Hi Rhymer

Thank you for your summary. And as our internalised models can never match the real world, it is interesting to trace our patterns of distortions, which we often call beliefs.

why not?

Mirror Symmetry?

Gestalt Psychology?

And, I measure it by observation/perception/interpretation.

And, intuition.

My perception is that whatever happens within our brains, and however it works, we nonetheless create internally (in the brain) a symbolic 'copy' of what we have concluded 'exists out there'. We have to have this in order to interact (hopefully, successfully) with everything external to our own bodies (and to our own bodies as well).

We (unconciously, most of the time) review our model (or possibly create new ones as time goes by - hence child, adult, parent - a major new model for each) in the light of consideration, and new experience or realisation.
Changing our model is very hard work, which explains why grieving is so painful.

These are purely my own conclusions, which, for me seem realistic and probably 'synonymous with what really happens if I have got it wrong.
In others words, the ideas are like 'it's as if this what happens' and I can't think of any other better explanation. Only my own ideas, and quite possibly way off-beam!

Rick,

Why according to Richard Feynman is it supposed to bother you?

What line of thought was Feynman entertaining here?

Alan Bloom 1930 - 1992

Professor of sociology, co-director of the John M. Olin Center for Inquiry into the Theory and Practice of Democracy. Bloom's book The Closing of the American Mind (1987) is a study of the narrowing scope of "permissable" intellectual criticism and discovery in universities, and a reduction of the rigour of their curriculum, as effects of rampant humanism and the declining importance of morality in these institutions.

"There must be an outside for the inside to have meaning."

There must be something beyond ourselves to give those selves a sense of what we are about.

Feynman, in his physics lectures, often implied that no one can or should understand quantum mechanics.

Where does the C I (of QM and reality) become discontinuous for you?

complementarity

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/#4

Extrapolating from what you wrote - if you have described the situation accurately, it would seem that the results of a quantum event, whether the reflection or emission of a particle or photon, or an internal state change, is unpredictable, irrelevent of whether anyone observes the event.

Sounds in Bishop Berkeley 's mood. Hmmm?

You keep Bishop Berkeley point Trip?

[a funny notion]
Though in the computer games the new levels are loaded into the Operative memory only when you enter that level or approach the new location in the game. E.g. in Doom 2 game the enemies start to move (the processor changes their coordinates) when you approach to the location).
[end of the funny notion]

[a joke]
Though the speed of light is considered to be the upper limit of “material transaction” (if not to take into account EPR paradox). Some may dare to joke that when the number of operations per second is processed in a box which moves with speed near to the speed of light, then The Operator have to change the coordinates of the box and correlate coordinate changing of any object within the box with the box coordinate changing in the space, thus as The Operator is unable to change the coordinates more faster than the speed of light, then he is forced to delay the coordinate changing in the box as the changing of the coordinates within the box require coordinate change per second beyond his operational abilities, so within the joke you can say that that is why The Operator slows the flow of events in the box, moving with speed near to the speed of light, all due to his INABILITY to Process the Calculations more faster. So who do you like the joke of Enki? Nice is not it?
[end of the joke]

[a Moral]
But as we all know that the Spoon Exists! Then. Long live the human believe in existence of the SPOON!
[end of the Moral]

Not all people see the material world objectively the same. It's all in slight perceptual variations arrived at from specific cognitive abillities.

'Thinking' about what we perceive. This seems illogical Bones.

Am I making an error now, because I sure am thinking about what I interpret/perceive of this statement.

eg?

i.e.?

Dear Mr. Rhymer,

I agree with you partly in matters related with rain. But I doubt that the imagination fully can be considered as part of the perception.
And I want to put one word more related with the imagination:
(a) One can imagine in his mind absolutely absurd things.
( But one can also imagine in his mind (re play) different possibilities of the coming future and quite possible realizations of events as well as project the scientific progress as well as foster interesting applications of different things in a new way. Thus such man thinks on the verge of the unimaginable. Actually by doing this he/she nears reality to that unimaginable, as thinking on the verge of the unimaginable is the first step of transforming the reality.

The other question is whether that process of thinking on the verge of the unimaginable can trigger (or correlate) the events or not? Within the first approximation (dialectical materialism) without any hesitation one can state that it is not possible.
But from the point of ideas percolation it may look like possible. There is an opinion that an idea once being triggered in the consciousness slowly transforms and tends to get transferred in a form of secondary mirroring via other ideas, which once being expressed and comprehended may, not directly, trigger the same initial idea in the brain of other people. As the idea transfer via secondary patterning will spread all over the world (certainly each with specific speed of percolation) the probability that it will be realized is extremely high. I think that it is extremely negative phenomena and must be studied with almost care if people want to think about the security and well being of our world !

I think that my dear Bishop Berkeley in some way accentuating on that. You can trace the same frames in the writings of Erich Fromm when he writes about the necessity of the prophets today, something similar you can find in Jung writings (e.g. he points on specific cases related with the printed news info).

Very good idea. I have a list of collected patters, which falsely claim extrasensory perception. The common victims of such specific illusions are women. As for centuries they have developed an unconscious art of how to attract men by different tricks, just like a flower attracts bees.

(dialectical materialism)?

How the individual (perceptive/subjective) reality becomes the collective reality.