On May 27, 5:45 pm, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > On 5/27/2012 2:04 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: > > > > > This does seem to imply an interesting situation where the > > mind/consciousness of the > > observer is in a sense no longer confined to being 'inside the skull" but > > ranging out to > > the farthest place where something is percieved. It seems to me that imply > > a mapping > > between a large hyper-volume (the out there) and the small volume of the > > brain that > > cannot be in a one-to-one form. > > The skull, the brain, and 'out there' are all just parts of the world model > your brain > constructs.
A model is a presentation which we use to refer to another presentation. To say that the brain constructs models relies on the possibility of a model which has no presentation to begin with. It means that our every experience, including your sitting in that chair reading these words, is made of 'representation-ness', which stands in for the Homunculus to perform this invisible and logically redundant alchemical transformation from perfectly useful neurological signals into some weird orgy of improbable identities. It doesn't hold up. It is a de-presentation of the world in order to justify our failure to locate consciousness inside the tissue of the brain. Consciousness isn't 'in' anything, and it's not produced by anything. It's a story which produces brains, bodies, planets, etc. They are parts of consciousness that are modeled as the world. They are representations made of condensed, externalized, temporally imploded presentations of sense. Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.