Comments

  • Currently Reading
    I liked Pratchett. I don't read much fantasy, but I found his style and humor appealing. I was introduced to Pratchett by a college buddy who was a big fan. Later I was gifted a set of audiobooks and I would often fall asleep while listening to them in bed :) (not because they are boring, it's just that audiobooks have this effect on me)SophistiCat

    I wonder how I managed not to read Pratchett for so very long. Currently, listening to his 'Small Gods', a new recording, courtesy of the Libby app and Penguin: https://www.penguin.co.uk/discworld-in-audio

    Narrated by Andrew Serkis - amazing changes of voice/dialect/tone. Om's Liverpudlian? accent made me think of John Lennon and wondered if that was deliberate. I'm enjoying the sense of fun, light and darkness. Also, the wisdom - if only I could keep the words in my head...

    Like you, I listen at night. Sometimes falling asleep before my setting of 25 mins! That's fine. :smile:

    Many of the books have reappearing characters and places, so it probably helps to read those in sequence, but it's not essential.SophistiCat

    Thanks. I usually would prefer to read in sequence but happy to know it's not needed, given my books already purchased. 'Small Gods' appears to be a stand-alone.

    ***
    I didn't really notice Om's Scouse accent until last night when I laughed out loud at the Q&A dialogue between him and Brutha (his believer). Reading it from my book pp42-47 - it just isn't the same.

    Brutha's increasing frustration, anger and horror at the small god Om's (as tortoise) lack of recall as to his powers. Om's accent becoming louder and more incredulous as to the suggestion that he as God was the author of the Book of Creation.
    'Brutha put his hand over his mouth in horror.
    'Thaff blafhngh!'
    'What?'
    'I said, that's blasphemy!'
    'Blasphemy? How can I blaspheme? I'm a god!'
    'I don't believe you!'
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Well, you started it! With your fancy 'facticity' :smile:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?

    Thanks for providing even more food for thought.

    Facticity and Being in the world. Consciousness. Linked to issues of 'authenticity' and 'freedom':
    He [Sartre] notes that human beings, like other entities in the world, have certain concrete characteristics that make up what he calls their “facticity” or what they are “in themselves” (en soi). Facticity makes up the element of “givenness” we must work with: I find myself with a past, a body and a social situation that constrains me in what I can do [...] While human beings share their “facticity” with other entities in the world, they are unique among the totality of entities insofar as they are capable of distancing themselves from what is “in itself” through reflection and self-awareness.SEP - Authenticity

    Perhaps, this 'distancing' is what happens in surreal art. And creative artists can express how they really are? How helpful is it to let go in a stream of consciousness? Doesn't it need to be grounded? Reality to be sifted, rather than being overwhelmed by a confusion of thoughts/ideas?

    From literature:
    What is consciousness? For literary studies the most influential framework has been William James’s “stream of consciousness.” “Consciousness,” he wrote, “from our natal day, is of a teeming multiplicity of objects and relations...

    First, James’s account actually argues that it is an unsuitable style for art. Insisting that the profusion of unimportant data in the stream’s “undistinguishable, swarming continuum” would overwhelm any legitimate object of interest if left unchecked, he claims what “gives [ . . . ] works of art their superiority over works of nature, is wholly due to elimination.”

    Here James seems in alignment with his brother Henry’s aesthetic, insisting on literature’s need to circumscribe the endlessly interwoven elements of mind so as to avoid generating “loose, baggy monsters.” And the tool of James’s eliminative process is the “habits of attention.”

    For him the stream of consciousness and attention serve as opposed poles, the former serving to expand the mental life and the latter to constrict it. As James writes, “without selective interest, experience is an utter chaos.”
    [...]
    Hardline materialists, like Daniel Dennett, reject the idea of a stream entirely, pointing to experiments in change blindness to suggest consciousness is “gappy” and possesses only the “apparent continuity” of a stream, generated largely from post hoc rationalizations that reconcile “multiple drafts” of experience.

    The basic problem is terminological. Since the mind is multilayered, and each layer functions in part by suppressing what occurs at other layers, what is contained by the term “consciousness” will often be less an empirical question than one of whether a given theorist wishes to include certain experiences within the concept.
    LitHub - If Consciousness isn't a stream, how do we represent it?
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    The idea of surrealism comes from the belief that we deal with reality indirectly by pulling it apart into pieces. Maybe we can experience it more directly when the intellect is offline, as in dreams, or in poetry.frank

    Interesting to consider. And I wondered whether the 'intellect' was 'off-line' in surrealist writing.

    From wiki, it seems there were 2 separate Surrealist manifestos. Imagine they literally fought over the rights to the term. I found this useful but that's only after a quick, superficial look:

    Breton's 1924 Surrealist Manifesto defines the purposes of Surrealism. He included citations of the influences on Surrealism, examples of Surrealist works, and discussion of Surrealist automatism. He provided the following definitions:

    Dictionary: Surrealism, n. Pure psychic automatism, by which one proposes to express, either verbally, in writing, or by any other manner, the real functioning of thought. Dictation of thought in the absence of all control exercised by reason, outside of all aesthetic and moral preoccupation.
    [...]
    Because Surrealist writers seldom, if ever, appear to organize their thoughts and the images they present, some people find much of their work difficult to parse. This notion however is a superficial comprehension, prompted no doubt by Breton's initial emphasis on automatic writing as the main route toward a higher reality. But—as in Breton's case—much of what is presented as purely automatic is actually edited and very "thought out". Breton himself later admitted that automatic writing's centrality had been overstated, and other elements were introduced, especially as the growing involvement of visual artists in the movement forced the issue, since automatic painting required a rather more strenuous set of approaches. Thus, such elements as collage were introduced, arising partly from an ideal of startling juxtapositions as revealed in Pierre Reverdy's poetry.
    Wiki - Surrealism
    [my emphasis]

    So, it seems that the intellect is engaged and control is exerted in expressing/understanding any surreal experience. It is an interpretation of the images or ideas dis/uncovered in dreams or expressed in poetry. The expression of such 'indirect' realities might be 'surreal' in the sense of a bizarre combination of the 'real', concrete and the 'unreal' - unexpected, hallucinatory quality of dreams. How is this 'the real functioning of thought' (as underlined above) ?

    The facticity of things at one level can obscure the fact of them at another. [...]

    Art can bring these things together by deconstructing the concrete facticity in a way that frees the symbolic within. E.g. Dali's surrealist representations of clocks and watches as flowing and ubiquitous allow the symbolic to "leak through" the concrete, unifying both into a greater whole that's psychologically enriching.
    Baden
    [my bolds]

    A lovely description. It sounds good. Who wouldn't want to be enriched, psychologically or otherwise?

    I enjoyed the 'leaking through' - but, then, I saw it as 'dissolving' rather than combining...water seeping through concrete. Making it weak. How bizarre!
    And then I wondered about the 'fact' of symbols. As well as being representations of ideas, can't they also be a 'fiction' in that they are dynamic and depending on cultural elements and imagination?

    Not sure what you mean by 'facticity'...
    Consider me confused :chin:
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    @Noble Dust - Responding to your recent clarification.

    I think there are layers to belief, and if you continue to strip them back, things do indeed get murky until you uncover something pretty raw in the core of your being. It's such a deeply private and personal concept that I literally cannot even attempt to describe with languageNoble Dust

    Re - 'layers of belief' and 'stripping them back' to a 'raw' basic, sense of self in a 'core' being:

    For you, this 'concept' is so deeply personal that words seem to fail you. However, as a concept there's plenty to be considered. I think you mean it is what we might discover about ourselves if we dig beyond the superficial. What is important to us in the attitude we take towards life and living. And that sometimes takes time and effort to work out. And not always reliable, given our usually subjective and already biased perspective. On TPF, there's plenty of theory and pontification to be challenged. What's important to me are the implications. The practical consequences. Do we walk the talk?

    Here's one psychological approach which outlines, explains 3 layers of belief. Although separate, they are interconnected. They form a cognitive belief system which might help navigate life and situations arising:

    'The cognitive-behavioural therapist understands how these three layers of cognition operate as a system and is skilled at discovering hidden or unconscious automatic thoughts, and intermediate and core beliefs. Only by being aware of the most deeply held beliefs, a person can start challenging those that are unrealistic and unhelpful.'

    https://psychologytherapy.co.uk/blog/core-beliefs-and-attitudes-rules-and-assumptions-in-cognitive-behavioural-therapy-cbt/

    ***
    So, we can all think of practical, perhaps spiritual, implications of holding certain ways of looking at life, can't we? Each appraised as being more helpful or beneficial to wellbeing. This 'judgement' can become part of our 'core' self. Our deepest values unchanging...until perhaps something happens to shake our very foundations....
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    a more useful language for the companions is dancing.wonderer1

    OK. Well, I am waiting for our dance companion, Noble Dust, before I twirl one more circle.
    Until then...
    Chubby Checker - Let's Twist Again (lyrics)
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Very well said. A refreshed you, back on form :sparkle:
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    A generous and lovely communication of a special experience connecting.
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    Beneath language, at the quantum level of experience, is something that exists in an undifferentiated form. This is belief.Noble Dust

    OK. This needs to be clarified. An explanation of what is meant by 'at the quantum level' might help. Unless it is simply a fanciful use of language...being creative...pulling readers in...

    I don't know why the focus is solely on 'belief' as a building block of world experience, if that is what you mean? There is a lot of noise and confusion surrounding this. Including the 'self'. All at distracting complex language level. Apart from simple definitions but even they are contested. As is to be expected in philo.

    There is more than 'belief' to consider. Why not put mind into neutral and listen to music. Or silence. Find peace there, away from the jungle of talking apes. Feel rather than think. For a moment. Just be. Isn't that the starting point?

    Follow up to previous post: 'Is music a universal language?'. Why do some dislike songs, music with words? And can only bear to hear instrumentals, excluding the voice as instrument. Don't they like the human connections made - sometimes disturbing? Escape into a melody...emotion without verbals. A world of your own making or sensing.
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/201507/is-music-universal-language

    Being quiet now. :sparkle:
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    In fact the video game Journey is an example of such a strange communication game, as it doesn't provide for language use between playerswonderer1

    So, it's a different kind of 'reality' produced for what purpose? Not to show that language isn't required or that there is no attitude. Because the players must be involved and believe there is something of benefit within the game. They have a mental attitude, perhaps hope, as did the programmers. This intrigues me. A different way of connecting. A belief that it is possible - not a case of true or false as in a propositional belief. To be challenged by not an Either/Or - black and white attitude - but something new. It relates to a narrative of wonder and a 'journey' of self, along with others.

    The game is intended to make the player feel "small" and to give them a sense of awe about their surroundings. The basic idea, as designed by Chen, was to create something that moved beyond the "typical defeat/kill/win mentality" of most video games [...]

    The developers designed Journey like a Japanese garden, where they attempted to remove all the elements that did not fit, so the emotions they wanted to evoke would come through. This minimalism is intended to make the game feel intuitive to the player, so they can explore and feel a sense of wonder without direct instructions. The story arc is designed to explicitly follow Joseph Campbell's monomyth theory of narrative, or hero's journey, as well as to represent the stages of life, so as to enhance the emotional connection of the players as they journey together. [...]

    The multiplayer component of Journey was designed to facilitate cooperation between players without forcing it, and without allowing competition. It is intended to allow the players to feel a connection to other people through exploring with them, rather than talking to them or fighting them. The plan was "to create a game where people felt they are connected with each other, to show the positive side of humanity in them".

    The developers felt the focus on caring about the other player would be diluted by too many game elements, such as additional goals or tasks, as players would focus on those and "ignore" the other player. They also felt having text or voice communication or showing usernames would allow players' biases and preconceptions to come between them and the other player.
    Wiki - Journey 2012 Video game
    [my bolds]

    I love the emphasis on exploration rather than fighting. To connect. With minimal bias.

    Philosophers have different approaches to 'Belief'. There is no one size fits all, as you might expect!
    I've picked out one, using game-playing as an example:

    Philosopher Lynne Rudder Baker has outlined four main contemporary approaches to belief in her book Saving Belief, related to common-sense:
    4. Our common-sense understanding of belief is entirely wrong; however, treating people, animals, and even computers as if they had beliefs is often a successful strategy.
    Daniel Dennett and Lynne Rudder Baker, are both eliminativists in that they hold that beliefs are not a scientifically valid concept, but they do not go as far as rejecting the concept of belief as a predictive device.
    Dennett gives the example of playing a computer at chess. While few people would agree that the computer held beliefs, treating the computer as if it did (e.g. that the computer believes that taking the opposition's queen will give it a considerable advantage) is likely to be a successful and predictive strategy.
    In this understanding of belief, named by Dennett the intentional stance, belief-based explanations of mind and behaviour are at a different level of explanation and are not reducible to those based on fundamental neuroscience, although both may be explanatory at their own level.
    Wiki Belief
    [my bolds]

    In a way, we all play games as we interact with others. Verbal language usually the main element. But non-verbal can say just as much, if not more, if particularly sensitive to a frown or smile. Interpretations can be right, wrong or a mix.

    The Journey uses music. Isn't that a kind of universal language?

    Unlike many games, where different songs have different themes for each character or area, Wintory chose to base all the pieces on one theme which stood for the player and their journey, with cello solos especially representing the player. Wintory describes the music as "like a big cello concerto where you are the soloist and all the rest of the instruments represent the world around you".
    The cello begins the game as "immersed in a sea of electronic sound", before first emerging on its own and then merging into a full orchestra, mirroring the player's journey to the mountain. Whenever the player meets another person, harps and viola are dynamically incorporated into the music

    Thanks for sharing :sparkle:
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    It’s a fascinating paper.Joshs

    Yes, substantial and well-written. I've only had a skim through but worthy of a closer read, for sure! Thanks for introducing it. :sparkle:
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    I think a distinction should be made between types of beliefs. The beliefs you're using as examples here are context-dependent and directly related to the world around us. What I'm trying to get at is fundamental belief,the beliefs that are the foundation of how each of us perceives and experiences the world. These are often not apparent to us (maybe more apparent to those of us who post on philosophy forums, true). They're beliefs about the self.Noble Dust
    [my emphasis]

    I’m not sure that such a distinction between self and world can be made.Joshs

    Yes. I'm not sure that the distinction between beliefs is so clear-cut. I understand ND to mean that beliefs about the self are the foundation from which we relate our perception and world experience? There are many aspects to self which are not Either/Or.

    Philosophical or religious beliefs are beliefs about the world, but beliefs about myself are the foundation on which these other beliefs are built.Noble Dust

    The different aspects of self are inter-related. For example, the physical, mental, spiritual, aesthetic, ethical and psychological. They can be broken down in bits for analytical or conceptual purposes. But as seems to be agreed, it is what matters to us that can make a difference in how the world is seen or interpreted. Perhaps our 'attitude' to events or others attitude towards us. The importance of making the best choice in any given situation. Our stories or narrative self can stem from - or be the source of - this attempt at understanding. Making the pieces fit the whole.

    ***
    Kierkegaard said that the truth or falsity of an aspect of the world is subservient to how it matters to us.Joshs

    I think this aligns with @Noble Dust's view of the importance of self? Knowing self as much as is possible. A basic core, and yet, a changing/changeable self.

    ***
    Thanks for the quote. It comes from Rouse's paper 'Kierkegaard on Truth' - pp13-14 of the downloadable pdf. Here: https://www.academia.edu/30917243/Kierkegaard_on_Truth
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    Does it need to be seen to be believed?
    — Amity

    This is a very good question
    javi2541997

    :smile: I think that my almost throw-away line at the end of a paragraph [*] was inspired by BC's excellent post, ending:

    How about "believing is seeing"? Some times we do not see reality because we do not believe that it is real; and visa versa, we see the non-existent because we believe it exists. Some see god's purposes in every bird song and car crash.BC

    [* ]
    What does the term 'quantum' mean? How does it relate to 'experience'? Mental meat? Physical heat? It seems to be the smallest, basic building block, have I got that right? Is it stable? I have no idea. Indeed, the whole thing is a mystery to me. Does it need to be seen to be believed?Amity

    For me, the word 'quantum' doesn't mean anything much when it comes to experience. I'm posing that question to learn how @Noble Dust interprets it in terms of linguistics and life.
    His 'Linguistic Quantum World' is a story of sorts.
    How has he dis/connected the dots to satisfy his 'belief/s'?

    Belief is undifferentiated from reality down here. There is no "higher" reality in a spiritual sense, nor a "true" reality (in contrast to falsehood) in a logical sense, that exists "behind" or "beneath" my beliefs about reality. Belief is reality. There is no difference.Noble Dust

    Where is 'down here'? Where your mind is?
    Here, the beliefs about the self is particular to you and your experience, no? Are you trying to make this a general claim in the world of concepts?
  • The Linguistic Quantum World
    This is just word vomit and I'm not posting these thoughts with the intention of arguing a position.Noble Dust

    Good. Nothing quite like a spew of thoughts about thinking, self and the world. Ideas not quite regurgitated (as in repetition without understanding) but bringing up swallowed food through one's throat.
    Sometimes because the belly has had enough (over-thinking?) or something hasn't agreed with it (toxin).
    Numerous causes. Pregnancy > sick > baby. A new thought bringing joy, pain or pleasure to the world.

    So, thanks for flinging some our way. To re-digest? Ugh! To examine, yes! Why not infect us all...

    The initial questions about synonyms/concepts of belief and attitude. Well, look no further than the online WordHippo Thesaurus. Simple. Pick your pleasing synonym from a list. As Concepts, then probably the SEP or similar.

    If I use language to dig around deeper into the cadaver of my thoughts, the knife eventually hits the operating table. I've cut through the whole thing. Belief is not a set of thoughts which are then represented by words. Belief is more fundamental than thought.Noble Dust

    First thing, your thoughts are not dead. They are alive and kicking. Pinning them down can be a problem. Some strong 'believers' do indeed pin or spin dead dogma (assumed, absolute truth) - holding a strict, stuck attitude to life. Others have flexible opinions or are open to examine thoughts/attitudes.

    The 'knife of language'. Hmmm. Ah. Now there's the thing...we can verily tie ourselves up in knots.
    How blunt or sharp - what are we wielding it for? What t/issue to be cut up and forensically examined?
    How many senses involved? Is it to improve our self-understanding or to argue with others about 'belief'.
    Both and more. We can make or read poetry to 'dissect' or express...just one example. We can use words like 'The Linguistic Quantum World' to gain attention. What the actual hell...?

    Cutting to the chase:
    What do I believe about myself? untangling this question requires a lot of rigorous work and honesty. I am the window through which I experience the world; I am fundamental to the world I experience.[...]

    Beneath language, at the quantum level of experience, is something that exists in an undifferentiated form. This is belief. Belief is undifferentiated from reality down here
    Noble Dust

    What does the term 'quantum' mean? How does it relate to 'experience'? Mental meat? Physical heat? It seems to be the smallest, basic building block, have I got that right? Is it stable? I have no idea. Indeed, the whole thing is a mystery to me. Does it need to be seen to be believed?

    My fundamental beliefs about myself shape my reality. That could be another way of saying it.Noble Dust

    That could well be true. Just as the opposite. It works both ways. The world, your experience of it, can shape your attitude and beliefs...your current 'reality' can change...depending...

    What are your fundamental beliefs about yourself? Thanks for voicing your thoughts :sparkle:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Perhaps you - or others - have a similar experience of alternating mental states when immersed in the creative writing process?Amity

    OK. Perhaps I've gone too far and will stop now. Treading on personal lines a step too far. I know some are uncomfortable or not interested in sharing such experiences. This ain't the place for that.

    One last thing, when I wrote 'alternating mental states', I was also thinking of 'altered states of consciousness'. What some creative artists (or anyone really!) practise to blunt the sharp edges or sharpen insight into life, physical or mental. To find their muse and ideas. Or simply to chill.
    https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/booze-as-muse-writers-and-alcohol-from-ernest-hemingway-to-patricia-highsmith-1.2369720

    Murakami thinks that 'rich, spontaneous joy' is the source of creative expression. He tries to attain a certain emotional state to invigorate and begin a new and different day. I wonder if he achieves this by his daily practice of running or swimming. Exercise producing an endorphin high? The energetic interaction of body and mind helping to generate ideas...time for a walk or wander...

    How can we know we are there? –In the room where dreams and life are merged– and could it be possible to know when we enter and when we leave the room?javi2541997

    It's perhaps the effects of being/becoming increasingly aware that mean more...?

    Bye for now - and thanks for the thoughts :sparkle:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    But every time I woke up, I realised it was all a dream, no matter how genuine it appeared. Perhaps Murakami refers to the third room as a mix of both. A more continuous experience where dreams and awakened moments are more plausible.javi2541997

    Do you never have lucid dreams where you know you are dreaming and can sometimes control the way it progresses?
    So, it can be seen as a mix of the real, the surreal - the conscious and the subconscious. A hybrid state of consciousness.

    How can we know we are there? –In the room where dreams and life are merged– and could it be possible to know when we enter and when we leave the room?javi2541997

    I am not sure that there is a definite point of entry or exit between the 2 types of awareness from the subjective perspective. It is more of a slide or flight, to and fro, I think. I don't know.
    However, objectively, a small study has apparently shown that: 'the unusual combination of hallucinatory dream activity and wake-like reflective awareness and agentive control experienced in lucid dreams is paralleled by significant changes in electrophysiology.' From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2737577/

    ***

    He admitted that the subconscious can often be unknown. He likes to explore this specific room in most of his novels, but I never thought he actually believed in the existence of this room. He couldn't explain with proper words what it feels like to be in the third room, but he claims that it exists, and he wonders if everything in the room exists as well, or if it is a hallucination. It was interesting to me to perceive that while he wished to explore this room, he also hesitated.javi2541997

    I think that if the 3rd room is his subconscious, then there is every reason to be wary of what ideas or images might surface. Perhaps that is why some people fear letting go, releasing their rational mind to explore the creative. Memories, emotive issues can be easily triggered by a single word.

    Murakami no doubt has his demons transferred to fictional characters and settings. Seems open to explore them but perhaps there are even deeper shades or layers of darkness, beyond the walls, wells and tunnels he keeps secret.

    Perhaps you - or others - have a similar experience of alternating mental states when immersed in the creative writing process? Surreal ideas?
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    So, if you don't really mind—or Jack, since this is his thread—I would like to share my opinion, quoting and understanding Haruki Murakami.javi2541997

    I understand Jack to encourage all and any participants with a relevant view. He talked earlier of a 'collaboration'. I like that spirit of discussion where we can learn, even be inspired...

    Murakami is an excellent novelist. He came to Spain because he was awarded a prize for literature. Debating with some fans, he stated: I think there is in our consciousness a hidden room. In this room, it is where our real selves live and create art. Sometimes it is difficult to enter it; others leave it. I imagine this room as dark or poorly lit, like a train station at night or a pit.javi2541997

    Thanks for sharing this. Were you there? I've read or listened to Murakami and yes, he has interesting things to say about himself and his writing. His creative use of metaphors. A metaphysical imagination, perhaps? Surreal ideas.

    What I learnt is that consciousness could hold a secret (rather than hidden) location where our ideas flourish. I agree with Murakami that it is difficult to join these locations. Well, what he actually said is that it is difficult to be aware when we are in our creative room, hidden from the rest.javi2541997

    In what sense did he mean 'aware' - fully conscious of the world around? The creative space being the layer below. The 'hidden' subconscious or unconscious. So, when in writing mode, you are in a flow of ideas and images desiring no interruptions from daily life. "Time for tea, dear!"

    I came to the conclusion that there could be three rooms for surreal or real ideas, dreams, etc. It is more normal to have a single tangible room. A second room where the tangible and unreal could be blurred (our dreams), and a third door, the one Murakami mentioned as the source of our creative thoughts, apparently.javi2541997

    Interesting conclusion and fascinating how the magic number 3 always seems to arise when talking about consciousness. Even in some TPF short stories about dreams/houses, there are 3 levels connected by stairs; the dark basement, the full main living area, the attic where things are stored or people hide.

    The 3 lines in meditative haiku verse. Metaphysical imagination? Realism. Idealism. Does it matter what label is used if there is a sensitive and sensible awareness that flows and captures a moment of time...I remember your simple poem which captivated readers in the TPF competition :sparkle:

    Freud's 3 levels: the structure of mental life - id, ego, superego. The 3 levels of consciousness, the iceberg analogy - the conscious (visible tip of the iceberg), the preconscious (just below the surface), and the unconscious (vast submerged portion).
    https://www.simplypsychology.org/unconscious-mind.html

    ***

    Only a few of the many links:
    https://eprints.glos.ac.uk/2393/ - with free download.

    Helewise, Freya (2012) Boundless Venus: the Crossover of the Conscious and Unconscious in the Works of Haruki Murakami. Masters thesis, University of Gloucestershire.
    Perhaps too academic - heavy reading at 122 pages! But the pdf allows you to skip to interesting parts.

    ***

    https://owlcation.com/humanities/1Q84-Is-About-Portals-of-Consciousness
    The novel, which is technically three books in one, holds together by what I call "portals of consciousness." Murakami is known for his works that play off ideas of intuition and psychic prowess. His readers are left wondering if the events in his stories are to be taken at face value as reality or if the events are about the characters losing their minds. The author pushes readers to think beyond what they expect of consciousness, that perhaps humans can do incredible things with their minds if they let themselves tap into the subdued parts of themselves.

    Murakami’s books aren’t for everyone. They can be violent and sexually graphic. For other readers, Murakami might be too strange. 1Q84, like many of his works, can be better understood if you know a thing or two about psychologist Carl Jung. In fact, Murakami pens a unique chapter in the novel that briefly mentions Jung. It’s one of the last chapters called “Cold or Not, God Is Present.” (This is a play on the phrase “called or not, God is present.
    ***
    Last but not least, an article written by Murakami himself. Quotes:
    I want to open a window in their souls’: Haruki Murakami on the power of writing simply.
    The master storyteller on finding a voice, creative originality and why he has never suffered from writer’s block.

    Writing in a foreign language taught me to express thoughts and feelings with a limited set of words.

    It is my belief that a rich, spontaneous joy lies at the root of all creative expression

    I came across this line recently in the New York Times, written about the American debut of the Beatles: “They produced a sound that was fresh, energetic and unmistakably their own.” These words may provide the best definition of originality available. “Fresh, energetic, and unmistakably your own.”

    Originality is hard to define in words, but it is possible to describe and reproduce the emotional state it evokes. I try to attain that emotional state each time I sit down to write my novels. That’s because it feels so wonderfully invigorating. It’s as if a new and different day is being born from the day that is today.
    Guardian - Murakami on the power of writing simply
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    I wonder if there is someone about who can explain how 'accepted answer' works? God, are you there?
    — Amity

    I don't want to derail this very interesting OP but after reading your question, I believe I can help you, Amity.
    javi2541997

    Heaven be praised :smile:

    However, I do not believe that 'accepted answer' follows a pattern of quality.javi2541997

    I know. I mean who does this AI guy think he is they are :roll:
    Seeing as how you're here, javi, good to see ya' - I wonder if you have any thoughts on 'metaphysical imagination'. What it means to you? Or anything else you'd care to add or comment on...the surreal wonder of language/s? Where your creative ideas stem from...
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Hmm. I thought perhaps you had been meddling with the OP, pressed a button to change the thread's category to 'Question' or something like that. I wonder if there is someone about who can explain how 'accepted answer' works? God, are you there? :pray:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    The term 'surreal' in my updated title is a way of seeing ideas and symbols as being a potential shift from metaphysics as absolutes, to the scope of a tentative notion of the metaphysical imagination.

    View Answer
    Jack Cummins

    Accepted AnswerJack Cummins
    What?!
    Why? Eh? :chin:

    Does this mean the question: How 'Surreal' are Ideas?' has been answered to your satisfaction?
    Or indicates your wish to end the thread, or your participation in it?
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Oh, we have crossed posts... it's all good :smile:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    The thread was intended to explore the debate over idealism, but with reference to semantics.
    — Jack Cummins
    What "debate"? You haven't even stated the proposition in contention we're supposed to either be for (thesis) or against (antithesis). Please clarify ...
    180 Proof

    I am totally bemused by the turn of events. However, I don't think Jack's intention was to start a 'for and against' debate. His style is exploratory. A follow-up to certain books he is reading.
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    I enjoy the exploratory aspect of your threads. And admire how you attempt to respond to each participant. If you are under personal stress, then is it wise to put further pressure on yourself? I know there is a plus side - a release of thoughts in writing and engaging with others with similar interests. However, when it comes to the big topics like 'Idealism', then it can become increasingly messy.
    I have sympathy with seeing how things go in a discussion and was inspired to read more. Still pondering 'metaphysical imagination'. Thanks for all your effort but remember to breathe and chill :cool:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Disappointed. It's been done before...and probably better...see Search box for other threads on Idealism. For starters: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13196/speculations-in-idealism/p1 - started by @Tom Storm.
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    OK. Later... :sparkle:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Glad you enjoyed. I just typed in 'metaphysical imagination' et voilà :cool:

    It wasn't exactly what I was looking for. Convoluted theories give me a headache.
    There's plenty out there relating truth to understanding to interpretation. I wanted something I could get my teeth into, a bit more 'arty' and relatable as it were...

    I haven't read all of this but it seems to tick a few boxes - with downloadable pdf:

    “Landscape and the Metaphysical Imagination”
    Hepburn, Ronald W. | from Multimedia Library Collection: Environmental Values (journal)
    Hepburn, Ronald W. “Landscape and the Metaphysical Imagination.” Environmental Values 5, no. 3 (1996): 191–204. doi:10.3197/096327196776679320.

    Aesthetic appreciation of landscape is by no means limited to the sensuous enjoyment of sights and sounds. It very often has a reflective, cognitive element as well. This sometimes incorporates scientific knowledge, e.g.,geological or ecological; but it can also manifest what this article will call “metaphysical imagination,” which sees or seems to see in a landscape some indication, some disclosure of how the world ultimately is. The article explores and critically appraises this concept of metaphysical imagination, and some of the roles it can play in our aesthetic encounters. (Source: The White Horse Press)
    Environment and Society - Landscape and the Metaphysical Imagination

    On p4/15 the question is posed: Why should metaphysical imagination be underacknowledged today? and then gives the answer as 'embarrassment'. Because it might be seen as a religious experience, lacking rational support. Other strands are explored like truth and the scientific understanding of nature.
    So far, I find this thought-provoking, and easy to read in quite an old-fashioned style.
    More about the author, here:

    Ronnie worked alongside Donald MacKinnon and Antony Flew, both serving as important, early mentors. Other thinkers he often turned to included Kant, Marcel, and Otto. This dynamic set of influences shaped a philosophical approach which insisted upon a dialectic between perception and theory, phenomenology and analytic method, where each would be at hand to question and sometimes undermine the other.
    Ronnie was wary of fixed positions, and often preferred a critical metaphysical outlook which sometimes put him at odds with other philosophers. In his exploration of the links and boundaries between the aesthetic, moral and religious, his attention was drawn to wonder, the contemplative stance, imagination, the sublime, freedom, respect for nature, and the sacred. Ronnie brought this distinctive approach together with autobiography, narrative and the shaping of the ethical life to challenge moral philosophy’s preoccupation with rules and principles in his paper ‘Vision and Choice in Morality’, his contribution to an Aristotelian Society-Mind Association symposium with Iris Murdoch in 1956.
    British Aesthetics - Ronald W. Hepburn

    ***

    That really resonated with a lot of my thinking.wonderer1

    Care to expand? Any examples of how metaphysical imagination is used?
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Thanks for further clarification. Even if we all end up in a tangled web of confusion...it's fun, innit?! Well...hmm...sometimes :wink:
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    The author of the paper you linked to writes

    …justified belief aims at truth, not imaginative capacity, or understanding. If we focus too much on having justified beliefs, it is harder for us to suspend disbelief and try to inhabit views that we don’t believe.

    Thinking of metaphysics this way as split off from empirical truth perpetuates a dualism between ideas and reality, the physical and the metaphysical. The philosophers I follow don’t treat the metaphysical as ‘imaginative capacity’, but as the plumbing undergirding the intelligibility of a true belief.
    Joshs

    OK. Update: I started reading the article, then started skimming, then stopped. Confused and bemused.
    I have sympathy with the view that imagination is central to understanding no matter what kind of 'truth' is involved. This involves a willingness to investigate other ways of thinking - to come in closer to an other's perspective or 'world'. Are some people more capable of this than others? Creatives in any field?

    I didn't read the author as trying to separate ideas and reality. But to see the value in describing metaphysics as being like art rather than science. Views or ideas are developed or generated by imagination. But this also includes what is experienced. It's a combination. But there is a high chance of me not having understood a word!

    As to the 'intelligibility of a true belief' - is this about understanding what someone truly believes? How can this be known? It seems that engaging in this might mean putting aside self, or pulling aside our own blinkers, all the better to see/hear/sense an other. Is that what you meant by 'plumbing'? To clear the blockages in pipes? Or is it more a processing system or conceptual structures...

    Your chosen quote comes at the conclusion of the article:

    Metaphysics as Essentially Imaginative and Aiming at Understanding
    Michaela Markham McSweeney
    Abstract: I explore the view that metaphysics is essentially imaginative. I argue that
    the central goal of metaphysics on this view is understanding, not truth. Metaphysicsas-essentially-imaginative provides novel answers to challenges to both the value and epistemic status of metaphysics.

    [...]
    There are other things that matter besides truth. Imagination is both intrinsically and instrumentally (in part because it can lead to understanding) valuable. Understanding is an important goal of certain kinds of inquiry. On the metaphysics-as-essentially-imaginative view, both imagination and understanding are central to what metaphysics is for. But justified belief aims at truth, not imaginative capacity, or understanding. If we focus too much on having justified beliefs, it is harder for us to suspend disbelief and try to inhabit views that we don’t believe. And there is value in doing so.
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Thanks for the quote and informed response. I haven't fully read or understood the paper, as yet. So, not sure of context. Interesting subject. Imaginative plumbing?

    It's possible that any confusion in my posts is on account of stress, because it can lead to muddled thinking. However, it would probably be going too far to describe me as 'psychotic' or 'deluded'.Jack Cummins

    I think you're doing just great, given your stress levels. I'm confused by what it is you're trying to unravel. That's another fine knot you've got me in :wink:
    You led me here:

    Metaphysical Imagination' - what do you think it is? How have you used it?
    In the meantime, I found this: https://philarchive.org/archive/MCSMAE
    Amity

    [ BTW, you introduced the idea of psychosis. Is this a case of "You don't have to be mad to plumb 'metaphysical imagination' but it helps." :chin: ]

    Edit to clarify: I am asking you what you think 'metaphysical imagination' is and what it involves/entails? You introduced it here:
    ... seeing ideas and symbols as being a potential shift from metaphysics as absolutes, to the scope of a tentative notion of the metaphysical imagination.Jack Cummins
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Language is the way humans process experiences, with the formation of concepts, but it does not mean that it the only possible way. For example, it is possible to form visual representations of ideas and this itself is likely to have come first in human culture, such as in symbolic representations.Jack Cummins

    Yes, of course, that is why I included 'images':
    ...any interpretations of anything depend on our minds processing words/images,Amity

    Ancient representational art.
    The painting of a wild pig and three human-like figures is at least 51,200 years old, more than 5,000 years older than the previous oldest cave art.
    The discovery pushes back the time that modern humans first showed the capacity for creative thought.

    Prof Maxime Aubert from Griffith University in Australia told BBC News that the discovery would change ideas about human evolution.

    “The painting tells a complex story. It is the oldest evidence we have for storytelling. It shows that humans at the time had the capacity to think in abstract terms,” he said.
    BBC News - World's oldest cave art

    Real or Surreal Ideas can be found and shared anywhere...in imagination and creativity.
    I really don't understand what your problem is? I note your edit:
    The term 'surreal' in my updated title is a way of seeing ideas and symbols as being a potential shift from metaphysics as absolutes, to the scope of a tentative notion of the metaphysical imagination.Jack Cummins

    :chin:

    'Metaphysical Imagination' - what do you think it is? How have you used it?
    In the meantime, I found this: https://philarchive.org/archive/MCSMAE
  • How 'Surreal' Are Ideas?
    Also, despite the emphasis on physicalism, all interpretations are dependent on ideas and language. What is language and its connections to symbolic forms of interpretation? Are ideas mind-dependent, subjective, objective or intersubjective constructs in human semantics?Jack Cummins

    Of course, any interpretations of anything depend on our minds processing words/images, ideas shared through language. Language is the main way we think and communicate. You have expressed your ideas here. You know how it works via symbols, syntax and semantics.

    We send and receive messages. To inform, to persuade, to express concerns/feelings and so on.
    It involves imagination and interaction with self and others. Language fascinates the ordinary reader of fiction and the linguistics expert. Not to mention the philosopher. So many ways...

    When it comes to Berkeley and his idealist philosophy. You paraphrased it:

    One author he points to is Berkley and the query about whether a tree makes a sound if there is no human being to experience it.Jack Cummins
    Are you sure that is what he asked? If you weren't there to hear it?

    "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions regarding observation and perception.
    While the origin of the phrase is sometimes mistakenly attributed to George Berkeley, there are no extant writings in which he discussed this question. The closest are the following two passages from Berkeley's A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, published in 1710. [...]

    The current phrasing appears to have originated in the 1910 book Physics by Charles Riborg Mann and George Ransom Twiss. The question "When a tree falls in a lonely forest, and no animal is near by to hear it, does it make a sound? Why?" is posed along with many other questions to quiz readers on the contents of the chapter, and as such, is posed from a purely physical point of view
    Wiki

    This time the question involves 'an animal'. It broadens the perspective. Outwards away from 'man'.

    Also, in fiction, the idea is considered by Terry Pratchett in 'Small Gods', p2, when he writes that the recurring philosophical question 'Does a falling tree in the forest make a sound when there is no one to hear?' says something about the nature of philosophers, because there is always someone in a forest. It may only be a badger, wondering what that cracking noise was, or a squirrel a bit puzzled by all the scenery going upwards, but someone. At the very least, if it was deep enough in the forest, millions of small gods would have heard it.'
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?
    :up: :kiss:

    Hilariously tragic. El-ev-en! :rofl:

    It reminds me of when my car wouldn't start. I phoned breakdown and suffered my way through the menu choice. Then I had to spell out the registration number to a friendly, female computer.
    ''S''.
    "Sorry, that number is not recognised. Please repeat."
    *sighs*
    I articulated a clear and careful, ''Ess!"
    "Is that 'F' for Foxtrot?"
    :rage: "No, it's S for..."
    Hold the line...
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?
    They'd shoot you dead, just for being incomprehensible. Red-blooded, gun-totin' 'Merickans hate it when they don't understand something.Vera Mont

    That's just not gonna happen, trust me! One of my greatest talents is speech shifting to fit in with whoever's around...I'm good. And when I bring my sample bottles of malt whisky...and host tasting sessions...they'll turn soft as smashed neeps and tatties. We have our ways...yup indeedy.
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?

    Well, whatever makes you think I look vulnerable?!
    Dae ye no' ken I'm a hard-nosed, Glaswegian bitch from hell...with the fuckin' filthiest mouth ye widnae touch wi' a barge-pole. Ma Hielan' grannie is worser than dried heather stuck up yer arse.

    But kidding aside (ah'm no' frae Glesga) you're right. I never thought of that. Playing a character. What about a mix of Katherine Hepburn and Clarice Starling as shape-shifting spaced out Time Traveller...
    See, I have NO imagination! All outta masks and melodrama :sad:
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?
    :smile: :up: :cool:

    Take care. Stay safe. :sparkle:
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?
    Ah, a muse for every purpose. I suppose... Me, I prefer one familiar spirit, even not a particularly powerful one. (My top favourite Terry Pratchett book is Small Gods.)Vera Mont

    Thanks. I found the audio re-recording and it's now 'On hold' in my Libby app. From Penguin:

    Listen to 40 magnificent new re-recordings of Terry Pratchett's Discworld series, read by leading names from British stage and screen including Bill Nighy, Peter Serafinowicz, Indira Varma and Andy Serkis. This epic programme of new audiobooks truly has something for everyone.Penguin - Discworld in Audio

    I might have to say "Au Revoir!" for a spell. Looking at travel options for Deadwood...
  • A Review and Critical Response to the Shortcomings of Popular Secularist Philosophies
    I'm sorry but this 'contrast' doesn't make sense to me. There is nothing simple about secularism as a philosophy. Leaving it here, thanks.schopenhauer1
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?
    Thanks for sharing your loss and how you coped.

    I won't indulge in more political analysis/speculation because I am not sufficiently informed and don't wish to side-track further. But I feel the need to address this:
    But, of course there is the dynamic of the counterprotests, which is the more left wing ventilation protest about so much misery and suffering.Jack Cummins

    I agree that there are complex issues underlying the riots/protests that need to be addressed. However, there seems to be a significant difference in the current make-up of the vicious attacks of the hard right rioters (young, white English males) and the more peaceful anti-hate, anti-fascist protestors (a mix of all genders, age and colour coming together as a 'community').

    Anything to the left of the rioters includes the centre and right of centre, not just left-wing activists.

    In Walthamstow, east London, thousands took over the street outside an immigration bureau shouting “we fight back.”Newspapers from across the spectrum, including several aligned with the center-right, united in praise of the “anti-hate marchers.

    “The show of force from the police and, frankly, the show of unity from communities, together defeated the challenges that we’ve seen,” Mark Rowley, commissioner of London’s Metropolitan Police, said Thursday.
    Politico - The night Britain fought back against riots

    I'll end here.There's bound to be more trouble in the pipe-line but...
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?
    Thanks for this further explanation. I understand the pleasure gained in poetry v the prosaic. You persuasive words poetic in themselves - 'an oracle of syntaxes and silences'.

    Poetry. I'm "attracted to" all the very human, Deadwood characters, major and minor, because each one is an oracle of syntaxes and silences, profanies and cries peculiar to that imaginary-historical place. I'm even more "attracted to" the female and beta-male (i.e. quasi-Beckettian) characters than I am to Al Swearengen even though he tends to be more quotable and one of the two main protagonists (the other being Seth Bullock).180 Proof

    It seems I might have to pack my bags and travel to Deadwood...
  • Tragedy and Pleasure?

    A quick response. Sorry to hear of your increased stress levels and continuing insecurity concerning a safe and affordable place to live in London. Pleasure may well be 'an antidote to suffering' - how would that work in your case? Coming here and 'ventilating'? But it doesn't solve any underlying problems or the causes of suffering. Any type at any level.

    Going back to Freud's ideas, catharsis involves sexuality but trauma too. It also involves the whole spectrum of love and hatred, with aggression sometimes being a source of cathartic pleasure.Jack Cummins

    Yes. And how quickly we go from one extreme of the spectrum to the other. Too many absolute statements being made and positions taken. The either/or scenario plain to witness in American politics and beyond. High stakes in being seen as a white 'saviour'.
    Now, Harris is viewed as the smiling figure of Hope (Love) contrasted to Trump's growling aggression stirring Fear (Hate). It's never as simple as that, away from the cameras, is it? The performance of actors...those behind the scenes pulling strings. They must be having a laugh as they enjoy the results of their manipulations.

    I am wondering about this in relation to the outbreak of the current outbreak of riots in the UK. In some ways it is the opposite to the Brixton riots which were based on opposition to racism. Rioting may be the expression of deep anger and hatred, like the expression of primordial anger of the tribe in the form of cathartic aggression in real life as opposed to in the form of the arts.Jack Cummins

    Today's riots in England are stoked by the fascist hard right. Good to read of the counter protesting forces, here:

    From Newcastle to London to Bristol, anti-racist demonstrators stood up against threat of further racist riots.

    The scale of the anti-racism protests was surely sending a message: an effort to change the narrative after a week dominated by rampant far-right, anti-immigrant violence.

    In Birmingham’s jewellery quarter, outside a migrant centre, they chanted “fascist scum out of Brum”.

    In Liverpool they held banners such as “Nans Against Nazis”, “Immigrants welcome. Racists not” and “When the poor blame the poor only the rich win”. An elderly man with a portable speaker resting on his walking frame played John Lennon’s Give Peace a Chance on repeat.
    Guardian - Protest - United against hate

    I don't believe for one minute that this will be the end of it. As yet, in Scotland we have been spared. Why? Some theories:
    https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/holyrood/24500512.scotland-far-escaped-riots/