Cycles of Consciousness
Dzedka wrote: Well, more Platypus than Dutch but you know what I mean. Not at all surprised we're all confused, we're literally talking about the incomprehensible. Who is a master of that?
Well I would call you a master of the incomprehensible to be sure. Are you saying that the platypus is some sort of interdenominational creature that spans the depth of human consciousness and beyond? It seems that zoologists have really missed the mark here as they failed to see this in this otherwise corporeal creature. I realize that the species is the only living representative of its family so it is a strange enigma but how did you discover its interdenominational nature? I think what Gist is asking is what is this nature beyond our detection and comprehension and how have you come to arrive at a definition of it without the means to study or test it? Do you interface with this platypus in some form?
Dzedka wrote: I did my Lesson 1 - Part 1 today, cycles came up a bit, quick thought on that. I was exploring this dimension map I was considering, I wanted to share my explorations, see if anyone has any thoughts.
--Too abstract to conceive
--Too abstract to conceive
I was thinking about dimensions in a 2-dimensional plane - connecting point A (low) to point B (high), but what if it wasn't a spectrum? What if it's a cycle? Now we're on a 3-dimensional plane, it looks completely different. Instead of moving up and down, you can travel completely different ways. It's the CIRRRCLE of liiiiiife. It's the wheeeel of - okay, sorry.
I came to this conclusion when I saw I had put "YAAAWN" at the second to bottom, sarcastically as a double reference to the brain shutting off when you lose consciousness and how boring it would be to be below focus. So sleeping is very obviously and scientifically proven to be a direct conduit to the unconscious mind, the dream world. So I think meditation can bring you there, we've proven that too. And we can go up and get lost in our imagination. That gap, the unconscious mind, is on both sides. So why the hell would the sides not be the same thing? A continuum, a cycle. But in 3-dimensions, it would be more like a pulse. A shockwave, a nova. The next dimension would be time, duration of the wave, qualities of the pulse. Like music. So maybe if we get our consciousness to circumvent or warp time, thinking in space, we could pop in and out of any state of consciousness we wanted if we knew the way. Like sensation association triggering memory, bringing you through time to an alternate reality experience. Maybe if you know 100% certainly that you can bring yourself there, you can be there instantaneously. You could associate the sensation of altered consciousness to anything, a smell would likely be the most effective.
That's all fine and dandy, but the real question is... what happens if you cycle through the other way? Oh god, that's the Dark Side, isn't it? God dammit. So that's Vader's story? Going too deep and getting lost, but coming back around the other side into balance with a little help from his friends?
Connecting a lot of dots here, interested to know what other peoples' thoughts are on this, it's a bit overwhelming and I don't get to really talk to anyone about this stuff. Let me know if there's a better place for this stuff, it's just been pouring out of me lately.
So I want to try and break down what you said here to the least common denominator. It appears you may have taken notes on your thought cycle. Saying they are different dimensions is a stretch it is recognition of other perspectives.
The time you took you mapped out a general learning process, noting your exact thought process of the lesson? Now, at parts it seems like you built your explanation of this in a similar pattern to what you mapped out. So, either way you can look at how you did this and find something that makes it more efficient and productive...."growthy" Now from there if you take notice of one of these points on the "thought map" can you eliminate one that allows you to see more clearly where time is not used as effectively in process? Random-ness is fun for me I like explaining some things whackly, and the way Gist hates However, sometimes it can be a little too much though and coherency of message is lost to thoughts well outside the realm of obscure to blatantly losing the message to both the writer and the audience.
So, really I am just going to say hey, good thought map, that's what I see that as, probably doesn't make sense to many besides myself but. Here you noticed a bunch of variables you may not have before. If I am reading all this right, I would advise humbly that you not focus so much on the definition or wandering to far into the definitions of the variables that you can't or won't define because you cannot change that. In that idea, if you learned something from this section of the IP then look at it the way you will, watch for obscurity though it can be very distracting to yourself. I know it's what I do honestly, it's fun. Just don't lose the message to the obscurity in which you see it or are trying to explain it.
In the end most things are cycles, learning being quietly literally the most natural one in all living things. Everything alive has to learn to live at least to some extent. The definitions of conciseness is a whole other can of worms.
I am curious if that's kind of what you were getting at and the course of the discussion.
Much Love, Respect and Peace,
Fighting what you cannot see, will only lead you to lash out with violence towards everyone. Know your enemy, and you may find yourself a friend.
You can act real rude and totally removed
And I can act like an imbecile- Men without hats
Training Masters: Carlos.Martinez3 and JLSpinner
Kobos wrote: So, really I am just going to say hey, good thought map, that's what I see that as, probably doesn't make sense to many besides myself but.
Nailed it. 100%. For me, they're more mind-puzzles because it goes out of order sometimes when I'm exploring multiple angles at once, but same concept.
It is so relieving to have that noticed, thank you. This was like day 1 or 2 of my first part of the IP, I was eager to discuss it as I was learning. I have learned immensely more than I ever would have alone and I'm very eager to keep learning more. That's what I got the most out of this discussion. I am literally trying to define the undefinable. It's already defined. It's called the undefinable. I realized I was using the code image of Platypus as a mini-myth representing the outer rim of conscious thought. The cycle thing was the main focus, it was where my head was most at, this concept of cycles of Hero Journeys, hard-resets on journeys, "spiritually respawning", etc. This came back up in my Part 4 tonight, cycles and oscillations are a bit of an obsession of mine and I go deeeep in the abstraction.