The Nature of Perception:

What is the nature of reality, is the ultimate question.. The problem for stems from the unreal, namely the perceptual judgments of truth and falsity. By nature, every species has its physical and sensory limitations. The mind has to interpret what it is able to sense, and act on that information. Unfortunately the information is far from complete, so the mind must fill the gaps of physical sensation. To do this the mind draws from memories of previous sensations, experiences and understanding. The typical list of senses includes sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell. To these five physical senses, we can attributed a sixth: mind. Naturally, with six senses there are six perceptions. Perception is the unreal part, the workings of mind.

Though the senses are necessarily limited, this is not the largest problem we have with them. The largest problem we have with the senses is the amount of attention paid to the information received. Even though the mind has to fill in gaps, it also neglects the vast majority of information provided to it. Most information goes into the subconscious and never enters conscious thought. The difference between conscious and unconscious is not a difference that can be mapped on a picture of the brain. Neurons literally take turns participating as either. Neurons that are merely transmitters of information, including those that regulate bodily functions, is not part of this process. As with other cells of the body, they justifiably cannot be categorized as conscious or subconscious. They are purely functional; obeying the direction or reacting to the choices of neurons that do participate. We should detour temporarily into the workings of the nervous system so we can get a firm grasp of conscious and subconscious.

The nervous system is highly fascinating. Unlike any other cells constituting the body, neurons are completely independent. They have their own circulatory systems, they digest, they think, they remember, they grow and they even kill each other. We are born with one set of neurons, and the neurons we die with were all there when we were born. No one knows exactly how long a neuron can live. There is no ideal body that can outlive the neurons; not including those circumstances where neurons die of "unnatural" causes (unnatural being anything other than their own old age). Old age is a function of decay, to which neurons are extremely adept so long as they have the nutrients and stimuli to combat it. Each neuron is an independent entity; limited only to the contacts its axons and dendrites make. In essence, we can view the nervous system as a large pure democracy. Just as in a real democracy, though everyone can vote, typically only those involved with or affected by the subject will vote. Also, as in a real democracy, some votes carry greater weight than others do (here we are distinguishing from the ideal democracy). In reality, a democracy (applied to a nation, not a convenient population) is always regulated by a sample of the population (less than the whole). Most often, democracies are regulated by pluralities. Plurality is a business term applied to stock voting, but is also applied in politics. When several options are provided in a vote, there may be no individual item that receives a majority. There may, however, be a single item that receives more affirmation than the others may, and is hence adopted. This would be called adoption through a plurality vote. To have a plurality means to have the control.

We can say, by these terms, that we consciously function on pluralities, though we may also perceive the perspectives of less representative neurons. As in a real democracy, it is not difficult for the agreement of the plurality to be reached and led through conclusion without the input of the majority. This is the nature of conscious perception, a sort of bureaucracy filled both with adequacies and inadequacies. Both of which form the basis of belief, and hence the judgments of truth and falsity being entirely distinct from and applied to reality, not to mention also distinct from, applied to and also integral of unreality (fantasy).

A more descriptive account of meditation, its processes and methods. For our purposes here, however, we must address certain qualities in meditation leading close to transcendental apperception (namely the focus all neural information). No matter how great the meditation, complete transcendental apperception will never be attained. The form of meditation that comes closest is called meditation without object. Ironically, this form of meditation is focussing on "no-thing," not even to include the concept of no-thing itself. It is pure emptiness. How can pure emptiness bring us closer to transcendental apperception and transcendental reality? Not only does it bring us closer here, it actually brings us closer to apperceiving an antithesis of transcendental metaphysical reality, which is required for TMR to fill. Confused?
Although it is true that TMR has no presentable antithesis, it is the totality of everything, hence a logical antithesis is the lack thereof. When we consider the lack of totality, the consideration is part of that totality. Meditation without object, however, is not a consideration; it is becoming the antithesis of TMR. As with a null-hypothesis being testable, it is through the antithesis we can observe the thesis. To think about the antithesis of TMR is to cloud the mind with fantasy about TMR, thus blocking transcendental apperception with perception of mind and belief.

alan

Many interesting points here Alan, thank you!

Spooky