Imaging and imagination in regard to whom we assume we are versus what we are bears evidence of what I have come to realize, that we imagine that we are conscious, which is more of a game than it is a text. Going further afield than most, in the past I noted the correlations between surrealism, anomalous experiential realms and the traps of referential language.
“Is," "is," "is"—the idiocy of the word haunts me. If it were abolished, human thought might begin to make sense. I don't know what anything "is"; I only know how it seems to me at this moment.”
― Robert Anton Wilson
“The imaginary is what tends to become real.”
― André Breton
I recently commented at another blog on the subject of Roswell..I said:
"Whether one believes in labels as a Ufologist or a Fortean or a Skeptic, they all share a game that seeks causation, a linear, explanatory narrative of rationality upon the presumed threat of a blank page or two. You can count the agnostics with one hand. One could say in the stubbornness of a blank page, all realities are naive ones. Each little community has a certain provincial charm to them decorated with the minutia of their choosing as wallpaper. "
In hindsight, I appear to be in the same territory as the father of surrealism, Andre Breton, while not recognizing this at the moment I wrote that passage.
“A game: say something. Close your eyes and say something. Anything, a number, a name. Like this (she closes her eyes): Two, two what? Two women. What do they look like? Wearing black. Where are they? In a park. . . . And then, what are they doing? Try it, it's so easy, why don't you want to play? You know, that's how I talk to myself when I'm alone, I tell myself all kinds of stories. And not only silly stories: actually, I live this way altogether.”
― André Breton, Nadja
Returning to my comment, I seemingly went deeper into this territory..
The demarcation between the dreams of sleep and the dreams of our waking hours are based upon a biological behaviorism that is observable such as immobility versus mobility and the physicality of tasking this or that reaction to circumstances which is defined as consciousness. Let loose from being enmeshed in these stimuli in the alleged state of wakefulness, we enter a self organizing tasking without the physicality of mobility, where the same associations are played out as a narrative that mimics a linear narrative while the question is posed,
n the province of the mind, what one believes to be true is true or becomes true, within certain limits to be found experientially and experimentally. These limits are further beliefs to be transcended. In the mind, there are no limits... In the province of connected minds, what the network believes to be true, either is true or becomes true within certain limits to be found experientially and experimentally. These limits are further beliefs to be transcended. In the network's mind there are no limits.
-John C Lilly The Human Biocomputer (1974)
Gurdjieff would parallel this view by saying our personality is made up of a false personality, which is concerned with our ego (pride, vanity, self-conceit, imaginations and day-dreams about ourselves, etc.), and personality proper, which is developed through education, vocation, training and study of all kinds, and which enables us to earn our living. Our ordinary, illusionary or imaginary self is a collection of "I's", and when ruled by it our mood changes according to which "I" has been stimulated (we sometimes recognize this in others, but rarely in ourselves). In contrast, our fundamental self is consistent and is ruled from within by consciousness.
One could say what we imagine ourselves to be has few limits outside of being human. From Adolph Hitler to the schizophrenic to the grocer, the baker and the candlestick maker. From Breton to Nixon.
The universe may mirror this same relationship as in what is more encompassing is reflected in a constituent process in the human being. The lack of a conclusive definition of either one leads to suggestibility in terms of a semi hypnotic state. The universe suggests this and we suggest that and in between lies the anomalous of hybrid experiential relations as if a conversation were taking place of which we are unaware and yet we are exposed to by it's effects.
The impossible becomes a defining characteristic through the anomalous and yet imaging and imagination remain hidden behind the seeming stability of our waking dreams. This street sign is there just where we left it yesterday and yet there is the juxtaposition of the unpredictability of human nature which may reflect the same hidden in the pantomimes of the universe imaging what it may be.
While the sidewalk remains in place , we do not necessarily are required to walk upon it. We might chose to walk on the grass. The same may apply to the universe. What this brings to mind is a lack of mechanical activity, a freedom of self organisation whose basis is oddly enough the stability of energy in various states of storage as a stage to be walked upon as a vehicle.
We have sidewalks and stop signs in our imagination through memory as a false dichotomy that becomes a defining principle of reality. We imagine we are conscious. Thou art That does not apply in the metaphor of mirrors. Yes, the image represents what was placed in the range and reflected back as a reciprocal process but it lacks a certain dimensional quality that corresponds to physicality.
Call it a trick of the light. What is between the face and what was reflected?
This morning I was watching a sparrow drink from a depression in my driveway and correspondingly I say "sparrow" as a reference, a symbol that stands for something else entirely that is unknown and while science can define relationships, and the ties that animate mechanisms, behaviorism, there remains for me a profound puzzle that accepts these probes by divisors and yet what remains is lodged between Taoism and pantheism, placeholders that suggest to me there are parallel mirrors of meaning derived from what appears from the surface of these matters. Unfortunately for me it seems I cannot surrender into acceptance of this or that as a conclusive framework or conglomeration much like a Stoic.
Every reality is a naive reality.
One could say that those that imagine they are abducted by aliens are referring to alienation in of itself as a visionary experience. The loss of the freedom to remain or go where one chooses. The humanoid faces that lack defining individuated characteristics that also lack eyes as a representation of a society whose directing organisation is aggregate. The aseptic environs of a technocratic process driven by a religion of science.
Do as I say.
“Anyone in the United States today who isn't paranoid must be crazy.”
― Robert Anton Wilson, The Illuminati Papers
Abducted? Perhaps all of us have been in our sleep by way of our environment and the result are improvisational by nature down to necessity, glued to a backdrop. Behind the props and the flats and scrims we have decorated the stage with, we walk along seeing these examples of physic architecture as tools, as surely as if they were hammers, saws and nails. Reflections without physicality that direct us to turn left or right or compel us to imagine what we may be.