite, no interest or desire to talk to anybody, no thoughts. I would stay in a bed for a couple days. At first I could not understand what happens to me, but for some reason I did not think it was flu or cold, and it was no other flu symptoms at all. My friend gave me an article written by Roberto Assagioli, Transpersonal Development, Crisis of Spiritual Development, where he describes and explains difference between going insane and ah-ha moments. He says they could look very similar and have similar symptoms, but they are not exactly the same anyhow. http://www.markovide.com/psychonaut/doc ... rsonal.htm

My question is why does it happen like that? Why was it a jump instead of slow and gradual movement? Is it possible to prevent these jumps, or make it not so difficult to overcome them? Was it a result of loosing my believe, and it was painful to have an "empty spot"? I did not have any intentions to rush into anything, at least as far as I was able to be aware my intentions.

Thank you,
Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.


Top
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:30 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

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

I would say that a series of dramatic ah-ha moments is probably just your learning style. An Ah-ha moment is usually caused by a belief suddenly popping (becoming transparent) or information suddenly falling in place like pieces of a jig saw puzzle, or some combination of both. Many other people watch their beliefs dissolve slowly bit by bit or struggle one piece at a time with their puzzles -- their transitions are less sudden and less traumatic -- indeed, they may be so gradual that they hardly even notice the significant change taking place inside of them.

Perhaps you are resistant to change and put off a conclusion until the evidence becomes so overwhelming the obviousness of it hits you between the eyes. Or, as stated above, perhaps it is just your learning style.

If I knew more about the specific ah-ha moments I might see a cause-effect pattern -- however, here are some generalities. If the Ah-ha moments have a strong relationship or emotional content or a major intellectual impact then you may simply shut down for a while until you can fully process the insight, impact, consequences, reasons why it is like that, and why you did not seen it sooner -- i.e., you may need a little time to adjust to your new reality. Others, with different personal styles and strategies for dealing with change may adjust on the fly.

Your growth only appears like a sudden great leap from the perspective of the little picture. In the big picture of your growth toward actualizing your full potential as consciousness, the progress is still gradual -- slow and deliberate -- even if it comes as a series of small sudden ah-ha moments that seem huge at the time, and in the moment.

Tom C


Top
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:41 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:35 am
Posts: 9999
Location: Ridgecrest, CA
This brings to mind something in a book, The End of Science. There was an evolutionary theory called punctuated equilibrium in which evolution proceeded in spurts I can see as ah ha moments. The scientists that didn't like this theory used to call it evolution by jerks. lol

Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.


Top
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 3:25 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 2088
Thank you, Tom. Yes, I am not taking changes easy. It is much better now, than it was when I was younger. On the other hand I was one who insisted to leave USSR, and it took me a whole year to convince my husband to agree with me.

Two my ah-has.

First one did happen almost three years ago, when we went to Israel. My husband and I both have relatives in Israel. It was my first trip to this country. We could go to see our relative and country much more earlier. All that time I was afraid of terrorist attack. Now I am ashamed of these feelings, though I was ashamed of them before too. Anyway, we flue from Prague, where we spent five days, to Tel-Aviv. Our flight was in a middle of the night, and we have landed in Tel-Aviv at 3:30 am. By the time when our bus was leaving an airport a night was gone, and a sun was getting up. I was dosing by the window, trying to keep my eyes open, since I did not want to miss even one minute of this very much anticipated trip. I cannot say what I feel exactly, but it was more than just interest to see a new country, new places. I feel being connected in a special way, as many other people feel, when they go to Israel. I feel being in the right place at the right time, and welcomed by everything I could see through a bus window. Next day I had one day stomach flu. I was semi-delirious, but at the same time in a certain way I was able to absorb and take in something, that I would miss otherwise. I had a special connection with different places. For instance, at Masada, I don't know why, I knew I was there, when it all happen almost 2000 years ago. It is an emotional place, and I did not have deja vu. Again, Israel is a special place for a lot of people, I am just one of them. Even before we went back home I have realized how much this country, Jerusalem, all what I was able to see and hear affected me. I was changed, I did not do anything to be changed, I just was there and listened, and observed. When we've got back home, it seems to me, in a week I had this post ah-ha case. After that I started writing short poems, never before I had an inclination to do so.

Second will not be so long. I think a year and half ago I was reading The Tao of Physics, by Fritjof Capra. While I was reading this book, I had ah-has here and there. Some of them were Ah-Ha, some of them ah-ha. Very soon after I have finished reading I had my after ah-ha case.

Sorry, it is a long post.

Thank you,
Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.


Top
PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:34 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 6:54 am
Posts: 417
Thanks to Tom for the posting at the top of the thread, well worth printing off as a MBT supplement.

So - while NPMR is itself an objective reality (it exists, is a thing), all perception of it, from within, or from outside, (PMR), can only be subjective, and perspective-related. Is that a fair summary, over-simplified, or just plain wrong?

Presumably NPMR residents who have had PMR experience would have a different perception of their NPMR environment than those who have never tried out the PMR role. I remember Bob Monroe's AA and BB NPMR entities (in Far Journeys) who seemed to spend their time simply swooping, flying about and having fun in their home reality and wondered why Bob wouldn't want to do the same (he was tempted). Bob met up with one of them later (in Ultimate Journey), to find that boredom had got the better of the other one, who had enrolled in PMR! Individual perception different everywhere!

Arthur

_________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."


Top
PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:21 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:00 am
Posts: 1285
Arthur: So - while NPMR is itself an objective reality (it exists, is a thing), all perception of it, from within, or from outside, (PMR), can only be subjective, and perspective-related. Is that a fair summary, over-simplified, or just plain wrong?

Tom: That is correct.
One's reality is individual. Consciousness is information. Information must be interpreted and that interpretation must be subjective. The concept of objectivity is a local VR concept generated by the more stringent constraints found in PMR type VRs. The experience of an objective reality is approximated within a PMR VR illusion when a large number of people share the same rule set defining their perception. There is no such thing as an objective reality in the way that PMR residents use the term.

Indeed, consciousness does exist, it is fundamentally real -- so we borrow the local PMR illusionary concept of objectivity and call the consciousness system "objective" because our language and cultural beliefs will not let our intellects consider anything to be fundamentally real unless it is also objective - a habit of PMR thinking that has no use or meaning beyond PMR.
Tom C


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited