Ashok
@_beyondwithin_
PhD candidate in philosophy at UWA. Post-traditional yogi & meditator (since 1995).
You might like
Repost. Major milestone achieved: because it's my *first* peer reviewed journal publication, wading into a debate on comparisons between mindfulness & phenomenology. I turn to Gendlin's work on implicit understanding & traditional notions of prajñā. contemplativejournal.org/article/azah71…
The 'binding problem' asks the wrong question from the outset. It's not how a brain—itself only ever a bunch of parts on this view—ties disparate properties into an experiential unity. It's how the primordial whole of experiencing splinters into a universe of discrete objects.
It's always a safe move for modern minds, even those disposed to spiritual practice, to reduce and explain.
Human beings don’t begin spiritual practice because they love truth. They begin because they’re promised relief. This is why every tradition starts with miracles. Babies need milk, not meat. The psyche, early on, cannot digest reality as it is. It needs sweetness, reward, and…
The Free Energy Principle is all map and no terrain. An infinite regress of Markov blankets.
"Many people do find the vast intricacy of experience and they know that it does not all derive from imposed forms. But then they think of it in just one way, and stop. We need a way to think further with and from it." Eugene Gendlin — 'Thinking Beyond Patterns'
Predictive Processing: always thought it absurd. Post deep dive for PhD, it's even more absurd than I thought. Why are philosophers & cog sci folks so taken by this just-so story? Fancy believing the visual cortex believes in coffee cups.
Consciousness is not the result of computation inside the skull.
It's clear that Dennett didn't read Ryle's 'The Concept of Mind' closely enough. Or he wouldn't have misunderstood the 'ghost in the machine' argument so badly.
It's not possible perception of a situation is constructed from separated sensations. Behavioural actions are not first only motions between location-points in empty space. Yet it's assumed from the start in most philosophy & science (esp. cognition).
In the old model, 'order' limits and determines what can happen. But no abstract set of possibilities *determines* what can happen. Occurring (what actually happens) doesn't fill out some abstract order. If that were truly the case, nothing could ever actually happen.
"We need to think about the fact that our scientific formulations change every few years. Neither the last set nor the next set of “determinants” can possibly be what actually determines nature." — Gendlin
The body is usually considered the stuff within the skin-envelope. But we are not assuming that the spatial distinctions in the spectator’s space are the basic conditions of reality. We can use them, but within interactional terms that are wider. — Gendlin
United States Trends
- 1. Indiana 160 B posts
- 2. Indiana 160 B posts
- 3. Mendoza 52,8 B posts
- 4. Giannis 12,4 B posts
- 5. Jabari 3.655 posts
- 6. Cignetti 26,4 B posts
- 7. 2019 LSU 4.109 posts
- 8. Dante Moore 17,8 B posts
- 9. Dan Lanning 9.035 posts
- 10. #TheLastDriveIn 3.794 posts
- 11. #iufb 7.999 posts
- 12. Hamas 136 B posts
- 13. #PeachBowl 5.768 posts
- 14. #NeverDaunted 5.668 posts
- 15. #DontGoInTheWoods N/A
- 16. Ayton 3.096 posts
- 17. Stein 8.395 posts
- 18. Konvy 4.422 posts
- 19. Blazers 3.730 posts
- 20. Usury 9.363 posts
You might like
-
jazz bard
@jazz_bard -
Jane
@joespurpleshirt -
Captain Blondy
@captainblondy -
☯️ MOON FIRE 🌖🔥
@chercher_ai -
Fractal Authenticity 30/1000 cranes
@FractalAuth -
🎃 Mark 👻 🟡⚪️🟣⚫️
@meditationstuff -
Dan
@eleventhturning -
sam
@SamRMickey -
made of clay
@samvega_pasada -
cup head
@smiling_for_fun -
Wystan
@WystanTBS -
Adam Elwood
@AdamCElwood -
Sunny Yun He
@SunnyYunHe -
David Lassiter
@SkilfulMeanz -
DeadMenDon'tTweet
@PoemsWeBurned
Something went wrong.
Something went wrong.