Sunday, November 9, 2008

Dreamland II.

Continued from Dreamland I.

I would like to discuss a related hypothesis. I must first draw a picture for you, a picture to be found within the realm of the very small. Imagine if you will the life of a single cell within your body. Where the cell is located and its function is not important (at least not for the sake of our picture.) What is of most concern to us at this time is the cell's perception, its world view so to speak. As a tiny conscious being, the cell can offer us some very odd observations.

1.) It would be most aware of the cells surrounding it.
2.) It might view itself as a vital member of a close-knit family, where it works together to produce effects shared by itself and its family.
There is no reason to believe that this cell or any other cell would understand its orientation or location within the whole body, in fact, it should not know that such a thing as a
3.) A group of like-minded or like-functioning cells would probably understand themselves in terms of their shared function.
4.)As an observer, the cell should have no idea that it is part of a larger whole, the human body. In fact, it should have no idea that the "body" exists at all!

As "human beings" we frequently ask the question, "Who am I?" Rarely do we ask "What am I?"
-C. Klinert Do we even consider the possibility that "we" exist as a part of a larger whole, that which is inescapable and yet virtually unknowable?

Let us propose for a moment that "we" are part of a larger whole, and that that larger whole is what we would traditionally call the "soul." The soul could also be called the mind. The mind is that unnamed observer, sitting hidden in dark. Try as we might, we cannot find them, we cannot dissect them to figure out how they work. This larger "mind" would be infinite, composed of every mind-version of oneself (that is to say a whole, composed of an infinite number of parts which are drops of consciousness, and inseparable from the whole) as a conglomerate of consciousness and being. Each "mind-unit" would be one with all the other mind-units, but partitioned off in such a way as to produce a workable individual consciousness. This "collective" mind would account for the random and chaotic nature of human behavior as well as the limitless potential of the human mind. How else can a finite being produce infinite possibilities? Every other finite thing we have encountered, has produced finite effects and possibilities, (even if the number of possibilities seems countless, it is not.) Their are very few people who would be naive enough to suggest that the human mind is finite, especially when they have seen the kinds of functions it can perform while dreaming.
Dreaming leads us to the concept that each mind could communicate on some level with the others. The random nature of dreams can haunt us, fill us with curiosity or even elate or frighten us to the point of tears.

It is time to consider the quantum nature of dreaming, as a real and tangible means of self communication, from one version of yourself to another version. If there are an infinite number of "you," or even a large number, how many of "you" are dreaming at the same time? How many are deep in thought? Would not these versions influence each other in unique and unpredictable ways? Lets us say that what ties them all together is a sense of focus, that which aims the collective power of consciousness into one particular world at a time. We could call this a lensing effect of sorts. If you focus on one world, you would experience that world. The mind has already been established to have certain cohesive and alterative properties, such that events and experiences which do not seem to make sense easily shift out and are replaced and repainted by new ones which more closely fit one's schema (or world view.)

No comments: