these questions were based on the article
"The Conscious, Subconscious, and Unconscious, a New Look at an Old Metaphor"
This Week's Questions
[These questions were posed by E D.]
I just want to take the time to write a little before re-reading the article. There is a conflict in me as to how much more I can learn having already read the article three times. The belief that I don’t need to do it again is not a new one. However it is being countered by what emerged in me during the last homework, the idea that learning and healing are the same experience. I am therefore ambivalent about doing this assignment again. The assignment is provoking ... I'm not sure what. Having said this I am going begin reading now.
Not two paragraphs in, and I have already realized that I had never seen "imagined space,” not as defined nor as written. Three paragraphs into the reading I am surprised to find that I missed the assertion of the article that Freud omitted how the mind develops in his theory of personality.
[Question 1] Are you saying that the introduction of words as labels creates the subconscious layers?
[Answer] I am saying that the introduction of words as "labels" stimulates the development of the subconscious layers. There is also the idea that the demands parents and teachers make on children; that children behave only in ways which will avoid pain, also stimulates this development. Finally, there is also the idea that over time, babies begin to accumulate noticeable amounts of BLocks. And as these BLocks accumulate into threads of similarity, the subconscious deepens. Eventually, then, the more serious BLocks accumulate in the bottom portion of the subconscious, and like dirt accumulating on an unwashed window, this accumulation slowly evolves into the unconscious.
[Question 2] Is pain what creates a sense of time? Is pain is a marker? Before pain, during pain, and after pain?
[Answer] Pain hides or distorts one's sense of time, as the majority of the suffering we feel comes from the experience of aloneness and not from the event itself. This is why your baby son can be OK when experiencing what you interpret to be painful events. He still feels pain as simply another event, albeit an unpleasant one. Why? Because he still experiences it in a connected state and so, does not suffer the pain of aloneness. He, in fact, suffers very little really. You and your wife probably suffer much more, each time you reinterpret what you see your baby doing as suffering.
[Question 3] Does historical time create the unconsciousness?
[Answer] In a sense, yes, as it requires that people be observers of themselves and not themselves. In other words, you have to see events from the inside to conscious of them. Thus, people who view life only from the theoretical distance of Layer 2 can never be conscious of their life events. They can only be aware of the patterns within these events. Admittedly, this awareness can sometimes be glorious. But conscious? No.
[Question 4] Is time what makes the connections between events?
[Answer] No. Time is an illusion. Ask Einstein. It's all just relative. However, time is the carrier of the information in the events, similar to how there is always a carrier frequency for the content of radio waves and television signals. "Time" combined with the "information" in events then, is what creates the illusion in people that events have literal, real meanings. More over, these illusions of real meaning are the basis of all "why logic." And all blame. And all talk therapies which are logic based.
[Question 5] Does the absence of time indicate a lack of connections between events?
[Answer] That the events are separate is an illusion. Therefore, there is no real lack of connectedness, only the experience of this lack. (Note: this is very similar to what the Course in Miracles says. Thus, despite the obviously religious overtones, I have found much truth in this book.)
[Question 6] So if children begin to erroneously see that which preceded pain as the cause of the pain, what is BLocked? The blank spot? It can never be what you believe caused the problem?
[Answer] That's right, it can never be what you thought caused the problem. Why? Because these "believed causes" are always relative and never absolutes, while the real truth is always an absolute and never relative.
What I mean by this is that all "true things" are infinitely variable and yet never change. A "square," for instance, is always a square no matter how you make one. It logically follows then that if something is the true cause of something else, this cause will always provoke the same outcome. This, in fact, is the idea underlying true science.
Here, then is the flaw in logically blaming "believed causes" such as that alcoholic parents cause their children's alcoholism. What I mean is, if alcoholic parents were the cause of their children's alcoholism, then why is the there such variety in the children of alcoholics, as in some get alcoholism, some don't, and no one can predict who will or won't get it.
[Question 6a] How does this approach (using why logic) distance them from the event?
[Questioner has an Emergence] Oh, they're looking in the wrong compartment. They are looking in the unconscious; in layers 1-4, when the answer resides in layers 7-10. Oh, why logic!
[Question 7] I can't picture how being startled wounds.
[Answer] Can you picture how it empties the mind? Now realize that startling events magnetize the mind into a fixed pattern of ideas and holes. This fixed pattern is the injury. More over, it is the startling experience of the suddenly empty mind which actually wounds.
[Question 8] Does "uncertain" = "unknown?"
[Answer] Yes. This is also known as being in Layers 8 through 1. More over, in its most common form, this is the terribly painful experience of "needing to know," the intellectual's most painful Layer 7 experience. Surely quite a powerful force and the main one propelling them back into the safe haven of Layer 2.
[Question 9] I go blank at the question, "Are you beginning to see what makes understanding this a metaphor for consciousness?"
[Answer] Which words can't you picture? Metaphor? Consciousness? If so, know this. These two words are the labels for what I call, "meta-ideas," words for ideas which are so large, we humans can never picture them. So what do we do? We make up pictures for them, as in the anthropomorphic visions we make up for God or for "the devil."
Herein lies one of the best ideas the ancient Greek ever came up with, the idea that the essence of the divine is not the same as the real world manifestations of it.
[Question 10] What is "chi?"
[Answer] Holy cow! Where'd this question come from!
"Chi" is a metaphor for "the experience of movement." Or in other words, "chi" is "information which travels between two connected points" in a circle. Finally, in the words most people would choose to use, "chi" is simply "energy."