Friday, 11 February 2011

Music for a missing orchestra:

Variations on a discontinuum idealism

The universe generously doesn’t care; it is its nature. Only when you have living beings, you have a sort of care. And when you have minds, you have the representation of being there to care, that is, to be a consciousness. One of the side effect of being a consciousness is filling gaps. A cognition detects gaps in the uncaring universe and it is puzzled, because from the caring point of view, everything is either friendly or hostile, but there is a horror vacui for interest. So the consciousness will ignite a narrative construction of habitable narrative environment. This is the mind-terraforming of brains. Because when a cognition accelerates itself in a narrative construction, it manufactures his own minding generation: giving meanings to events is also giving a meaning to the perceiver of meanings.

Things surrounding you can tell you something, because your mind extended itself in the environment as a narrative developer; hence everything is telling that you are the narrative recipient of the stories around you. Asking for consistency is unfolding the narrative. Indeed there is a narrative because a mind is unfolding its cognitive deployment. This is the narrative continuum.

Very easily a mind will deduct that because everything is the story told to a consciousness and the tale is generated by the consciousness itself, then the universe is the mind. This is crazy and the conclusion of the German idealism from Hegel. But…first of all: is it that crazy? Yes. Ok, reformulate is that wrong? No way. Nonetheless, it is wrong. And the reason is that there is a confusion between mind as the deployment of narrativity and mind as the author of narrativity.

Your accelerated brain projects itself as mind through the deployment of narrativity. But it is not the author of the consequent narrations. In other words you generate your narrations but you are not the owner of them. So consciousness is the spirit and it is universal. But it’s not absolute. Is the spirit absolute? I don’t know, I’m just a dude…But consciousness is the representation of the spirit. Because the spirit is a narration. And the narrative representation is “universal” for the human beings; your single consciousness is the individual instance of this technique, handed down from generation to generation. Your mind actually appeared for the first time, roughly speaking, between 50 and 150 thousand years ago. It did appear because the convergence of a bundle of stories generated by a flock of brains.

But if you draw the line of continuum you’ll see the universe as a consciousness. Actually as your consciousness. But the universe is much cooler: it doesn’t care. It’s like the struggle to make your mind blank: no effort is required.

The orchestra finally starts to play in sync. No effort now.

Sunday, 6 February 2011

Puppet’s Ghost

Many talks about consciousness and what is left? Science and modern philosophy (moat of all, Anglo-Saxon) tell you that there is no such a thing as consciousness. This is mythological talking, it’s past, it’s French. There are no spirits. It’s a belief for primitive people, poor guys from the old times, a tribe thing. Take the Australian aborigines: it’s not them, they are not stupid. They lack appropriate knowledge, that’s it. Now we have science, we have neurology. We have quantum physics (which we don’t understand, by the way. I mean: no human being understands it, properly). We have big bang theory (bang a gong).

So is brain just electrocuted soft tissues?? Actually,yes, I agree with this option.

Our brain is a biological puppet, maneuvered in cognitive postures by the narrative forces in which is immersed. The narrative environment radiates on his cognition the response of a character. A brain in this semiotic atmosphere is accelerated in a mind: the semiotic rays turn cognition in narration. That’s it.

What else???

Oh, I forgot. When a brain turned in to a mind, it represents itself to itself in a narrative mode. He becomes a long journey chasing the narrative tracks that generated him. He runs on the semiotic trails, that are the passage of a consciousness. Finally he reaches the source of the narrative radiations: a mind telling a story. Or a brain self-representing to itself. Meaning???

You can say that a brain to explore appropriately the permutative and multiverse complexity of his own architecture, needs to project itself in the extended environment generated by other mate brains.

Or you can say that the narrative forces haunt the brain and the cognitive infestation evokes hallucinations and deliria in the neuro-architecture. A cerebral fever calls the projection of a ghost. Is it real? Like any ghost…( I think that the Anglo-Saxon audience has a problem with ghosts: Hegel was really meaning that ideas are more real than stones: spirit is more real than matter. Catholics really believe in the transubstantiation of the wafer. Ontic as pragmatic in Heidegger is bad in comparison to ontological or theoretical…).

I’m confused: brain is a puppet, consciousness is a ghost…. Don’t tell me that….


Mind is the puppet ghost.

I mark two red strips under my eyes, beating my chest. Outside there is battle of ghosts. And gods and demons. And I don’t want to miss it. Hóka-héy.