Meaning and Perception

[Dontaskme]

The world as it is known is not as it appears.

In itself, the world is known to be fixed in size with all fixed objects having defined shapes and location relative to each other.

The world as it is perceived is not like this.

Objects perceived to be 'in the distance' are small and every object appears to move relative to other objects as the viewpoint changes, changing size and shape in the process.

That which changes cannot be like that which does not change.

Yet that which does not change gives meaning to the changing shapes.

A car seen from the rear looks nothing like the same car seen side on, yet it is seen to be the same car.

This is possible only because the whole car is known. This 'knowing' is associated with both 'views', giving meaning to them. In one case, it is named the 'back view', in the other it is named the 'side view'.

In itself, the car is not like either view, it is an object that cannot be visualised or experienced 'all at once'. Whatever is visualised or seen is a 2-D projection, not the object as it is 'in itself'. What is true of the 'car' is true of all objects, including all 'people'... including 'me'... (every me) .

The world and all objects are thought of as 'extending in time and space'. They do not. As a dream they have no reality. They exist in no place and no time.

All objects 'exist' only as conceptions within the knowing which is one with Consciousness.

'What' is the nature of 'Knowing'... no idea

Knowing is the source of ideas/knowing/meaning/conception... which are not like 'human thoughts' (which are mere commentary or imaginings). These 'conceptions' are the 'thing itself'... on every 'level' from 'micro' to 'macro' and everything in between, including all 'inter-relations' with every other object... all things as one.

The Knowing knows all that is to be known. When it comes to 'concepts', there are none it does not know.

Yet, it cannot be conceived of, for it is the source of conception.

As the Unknowable, Knowing is known.

Author unknown knowing.

.

[SteveKlinko]

The world as it is known is not as it appears.

In itself, the world is known to be fixed in size with all fixed objects having defined shapes and location relative to each other.

The world as it is perceived is not like this.

Objects perceived to be 'in the distance' are small and every object appears to move relative to other objects as the viewpoint changes, changing size and shape in the process.

That which changes cannot be like that which does not change.

Yet that which does not change gives meaning to the changing shapes.

A car seen from the rear looks nothing like the same car seen side on, yet it is seen to be the same car.

This is possible only because the whole car is known. This 'knowing' is associated with both 'views', giving meaning to them. In one case, it is named the 'back view', in the other it is named the 'side view'.

In itself, the car is not like either view, it is an object that cannot be visualised or experienced 'all at once'. Whatever is visualised or seen is a 2-D projection, not the object as it is 'in itself'. What is true of the 'car' is true of all objects, including all 'people'... including 'me'... (every me) .

The world and all objects are thought of as 'extending in time and space'. They do not. As a dream they have no reality. They exist in no place and no time.

All objects 'exist' only as conceptions within the knowing which is one with Consciousness.

'What' is the nature of 'Knowing'... no idea

Knowing is the source of ideas/knowing/meaning/conception... which are not like 'human thoughts' (which are mere commentary or imaginings). These 'conceptions' are the 'thing itself'... on every 'level' from 'micro' to 'macro' and everything in between, including all 'inter-relations' with every other object... all things as one.

The Knowing knows all that is to be known. When it comes to 'concepts', there are none it does not know.

Yet, it cannot be conceived of, for it is the source of conception.

As the Unknowable, Knowing is known.

Author unknown knowing.

.

I don't understand what you mean when you say that Objects don't really exist and that Objects are only Concepts. Do you believe that the Universe is a big Virtual Reality Simulation?

[Dontaskme]

I don't understand what you mean when you say that Objects don't really exist and that Objects are only Concepts. Do you believe that the Universe is a big Virtual Reality Simulation?

An object is a concept known. It is not known who or what knows a concept - and yet knowing is apparent as a concept is known.

A concept known is not the knower, for example: the concept ''human'' is not the knower, ''human'' is a concept known, known by the knower that cannot be known. Ulitmately, you are that KNOWING.... As the knower of a concept, you cannot experience yourself as the concept you know...but without the concept known, you have no concept of anything at all...You are just a blank slate of pure not-knowing AWARENESS...aka LIGHT

Awareness is the fundamental and primary constant unchanging boundless unknown unborn stateless state.

Note that concepts known become the knowledge of reality....of what was previously unaware... means the whole existential conceptual world of things and objects is an illusionary projection of consciousness...like a holographic image being projected from a light beam. The light is not dependant on the image it projects......but the image is wholly dependant on the light to be...for any image to be, it's totally dependant on a projecter, and that projected image is only ever sourced within the projector itself from within itself... because there is only LIGHT..so the world of apparent other things and objects aka concepts KNOWN... are nought but THE LIGHT herenow ..and so there is no objective world out-there apart from light HERENOW that is everywhere at once one without a second.

And so for the holographic image of the known aka knowledge...as it appears in the light of consciousness the only knower there is... there has to be this imageless blank screen already available so the contrast is made known as seen upon the conscious knowing screen of blank non-conceptual awareness..which cannot be conceptually known, because it's the only knowing/knower there is... in other words the knower is not a known concept, and yet all known concepts are known to IT

So insofar as what I've just said, then yes, reality is a virtual reality simlulation. How this is apparently known? is the only question..so the only answer available would be ...'' I DON'T KNOW '' ... How would this no-thing know this?
There is knowing..."It" can "know" nothing...It is not I that asks the question, there is only the question.


The question contains the answer..and together they cease to exist.

Do you understand this thus so far?


.

[SteveKlinko]

I don't understand what you mean when you say that Objects don't really exist and that Objects are only Concepts. Do you believe that the Universe is a big Virtual Reality Simulation?

An object is a concept known. It is not known who or what knows a concept - and yet knowing is apparent as a concept is known.

A concept known is not the knower, for example: the concept ''human'' is not the knower, ''human'' is a concept known, known by the knower that cannot be known. Ulitmately, you are that KNOWING.... As the knower of a concept, you cannot experience yourself as the concept you know...but without the concept known, you have no concept of anything at all...You are just a blank slate of pure not-knowing AWARENESS...aka LIGHT

Awareness is the fundamental and primary constant unchanging boundless unknown unborn stateless state.

Note that concepts known become the knowledge of reality....of what was previously unaware... means the whole existential conceptual world of things and objects is an illusionary projection of consciousness...like a holographic image being projected from a light beam. The light is not dependant on the image it projects......but the image is wholly dependant on the light to be...for any image to be, it's totally dependant on a projecter, and that projected image is only ever sourced within the projector itself from within itself... because there is only LIGHT..so the world of apparent other things and objects aka concepts KNOWN... are nought but THE LIGHT herenow ..and so there is no objective world out-there apart from light HERENOW that is everywhere at once one without a second.

And so for the holographic image of the known aka knowledge...as it appears in the light of consciousness the only knower there is... there has to be this imageless blank screen already available so the contrast is made known as seen upon the conscious knowing screen of blank non-conceptual awareness..which cannot be conceptually known, because it's the only knowing/knower there is... in other words the knower is not a known concept, and yet all known concepts are known to IT

So insofar as what I've just said, then yes, reality is a virtual reality simlulation. How this is apparently known? is the only question..so the only answer available would be ...'' I DON'T KNOW '' ... How would this no-thing know this?
There is knowing..."It" can "know" nothing...It is not I that asks the question, there is only the question.


The question contains the answer..and together they cease to exist.

Do you understand this thus so far?


.

When you say "I DON'T KNOW" you are exposing an Explanatory Gap that lurks in your Philosophy. But you are also saying that you believe you can't Know. I suppose saying you can't Know eliminates the Explanatory Gap for you. But you raise a new Gap because you can't just say that you can't know without Explaining How it is that you can't know. I don't think that anything is Unknowable. So ... I don't think I understand. But it all probably goes back to the Oneness thing which I'm still working on.

[Dontaskme]

When you say "I DON'T KNOW" you are exposing an Explanatory Gap that lurks in your Philosophy. But you are also saying that you believe you can't Know. I suppose saying you can't Know eliminates the Explanatory Gap for you. But you raise a new Gap because you can't just say that you can't know without Explaining How it is that you can't know. I don't think that anything is Unknowable. So ... I don't think I understand. But it all probably goes back to the Oneness thing which I'm still working on.

There's no gap ..one can only know what they know in the instant it is known one with the knowing, and that instant of knowing is only ever NOW

No thing is causing now to happen. So who is going to explain how happening is happening? ...you'd have to be outside of the happening to observe it happening...CAN the observer be outside of observing?....isn't reality going live right now in realtime..and not in some memory past or projection of some future event?

Once something is known it then becomes history, it's in the past, it's in a memory which is only ever recalled NOW.

There is no knowledge of any future event either because the future never comes, the future and past are only ever occuring in the eternal NOW...the NOW that never moves..that NOW is conscious knowing one with itself.

There is no gap...between the knower and the known except in this conception inconceivable even to itself.

.

[surreptitious57]

The world as it is known is not as it appears

Our perception of reality is very limited indeed as most of what actually exists is way beyond human sense capability
Reality at its most fundamental level is quantum but we cannot sense that world at all even though we know it exists

We and everything else that is matter are composed of atoms and sub atomic particles but we cannot see them
Solidity is actually an illusion because most of solid matter is empty space but we cannot see this

Most of the electromagnetic spectrum [ over 99 per cent ] cannot be seen by the human eye at all
The reality we can see may be all we need to see but it is a very tiny part of the reality that exists

[Age]

The world as it is known is not as it appears

Our perception of reality is very limited indeed as most of what actually exists is way beyond human sense capability
Reality at its most fundamental level is quantum but we cannot sense that world at all even though we know it exists

We and everything else that is matter are composed of atoms and sub atomic particles but we cannot see them
Solidity is actually an illusion because most of solid matter is empty space but we cannot see this

Most of the electromagnetic spectrum [ over 99 per cent ] cannot be seen by the human eye at all
The reality we can see may be all we need to see but it is a very tiny part of the reality that exists

But we do not need to see with the physical eyes at all, to be able to see [understand] all of what is called 'reality'.

[surreptitious57]

But we do not need to see with the physical eyes at all to be able to see [ understand ] all of what is called reality

We can use our minds to understand what we cannot see but there will always be gaps in our knowledge
While we can acquire greater knowledge and understanding over time we will never attain omniscience

[Age]

But we do not need to see with the physical eyes at all to be able to see [ understand ] all of what is called reality

We can use our minds to understand what we cannot see but there will always be gaps in our knowledge

To me, there is no "our minds". There is only one Mind, and what you can not see visibly is of no real importance in understanding and knowledge, as you well already know.

What can not be seen with the physical seeing eyes is, literally, no thing anyway, and thus there is no knowledge of it other than that.

Who is 'our' in 'our knowledge'? And, where are the 'gaps'?

If the gaps are made known, then they can be filled in.

While we can acquire greater knowledge and understanding over time we will never attain omniscience

To me, omniscience already exists.

But, remember, I am look at things differently. So, what you are assuming now may not be what I am talking about and seeing at all anyway.

[surreptitious57]

The Universe is all that exists and therefore constitutes all that can be known
But all that can be known is not what any individual mind or minds can know

Individual minds are an infinitesimal part of the Universe and so therefore cannot know all that the Universe knows
Only the Universe can know what it knows although it merely possesses this knowledge rather than knows it as such

[surreptitious57]

There will always be something because absolute nothing cannot exist beyond the infinitesimal as it is far too unstable
Information is like energy in that it cannot be destroyed only transferred so therefore it will always exist in some form
Even when this Universe dies it will still contain information even though there will be no minds to process it any more
Universes shall come and go but existence will always exist in whatever form as a single eternal forever changing state

[surreptitious57]

The Universe is all that exists but it can be also be composed of many individual Universes such as this one
To avoid confusion the total Universe is usually referred to as the Multiverse but I prefer to call it Existence

[surreptitious57]

In this Universe that I inhabit with other minds such as all these on the forum I prefer to keep my own mind open
For it is the most effective way I choose to use it but how other minds choose to use theirs is entirely up to them

[Age]

The Universe is all that exists and therefore constitutes all that can be known
But all that can be known is not what any individual mind or minds can know

If that is what you think is true, then that is okay. But why would anyone even consider that one individual person could know all that can be known?

Are there some human beings who believe themselves to be so great that they even consider that this could even be a possibility?

Individual minds are an infinitesimal part of the Universe and so therefore cannot know all that the Universe knows

Why would anyone even consider, for more than a millisecond, that one individual person could know all that can be known?

Only the Universe can know what it knows although it merely possesses this knowledge rather than knows it as such

Why then say that "Only the Universe can know" although It can not know?

[Age]

There will always be something because absolute nothing cannot exist beyond the infinitesimal as it is far too unstable
Information is like energy in that it cannot be destroyed only transferred so therefore it will always exist in some form
Even when this Universe dies it will still contain information even though there will be no minds to process it any more
Universes shall come and go but existence will always exist in whatever form as a single eternal forever changing state

Are you able to see contradictions in your writings?

How do you define the words 'Universe' and 'existence'?

To you, how can there be one but not the other?

Also, you appear to still be looking for answers about things like the Universe Itself. Is this correct?

If yes, the are you also aware that if you just remained open to looking at different definitions, for some of the words you use, then the answers that you are looking for can be very simply and very easily found and uncovered?