Thursday, February 5, 2015

Image, Suggestion and Imagination

Many an experiential account where things go bump in the night has been theorised to be a state of physiology that is termed Hypnagogia which is the experience of the transitional state from wakefulness to sleep: the hypnagogic state of consciousness, during the onset of sleep. In opposition,hypnopompia denotes the onset of wakefulness. The related words from the Greek are agōgos "leading", "inducing", pompe "act of sending", and hypnos "sleep".
Mental phenomena that occur during this "threshold consciousness" phase include lucid dreaming, hallucinations, and sleep paralysis. I am somewhat convinced that this waking consciousness is mislabelled as  being separated by an artifice that denys we may be in the same state “fully awake” as we have defined such a state where we go grocery shopping.

If we had no exterior referents in relationship to our spacial orientation, what would be our state? Thought as derived from language would be non existent in a subject that concerns linkages between what we consider to be normative psychology versus anomalous experiential realities..
Thoughts and experiences are  transparent in a semantic sense in that their meanings seem immediately known to us in the very act of thinking them.  In that sense we might said to ‘think right through’ them to what they mean or represent. Transparency in this semantic sense may correspond at least partly with what John Searle calls the “intrinsic intentionality” of consciousness  Answers before any question is posed. Linearity as in a sentence opposed to a discontinuity that requires continual analysis and extended verifications.  As a result I  ask if  this an intrinsic state of hypnosis wherein we suggest what we may be to ourselves as the environment suggests to us? In the midst of this we have shared communication systems that reinforce predictive suggestions by repetition. In contrast Robert Anton Wilson suggested that existence is larger than any model that is not itself the exact size of existence (which has no size...)
We transparently “look through” our sensory experience in so far as we seem directly aware of external objects and events present to us rather than being aware of any properties of experience by which it presents or represents such objects to us.
When I look out at the wind-blown meadow, it is the undulating green grass of which I am aware not of any green property of my visual experience. Further we only see the outline of representations as the image collaborates with the extrapolations of the imagination as a coordinated nexus of what is a delimited spacial relationship. Our integration of sidereal time appears to affirm this as an adaptation rather than what lurks below the surfaces of appearance which is discontinuous to thought.. If we compare anomalous experiential accounts to this erstwhile cartography they are antithetical to these architectural linkages as they are anti-structural by nature in opposition to predictive interpretation. In terms of our own nature it may be bias is the grounding of deception as a lawful enterprise by consensus in a feedback loop.

“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”
― Adolf Hitler

Our states have their meanings intrinsically or from the inside just by being what they are in themselves, by contrast with many externalist theories of mental content that ground meaning in causal, counterfactual or informational relations between bearers of intentionality and their semantic or referential objects, whereas yet both seem needed as being operative to derive an observer that is a two way mirroring process that creates a third orientation as an imagined intermediary  which creates or programs future feedback which is in the present simply by way of our self generated encyclopedia of programmed references. otherwise it would seem we have a solipsism where the external universe does not exist. But then again if external causation were removed thought would not be required as a adaptation.
And so it goes...perhaps we suggest as we are suggested to. As internally as externally and so, what is anomalous to us may be normative whereas we are the paranormal in opposition to the constituency of nature.
By the extension of this postulate how would we appear by way of our behaviorism induced by this suggestibility to a theoretical extraterrestrial armed as it were with an advanced cognizance?


  1. It appears that the model is robust in some ways, suggesting an underlying "reality" outside of our senses. The Scientific Method is based on this, although I would say that most scientists would claim that the instruments "prove" reality is the same as their repeatable experiments indicate. Perhaps that is solopsism as well!

  2. Greg
    In my book that's a strong possibility and a point well taken.