It appears that our common consciousness is destined by Nature
never to be individualized.
As social beings we can never be objective about ourselves. Only through
the existence of at least one other human being can we find the objective relativity necessary for recognition.
The principle that 1+1=2 is an interdependent measure that has reciprocal value, and is unifying constructive knowledge. This objective principle as related to social beings, retains our sanity.
Each moment in our present reality always provides its own fundamental meaning.
That meaning has the potential to be experienced in the combination of absolutes.
In classical Newtonian physics there was a clear understanding of ‘what reality is’. Indeed in this classical view, reality at a certain time is the collection of all what is actual at this time, and this is contained in ‘the present’. Often it is stated that three dimensional space and one dimensional time have been substituted by four dimensional space-time in relativity theory, and as a consequence the classical concept of reality, as that what is ‘present’, cannot be retained. Is reality then the four dimensional manifold of relativity theory? And if so, what is then the meaning of ‘change in time’?
Aerts, D. (1996). “Relativity theory: what is reality?”. Foundations of Physics, 26, pp. 1627-1644.
When the knowledge we receive is factual and recognized, our collective
consciousness evidently changes and we progress.
Predictability apparently lies in the consciousness that is capable of
identifying its own existence.
As a species our progression is mirrored by our constant extension of
Inherent, then, in our concept of the effective time-binder is an attitude, an ethical judgment, a moral precept as strong as any of the Ten Commandments: “Thou shalt not knowingly warp the functioning of any nervous system.” Or stated positively, “So act as to make thyself a better time-binder; so act as to enable others to use their time-binding capacities more effectively.
Levels of Knowing and Existence: Studies in General Semantics (Harper and Row 1
We are generally equipped with five senses, sight,hearing,taste touch, smell.
Enjoining them we have our intellectual, emotional and instinctive properties.
These collaborative abilities allow us to absorb information within our spectrum.
That absorption rate depends entirely on the above properties.
Consider the difficulties between cultures and races to absorb one piece of factual information.
That measure of absorption is compounded unless our consciousness communication evolves new processes.
We have all some experience of a feeling, that comes over us occasionally, of what we are saying and doing having been said and done before, in a remote time — of our having been surrounded, dim ages ago, by the same faces, objects, and circumstances — of our knowing perfectly what will be said next, as if we suddenly remembered it! Charles Dickens, David Copperfield (1850), Ch. 39.
Refer you to Occam’s Razor:
“One should not increase, beyond what is necessary,
the number of entities required to explain anything”
The principle of parsimony.
We need something new. We can’t predict what that will be or when
we will find it because if we knew that, we would have found it already!
CH CBE FRS (born January 8,1942) British theoretical physicist.
Given our historical knowledge acquisition, it does appear that
evolutionary consciousness sifts all forms of new knowledge, and in
time we adopt whatever form will sustain the species.
That presupposes that all new knowledge is still conditional until its
properties are evaluated through experience and application, and an
eventual rise in consciousness.
Clearly the linear evolutionary trajectory may be transplanted to higher
plains to improve our survival chances.
“Our best theories are not only truer than common sense, they make more sense than common-sense”.
David Deutsch (born 1953 in Haifa) is a physicist at the University of Oxford.
The measure of any improvement in our understanding of basics in language is constrained by divergence in their overall construction. For as long as that divergence continues. the further we are removed from the clear simplicity of their reality.
If someone wishes to speak in his language about a new kind of entities, he has to introduce a system of new ways of speaking, subject to new rules; we shall call this procedure the construction of a linguistic framework for the new entities in question.
Carnap (1950). “Empiricism, Semantics, Ontology
Before Pythagoras (6th century BC) et al, many ancient cultures believed the earth was flat.
The historical embedding of such a belief would surely have a restrictive effect on all social activities and their willingness to believe in any other alternative.
Move along to 2015.
When communicating, know what the truth is, and amplify its existence.
The whole picture with regard to our sensory receptors seems not to be as exclusive as individualized experiences. Generally speaking there seems to be massive accord that does not depend on individual opinion.
It would appear to suggest that there is a form of certainty readily recognizable by the usual function of human sensory receptors.
Everything that is, is in perfect synchronicity, in that everything ages all at the same time.
Everything that is, at any moment in time, has its own share of space, no more no less.
That large commonality of factual knowledge seems to have no active displacement of our experience of reality.
In essence our experience of our reality must be a consciousness act of unification of the whole.Our sensory receptors act in concert with others to provide us with a stabilized reality.
Our curiously sensitive sensory receptors are curious because our species generally accept an extraordinary equality of experience. We recognize in common, schools, universities, hospitals, cities, in fact the continual evolution of this planet’s history, including wars, crime, corruption.
Recognition that belies experimental science of our sensory receptors.