Thursday, 2 May 2013

On not being a brain (further commentary on consciousness and identity re the TED book; the Virtual Shadow)

It's sort of cute to read "the brain just needs to be present'.
The substitution of "scientifically correct" terms for the process of life - that is not only present - but Presence is an example of being more concerned with one's presented commentary on life than living it - or should I say - "being Lived' - because it is not by our own power that we live or think or have awareness of existence - and nor, are we a brain or an effect of a meat brain.
If you mess with my computer, I may not be able to type and communicate with you via these means - but my Mac is not the intelligence behind the message.

The focus on forms is the defocus from the relational field of which the awareness of the form is but part of the event.
This - further down the river of its process - becomes a consciousness that has to think or maintain a self referencing activity or it fears it will not exist - or will be confronted with non-existence. This compulsive activity is mental illness and not normal healthy running - even if such a loop is accepted to be the norm and therefore considered to be our nature.
Substitutes for life are the result of searching for a completeness that is believed lost by the act of identifying exclusively with forms and forgetting the relational being in which all experience is expressing.
Therefore people who meditate or enjoy silence or indeed one pointed appreciation and singleness of purpose, are much less inclined to 'scatter' themselves in distraction, or give themselves to what does not actually fulfil.

Virtual identities and dislocated consciousness

I feel that digital 'virtual reality' is an extension of a process of self commentary and self presentation that is ALREADY running as a virtual overlay in our minds.
Thus, one can look at the blatant and easy to see aspects of digital dislocation (if one is not consumed and identified within it), and pause to see this replicates the way our mind is already tending to work.

Identifying with illusions is a bit like 'dressing up' or constructing a self-identity as a better 'mask' or handle on the world.

Clearly this can be fun, entertaining or thrilling - but can become a substitute for what life actually is, when we take our identifications and our investment in them as more real than the fundamental experience of being and feeling aware of existence.

So yes there is a 'new territory' in which to engage in surrogate experience that our daily or working life may not otherwise afford. There is also the 'flock' mentality of becoming caught in the opinions and impressions of a mentality that is essentially conditioned and reactive.

To be able to use technology of the mind - or the digitally extended mind - without becoming lost in it or possessed by the urge to possess what is not even real - is to be truly grounded and connected in one's Self, in Life - in real relationship.

The lack of real relational honesty leaves one open to every kind of nonsense. But if this then undermines the joy and fulfilment of life it will create the conditions for re-evaluating one's orientation and foundation. BUT on the way, every kind of defence will be called upon to try to make a false foundation work. One of these is distraction from an honest appreciation or accounting - and being able to 'escape' into surrogate realities is the 'name of the game'.

But as they say - 'wherever you go, there you are'. Regardless of apparent conditions and presentations of self, reality is not affected by the mask - and yet our awareness of it IS.

Consciously on purpose life is fulfilling where it holds us in a present appreciation rather than chasing a promise or running away from a fearful or meaninglessness.

Mind - or Consciousness is so fundamental to everything we experience, that I feel to suggest exploring it as a participant - or living scientist, who is the curiosity AND the experiment. Nothing is so blinding as the mind that thinks it knows - though the most complex and convincing programs of experience and thought may arise as a result.

Garbage in - garbage out. One cannot 'save' others from their own learning experience. But nor do we have to withhold communication from a willingness to listen and learn.

When our private lives become public online … will it make us more or less tolerant?



There is no such thing as thoughts that have no effect at some level - yet human thinking WANTS to set up so as to have a private mind in which to explore, enjoy and also mask and hide thinking that is mean-spirited and dishonouring of oneself, others and life.
And then one seeks 'like-minded' others for validation and support - and to create cultural or social environments in which to indulge and gratify one's 'avatar'.

The current mindset of corporate consumerism encourages such indulgence - as it can gain private advantage or profit thereby.

Where is the voice for integrity of being?

Not merely a calculated analysis of risks and benefits within a narrow range of vision - but the conscious expression of honesty.

There is such a thing as good clean fun that is not at the expense of others, but to access it, one needs to disinvest of an addictive or passive compliance with the thinking that uses our mind without having a genuine basis for being there. For much of our ego or self presentation is an attempt to cover or hide a sense of dissonance in fearful or guilt escaping persona.

So maybe it is a good thing to have come to a time where our thought is not so much controlled - but no longer private or provincial.
So we have to start to stand in and with what we say and do rather than live superficially within a sort of cultural permission to unconsciousness.

The attempt to control thought is very strong in the mind and thus will attempt itself through the Net - even as it does in politics, media and commercial activity. But it is always a self-defeating impulse, no matter how much of a short term hit it seems to offer or deliver.

Organic systems cooperate as expressions of a whole, whether they seem to compete at surface level, and so does a paradigm shift. The end of privacy will have profound effects which must include a fresh perspective of tolerance. For who is without sin - let them throw the first stone!

Looking for fault in others is a way of avoiding your own. Period. But apparent fault in others IS the way to detect your own - and thus become free of it.

There is a new perspective within the 'new wine' that is integral to it. While we seek to apply the old mindset we hold ourselves in the dark ages.