Sensed perceptions, mental conceptions. (was RE: Life and Hell I think)

[Guest guest]

Hi Jan,

 

You wrote:

>I don't have the slightest idea what is meant with "non-duality people"

 

Oh, I meant people who frequent Non Duality Saloon. The more orthodox

advaitins. Nothing wrong with that, except for a strange tendency by some of

them to be dualistic in many other aspects of being, except for the advaita

meaning of being beyond it. Hehehehe..

> Both heat and cold can be perceived and what is more,

> mixing hot and cold water can result in lukewarm water...

> Calling cold and warm "opposites" is a conclusion based

> on perception: the only difference regarding the

> water is the rate of molecular vibration.

 

The sensed *perceptions* of temperarture can be compared, put side by side,

related, gauged. When it is done with digital thermometers rather than

through touch, the word "opposite" does not even come up.

 

I know it is subtle... But a slight deviation in conceptual thinking (as

though "opposites" are existing realities rather than mental visualizations

to aid in understanding) a slight deviation can cause the catastrophic view

of our world and the universe...

The way we are still dealing with our world, is still so much based on

conceptual outdated and non scientific fallacies that still somehow have

momentum, all this under the guise of reality.... and of course this

creates it's own form of reality as well. A self sustained momentum. of

illussive reality and suffering.

 

So temperature difference is *per*ceived with our senses, even when if it is

done instrumentally. The application of the word "opposite" is *con*ceptual

and eventually develops into an inaccurate and incomplete world view. Us /

them, black / white, communism / capitalism, east / west, rich / poor, ad

infinitum.

 

This is exactly what some are trying to change in the school system with the

Maria Montessori approach, using amongst other materials the 'mathematical

materials'

This started in 1905 in Italy, the same time that Einstein came up with his

relativistic theories.

In the Montessori environment and approach children discover a graduated,

variegated multi dimensional world in which they discover that "opposites"

are concepts, not congruent with perceptually sensed reality. They discover

that as such they have no absolute value. The 'sensorial materials' are

extremely important and cleverly, if simply, designed for that.

An attempt is also made ensure that 'absolute' moral values (like good

versus bad) get understood differently by the children by letting the

dynamics of realationships count through a very varied approach (mix of ages

into family grouping. No biased distribution of certain tasks to a certain

gender through the 'practical life materials', etc.)

All this in order to get 'new science' (just like 'new math' a few decades

ago) into the school system.

These children at age 6 already work with binomial and trinomial formulas in

a very tactile manner. They count in base two or hexadecimal just for the

fun of it. The multidimensionality (through the 'coloured and golden bead

math materials') of the world is not even a question. These children are

definitely not flatlanders and time is experienced by some of them as

nonlinear.

These kids eventually make good programmers, psychologists, physicists,

clergy and generally well functioning normalized humans, carriers of water

and hewers of wood.

 

If you haven't yet, find out about gauge fields, or scalar fields. The

simplest idea, but one of the hardest of 'concepts' to describe, maybe

because it is so hard to grasp conceptually, it being so much more directly

related to the tangible world through measurable sense perceptions.

Does this have to do with enlightenment , etc? Oh yes, through the 'form /

void' conundrum.

 

I have many a time tried to describre this gauge field thing, but have not

been able to turn that into a shortish email.

 

Neatly enough, whiIe I was gathering some translation material for the Heart

Sutra yesterday, I found some Zen Monk treatment of the Heart Sutra that was

very naughty, rambunctious, almost raw. But boy did this man get the void /

form dichotomy and the need to overcome the dualist viewpoint right. This is

an enlightenment issue... That is why I keep harping on it.

>That has to be the case for human perception,

>reasoning and intuition too: relative,

>permitting a look through the proverbial peephole.

>Whatever is expressed is the expression via

>human perception and reasoning:

>always a hypothesis as there isn't an

>option to go "outside" the human realm.

 

True enough, but when we put your two paragraphs to gether, we can

apparently be a bit more subtle and correct about it... Sensory perception

being a way to look through that peephole... to 'look' "outside" at least.

Talking subtle here.

>It is always possible to talk about properties instead of calling specific

>properties opposites - and that doesn't require a relation.

 

Properties are known through measurement in principle, and measurement is

relating, gauging, comparing, if not almost interfering...

>The direction of electron spin will determine

>the orientation of a magnetic field

 

I think you know that spin means not the same as direction nor

orientation...

Spin up and spin down are verbalizations and helpful vizualizations, the

physicists using them are extremely aware of this...

 

I have done some thought experiments, and tested them later with 'stuff',

where it became evident that without any prior reversal that property

transformed. From which I then had to conclude, having to use logical

simplistic polar concepts that a reversal must have taken place prior to the

property transformation.

When redoing the experiment with the "polar" reversal prior to the property

transformation, the property transformation did not take place.... curious.

I tried to bring in time reversal, Feynman diagram like, no luck.

Time is not even linear so reversal of time could not be brought in lucidly.

A hard to describe thought and physical experiment... have lots of diagrams

on it though... and pieces of clay and strips of paper...

 

There is a fantastic little book by David Z. Albert: "Quantum Mechanics and

Experience" from Harvard University Press 1994, that has a similar approach

although using a different experiment. Now I know I can see poetry in many

things but the way that book is written... if it is not understandable at

points (which it is after some repeated readings), it reads at least

beautifully....

But then I am biased.

 

Jan, always so nice talking to you

 

Love,

Wim

[Guest guest]

Hi Wim,

 

The pleasure of talking is mutual - instead of commenting sequentially,

just a few remarks...

 

Concepts have a perceptual basis but often, the link no longer is seen.

Conditioning (the kind that prevents "seeing what is") is consisting of

concepts.

These "things" are leading a life of their own as a kind of "cellular automaton"

and most of them go on till death. Only in a few cases, the "cellular

automatons" end with

the mind-body remaining alive... Because, the so called "K. blocks" are deeper

lying "cellular automatons".

 

And take the food-issue: the source of processed food has become a concept,

"milk is manufactured in factories" as goes for many products. The sensory

link with the source of food has gone. And for many a city dweller, that source

has become a concept too - a picture.

 

To my knowledge, some scientists are aware of the fact that a universe having

12 dimensions or so is purely conceptual - and effort is undertaken to find

explanations based on perception.

 

Jan