Meta-Hallucination versus 'General' Hallucinations.

[Eodnhoj7]

The interpretation of empirical phenomena through a framework necessitates the phenomenon as being interpreted through pure reason. Evidence is interpretation.

The above is an oxymoron.

What is your definition of Pure Reason.

Pure Reason is defined as
'a completely distinct Cognition in which the Understanding [intellect, reasoning] is separated from the Senses and Imagination'.

How can the interpretation and cognition of empirical phenomena [senses] through a framework be based on pure reason? It is impossible.

The formalities of quantification, which are used to test phenomenon, are beyond the senses. The point, line and circle, as perfect, are beyond the senses as well.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Nevertheless, it is the brain that distorts reality and the mind that gives meaning to the distorted information. It is crisp. The brain processes and the mind perceives the distorted (or undistorted) information. Moreover perception is not a choice anymore than reality is a choice. Perception of reality is a process that the brain makes and the brain does not choose.

There are many complex functions and levels within of the brain, mind and body operating within the Universe.

1. Here is one basic levels and function of the brain;
Humans are the Co-Creator of Reality They are In
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=31180
I don't mean like creating using a magic wand and things appear.
The gist is reality cannot be absolutely independent from the human conditions which are part and parcel of reality.
This is related to the meta-hallucination of reality.

2. As such, the brain at one level would perceive the reality it has co-created. This is the empirical phenomena that is perceived.

3. At another level, the brain and mind can also distort the reality it "co-created" i.e. in the case of a hallucination, illusion and misperceptions. This is the general hallucination, e.g. a schizo claiming the garden gnome he talked to is real.
The experience of virtual reality [seemingly so real] is a form of hallucination.

You cannot conflate 1, 2 and 3 as all the same but rather must always qualify its context of which reality you are referring to.

A computer is not an algorithm nor is the programmer's mind a computer.

Not sure what is your point here. Any way ..
A computer is comprised of its physical parts and the softwares which are in algorithmic forms.
A programmer's mind is not a physical working computer, but it is organic and has much similarities with a physical working computer.

If you agree, then what is the difference between reality, the brain and the mind?

Reality is all-there-is that is real.
The brain and mind are part and parcel of all-there-is, i.e. reality.
What is real [known and possible] must be verified and justified empirically and philosophically within a framework of knowledge or reality.

My points of this OP are;
1. What is reality to humans are realized via meta-hallucination.

2. Within the meta-hallucination, some people have typical hallucinations, e.g. seeing God or flying pigs, etc.

[Veritas Aequitas]

The interpretation of empirical phenomena through a framework necessitates the phenomenon as being interpreted through pure reason. Evidence is interpretation.

The above is an oxymoron.

What is your definition of Pure Reason.

Pure Reason is defined as
'a completely distinct Cognition in which the Understanding [intellect, reasoning] is separated from the Senses and Imagination'.

How can the interpretation and cognition of empirical phenomena [senses] through a framework be based on pure reason? It is impossible.

The formalities of quantification, which are used to test phenomenon, are beyond the senses. The point, line and circle, as perfect, are beyond the senses as well.

Yes, the process of justification of reality is beyond the senses but not absolute independent of the senses, experiences and intuitions [sensibility].

Reasoning with Pure Reason is totally and absolute independent of the senses and intuitions.
The impulse of Pure Reason extricate itself from the senses, experiences and sensibility, thus is unrestricted to conjure whatever thoughts, e.g. a square-circle, God, a being than which no greater can be conceived, etc.

This is why Kant critiqued Plato Free Flight beyond the senses [sensibility] and experiences;
[mine]

It was thus that Plato left the World of the Senses, as setting too narrow Limits to 2 the Understanding [Pure Reason], and ventured out beyond it on the wings of the Ideas, in the empty Space of the Pure Understanding [Pure Reason].

He [Plato] did not observe that with all his efforts he made no advance meeting no resistance that might, as it were, serve as a support upon which he could take a stand, to which he could apply his powers, and so set his Understanding [Pure Reason] in motion.

It is, indeed, the common fate of Human Reason to complete its Speculative Structures as speedily as may be, and only afterwards to enquire whether the foundations are reliable.

All sorts of excuses will then be appealed to, in order to reassure us of their solidity, or rather indeed 3 to enable us to dispense altogether with so late and so dangerous an enquiry.
CPR A5 B9

Kant's whole Critique of Pure Reason argues how Pure Reason hastily jumped to the conclusion of illusory things that are groundless.
Thereafter, the delusional [like you and theists] will find all sorts of excuses to justify their reified illusions without avail.

[jayjacobus]

There are many complex functions and levels within of the brain, mind and body operating within the Universe.

1. Here is one basic levels and function of the brain;
Humans are the Co-Creator of Reality They are In
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=31180
I don't mean like creating using a magic wand and things appear.
The gist is reality cannot be absolutely independent from the human conditions which are part and parcel of reality.
This is related to the meta-hallucination of reality.

2. As such, the brain at one level would perceive the reality it has co-created. This is the empirical phenomena that is perceived.

3. At another level, the brain and mind can also distort the reality it "co-created" i.e. in the case of a hallucination, illusion and misperceptions. This is the general hallucination, e.g. a schizo claiming the garden gnome he talked to is real.
The experience of virtual reality [seemingly so real] is a form of hallucination.

You cannot conflate 1, 2 and 3 as all the same but rather must always qualify its context of which reality you are referring to.

A computer is not an algorithm nor is the programmer's mind a computer.

Not sure what is your point here. Any way ..
A computer is comprised of its physical parts and the softwares which are in algorithmic forms.
A programmer's mind is not a physical working computer, but it is organic and has much similarities with a physical working computer.

If you agree, then what is the difference between reality, the brain and the mind?

Reality is all-there-is that is real.
The brain and mind are part and parcel of all-there-is, i.e. reality.
What is real [known and possible] must be verified and justified empirically and philosophically within a framework of knowledge or reality.

My points of this OP are;
1. What is reality to humans are realized via meta-hallucination.

2. Within the meta-hallucination, some people have typical hallucinations, e.g. seeing God or flying pigs, etc.

Reality is the physical universe. The brain represents the physical universe or misrepresents reality. The mind perceives what the brain represents.
"Meta-hallucination" seems to confuse reality with what the brain represents and what the mind perceives.

Are you proposing that you are hallucinating our back and forth posts?

[Veritas Aequitas]

A computer is not an algorithm nor is the programmer's mind a computer.

Not sure what is your point here. Any way ..
A computer is comprised of its physical parts and the softwares which are in algorithmic forms.
A programmer's mind is not a physical working computer, but it is organic and has much similarities with a physical working computer.

If you agree, then what is the difference between reality, the brain and the mind?

Reality is all-there-is that is real.
The brain and mind are part and parcel of all-there-is, i.e. reality.
What is real [known and possible] must be verified and justified empirically and philosophically within a framework of knowledge or reality.

My points of this OP are;
1. What is reality to humans are realized via meta-hallucination.

2. Within the meta-hallucination, some people have typical hallucinations, e.g. seeing God or flying pigs, etc.

Reality is the physical universe. The brain represents the physical universe or misrepresents reality. The mind perceives what the brain represents.
"Meta-hallucination" seems to confuse reality with what the brain represents and what the mind perceives.

Are you proposing that you are hallucinating our back and forth posts?

In the perspective of the OP,
yes, I and you are within a process of meta-hallucination while we are posting back and forth.

But this meta-hallucination is different in the continuum from what the schizophrenic is hallucinating.

[Eodnhoj7]

The above is an oxymoron.

What is your definition of Pure Reason.



How can the interpretation and cognition of empirical phenomena [senses] through a framework be based on pure reason? It is impossible.

The formalities of quantification, which are used to test phenomenon, are beyond the senses. The point, line and circle, as perfect, are beyond the senses as well.

Yes, the process of justification of reality is beyond the senses but not absolute independent of the senses, experiences and intuitions [sensibility].

Reasoning with Pure Reason is totally and absolute independent of the senses and intuitions.
The impulse of Pure Reason extricate itself from the senses, experiences and sensibility, thus is unrestricted to conjure whatever thoughts, e.g. a square-circle, God, a being than which no greater can be conceived, etc.

This is why Kant critiqued Plato Free Flight beyond the senses [sensibility] and experiences;
[mine]

It was thus that Plato left the World of the Senses, as setting too narrow Limits to 2 the Understanding [Pure Reason], and ventured out beyond it on the wings of the Ideas, in the empty Space of the Pure Understanding [Pure Reason].

He [Plato] did not observe that with all his efforts he made no advance meeting no resistance that might, as it were, serve as a support upon which he could take a stand, to which he could apply his powers, and so set his Understanding [Pure Reason] in motion.

It is, indeed, the common fate of Human Reason to complete its Speculative Structures as speedily as may be, and only afterwards to enquire whether the foundations are reliable.

All sorts of excuses will then be appealed to, in order to reassure us of their solidity, or rather indeed 3 to enable us to dispense altogether with so late and so dangerous an enquiry.
CPR A5 B9

Kant's whole Critique of Pure Reason argues how Pure Reason hastily jumped to the conclusion of illusory things that are groundless.
Thereafter, the delusional [like you and theists] will find all sorts of excuses to justify their reified illusions without avail.

Mathematics as the quantification of forms exists independent of the senses given the forms which is quantifies, a line, is not limited to the senses. The line as a distance between two points necessitates it as the grounding of all measurable phenomena with the measurement being not limited to the senses.

A square circle can be observed as both a circle and square inside eachother. Dually the square forms a loop given its beginning and end points are the same, in these respects circle can be a square through the loop.