'the projection' ...by that I mean, what is being projected from reality external from the receiver - consciousness.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 am"A projection"? "the projection"? ...What do you even mean by that? Yes, I can agree that there is some projecting going on in reality. There wouldn't be a word for it if not. Your choice of words makes it sound like reality is one projection being played for the benefit of something, and I can't agree with that.attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:53 pm Reality has a projection within itself, surely you cannot disagree with this. Consciousness is a unique configuration of reality, in that as a receiver of the projection it has the ability to receive, decipher, and logically comprehend the information received.
You used the term 'benefit'..the primary benefit would be the type of configuration of reality that has benefit from the projection - and that is a conscious entity, and not necessarily restricted to the level of conscioussness that humans have.
Memory is purely a living entities domain. Fossils are not a memory, they are a history. A rock cannot remember the light reflected by the apple, because it is not conscious..whatever of the photons that have entwined with the rock's electrons could never be considered a true reflection or memory of an apple. We are now left for you to find a definition of 'memory' that is not that of a conscious being, but that of a rock.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amThey remember the appearance of life, and of the dinosaurs, projections of magnetic fields, and all sorts of other things. The apple is more difficult, but yes, rocks can do that.
Your voice can shout such that it is projected to your concious awareness - that of hearing. Your finger placed upon a burning ember can project pain, such that you are consciously aware of it. As I stated - 3b should include the other senses receiving a projection from the reality beyond consciousness, or at least there should be 3a (already - light), 3b (sound), 3c, 3d, 3e at the minimum for the five senses.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amDoesn't seem to work. 3b for instance is to project one's voice in such a way that it can be better heard. That simply doesn't go on anywhere between my senses and conscious processing. My finger doesn't shout to my head that it detects heat, and even if it did, it wouldn't be 3b.attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:53 pmAll points of 3 are met, they are all from the point of a cause with a result being a projection, and within the confines of our debate, the receiver of the projection is our conscious decipheration of this information. To use 'transmits', for me is your 'firefly' example.
So you are the part of reality that is projecting to me. No?Noax wrote: ↑Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:57 amYou and I are not the same entity. That comes from me, and you are the receiver in that example.attofishpi wrote:You are now contradicting your earlier statement:-
'I do project my observations. I'm doing it now, projecting them on this forum to you. Projecting is what one entity purposefully does to a target that is not the first entity.'
The form of the projection is the thing I am stating is irrelevant, whether is be a whisper or a shout.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amThere is normal speaking/singing, which yes, involves this interaction you speak of. I don't deny that. 3b is a specific alternate meaning of the word, and it just doesn't apply. It is a difference in how the sound is formed so that it penetrates better, and doesn't just mean shouting. I'm not trained to do it, but I know several who can, quietly even. It is impressive.attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:53 pmThis is all irrelevant, it was just the definition's stance on the source of the projection. 3b also more importantly mentions the sense of hearing (from the projection) as I stated it is limited and should have also gone into other forms of sensory input to a conscious being.
No, the image of the apple within your mind and as a memory, is an image (from an external source within reality - that of an apple) that is still projected within your mind, your memories of things are still a projection to your conscious awareness.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amThat seems to indicate my conveying an idea (of an apple maybe) to you. It could be projecting if I communicate it to something else, and not just imagine it myself. I don't remember using the word 'convey' when describing my imagining of an apple (post 44?). That has the same sort of implication of source->separate-target.
But you are a materialist no? All that matters is that there is a projection from physical reality to a conscious entity, whether conciousness is considered material or non-physical is not pertinent to the question regarding 'projection'.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amThe title suggests otherwise. OK, we're debating if there is projecting going on, apparently from physical reality to the non-physical experiencer.
How is light or radiant heat not information that is projected - from a source?Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amIf there is such an arrangement, yes there needs to be information transfer of some sort going on in both directions (only one direction if epiphenomenal). But that information transfer is not well characterized as a projection since the 'projector' is incapable of sending the information.
Consciousness receives information without necessarily making a conscious effort to gain it.
Eureka!Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amIf on the other hand there is no such separation of experiencer from physical reality, then I don't see reality (no need to call it physical reality if there is no other kind) transferring information to anything that isn't reality. Information moves from parts of reality to other parts, so sure, there is projecting going on.
I think you have been, and perhaps this is the main stumbling block.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amI must also point out that while I don't think there are different realms of reality (I am not fundamentally different than the apple), I see things as being 'my reality' and not 'reality'. That's almost idealism, except it has zip to do with consciousness. I don't hold a conventional view, but I don't intend to assert it. I'm not asserting physicalism here, in case you wonder.
Why are you talking about 'beyond reality'? I still don't understand why this is part of your side of the debate. Unless you want me to go into what I stated in another thread regarding qualia and dark matter/energy. For that matter is dark energy/matter beyond reality?Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amThat would qualify except for my objection above where reality has no mechanism to project information to beyond-reality. Fetching the information doesn't violate physics (it does violate most QM interpretations), but the role reversal of cause/effect does seemingly conflict with the definition of projecting.attofishpi wrote:..when I state reality projecting to something, I am implying it is projecting to something that is conscious, something with the ability to discern in its own conscious way, the object of the input - from the projection that is external to said consciounsess.
Fetching the information? As I stated above, consciousness receives information without necessarily making a conscious effort to gain it.
Glad to hear it! I can't say I've formally studied philosophy but over the past years of what i've read, there is a fair amount I would not subscribe to.Noax wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:57 amThat would be horrible. Why philosophize if you already know the answers? I've changed views at least half a dozen times, forever finding contradiction in whatever is yesterday's favored view.attofishpi wrote:Funny, ironically I was going to bring up the term 'seems' but I thought you were more certain about such a thing.