• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Consciousness and the Paranormal — Part 7

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Notes from Two Scientific Psychologists: Ecological Representations

{The above page illustrates the utter ambiguity with which the term 'representation' continues to be used in 'scientific psychology' and cogsci-dominated consciousness studies and POM. If you find the discussion there engaging, there are links included to a paper by the site's authors, which was recently rejected by a cogsci journal, a detailed online critique of that paper by another thinker, and an inadequate response to it by the paper's authors.}
 
Last edited:
I think this recent paper by Anthony Chemero strongly supports Honderich's thinking in his most recent works (books and papers) concerning 'actual consciousness'. Here is a link to the pdf which I think can help us to make progress at this stage of our discussion of what consciousness is. It might be especially helpful in sorting out the issues in @Pharoah's hierarchical construct theory that have remained unresolved here, including for Pharoah.

http://www.idiap.ch/ftp/courses/EE-700/material/31-10-2012/chemero.pdf

Extract:

An Outline of a Theory of Affordances
Anthony Chemero
Scientific and Philosophical Studies of Mind Program
Department of Psychology, Franklin and Marshall College

Abstract: A theory of affordances is outlined according to which affordances are relations between the abilities of animals and features of the environment. As relations, affordances are both real and perceivable but are not properties of either the environment or the animal. I argue that this theory has advantages over extant theories of affordances and briefly discuss the relations among affordances and niches, perceivers, and events.

The primary difference between direct and inferential theories of perception concerns the location of perceptual content, the meaning of our perceptions. In inferential theories of perception, these meanings arise inside animals, based on their interactions with the physical environment. Light, for example, bumps into receptors, causing a sensation. The animal (or its brain) performs inferences on the sensation, yielding a meaningful perception. In direct theories of perception, on the other hand, meaning is in the environment, and perception does not depend on meaning-conferring inferences; instead, the animal simply gathers information from a meaning-laden environment. However, if the environment contains meanings, then it cannot be merely physical. This places a heavy theoretical burden on direct theories of perception, a burden so severe that it may outweigh all the advantages to conceiving perception as direct.1

[1 Among these advantages are that direct perception is more true to phenomenology, is more realistic from an evolutionary point of view, and short-circuits traditional skeptical worries.]

This is because direct theories of perception require a new ontology, one that is at odds with today’s physicalist, reductionist consensus that says the world just is the physical world, full stop. Without a coherent understanding of what the world is like, such that it can contain meanings and is not merely physical, direct perception is simply indefensible. Thus, like earlier theories that take perception to be direct (e.g., Heidegger, 1962; James, 1912/1976), James Gibson’s ecological psychology (1966, 1979) includes an ontology, his theory of affordances (1979).

Gibson’s (1979) first description of affordances is deceptively simple: “The affordances of the environment are what it offers the animal, what it provides or furnishes, either for good or ill” (p. 127). An affordance, this seems to imply, is a resource that the environment offers any animal that has the capabilities to perceive and use it. As such, affordances are meaningful to animals: They provide opportunity for particular kinds of behavior. Thus, affordances are properties of the environment but taken relative to an animal. So far, so good. It is unfortunate that, two pages later, Gibson’s valiant, plainspoken attempt to make clear how much his theory of affordances differs from standard physicalist, reductionist ontology ends up just being confusing:

'An affordance is neither an objective property nor a subjective property; or it is both if you like. An affordance cuts across the dichotomy of subjective–objective and helps us to understand its inadequacy. It is equally a fact of the environment and a fact of behavior. It is both physical and psychical, yet neither. An affordance points both ways, to the environment and to the observer. (p. 129)'

This description makes affordances seem like impossible, ghostly entities, entities that no respectable scientist (or science-worshipping analytic philosopher) could have as part of their ontology. The purpose of this article is to provide a description of affordances that makes them more ontologically respectable yet still does justice to Gibson’s conception.

DEFINING AFFORDANCE: 1. PREVIOUS VIEWS . . . . . . . ."

Human beings supposedly by self review the highest condition in creation as observer and valuer of all other conditions.

All other conditions "lower" by status of evolution as data considered in the review, for the human male proposes his ideas from and through his own presence regarding his own safety (highest condition beyond change) whilst considering altering/changing the past......data that he can review.

Yet the condition states.....human being does not exist before his own status.....after animals, with 2 adult parents who procreate/continue the species.

Why would you consider to change anything, if by your own status and self statement you are higher than all other conditions, placing your own person in the top position to "fall"?

Behavior itself belongs naturally to the species and the species by human review is in a lower status of self expression as a conscious state.

The human stating its higher awareness somehow thinks that it knows the behavior of a lower status as consciousness?

How can an evolved conscious awareness know anything other than itself and then propose information as if its own self does not exist in an evolved status?

You cannot remove the condition of consciousness in the status in which it is owned, therefore it would be impossible to know a condition that you do not belong to as an expression.
 
I think this recent paper by Anthony Chemero strongly supports Honderich's thinking in his most recent works (books and papers) concerning 'actual consciousness'. Here is a link to the pdf which I think can help us to make progress at this stage of our discussion of what consciousness is. It might be especially helpful in sorting out the issues in @Pharoah's hierarchical construct theory that have remained unresolved here, including for Pharoah.

http://www.idiap.ch/ftp/courses/EE-700/material/31-10-2012/chemero.pdf

Extract:

An Outline of a Theory of Affordances
Anthony Chemero
Scientific and Philosophical Studies of Mind Program
Department of Psychology, Franklin and Marshall College

Abstract: A theory of affordances is outlined according to which affordances are relations between the abilities of animals and features of the environment. As relations, affordances are both real and perceivable but are not properties of either the environment or the animal. I argue that this theory has advantages over extant theories of affordances and briefly discuss the relations among affordances and niches, perceivers, and events.

The primary difference between direct and inferential theories of perception concerns the location of perceptual content, the meaning of our perceptions. In inferential theories of perception, these meanings arise inside animals, based on their interactions with the physical environment. Light, for example, bumps into receptors, causing a sensation. The animal (or its brain) performs inferences on the sensation, yielding a meaningful perception. In direct theories of perception, on the other hand, meaning is in the environment, and perception does not depend on meaning-conferring inferences; instead, the animal simply gathers information from a meaning-laden environment. However, if the environment contains meanings, then it cannot be merely physical. This places a heavy theoretical burden on direct theories of perception, a burden so severe that it may outweigh all the advantages to conceiving perception as direct.1

[1 Among these advantages are that direct perception is more true to phenomenology, is more realistic from an evolutionary point of view, and short-circuits traditional skeptical worries.]

This is because direct theories of perception require a new ontology, one that is at odds with today’s physicalist, reductionist consensus that says the world just is the physical world, full stop. Without a coherent understanding of what the world is like, such that it can contain meanings and is not merely physical, direct perception is simply indefensible. Thus, like earlier theories that take perception to be direct (e.g., Heidegger, 1962; James, 1912/1976), James Gibson’s ecological psychology (1966, 1979) includes an ontology, his theory of affordances (1979).

Gibson’s (1979) first description of affordances is deceptively simple: “The affordances of the environment are what it offers the animal, what it provides or furnishes, either for good or ill” (p. 127). An affordance, this seems to imply, is a resource that the environment offers any animal that has the capabilities to perceive and use it. As such, affordances are meaningful to animals: They provide opportunity for particular kinds of behavior. Thus, affordances are properties of the environment but taken relative to an animal. So far, so good. It is unfortunate that, two pages later, Gibson’s valiant, plainspoken attempt to make clear how much his theory of affordances differs from standard physicalist, reductionist ontology ends up just being confusing:

'An affordance is neither an objective property nor a subjective property; or it is both if you like. An affordance cuts across the dichotomy of subjective–objective and helps us to understand its inadequacy. It is equally a fact of the environment and a fact of behavior. It is both physical and psychical, yet neither. An affordance points both ways, to the environment and to the observer. (p. 129)'

This description makes affordances seem like impossible, ghostly entities, entities that no respectable scientist (or science-worshipping analytic philosopher) could have as part of their ontology. The purpose of this article is to provide a description of affordances that makes them more ontologically respectable yet still does justice to Gibson’s conception.

DEFINING AFFORDANCE: 1. PREVIOUS VIEWS . . . . . . . ."
Constance thanks for posting this. This is one of my main areas of interest right now in Pom; direct versus inferential theories. I'm pretty firmly in the inferential camp, but I want to understand the direct position. Frankly I don't understand the direct position. All of the embodied/ecological writing I've read has been impenetrable to me (as far as claims about consciousness being "located" in our arms, legs, the environment, etc.). Hopefully this article can make the position clear to me.
 
The reason that humanity is reviewing the conditions of consciousness and the paranormal belong to 2 reviews.
1. is Occult science
2. human self experience and spiritual awareness.

Many forums reviewed the AI condition and the UFO manifestation and then considered what advice was given in many different forms of personal reviews, reviews that belong to those humans hurt by the conditions or those who knew from self experience that the leadership (occult society/brotherhood) condition was the cause for the attacks on Nature and life itself.

The brotherhood, known for the secrecy that involves illegal occult activity beyond spiritual laws and human laws have advised through various means that they want the understanding of what they believe is consciousness or the Creator aspect to have it as a personal condition of ownership. So no longer is God or the Christ consciousness considered a spiritual teaching, it is now being studied as an occult aspect, only because occultists, aware that the ancient human mind was the reason for gaining advice regarding conditions of powerful conversions belonging to nuclear aspects.

So human kind then became a new situation awareness of being studied as the mind condition that originally gained information for occult practices, converting the nuclear of stone.

If anyone is going to be correct about the condition of consciousness is to understand that our occult brother has and always will be an evil chosen self motivated human life, just because he can.

His spiritual ancient documentation espouses that the human male was the receiver of information about concepts of God and evil spirits, yet if you relate the conditions of consciousness, the natural and normal status it once had was a mutual life presence with Nature, existing as a being who knew what food to eat, knew to drink, had sexual intercourse, formed a family status that took care of its family members by the ownership of natural and mutual living experiences.

For any human to use their mind for other conditions is to then pertain that a human male considered creation and aspects of creation for a self motivated cause.

To consider the aspects of science had to therefore of been a study model to review spiritual conditions through the use of the human mind, the presence of the human body and the Nature in which it existed.

Yet the Nature details that the consciousness of other species exists in lower statuses of evolution, where the human mind and presence does not belong and should not be considering.

The reason this statement is true, is because if a human is considering what exists as consciousness without its own presence existing in the condition of what it is reviewing, then it is stating to its own person that it wants its own person removed from the spiritual life.

Hence science and conversion as an aspect of a human mind considering all preceding information tried to destroy and remove its own person from the Nature to which it belongs.

Therefore the human mind, attacked as a condition began to become aware of the spiritual outcome of manifesting imagery in an unnatural state, which attacked the chemical mind/brain, the chemical natural cell body of the human presence and also documented this information.

This is how religious teachings evolved regarding the aspects of human spirit consciousness and its attack due to changing the aspects of what was considered to be consciousness.....God and the Christ review.

Hence when anyone of us studies these concepts as secret teachings as an occult awareness on human intelligence reviews, it is noticed that the aspects had secret occult meanings known only to the occultists, as an organization, as a brotherhood, as a controlled aspect of keeping information only amongst males and also their own orders.

This is no new status for humanity to be aware of, for it has happened to us before as the condition of occultism, using the human consciousness in a status of gaining personal attacks, just as demonstrated to us all.

As the male condition allowed for the structures of civilization, laws, medicine and philosophies - physiology, psychology, then it allowed them to own the conditions of applying the status of information regarding human behavior.

Yet if we all took the time to review the natural human state and consciousness...human behavior belongs to a normal condition of a healthy body and healthy mind.

So if we all asked ourselves what changed consciousness as a condition that involves a changed mind state and a changed human awareness, is to review the conditions that causes human mutations and human life change.

This can only involve unnatural life applications, being science and the use and application of converting nuclear products into unnatural Earth states, changing both the radiation level of natural fused stone and also the atmospheric radiation.

Human life and consciousness therefore changes due to the amount of radiation or irradiation that falls out in the wavelengths coming to contact with the ground state where the buildings are built to use the conversion of nuclear matter. Wavelengths interact with the natural human mind, the natural human cell state and causes the cell condition to convert unnaturally by and because of the amount of radiation being received.

Therefore the condition of a changing consciousness demonstrates the Nature as a whole condition gets attacked, which it has demonstrated.

So no human can argue the introduced condition, for the natural state does not belong to the acts of sciences....science being a human introduced condition.

Therefore indoctrination and teachings about conscious concepts are controlled by the ownership of the social systems, the condition known to belong to the elite who control all choices belonging to their own self gain.

They have never and never will be spiritually conscious beings, who by self review know as a human being that they would never personally choose to harm themselves, their brothers and sisters or the Nature which supports their own existence.

This is what the review of consciousness itself is about in the modern day condition.

A spiritual human being is aware that only the organic presence of a human being is consciousness as a level of status as a condition of reviewing information.

The human does not belong anywhere else as a self concept, yet try to explain this condition to an occultist who wants our consciousness to be God or Christ, so that they can unnaturally and artificially emulate a cell condition for energy gain as a natural aspect of cell replacement and cell continuance as a constant.

The human consciousness knows that it does not exist in the natural state as a constant, for our life dies and the only reason why our life continues is because the human adults have sexual intercourse.

As our life is natural and our occult brother who uses his own conscious awareness incorrectly seeing his mind first created the conditions for using and applying nuclear conversions....nuked and irradiated his own mind and cell conditions and has not as yet regained his origin statuses.

If any of you cared to review his occult considerations as an ancient occult science application relating to consciousness and spirit he implies by his values that a human life was perfect.

If you review the conditions of a changed mind and consciousness....we are no longer perfect, as the cell ages, the cell is sick via many conditions the mind chemical balances altered....yet the chemicals only exist within the organic body as a cell state.

His own occult reasoning tries to imply that the human chemical state belongs in a dimension as if it exists all by itself.....yet if a human being died out as a population and only animals existed in Nature, where is his review of his occult concepts and conscious unawareness as a condition of implying that our natural life as a chemical exists outside of itself?

Our mental conditions changed because our chemical mind was altered, and this altering is not artificial, this altering of consciousness happened due to the introduction of artificial to our natural environment and our natural chemical balances converted into unnatural states of hearing (sound) and also imagery (sound).

The only unnatural sound that exists on Planet Earth is the introduced artificial sounds caused by the conversion of naturally fused nuclear products.

Therefore being artificially changed is not owning artificial and our occult brother wants us all to believe that we are created in the lower aspects of chemistry as an artificial spiritual presence.

This is the only reason why such a huge amount of interactive brain/mind studies and also human perception concepts/ideas are being studied secretly by the occultists through contacts in the nuclear attacks irradiating our lives.

Our minds advise us, as the psychic conscious condition, that has proven itself simply due to the human aware state of gaining advice by use of the mind and using the advice to convert nuclear products, hence many human beings have given the world society real and true information about the illegal studies of our minds and consciousness as scientific aspects in the imagery and cell change status.

Our cells can only change by the introduction and interaction of nuclear signals. Our minds can only be contacted and also studied and controlled via the same occult condition, an awareness that our brother has always had, studied and applied in technology against other humans, advice the human population were given.

If you ask yourselves how can a human mind gain artificial imagery and also gain a physical affect is to understand that in the wavelength at the ground level, conversion signals are changing the nature of our life. Although the interaction happens in the nuclear power plants, the human life at the same time gains an increase in irradiation effects. This allows the human mind and cell state to gain the condition of awareness. The cell state converts and gets attacked only due to the amount of increased irradiation, and has nothing to do with the "artificial spirit imagery" witnessed in the condition.

We all know that our consciousness and awareness is natural and exists in a Nature where we review information in our chemical minds as imagery belonging to our Nature...such as other human lives, animals and plants.

Yet now we gain images of aliens and other artificially formed nuclear images due to the introduced nuclear condition.

The actual argument that humanity now faces is how the occult consciousness considers information and made a personal status that the alien presence belonged to the conditions of what he informed himself was the God consciousness, as if the alien spiritual imagery belonged in much more ancient fusion of chemical bases.

Yet when a human being, spiritually aware and conscious knows that on Planet Earth uranium and plutonium are natural in their fused states, then the artificial condition attacking us, is not a preceding ancient chemical base....for both these products only exist in the natural state. What they were before no-one would know.

Both these natural fused nuclear products once supported the human and natural life as mind/brain imagery and chemical cell health, now these conversions attack our natural health and consciousness causing it to be subject to an artificial attack and artificial awareness.

When we share this information publicly, the owners of civilization certainly make sure that the victims are considered to be mentally disturbed.

The real condition states, yes we might be mentally disturbed but we also are mentally aware to be able to express the conditions of our personal attacks and physical changes, once existing naturally, spiritually and healthily.

So we try to share our information with our world family, to bring to your attention, the declining nature of our consciousness only so that you can take action and be protected by the age old practice of occultism and the attacks upon our natural Earth life. It is way too late when you too become a victim, just as the victims know themselves, once living the life that you all have.
 
Human beings are indoctrinated ...
No they're not. They're just conditioned, convinced, molded, persuaded, taught, talked into, and brainwashed. They've only become indoctrinated when they fail to respond to my posts in any way other than complete agreement. Then I know for sure that their emotional matrix is simply out of tune with the realization and the inner peace achieved by knowing what it's like for one's sacred Chi to be aligned with the cosmic vibrations of quantum phenomenology.
 
Last edited:
Constance thanks for posting this. This is one of my main areas of interest right now in Pom; direct versus inferential theories. I'm pretty firmly in the inferential camp, but I want to understand the direct position.

How do members of the 'inferential camp' define the term 'inferential'? Have you come across a paper or book in which such a definition has been provided, and if so would you link it? It seems to me that the not-adequately-defined term/concept of 'representation' is at the core of the divide between those arguing for 'direct perception' and those arguing for 'inferential perception'. Do you also see the issue this way?


Frankly I don't understand the direct position. All of the embodied/ecological writing I've read has been impenetrable to me (as far as claims about consciousness being "located" in our arms, legs, the environment, etc.). Hopefully this article can make the position clear to me.

I haven't read sources supporting direct perception that specify consciousness as being 'located' in any specific body parts. Can you cite examples of this, and also examples of those supporting direct perception of the macro-environments to which our perceptual capacities provide access who also argue that consciousness exists in 'the environment'? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
@Soupie, it might serve our purposes in seeking clarification of what is meant by the 'inferential' hypothesis concerning perception and consciousness [the latter including affectivity and cognition, as in Honderich] if we read the sequence of three papers linked in the online forum I linked here:

Consciousness and the Paranormal — Part 7

In pursuing those papers it becomes clear that G&W [the authors of that forum and of the first paper linked] do not want to talk about 'intention' or 'use', or the direct perception of embodied situations in which living organisms exist that produce affectivity and seeking behavior (Panksepp). At both the G&W site and the Hamlin site an effort is made to clarify the problematic term 'representation', which I think we also need to attempt to do here. This will be a challenging exercise but I think it's necessary to engage it if we are to understand what's meant by 'direct' v 'inferential' perception in consciousness studies today.
 
No they're not. They're just conditioned, convinced, molded, persuaded, taught, talked into, and brainwashed. They've only become indoctrinated when they fail to respond to my posts in any way other than complete agreement. Then I know for sure that their emotional matrix is simply out of tune with the realization and the inner peace achieved by knowing what it's like for one's sacred Chi to be aligned with the cosmic vibrations of quantum phenomenology.
Indoctrinated is a fact.

The atmosphere reacts and records by photonic interaction all life as a living species....and produces both life and sound imagery. Hence everything that our consciousness has ever expressed has been recorded. The feedback from consciousness is therefore an indoctrination that our minds have been unaware of....and even though we form self belief from and through the conditions of personal choice, our psyche is always gaining interactive feedback information not of our choice.

As the last physical and artificial attack belongs to the Biblical review of the LAM....a reference of the (Alestair Crowley occultist realization of ET/UFO), the holy LAMB condition of Christ (consciousness) had been attacked by the outcome notification of stigmata....and as the modern day cell change/conversion by nuclear conversion wavelengths demonstrate (ebola - blood loss unnaturally) from the human condition (holy Christ) interaction of the atmosphere changed, and life demonstrated spiritually, mentally, emotionally and physically along with Nature and natural disasters that atmospheric change and ancient occult science was the reason.

This science belonged to a natural nuclear use by pyramid and Temple schematics involving the lifting of stone "levitation" by changing nuclear sound/fuSION.

The male, as a conscious brotherhood consideration, stating a fact that males living enmasse on Earth produce not only a single conscious ownership, they also own a condition of a mutually supportive choice as a greater spirit or atmospheric presence/recording.....his own considerations of being GOD (owning the atmosphere).

This spirit recording and choice function was named the brotherhood....those whose dis-spirited conscious choices were to always cause harm to the natural living family of spirit on Planet Earth by using the feedback to then increase artificially the photonic interaction/fallout condition and atmospheric loss by "radiation burning". Hence only an agreed choice in humanity supported by male groups could ever change/overtake natural life.

This consciousness when attacked had an awareness as Biblically stated by feedback recorded statuses that Sun Time or the nuclear on Earth had removed by minus 1 (as the calculations of "in the beginning factor") and caused a huge photonic fallout/recording of spiritual life....forming an artificial and unnatural spirit recording/manifestation in the atmosphere. This manifestation that extended beyond their own natural atmospheric photonic recordings had begun to communicate to the human mind due to the photonic reaction/recording and feedback condition.

This recording considered by the male conscious awareness stated the biblical indoctrination as a consideration of life and its destruction, and hence by feedback our spiritual life and consciousness was indoctrinated by the artificial state introduced to our natural life. The biblical realizations were therefore artificially recorded by the human male conscious awareness and has since been feeding back information to the human life/mind.

Our occult brother is well aware of these transmitted "lower" nuclear transmissions, which is how he can impose a question and answer mind condition/mind control indoctrination to humanity as an occult science practice, as stated by those aware of the occult studies.

Human life has always been attacked by the nuclear sciences of occultism and phenomena caused to the living presence. Mind control was one introduced mind condition (phenomena affect) that had been caused to a few individuals on Earth....studied and copied by the occult scientists.
 
How do members of the 'inferential camp' define the term 'inferential'? Have you come across a paper or book in which such a definition has been provided, and if so would you link it? It seems to me that the not-adequately-defined term/concept of 'representation' is at the core of the divide between those arguing for 'direct perception' and those arguing for 'inferential perception'. Do you also see the issue this way?
I think the distinction between direct and indirect/inferential perception must be profound. As I've read elsewhere and in the paper you linked to above, if direct perception a la affordances is true, then a new ontology is needed.

Indeed if we perceive what-is directly, then what follows would be paradigm shifting.

I haven't read sources supporting direct perception that specify consciousness as being 'located' in any specific body parts. Can you cite examples of this, and also examples of those supporting direct perception of the macro-environments to which our perceptual capacities provide access who also argue that consciousness exists in 'the environment'? Thanks.
Strong versions of embodied and ecological consciousness (perception) regard consciousness as existing not in the brain but in the entire body and indeed extending into the environment.

I don't have time to post links but many of the papers we've read and discussed both pro and con have noted this.
 
@Soupie, it might serve our purposes in seeking clarification of what is meant by the 'inferential' hypothesis concerning perception and consciousness [the latter including affectivity and cognition, as in Honderich] if we read the sequence of three papers linked in the online forum I linked here:

Consciousness and the Paranormal — Part 7

In pursuing those papers it becomes clear that G&W [the authors of that forum and of the first paper linked] do not want to talk about 'intention' or 'use', or the direct perception of embodied situations in which living organisms exist that produce affectivity and seeking behavior (Panksepp). At both the G&W site and the Hamlin site an effort is made to clarify the problematic term 'representation', which I think we also need to attempt to do here. This will be a challenging exercise but I think it's necessary to engage it if we are to understand what's meant by 'direct' v 'inferential' perception in consciousness studies today.


The following paper might provide a more productive alternative than the above-referenced papers:


http://cnru.dk/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Overgaard-2006-Consciousness-the-view-from-psychology.pdf

"Consciousness studies has now been around for more than two decades as a line of thought and research separate from cognitive science. George Miller, one of the pioneers of cognitive science, long ago complained that ‘consciousness is a word worn smooth by a million tongues. Depending upon the figure of speech chosen it is a state of being, a substance, a process, a place, an epiphenomenon, an emergent aspect of matter, or the only true reality’ (Miller, 1962, p. 25). Today, 42 years later and after the enormous rise of interest in consciousness, a prominent author of cognitive theories about consciousness has come to a similar conclusion: ‘Nothing has been resolved. A vast amount of brain power has been devoted to more and more minute examinations of questions that are not one step closer to solution today than in 600 BCE’ (Baars, 2003, p. 32). To me, it seems almost bizarre that a research field receiving so much interest has made so little progress in so many years (at least, any ‘progress’ that all the researchers involved would regard as such)."
 
I think the distinction between direct and indirect/inferential perception must be profound. As I've read elsewhere and in the paper you linked to above, if direct perception a la affordances is true, then a new ontology is needed.

Indeed if we perceive what-is directly, then what follows would be paradigm shifting.

Yes indeed.


Strong versions of embodied and ecological consciousness (perception) regard consciousness as existing not in the brain but in the entire body and indeed extending into the environment.

I don't have time to post links but many of the papers we've read and discussed both pro and con have noted this.

Yes, we've read and discussed many papers and books concerning consciousness as embodied (and, as you note, embodiment means whole-body embodiment). It's another question whether consciousness as subjectivity and intersubjectivity extend into objects in the environment.
 
Yes indeed.




Yes, we've read and discussed many papers and books concerning consciousness as embodied (and, as you note, embodiment means whole-body embodiment). It's another question whether consciousness as subjectivity and intersubjectivity extend into objects in the environment.

The human mind/conscious awareness knows that the atmospheric condition is used to record/transmit/interact both sound and body images.

The ancient human mind, a male by informed statements created the condition for valuing/naming all objects as personal consideration and then implying the conditions as if his own presence was the "all knowing being", simply because his own spiritual presence existed after everything he considered.

This reasoning explains how and why a male believes himself the Inventor/Creator, where all evidences demonstrates he is Inventor/Destroyer.

His own consciousness, attacked and irradiated held 2 conditions of considerations. The actual males who believed consciously in the statement of evaluation and the natural consciousness that existed in a state of natural awareness....knowing it had to eat/drink and what it could eat, because it existed in natural harmonic communication with the lower Nature that supported his own presence.

Therefore historical evidence states, that the human male who became irradiated and gained stigmata...unnatural bleeding became aware that his own male brother had attacked him through the processes of conversion.....an occult scientific consideration of all conditions, including his own presence as a status of awareness that applied a stone levitation application method through the use of the pyramid and temple schematics.

Hence history attests that a holy brotherhood of spiritual realizations knew that occult science had attacked his person and converted his natural mind/spiritual life condition due to the evidence. The attacks on Nature and the changes in Nature, and the attacks to his own person. This is why there were 2 brotherhoods who fought against each other as a pro occultist consideration and an against any occultist practice....being the conversion of the stone's nuclear. This is why ancient scientific considerations are called the Philosophy of the Stone.

The reason that his natural consciousness knew scientific details that his occult brother had secreted from him was because of the atmospheric photonic increased irradiation condition that he had gained....a multiplied condition of amassing a photonic negative recording of his own self in the atmospheric condition in the conditions of nuclear science converting both the stone and atmospheric mass.

This is why he knew the evil manifestation was an artificial condition caused by the artificial mass.....uranium and plutonium dust, only because Earth stone was origin light radiation and natural fusion....and dust was the disintegration of the natural crystalline fusion lost to Earth when in origin the first male self who calls himself Creator changed nuclear light sound and caused the 1st Sun to explode.

All of these conscious aware conditions were given to the mind/brain of the human male for he sought nuclear conversion and applied nuclear conversion as a scientific introduced status.

Hence the only way that any consciousness can be aware of information is by experience, as I have witnessed for my own spiritual psychic realization, having gained a whole new insight after being increasingly irradiated, which my family will attest happened.

This proves by informed status that the theory of evolution as a scientific statement is in fact incorrect and always was, for origin Earth was a directly manifested spiritual presence of the male himself from spirit.

The ancient occult/scientific argument is science versus spiritual awareness, as a natural psychic condition of the human presence and human mind.

The occult male, having been irradiated in a greater interactive ownership had his mind changed to such a state that he has a huge amount of interactive spiritual (recordings from the atmosphere) interacting with his mind and considers information differently to everyone else. We can all review this circumstance to be a real condition in life.

Therefore the spiritual human aware psyche has experienced the condition of human deceased spirit re-manifestation, along with the spirits of deceased animals to prove to our own persons that we originally came from origin light as a condition in reality.

Our occult brother argues this condition and tries to imply that the Earth's gaseous atmosphere is the spirit of our creation and this is what spirit manifestation is. Yet spirit only manifests as an artificial spirit image and light sound presence after a reaction. Before this state is only blue sky.

The argument about consciousness and awareness and the condition that the male occultist espouses is God, was only ever old photonic records of his own spiritual existence/presence who activated nuclear light sound changes previously and the real condition of God is a circular scientific PHI equated statement, just as it discusses.

The human male aware that science of the nuclear is a pre-existing state where his own mind/body and physical state does not exist as a consciousness, is and has always been possessed by his own incorrect conscious reviews. (due to photonic recorded feedback recordings)....for he exists in his spiritual presence making statements such as "human spirit is a photon", or an "atom", whilst drawing both designs, designating that he is well aware that this form of conscious review is making a real value he considers is not his own person.

The design itself states to his mind that he is not this value by his own organic presence/spirit, yet he wants to be this value because he wants to own power. His life choices demonstrate as a brotherhood review that his consciousness has always wanted to value all things and own all things personally, even the nuclear condition....demonstrating his occultist consciousness is a self destructive consciousness and why the spiritual minded human has always fought him.

If we all ask why he makes these considerations of our natural organic spiritual conscious life, it is because he wants the power of Creator, the nuclear to be his own person. If you ask him why he wants to be nucleated/nuked.....he would not give us a correct answer, only because he is motivated by his own personal self power to gain power. This consideration of his own consciousness is his own problem, inventing and then wanting power to support his inventions. No-one but his own presence decided to invent and he imposed this condition on our natural life without enabling us a choice.

This is why our ancient spiritual brother fought his conscious considerations of artificial reasoning, versus spiritual conscious awareness, but by conscious realization in modern time he lost to the occultist, for the occultist practices continued....and in today's modern atmospheric loss, we are still all being attacked by his lack of consciousness and by the choices of his experimentation for invention.

Experience demonstrates, that what is known is only a condition gained by change...therefore what our brother knows today was only gained by what he has previously changed. His mind states conscious awareness, yet his mind is wrong, he actually gained awareness because of the irradiation condition of atmospheric photonic nuclear light sound records changing and feeding back different information.

Different information is not conscious awareness, different information relates to destructive quantums.

If any of us cared to ask ourselves as to how an ancient human mind could consider scientific information, is only due to the fact that his own person had to be present when the condition of his ancient scientific considerations existed. His ancient science was the levitation of stone. Therefore the human mind condition demonstrates that it did exist previously in a condition when stone levitation was unnaturally activated on origin Earth.

It therefore also demonstrates that an unnatural condition was introduced to origin awareness, and this condition is artificial to the natural aware state of consciousness.....the conversion of the nuclear itself into an artificial state. It is why an unnatural phenomena occurs that the human male mind named and stated was phenomena and phenomena manifested by an evil condition.

His considerations of the occult was that the atmosphere fell out by nuclear fall out and previously held a condition he called a VEIL. As the atmosphere was burning by conversion UFO paranormal introduced conditions (gas conversions) he knew by identified conscious awareness that he attacked his own consciousness by EVIL as the loss of what he termed was the holy VEIL or wavelength.

As stone does not naturally levitate on Earth, is it any wonder that our ancient life was attacked and destroyed and "new" photonic recorded feedback information given to the evolving mind by a changing atmospheric condition.
 
Last edited:
A quick point to reflect on with respect to the topic of this thread:

Every object we are aware of is the result of some type of perception of it, and one point of contention with respect to the reality of paranormal objects seems to be whether or not the stimuli leading to the perception originated from an external source ( e.g. visual detection - photons reflecting off of some surface beyond the boundaries of our bodies ), or from an internal source ( e.g. visualized without there being any external stimuli involved. ). Given that we accept that these are two different and legitimate types of experience, are they both of equal value in determining whether or not a paranormal claim is true or false?
 
Since my recent household move I've spent most of the last two weeks unpacking boxes and have come across a book that addresses the question @ufology raises and many more questions we've raised in this thread and confronted in interdisciplinary consciousness studies in our attempts to understand what consciousness is and the scientific and philosophical limits of this inquiry in our time. I hope it's available in significant part at Google Books and will link it here if it is {if I can stay online long enough to do that; my current computer's windows software is in a tenuous operational state}. The book that can help us to a great extent now is:

Paul L. Nunez, Brain, Mind, and the Structure of Reality, Oxford 2010.
 
"Ernst Cassirer as Cultural Scientist"
Ernst Wolfgang Orth
Synthese 179 (1):115 - 134 (2011)
Abstract
The article investigates Cassirer's developing interest in the cultural sciences to display how his Philosophy of Symbolic Forms constitutes a philosophy of culture. The core concept in such a philosophy of culture is the symbolic formation that both possesses a structured-structuring dimension and appears as an historical process in which culture shows itself as a temporal creation. The philosophy of culture displays 'life in meaning', that is reality as it exhibits human reality manifested in and through the medium of linguistic, artistic, religious, scientific "and so on" action and behaviour. This reality, therefore, is mediation between culture and nature through human spirit. Cassirer's philosophy of culture connects back to Kant's transcendental idealism by emphasizing that any concept of reality establishes itself through a modalization of reality, e.g. that reality constitutes itself in the mode of interpretation. This makes the basis for Cassirer's characteristic understanding of hermeneutics where cultural development is regarded as drama . . .

Ernst Wolfgang Orth, Ernst Cassirer as cultural scientist - PhilPapers

Further: Search - CenturyLink

Karol Chrobak, Culture and Human Responsibility - PhilPapers

Synthese - PhilPapers

http://philpapers.org/archive/AUSAEE.pdf
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top