Love your videos, Love your comments,
I’m a giant Alan Watts fan my self
I’ve found Thomas Metzinger to be a great addition to his ideas, have you read Being No One?
The functional boundary between a supposed internal and external world seems to me nothing more then a evolutionary tool which can not be justified outside of human experience (whatever it is that might lie outside our phenomenal reality).
I’m fascinated by case studies where individuals lose this feeling of disconnectedness with there representations (or representandums?).
Anyway, I’m not going to get to carried away here, I’m still arranging this information in my mind.
Also, I’d like to get on your friends list if you wouldn’t mind.
thanks for your interest, if you love watts I’m sure we have much in common!
I have not read Metzinger’s book, but I did watch him present the basic idea in an hour long google video. the notion that inside and outside are necessary illusions (for what we call consciousness), and that reality is somehow neither, is very interesting. I wonder what we could possibly mean, though, by saying there exists something outside phenomenal reality. without there being something that appears, how could there be anything that exists? to appear, the world must be phenomenal, it must be seen by a body.
think of newton’s experiments on color. he supposed that color was an illusion created by a prism. the prism analyzes the light, breaks it up into a vivd rainbow. the light itself is actually white (or so-called “pure electromagnetic energy”), or so he assumed. he made the claim that light was something that existed independently (or “outside”) of the human eye (and therefore “mind”). he has no real proof that this interpretation is warranted, he is merely making the assumption that light exists independently of his eyes (and being, mind, soul…). In actuality, all his experiment showed was how light appears to our eyes under certain conditions. to suppose it exists independently of how it appears to us phenomenally as color (or white light) is a sneaky way of bringing metaphysics into science. the only reason it works and is believed by many smart people is because it is backed up by mathematics. We have no way to imagine what “electromagnetic energy” or “pure objective light” look like, we can only work them out mathematically. the equations about this energy which supposedly exists independently of our awareness amount to syntactical relationships between symbols which a particular mathematic community has agreed to memorize. experiments are designed to prove that light really is the way they have modeled it. what is only now (by people like metz and other embodied philosophers) being realized (it seems) is that science cannot transcend experience. to suppose we could know of a world independently of ourselves (and therefore, be able to control it) is no more than metaphysical madness, blind agreement with axioms which in the end may lead us down a rather self-destructive path. in fact, i think the notion that reality is out there, and that our subjectivity is merely a distortion of it, has been the sole cause of most of that peculiar type of suffering that only humans manage to find, that animals have barely the capacity to create or comprehend. This duality is a rift in being, it separates us from ourselves, keeps what we want perpetually out of reach. I know of no better situation for evolution! however, it may be time for involution (for consciousness to awake from its self-torture). I’m not sure how it will all work when and if this happens…. I don’t expect lion to actually start laying down with lamb as the bible says. maybe nothing at all will really change, i mean, how could it? reality is exactly as it appears, isn’t it?! (well, if you’ve followed and agreed with me so far, you might agree… if not, shoot me back a reply and straighten me out!).
peace for now,