Chicken or egg?
Which comes first? The chicken or egg? Is your mind inside your brain or the other way around? Is it possible that your brain, which is actually a physical mass, a creation of your mind? Is it possible that your mind may have created your concept of a physical reality which in turn comprises your body and brain? Is it possible that your brain was created by your mind to serve as a physical or focal point within the physical world it also had created? Is it then possible for a network of minds to blend and form the interactive reality or world which you are now experiencing? Is it possible that all things physical is just a by-product of an entire network of minds? Could this be the reason why time and space seems to be infinite, both being non-physical or intangible as the mind itself?
Parallax: The mind is the YOU which says, "YOU are an individual BODY amongst others". The mind is your perceptive reality of totality.
Imagine. Let "reality" be not only what the mind is capable of perceiving. Let reality be the 'totality' of all including those preceding and not perceivable by the mind. Let the tangibly perceivable be represented as "physical" while the intangible including those preceding and not perceivable by the mind be represented as "metaphysical potentialities". Let the "mind" be a metaphysical trait. Let some metaphysical potentialities transcend a physical state. Let some physical state consist a physical "body". Now, what do we have? A transcended physical state consisting of "space", "matter" and "body" intrinsic of physical traits (bound by the laws of physics) and the ever intangible mind capable of perceiving the transcended physical state as well as other intangible traits ergo "time", "consciousness", "will" etc. Let the body and mind altogether comprise your 'perceptive reality'. Let perceptive reality be that segment or subset of totality which the body and mind sense and perceives, not totality per se, as totality precede and extends beyond any mind's capability of perception. Your consciousness and physical condition, attitudes and opinions, including events unfolding or which you think had been or will be. Let perceptive reality be one's personal reality, a version of one's "own small world".
Parallax: Only YOU can prove to yourself the physical YOU is alive and reading this. Whatever YOU are thinking can only be affirmed by a transcended physical state that is within the same framework of your perception of totality. You may think - any distinct physical BODY may claim that YOU are alive and distinct - but that BODY cannot prove the claim because that BODY is within the same physical framework of your perception of totality. To prove the existence of the physical state which consist of your BODY, the affirmation must originate from the external metaphysical such as your mind, NOT another BODY existing within the framework of your mind. Only YOU can prove to yourself the external metaphysical, because only YOU can prove to yourself that your perceptive reality of the physical state is only a subset of totality.
Perceptive reality versus totality or reality per se. Let perceptive reality be variable while totality constant. Why? Something is variable if it is changing. If something is changing, it isn't whole since a whole is supposed to be the sum of its parts. Because perceptive reality changes with perception, we can logically infer that perceptive reality is variable. Totality is supposed to be the whole. A whole that is net of changes.
How does one "change" perceptive reality? Manipulating perceptive reality will require a "change of perception" which is often misconstrued as a "change of reality itself". Even as the "intention" and "claim" to have change are themselves a factor of totality. Hence, the "reality" or "world" one wanted or claimed to have "changed" is actually one's perceptive reality, not reality per se.
Can one effect a change of perceptive reality with impact to affect another person? As manipulation of one's perceptive reality may involve intrinsic traits of the mind's transcended physical state, changes of a physical nature may occur within the framework of another person whose perceptive reality may be coherent to yours. Take for instance this writing. My perceptive reality says I'm writing this blog for some readers to read. For my perceptive reality to be "affecting" another, I must be able to perceive at least another who read and comprehended what I wrote.
Parallax: The mind is the YOU which says, "YOU are an individual BODY amongst others". The mind is your perceptive reality of totality.
Imagine. Let "reality" be not only what the mind is capable of perceiving. Let reality be the 'totality' of all including those preceding and not perceivable by the mind. Let the tangibly perceivable be represented as "physical" while the intangible including those preceding and not perceivable by the mind be represented as "metaphysical potentialities". Let the "mind" be a metaphysical trait. Let some metaphysical potentialities transcend a physical state. Let some physical state consist a physical "body". Now, what do we have? A transcended physical state consisting of "space", "matter" and "body" intrinsic of physical traits (bound by the laws of physics) and the ever intangible mind capable of perceiving the transcended physical state as well as other intangible traits ergo "time", "consciousness", "will" etc. Let the body and mind altogether comprise your 'perceptive reality'. Let perceptive reality be that segment or subset of totality which the body and mind sense and perceives, not totality per se, as totality precede and extends beyond any mind's capability of perception. Your consciousness and physical condition, attitudes and opinions, including events unfolding or which you think had been or will be. Let perceptive reality be one's personal reality, a version of one's "own small world".
Parallax: Only YOU can prove to yourself the physical YOU is alive and reading this. Whatever YOU are thinking can only be affirmed by a transcended physical state that is within the same framework of your perception of totality. You may think - any distinct physical BODY may claim that YOU are alive and distinct - but that BODY cannot prove the claim because that BODY is within the same physical framework of your perception of totality. To prove the existence of the physical state which consist of your BODY, the affirmation must originate from the external metaphysical such as your mind, NOT another BODY existing within the framework of your mind. Only YOU can prove to yourself the external metaphysical, because only YOU can prove to yourself that your perceptive reality of the physical state is only a subset of totality.
Perceptive reality versus totality or reality per se. Let perceptive reality be variable while totality constant. Why? Something is variable if it is changing. If something is changing, it isn't whole since a whole is supposed to be the sum of its parts. Because perceptive reality changes with perception, we can logically infer that perceptive reality is variable. Totality is supposed to be the whole. A whole that is net of changes.
How does one "change" perceptive reality? Manipulating perceptive reality will require a "change of perception" which is often misconstrued as a "change of reality itself". Even as the "intention" and "claim" to have change are themselves a factor of totality. Hence, the "reality" or "world" one wanted or claimed to have "changed" is actually one's perceptive reality, not reality per se.
Can one effect a change of perceptive reality with impact to affect another person? As manipulation of one's perceptive reality may involve intrinsic traits of the mind's transcended physical state, changes of a physical nature may occur within the framework of another person whose perceptive reality may be coherent to yours. Take for instance this writing. My perceptive reality says I'm writing this blog for some readers to read. For my perceptive reality to be "affecting" another, I must be able to perceive at least another who read and comprehended what I wrote.
Take another instance one's perception of what is supposed to be an "event of crime". A crime can be committed if there is at least a victim to be victimized. From the perspective of what is supposed to be one's perceptive reality of an event of crime, a victim is necessary to make one's perception of this a part of reality. In other words, one must perceive that another person's perceptive reality is fallible or weak enough to become a victim before one can perceive a crime is actually committed by a criminal. The three elements involved herewith - perceptive reality of what is supposed to be an event of crime, who is supposed to be the victim and criminal respectively. In effect, the victim makes a crime and criminal real in one's perception of what consists an "event of crime".
