The above image courtesy of Google “free to use images”..
The quotes, images, videos etc., included in these posts come courtesy of Wikipedia, Wikimedia, Bartlett’s, About, Google, Flixxy.com. Pixabay. Ted’s talk, Internet Archive. My sincere thanks for their service.
That this work is available at all is down to the services of Word Press.com and the team of “Happiness Engineers” whose help throughout these past few years has been invaluable. With their patience, technical skill and courtesy, it is now available.
All my personal copy here is ‘free to use’. Images, videos, and talks I have used are classified as ‘derivative work’ and deserve proper attribution from the relevant sources. Note my inclusion above of the sources I have used.
All images used on this page are always being re-evaluated to ensure they fall into the ‘free to use’ category.
All material is used by me in good faith to follow the Public Domain, ‘free to use’ and share policies, within the Internet structure and a non-commercial environment.
This Creative Commons License has been acquired as it is essential that this information be shared, and brought to a higher level. It is always courteous to provide attribution. Based on a work at: https://imperativeobservations.wordpress.com“. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://imperative observations.wordpress.com. All text referred to by other writers will be acknowledged at the bottom of each of each page.
The purpose of this entry is to provide some elementary information that may put a new light on both my domain sites.
In them I talk about dichotomies in language, and how we should approach them in the way we think.
First of all to define the term absolute and principle in their simplest form, as being “always true” provides us with a way to reason about them. Archimedes principle of leverage is not a property we can own, but universally it is a true principle that we now “use” in common, in so many diverse ways.
Such is the principle of language that dominate the people of this planet, and how our conscious minds use it. Implicit within most language systems we have embedded “opposites” for each primary term e,g ‘good – bad, and we justify them accordingly. Dichotomies then become a limitation factor. The bane of Heraclitus life.
When we physically remove them we are left with principal terms, or absolutes, which in philosophical history are denoted in an individual state, as constants, and belie human experience as becoming.
Paradoxically, in an individual state they are a fixed constant, but when conjoined with each other they are energised to provide new meaning. Semantics and their implicit meaning then progresses exponentially – using copula’s, or conjunctions. With that the Absolute vs Relativity debate is irrelevant.
Below is a way out of the confusion that arises.
Lifes inception. From that moment life is dependent for its growth cycle in it’s mothers womb, and the processes that must take place to ensure that life survives.
At birth that cycle changes, and external processes take over, and the child experiences a whole new world in which it is totally dependent. It requires air, food, water, space, relationships, and language. A whole gambit of functional necessities must be delivered.
At no stage can any life be removed from that initial dependency, we are always dependent. In maturing, we grow into processess of being interdependent, and can take some responsibility for our actions, but that does not translate into the myth of being independent. We never can be independent – like it or not.
Oxford Dictionary. One version of the definition of independent: “not dependent on others for validity”
If that speaks to identification,or for what they say, it is of no matter, because we cannot escape from being dependent on everything that is.
All forms of life depend on contributing necessities whatever they may be.
Our best information is to recognise for ourselves, that the words we use can have powerful consequences.
Construct new concepts for yourself!
Only you can do it.
28 May 2016.
Have recently rediscovered The Wisdom Paradox by Elkhonon Goldberg – Clinical professor of neurology. With that it seems that over the past four years I have unwittingly pursued a path toward cognitive improvement. As a layman, my intention was only to provide new concepts in language that I considered would be useful to delay the ravages of Alzheimer’s disease that my wife had suffered from, and if useful for professionals to run trials.
In Chapter 14 of The Wisdom Paradox there is reference to the fact that as humans we can reproduce, or improve, sections of our organs which includes our brain. Apparently that is best done by forms of exercise suited to the particular action of the individual. My particular form of exercise is redefining concepts without dichotomies.
Will always remember this chapter number, how old I was when I left school in Glasgow.
It should be said that at this point I will freely use whatever material that is available legally, and ethically, to promote my efforts to highlight the subject of Alzheimer’s disease.
At 89 years of age (well past my used by date) it may well be that I am a candidate with a focus on my own pending dementia. If so, then the theory and the method I write about is holding it at bay. To address the health of my mind in this way could be the catalyst that retains its own functional activity.
The only reason I can write about consciousness is that I, like all of humanity have it. It’s existence became more of a reality for me because of my wife’s illness, and the slow and inevitable decline of her consciousness via Alzheimer’s disease.
Could it be that our evolutionary consciousness bank can only be developed toward the welfare of all life on this planet?
The Wisdom Paradox is a book for all readers.
The archiving of historical anecdotes, or quotes, offers us the opportunity to use valuable information of a particular era, time, or place. They are harvested and recorded from every language available, and it would seem always to evoke a measure of understanding to those who would read, or hear them.
The condensed information and ‘meaning’ behind those chosen, give us the impetus to at least ponder the real intention behind each expression.
We owe a bond of gratitude to those who have contributed their time and effort to record them.
My use of all the factors above are chosen and inserted to provide further interest in the subject, and provide a stepping stone to the continuing text. Without the efforts of those who created the panoramic vision available on the internet, none of that would be possible. All placeholders, and quotations, are simply introductions to a very wide spectrum of historical knowledge that we can use.
The man whose book is filled with quotations, has been said to creep along the shore of authors, as if he were afraid to trust himself to the free compass of reasoning. I would rather defend such authors by a different allusion, and ask whether honey is the worse for being gathered from many flowers. Anonymous, quoted in: Tryon Edwards (1853) The World’s Laconics: Or, The Best Thoughts of the Best Authors. p. 232
Amen to that.
The term ‘Imperative Observations” is I believe an instinctive reaction to the concept that “we take things for granted”. There does seem to be a need to take more care, and address what Nature and Life present. Personal experience tells me that a change in the direction we go is a healthier road to travel.
Comments are welcome, but you should know that adding new placeholders, links, and equivalent quotes is all I am able to do.
To finally address the subject of my wife’s dementia and its inevitable progression, was not driven by the fear of its existence, but to at least challenge myself in the hope that anything I can do may offer the scientific profession a new path to explore.
My direction can only ever be general with regard to the deterioration that inevitably takes place in our mind. The value of primary principles in our language structure may provide the tools to retard that deterioration.
Curiously and interestingly, my brain function in certain areas has dimmed with age, but in pursuing this particular project there is no diminution of purpose. Certainly my body is showing significant signs of the ageing process, and it will take its inevitable course.
Having lived first hand with a mind deteriorating, I can claim the emotional right to propose a new theory that may offer some clues to evoke interest in a research project.
The subject of language and dichotomies has had a long historical pedigree and its proper use can only ever be to improve our understanding of it, and its free dissemination.
Unlike Dylan Thomas’s admonition to his father ‘to rage,rage against the dying of the light’ I will, against previous existential beliefs, take a peaceful road toward a real, or imaginary world, where Jean waits with her arms unfurled to welcome me in her new world of higher consciousness.
Share the values we all depend on that are inherent in every principle we use.
They are everything in every language that exists when we remove dichotomies.
The proposition being that the panoramic phenomena of Mankind were unfortunately disposed toward a life that precluded them needlessly from a state of consciousness beyond their experience.
Heraclitus’s particular insight we can presume, was principally initiated by his intense interest in language composed of “unity of opposites”.
He seemed also, to come very close to saying that there are no dichotomies when he proffered that there was a “unity of opposites”, and that there distinction was only one of difference.
The contagious effect of thinking that there is a “unity of opposites” has carried the mythology to date. The term seems simply to be a misnomer, compounded by another simpler “category mistake” which lends itself to the dilemma he faced. See illustrations of “category mistakes”. (The Concept of Mind, Gilbert Ryle, p,17).
Heraclitus and his “unity of opposites” was displaying an adherence to “category mistakes”.
Simply put, if you are alive then you have a measurable degree of health, somewhere in the spectrum scale of health. That irrefutable conclusion leaves no room for”category mistakes”.
It is preferable if we could turn our attention to the unity of principles that are the construct of every language we use. By uniting the principal terms we can elevate the meanings we desire. Reasonable constructs and the proposed duality of established principles always lead toward meaning. It is the only form of meaning that leads to its own extension – how else could it be? All principles (placeholders) have reciprocal value one to the other. No foundation principle can stand alone. They can only exist in union, one with the other, the source of reciprocity.
All absolutes are universal. There is no hierarchy beyond the meanings they evoke in their joint construction. The binary connotations, however they are commonly expressed, provide a constant reality beyond conventional consciousness. That experience is the immediate reward through disciplined application of their use. That discipline takes the form in all human action disposed toward the correct functionality of its associate welfare.
The daily connections we make always include the distinct possibility of their recognition, when we make those connections in a mindful state.
Association means at least one other 1+1=2. The perfect absolute reciprocal equation.
Life is not composed of “your” mirror image. It is composed of “our” mirror image. That image defines our dependability, and our connectedness.
Our evolutionary advantage is that language with all its complexities has already been created.
A necessary reason of our lives, is the use of language to communicate the relationship we have with each other, and our understanding of that action.
Our conscious understanding will be collectively diminished by the apparent separateness of race, nationality, tradition, and beliefs that exist. Categories that demand our constant attention.
The contemporary need is to correlate human consciousness, utilise observable categories, and meld them into an enlightened recognized construction of the whole. Universal meaning lies within the use of language without dichotomies, whatever language is used. Semantic translation without dichotomies will have the beneficial effect of finding common agreement, clarity of reason, and the release of historical embedded impediments.
The exercise of uniting principal terms without dichotomies is imperative to break down crystallized concepts that are counter productive to individuals, and societies. Their effect would not be the changing of what is, but the experience of seeing reality as it is.
Writing about the existence of dichotomies in language is not unprecedented. Heraclitus (c.535-c.475 BC) made them apparent in Mindfulness semantics operate through you with their own agenda. Their binary properties and subsequent definition are of a dimension outside our conscious awareness.
Mindfulness and healing are co-existent, and their activity is not personal property that function within the realms of our space-time-energy-matter domains. Look upon the practice of mindfulness as a social contribution whose effects may take their own manifestation.
The double helix effect of mindfulness semantics is infinite, and adds beneficially to our collective consciousness.
Personal benefit comes with the realization that change of being has taken place, and our functionality can develop. We evolve. Let it be.
Create your own semantic template guide. It is an invaluable tool.
Given the remarkable talk below, maybe semantics and their real value is beginning to bear fruit.
In a way I find some validation to the stuff I write.
As in the mathematical equation above, correct association means also a correct outcome.
Therein lies the truth that always flows from binary connections from any established absolute. See also (Imperative observationsMk2.
The most compelling human interest is in knowing who ‘we are’.
Hypothetically if any individual was born in a cocoon in dark outer space, then identity would be impossible.
Our only source of recognition lies in relation to all and everything that exists, especially to other forms of life as we know it. In its growth every child begins to identify with its environment, relationships, and with everything it experiences. In doing so it puts on a mantle of identification as to its personality. Life then becomes the marker, and the prohibitive means of any real identification we can rely on. That forms the presumption that as we are we can never know ourselves – which is a gap in human consciousness – a gap applied to us all.
That gap can best be filled when the elemental structure and pure identity of at least one other is experienced, then it becomes a mirror image of oneself, and knowing who you are is unqualified.
True consciousness experience has a complementary distinguishing feature, notably the apparent absence of Space – Time – Energy – Matter. Our conventional trappings fall away in that experience and we KNOW! Cognition at any level appears to extend our interest in knowing.
In this regard it connotes with our life experiences and utilises the extent of our perceptions to disseminate within that reality its own form of development. The complexity of our brain cells and neurons and our own consciousness, is beyond our comprehension. What seems apparent is the continual need for cognitive acts to proceed in a fashion that always raises our consciousness.
Those acts of cognition and there prestigious effects are briefly recorded here.
The array of distinctive personalities have moved throughout our history leaving us a legacy of their contribution to our consciousness that is part of our daily lives.
Our commonality is the compound of each individual personality, and vice versa. Each and every personality experiences their measure of reality external to it, and with their prevailing consciousness, acts and re-acts accordingly. Both action and re-action are inner self-determinants to an external reality. Those determinants essentially use consciousness reasoning to acquire knowledge of the phenomena of its existence. In this respect coalescence is an instinctive natural need. To be alive sustenance of all kinds is essential, which entails a powerful dependency reason that must be enshrined. With co-habitation it seems apparent that survival values are of a kind, and absolute.
Whatever developmental processes are achieved in any community they are essentially part of the prevailing consciousness. The power of attribution to any individual, or group, who contributes, is essential.
Like it or not, we each and everyone contributes in common to our own survival.
So cognition (knowing) is always part of our commonality. We do not have the choice to being part of it – we depend on it!
The rising of human consciousness is not necessarily attached to a human evolutionary cycle but can be an episodic experience attributed to anyone at any level. Throughout human history we are the benefactors of such experiences and live within the continuum of their evolution. Placeholders are the elementary evidence and record of those who raised our consciousness level, expressed in every language.
The proposition above would imply that knowledge can only be the essential sharing properties of others, otherwise it is useless if it is only contained in one repository. That complementation epitomizes the answer to the question ‘who We are’. Our natural connectivity and interdependence always reaches for a higher level of consciousness that continually improves our level of collective understanding.
As that form of experience seems to be a remove from Space – Time – Energy – Matter, we could consider it is of another dimension.
Miracles only exist within the collective impressions of human experience.
Our normal life cycle is the compound of a series of extraordinary events that reaches
for its own normality. Within that normality, reason – knowledge and consciousness are its expression. That combination of events allows us to proceed through our life span.
They are the products of an egalitarian process shared by all human life.
Recently as a matter of urgency I was admitted to a hospital cardiac unit to undergo a cardiac angiogram.
Was advised that angioplasty and stents may be part of the procedure. The alternative would be by-pass surgery. The procedure was over in a very short time, and quite painless.
Later the surgeon explained that although I had two blocked arteries there was no need for any surgery as my heart had created its own by-pass artery. It appears that our heart has the ability to sense that arteries are being blocked, and can engineer an embryonic new artery to compensate.
Why that happens to some and not others is a question I’m sure biologists are asking. And so am I!.
Could we be in an evolutionary process where we can eventually reproduce the necessary healing mechanisms to sustain our bodies?
It is only through the prism of our normality are we able to experience the miracle of our existence. At any level, our consciousness and sensory receptors can coalesce to show and give recognition to the existence of our life.
That identification is only experienced via the existence of at least one other, when the recognition of the mutual principles we share in common are revealed. Our basic mutual dependence is of another kind.
The Oxford dictionary defines “independent” as, ” not dependent on others for validity”
This definition presumes a kind of magical individuality, and invisibility!
It is an impossible task to define something which does not exist.
Everything that is, is inevitably sourced from this planet. Any reasonable standard of life is dependent on this planets provision. Nothing comes from nothing.
Whatever factual evidence may prevail, stating its reality infers no personal knowledge, or ownership of its existence. When that reality is universally agreed upon, shared and used, its continuing presence and its effects on human consciousness, posit evolutionary development. That form of development seems to proceed in an invisible consciousness fashion, inhibited by any actual experience of evolving.
The theory of evolution was posited by two naturalists Darwin and Wallace circa 1850, based solely on their observation of the diversity of every manifestation of life available to them. Such theories are not products to be owned or merchandised, but only if they are true, to be utilized for the continuing preservation of the species, and this planet.
The term ‘commonality’ used throughout this text relates specifically to our species, the functionality and basic properties we all have in common to survive. Identifying those can give us a ‘common meeting ground of agreement’, whoever you are, wherever you are. Our commonality is not an ideological term that excludes the reality of each personality. It distinctly and evidentially establishes all forms of relationship where individuality contributes its measure of interdependence, and interconnectedness. Human consciousness can only thrive in an environment that will procreate its existence through recognition of others. Its evolution and mankind’s existence are constantly intertwined.
This is no Pollyanna presentation but perhaps a prescription that points to the need for new thought to take place.Paradoxically ‘new’ thought may have to discuss the value of historical experience and meaning, as there seems to be a serious dislocation in the digital age where meaning is concerned. Language reduced to code has the possible danger of reducing any insight into our common consciousness.
The default ‘Follow’ button is located at the top of this web page. Using it notifies you by Email that this material has been updated.
(Tells you how little I know about Internet technology.)
All pages are numbered below. Page links at the bottom of each page.
This web page is like me, under constant construction. Primarily because the published text changes beyond my limited control?
As this copy undergoes constant change, would recommend that if you do reach the end it may help the reader to return to the beginning. There may well be new copy to confirm your views.
This web page is a kaleidoscope of text, talks, music, and scenery, constantly being added to. Collectively, singly, or combinations that may have some meaning for you.
The use of text etc., and the continual addition of placeholders are the best source of answers to any questions.
In the final analysis the right answers for you can only be your own. Within our commonality, paradoxically, you are the agent of your own destiny.
The widespread notion that you can act independently is a myth.
To realize the physical truth of that, occasionally touch your belly button as a reminder of your connectivity, and what it all means.
The theory and the process below is to introduce the possibility that we can think in a new way, through the potential construction of a language, without dichotomies.
The pace of modern life gives us little encouragement to take time to stop, observe, and make new connections.
Our primary need is to make new and meaningful connections that actually impress on our consciousness. New impressions require new forms of definition. Because of the intricate complexities of modern life, adapting to its problems, and trying to make sense of their effect on us, perhaps the language we use may be the best tool available to provide that support.
My use of quotations, placeholders and images with the introductory text will be just so much jargon unless you personally find some real meaning in the presentation, and the will to follow through the suggestions to promote your interest. That interest will be the catalyst to build these concepts for us all.
Aesop’s Fables (c.620BC – c.560BC) The Hare and the Tortoise.
A contemporary interpretation could be applied in relation to our understanding of evolution. Evolution which proceeds at a pace beyond our consciousness level. The human species seem to be in a race outside their natural abilities, and if we take the message of the fable, that race is doomed to failure. Turn to the Tortoise! Bridie.
Good does not necessarily come by design. It can come by circumstance.
There is now enough material, and examples below, to provide information for you the reader to formulate your own set of principles into acceptable placeholders. Search the web for material that is equivalent, either in quotes, or short extracts from any contemporary or historical figure, male or female.
Enjoy the wide range of choices you find that agree with your placeholder formation. You may also want to check Ted talks for the same reason (include only the URL).
All acceptable contributions from individuals or groups, will be given proper attribution.
Place them in the comments box below.
Alternative option: Write a blog to the contrary in the free to use medium.
The term above by definition can basically mean ‘measure fulfilled’. In those terms we can relate it to all and everything that exists. In our dealings with others our relationships are sound when I propose to do something for someone and carry it out, it establishes a bond of trust that has invaluable currency.
Equally so when the recipient of my actions recognizes their value, the bond of trust rises exponentially, and there is established a relationship that secures our identity.
All principles (placeholders) have reciprocal value one to the other. No foundation principle can stand alone. They can only exist in union, one with the other.
As we provide a reason for someone to trust us, we presume reciprocity, measure fulfilled.
Then we have ‘mutual trust’.
The challenge then is to find your own meaning, a meaning that is implicit and available. That form of cognition develops its own creative energy peculiar to every form of educative discipline – and is freely available with honest application.
This blog now runs to 13,000 words and counting. Coupled with that there are videos of Ted talks where I have found some relevance to the subject. In effect it is a time-consuming exercise, not your conventional blogging. The reader may find it is better digested in smaller portions, page by page. (See Imperative observations Mk2.com).
All content on this domain page operates under a Creative Commons International license. It is not designed for any commercial purposes by this writer.
An insight into our consciousness limitations below.
Neuroscientist David Eagleman.
Will be adding Flixxy and You Tube videos and Ted talks throughout these web pages staying strictly within their guidelines (non commercial), with the accompanying sentiment below as an introduction.
If you like today’s video, please share it with your family and friends. Having listened to this authority I could just fold up my tent, and disappear into the night. It might just be enough for you, but I will keep adding placeholders where I find them.