Understanding Rationality Explained

Platohagel: What is a Rational person?

Socrates: A rational person is one who consistently uses reason and logical thinking to make decisions and form beliefs. This person prioritizes evidence, coherence, and consistency in their thought process, aiming to avoid biases, emotions, or impulsive judgments that might lead to error. They seek to understand the underlying principles of a situation and weigh the potential consequences of their actions carefully. Rationality, in this sense, involves not only the use of logic but also the willingness to question assumptions, revise beliefs in light of new evidence, and consider the perspectives of others.

Platohagel: Is there a way to logistically arrive at a rational perspective that has become self evident?

Socrates: Rational logic can jump to belief without becoming self-evident when certain gaps in reasoning are filled by assumptions, intuitions, or external influences that aren’t fully scrutinized. This can happen in several ways:

1. Assumptions Taken as Given: Sometimes, premises or assumptions are accepted without thorough examination. If these assumptions are flawed or not self-evident, the conclusion derived from them may be logical within the framework of those assumptions but not necessarily rational or self-evident.
2. Incomplete Reasoning: In some cases, reasoning may be based on incomplete information or insufficient analysis. This can lead to a belief that seems rational but lacks the depth needed to be self-evident. The logic might be sound within a limited context but fail when considered in a broader or more comprehensive context.
3. Cognitive Biases: Cognitive biases can cause individuals to favor certain conclusions that align with their pre-existing beliefs or desires, even if the logical steps leading to those conclusions are weak. The belief might seem rational to the person, but it isn’t self-evident because it’s influenced by biases rather than pure reason.
4. Heuristics and Intuition: People often rely on heuristics—mental shortcuts that simplify decision-making. While heuristics can lead to beliefs that seem rational, they aren’t necessarily self-evident because they bypass the deeper analytical process that would otherwise reveal any underlying flaws or assumptions.
5. Social and Cultural Influences: Beliefs can be influenced by social, cultural, or ideological factors that shape how one interprets evidence or constructs logical arguments. A belief formed under such influences may seem rational within a specific cultural or social context but isn’t self-evident in a universal sense.
6. Complex or Abstract Concepts: In some cases, logic deals with concepts that are highly abstract or complex. The leap from logical reasoning to belief may occur because the full implications of the reasoning process are difficult to grasp or because the reasoning process is opaque to those not fully versed in the subject matter. Here, the belief may not be self-evident because the underlying reasoning isn’t easily accessible or understood.
7. Pragmatic Acceptance: Sometimes, a belief is accepted as rational based on its practical utility rather than its self-evidence. In this case, the logic behind the belief is oriented toward achieving a particular goal or outcome, and the belief is adopted because it works, even if it isn’t self-evident.

In all these cases, the leap to belief occurs without the belief being self-evident because the belief is built on foundations that haven’t been fully examined or because external factors, rather than pure reason, drive the conclusion. Rationality requires not just logical consistency but also thoroughness in examining the premises, evidence, and potential biases involved.

Platohagel: Can intuition form the basis of the image that is portrayed in a persons mind.

Socrates: Yes, intuition can indeed form the basis of the image that is portrayed in a person’s mind. Intuition is the ability to understand or know something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning. This intuitive process often involves the synthesis of past experiences, emotions, and subconscious knowledge, all of which can create mental images or impressions that feel compelling and true, even if they are not fully articulated or rationally explained.

Here’s how intuition can shape the image in a person’s mind:

1. Subconscious Processing: Intuition often draws on vast amounts of information stored in the subconscious mind. These are things you have learned or experienced but may not consciously remember. When faced with a situation, your mind can quickly process this information and form an image or impression without you being fully aware of the steps involved. This image might guide your understanding or decision-making.
2. Pattern Recognition: The human mind is highly skilled at recognizing patterns, often on an unconscious level. Intuition can create a mental image based on patterns it detects from past experiences. For example, someone might get a “gut feeling” about a person or situation because their mind has unconsciously recognized similarities to previous experiences, forming an intuitive image of what might happen next.
3. Emotional Influence: Intuition is closely linked with emotions. Emotions can color and shape the images that appear in your mind, making them more vivid or persuasive. An intuitive feeling about something might come with a strong mental image, influenced by how you feel about the situation.
4. Immediacy and Certainty: Intuitive images often come with a sense of immediacy and certainty, even if you can’t explain why. This is because intuition bypasses the slower, more deliberate processes of conscious reasoning. The image formed intuitively might feel more like a sudden realization or a flash of insight.
5. Creativity and Innovation: Intuition can also play a role in creative thinking. When people are brainstorming or trying to solve complex problems, intuitive insights can lead to the formation of new ideas or mental images that are not strictly the result of logical reasoning but rather a synthesis of different thoughts and experiences.

While intuition can be powerful, it’s important to remember that it is not infallible. The images or impressions formed by intuition can be influenced by biases, emotions, or incomplete information. Therefore, while intuition can provide valuable insights, it’s often wise to complement it with rational analysis to ensure that the images in your mind are accurate representations of reality.

Platohagel: Would we not consider Justice to be an amiable process to get to what is self evident to render judgement? We might say we withhold judgement until the process of rationality has been followed?

Socrates: Indeed, we could consider justice to be an amiable process, one that seeks to arrive at what is self-evident or as close to the truth as possible before rendering judgment. Justice, in its ideal form, requires the suspension of judgment until a thorough and rational process has been followed. This ensures that any conclusions or judgments made are not only fair but also grounded in reason and evidence.

Here’s how this concept plays out:

1. Deliberative Process: Justice involves a deliberate and careful process of gathering and examining evidence, hearing all sides, and weighing the facts. This process is meant to strip away biases, emotions, and preconceived notions, allowing what is self-evident or most reasonable to emerge.
2. Withholding Judgment: In the pursuit of justice, one withholds judgment until all relevant information has been considered. This ensures that the final judgment is not rushed or based on incomplete understanding. By withholding judgment, the process respects the complexity of truth and the difficulty of arriving at it.
3. Rationality as a Guide: Rationality serves as a guiding principle in the pursuit of justice. It helps ensure that the process is systematic, consistent, and aligned with principles of fairness. Rational deliberation is essential for discerning what is just, and it requires a commitment to following logical steps and evidence wherever they lead.
4. Self-Evident Truths: Ideally, the outcome of a just process should align with what is self-evident, meaning that the judgment should be clear, reasonable, and convincing to those who understand the reasoning behind it. This doesn’t mean the truth was obvious from the start, but that after careful examination, it becomes apparent and indisputable.
5. Integrity of the Process: Justice is not just about the final judgment but also about the integrity of the process leading to it. A just process requires transparency, fairness, and a willingness to revise judgments if new evidence or reasoning emerges. This ongoing commitment to rationality helps ensure that justice remains dynamic and responsive to the truth.
6. Moral and Ethical Considerations: Justice also involves moral and ethical considerations, which must be balanced with rational analysis. These considerations guide how we interpret the evidence and apply the law or principles in question. The goal is to arrive at a judgment that is not only rationally sound but also ethically right.

In essence, justice can be seen as the pursuit of self-evident truths through a rational and ethical process. By withholding judgment until this process is complete, we honor the complexity of truth and strive to render judgments that are fair, reasonable, and aligned with the deepest principles of justice.

The Law of Attraction

The law of attraction is the name given to the maxim "like attracts like" which in New Thought philosophy is used to sum up the idea that by focusing on positive or negative thoughts a person brings positive or negative experiences into their life.[1][2] This belief is based upon the idea that people and their thoughts are both made from "pure energy", and the belief that like energy attracts like energy Law of Attraction

I do believe there is an organizing principle here( the breaking of symmetry triggers the Higgs mechanism , and of late, [Positive energy theorem] as organizing principle)......some analogies come to mind.  While materialistic of mind as mass), one has to begin to understand how and where this all begins?

“You don’t see what you’re seeing until you see it,” Dr. Thurston said, “but when you do see it, it lets you see many other things. Elusive Proof, Elusive Prover: A New Mathematical Mystery

Quickly,  what came to view was the dung beetle and how elephant shit is rolled into a ball, while this ball becomes the  food for a new generation. Not the best analogy, but one might get the abstraction of a point in a circle.

The fish is "soul food." The water the unconscious, all possible facets of the sensorium. The hook and worm, aspects of the "focus held" while you are fishing.

 Versus..........

The Principle of Finite Imagination II

While one is out fishing.....you drop your line into the water......you use bait to attract the fish......and wait for a bite? Complexity,  of getting fish from a large body of water.

So while analogies, these represent an action we are quite amenable too, given environment and the bait as an attractive,  can bring things to a point.

I too read Napoleon Hill many years ago, and this did form part of my developing perspective about what and how I think now. Positive thoughts versus negative ones which serve as a precursor to environmental change. This can be psychological in affect, as to relationships with people and what is predominant in mind. How we say things to our selves and how things become bleak in our outlook, from our constant underlying breath and from what we can say to ourselves and how we think.

Ideas drawn from vast reservoir of information has to have an attractor, so you set the stage? Thoughts? Incubation? AHA!

Aristotle-The Square of Opposition (Whiteboard Animation)

Aristotle laid out the principles of his logic in his writing Περὶ Ἑρμηνείας, in Latin De Interpretatione, in English On Exposition. It is a graphical representation of the relations between propositions that guarantee their truth. If philosophers and scientists would internalise the logical rules in Aristotle's square of opposition, a lot of misunderstandings would be prevented. SEE: The Square of Opposition as a Whiteboard animation

 Basics of the Square of Opposition of Aristotle

0:06 A proposition (e.g. "All Greeks are men.") consists of a subject ("Greeks") and a predicate ("men").
The four types of propositions are:
Universal positive ("All Greeks are men.", abbreviated "aGM"),
Universal negative ("No Greeks are men.", abbreviated "nGM"),
Particular positive ("Some Greeks are men.", abbreviated "sGM") and
Particular negative ("Some Greeks are not men", abbreviated "sGnM").

1:38 Contradiction (Aristotle)

Universal positive and particular negative, as well as universal negative and particular positive are contradictory. They can't both be true and can't both be false at the same time.

1:59 Contraries (Aristotle)

Universal positive and Universal negative propositions are contraries. They can't both be true, but can both be false at the same time.

2:15 Subcontraries (Aristotle)

Particular positive and Particular negative propositions are subcontraries. They can't both be false, but can both be true at the same time.

2:35 Implication (Aristotle)

Implied propositions (particular positive and particular negative) are true, when their implying propositions (universal positive and universal negative) are true.

2:55 Counter Indication (Aristotle)

Universal propositions (positive and negative respectively) are false, when their particular propositions (positive and negative respectively) are false.

3:19 Converse propositions (Aristotle)

In converse propositions, subjects (e.g. Greeks) and predicates (e.g. men) can be switched without altering the proposition's truth.

Converse Propositions are:
"No Greeks are men" and
"Some Greeks are men".
so it is also true that
"No men are Greeks" as well as
"Some men are Greeks".

3:44 Complements (Aristotle)

A complement of a subject or predicate is everything that it is not.
E.g. "all that is not a man" and "all that is not a Greek".

3:58 Contrapositive propositions (Aristotle)

In contrapositive propositions ("all Greeks are men" and "some Greeks are not men"), if the subjects' and predicates' complements are switched, the proposition retains its truth.

***

See Also:

• Traditional Square of Opposition

Death is Not Final

You all have to know the hammer analogy was made aware to me about a week before this debate took place. Also,  a YouTube label given to this demonstration was posted under "gaming" so I find that kind of funny given the seriousness of this debate.

I pushed Number 1.  But, you also know my bias right so I did not think providing this image would hurt in an way given that you already have some insight into my perspective? My opinion at Sean's Blog as well pertaining to this subject.

So as I am going through the debate I thought it necessary to keep a running tab for my self so as to see from what position one is speaking.  So now that I know Sean is speaking from a Naturalist point of view. I will continue.

A metaphysics that goes beyond the commitments of science is simply unsupported by the best available evidence.^[27]

—Lynne Rudder Baker, Naturalism and the First-Person Perspective

 A naturalistic methodology (sometimes called an "inductive theory of science") has its value, no doubt.... I reject the naturalistic view: It is uncritical. Its upholders fail to notice that whenever they believe to have discovered a fact, they have only proposed a convention. Hence the convention is liable to turn into a dogma. This criticism of the naturalistic view applies not only to its criterion of meaning, but also to its idea of science, and consequently to its idea of empirical method.

— Karl R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, (Routledge, 2002), pp. 52–53, ISBN 0-415-27844-9.

Okay I am at 36:58 of the video so I have had the opportunity to listen to the four speakers. I have to say oh my gosh, there is a lot here to consider, and a lot I have already considered. So I need to respond to that first part of the video.

As life calls us to do our things in the day to day, I also have a schedule today, so this posting will be broken up in terms of my response as to the first part of the video. Please be patient. It also gives me time to think about what has been said.

I want to open with the quote Sean responded too, of Eben Alexanders of Einstein. So give me time to drawn this comment out of Eben's book.

A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks  should be. -Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

I am still ay 36:58 so I needed to finish what  what I have surmised in that first part so I can go on with the video. Below is something that I had written to my Aunt,  so hope she is okay with me repeating it here.  You will see that entry below. It basically sums up the first part of the debate for me.

As I was finishing listening to Steven Novella speak, the quote of Einstein, now gotten from Eben's book, Proof of Heaven under Prologue,  and response given by Sean Carroll was a matter of fact to the whole first part to me as it was for Sean to Eben's Alexanders use of the quote.

Something also interesting to me was Sean's admittance of wanting to believe (that death is not final) but at this point not being able too.That said a lot to me, and in the aspect of being a scientist,  I believe what he is saying.:) So I will continue on with the rest of the video now.

***

 In a note to my Aunt.

Hi Aunt Celine,

 I am a bit of a science buff when it comes to what is currently happening in science. I too had been reading about the NDE for quite a long time as well. Moody agrees with you, about science not quite ready. Since I have studied other aspects of consciousness research, it is my hope that one day we will understand this debate, as a recognition of who we all are as spiritual beings, in a physical body.

What Moody proposes is the beginning of a true dialogue based on logic and reason, and these stem from philosophy. So it is important to see the discussion in terms of where this dialogue can truly begin. Moody mentions pseudoscience and from that, his journey through philosophy. He is trying to set up a credible debate.

 I read Eben Alexander's book as well so I knew where he was coming from, as well I have been following Sean Carroll's science for sometime now. The only one that was sort of new to me was that Steve Novella, and as a neuroscientist, I am open to what he has to say. I must say then I am also a bit of philosopher that has had me venturing through aspect and developments about the Mind/ body debate that is going on, and that is where the science is saying that it is based on materialism. On my own, I have studied Plato and other philosophers.

 In order to accept materialism one has to believe, that consciousness is derived from the brain, while the other perspective is that the brain in my view, is what consciousness uses while the body is alive, but that consciousness can exist, once our body dies. That understanding is in contradiction to what science saids today, but I am saying to science, that they indeed do not have all the facts to make this conclusion even though they can simulate experience from manipulating the physical aspects of the body to produce the near death experience.

Religion has not helped me and I must say, that my upbringing within the Catholic Church has left much for me say, about its patriarchal construct, and how it falls short of providing support for what spiritual means to me. I hope you are not offended.

I do believe in a higher power, and I do believe that Heaven is capable in all of us now. In my education, I might of called it Symmetry, in the very beginning, and science has something to say about that. While I have a real study in reductionism, the work that has been going on, I believe eventually it will lead to an understanding within science, but it has to be developed, and in my view Moody's philosophical standpoint, is where we will start.

***

So I finished the rest of the video last night. There were somethings that were quite memorable to me that stood out.I wanted to quickly move to the end of the debate where each had an opportunity as they did in the beginning to give their last assessment as to why Death is Final, or not.

I was more focused on Sean's response and reiteration of respect for people and their beliefs. This was important to me. When Moody spoke of the work that he had been doing for the last forty years with regard to NDEs and the listening to people about these experiences, these were genuine stories of,  "Death was not Final"  for Moody. I was encouraged by the votes last night, not for which side supposedly won, but by the uncertainty(final 12%) as to the question of what remains as a definitive, as to Death is Final. These shows to me that people in the end still do not know, and that,  they could not be decisive. This to me,  leaves room for work to be done.

I also liked Sean Carroll's response too,  the responsibility of acceptance as to how one may look at life given the perspective of responsibility he has having accepted his position on Death is Final. Of course he might used,  when he was a child, as one might use as Moody did, as was his thrust to understand astronomy.

I believe this to be sincere, and such a question about death that would come to all in the child's mind, a determiner of what the future would bring for him as he sat on that panel. Not so much as a Skeptic full blooded, so as to be glib with the response of,  as if Steve Novella was the amazing Randi and waited for the bet that has not been collected. :) But to remain open, as the undecided results spoke toward, as if,  more information would be needed to make a final definitive statement.

So anyway, another moment stood out in regard to Sean Carroll's response to a woman about where the energy goes once we die. His analogy of a flame going out was like the hammer statement used above, as used in the repertoire of such a question about energy and death. What I liked about the response, was as to where it put the woman in mind. If you have ever come to the point of a logical constructive immobilizing one's position, as it was on the face this woman wore,  as to where the woman could go next. That final deductive state is an important one to me.

I have much more to say about reductionism and how that research is important to me as if the table would be permanent as the atom that make it up, would be a table ad infinitive. So as sure as, matter in all it's constitutions have been described, as to say I am pointing right a it?:) We are not objects like the table. The analogy of the narrative is always important as it is spoken, and as subjective and alone as it might seem there is the greater picture of the story of the NDEr.

I must say too, that the idea of reductionism as much as materialism, causes flinches in those who speak about spiritual things, would make one from that side speak about what is not reducible?  Since energy is an important topic and how we use configuration space to surmise  it's existence,  it becomes a classification of matter. I would assume there is much still to be ascertained.  I read the blogs of other scientists who are at the front with questions phenomenologically expressed that want to see where the science goes next. Just as we have been taken t the limits of where the identification of the Higg's operates and what that energy range is.

Unus Mundus-One World

Unus mundus, Latin for "one world", is the concept of an underlying unified reality from which everything emerges and to which everything returns.

The idea was popularized in the 20th century by the Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Jung, though the term can be traced back to scholastics such as Duns Scotus^[1] and was taken up again in the 16th century by Gerhard Dorn, a student of the famous alchemist Paracelsus.

The striving  for me was to dig deeper into our very natures.  It always the quest to understand the  patterns that reside in us. The very idea for me was that in  this quest to unify,  the objective world(matter) with the world that resides in a center place. To me that place was the source from which all things manifest.

 Jung, in conjunction with the physicist Wolfgang Pauli, explored the possibility that his concepts of the archetype and synchronicity might be related to the unus mundus - the archetype being an expression of unus mundus; synchronicity, or "meaningful coincidence", being made possible by the fact that both the observer and connected phenomenon ultimately stem from the same source, the unus mundus.^[2]

So while there was this objective striving to see how such formations emerged as materiality of such expression,  was a final construct that existed in that external world. For me this was something no one could quite explain to me, yet,  as I moved forward  I began to find such correlates as to others who tried to map that expression.

 It was this psychoid aspect of the archetype that so impressed Nobel laureate physicist Wolfgang Pauli. Embracing Jung's concept, Pauli believed that the archetype provided a link between physical events and the mind of the scientist who studied them. In doing so he echoed the position adopted by German astronomer Johannes Kepler. Thus the archetypes which ordered our perceptions and ideas are themselves the product of an objective order which transcends both the human mind and the external world.^[2]

This as the idea emerged,  I looked for what emergence might mean, as an example of a beginning,  and the subsequent model that may emerge from that source. This then became know as the "arche,"  and the tendency to form"(type)" as a movement forward in the solidifying of that expression. This was a matter bound expression, fully recognizing the need for a spiritual recognition of this opposition as a struggle in with consciousness to seek balance with materiality. Polarity,  as the world of the real.

One of Duchamp's close friends Man Ray (1890–1976) was also one of Duchamp's collaborators. His photograph 'Dust Breeding' (Duchamp's Large Glass with Dust Notes) from 1920 is a document of The Large Glass after it had collected a year's worth of dust while Duchamp was in New York. See:
Dust Breeding (Man Ray 1920)

Such histrionically values were tied to such expressions to have found that the inner world and the outer-world were extremely connected. The observance not seen until it was understood that this psychology was topological interpreting itself from an inductive/deductive stance,  as to the question, and with regard to the nature of the question.

 Jung interpreted the practice of alchemy as the symbolic projection of psychic processes. In Psychology and Alchemy and Mysterium Coniunctionis (1955/56), Jung’s empirical exploration and rediscovery of the objective psyche led him to recognise that the basis of the alchemist’s endeavour was the archetypal union of opposites by means of the integration of opposing polarities: conscious and unconscious, reason and instinct, spiritual and material, masculine and feminine. In the last summaries of his insights on the subject, influenced in part by his collaboration with the Nobel Prize winning physicist Wolfgang Pauli, the old Jung envisions a great psycho-physical mystery to which the old alchemists gave the name of unus mundus (one world). At the root of all being, so he intimates, there is a state wherein physicality and spirituality meet. See:Reflections On Duchamp, Quantum Physics, And Mysterium Coniunctionis

This would place myself in the position of questioning this causal nature to have said that "will" was deeply connected to our psyche,  to have not understood this deeper perception of a reality connection. Also,  that such unification was deeper embedded in this practice of unification,  so as to strive to form,  as a example of an idea into expression.

Betrayal of Images" by Rene Magritte. 1929 painting on which is written "This is not a Pipe"

This alchemy valuation of that work toward expression was based on a fundamental reality of joining the objectified world with the nature of the source. This forming process,  the constructs,  as a fundamental structure of the reality given.

***

See Also:

• The Arche, is a Fundamental Point of View?
• Who is the Clockmaker?
  
• Pauli's World Clock
• Crystal Structure

The Arche, is a Fundamental Point of View?

The term phase is sometimes used as a synonym for state of matter, but there can be several immiscible phases of the same state of matter. Also, the term phase is sometimes used to refer to a set of equilibrium states demarcated in terms of state variables such as pressure and temperature by a phase boundary on a phase diagram. Because phase boundaries relate to changes in the organization of matter, such as a change from liquid to solid or a more subtle change from one crystal structure to another, this latter usage is similar to the use of "phase" as a synonym for state of matter. However, the state of matter and phase diagram usages are not commensurate with the formal definition given above and the intended meaning must be determined in part from the context in which the term is used.

One may find a correlate here with regard to how a question can be properly placed. Lets say, as a result of a inductive/deductive approach this puts one in a position of being truly like the fisherman/woman, looking for fish. However, one might look at that terminology, this might be an insightful way of recognizing a fundamental feature of always gong to the "edge of something?" Dropping a line into the deepest waters of.....?

To wit, it’s the concept of “being directed toward a goal.” In the good old days of Aristotle, our best understanding of the world was teleological from start to finish: acorns existed in order to grow into mighty oak trees; heavy objects wanted to fall and light objects to rise; human beings strove to fulfill their capacity as rational beings. Not everyone agreed, including my buddy Lucretius, but at the time it was a perfectly sensible view of the world.Reality, Pushed From Behind

So you may throw coins to the winds and ask the winds, "which way is it going to blow today," yet, there is an underlying fundamental feature associated with this question? It is an improved version of an ole method, that seeks to be explained in the fundamental of approach given today.

To Plato it may be this "One Thing," while to Aristotle, a hand sweeping as to indicate as to say  it is all around you?

So given the truth of what a seeker will find, its correlate, may surprise you.

True North

What is your true north? What does your bird look like?

http://www.revivewithenergy.com If you find that you are confused on whether you are sensing the voice of intuition or the voice of ego, skip to 5 min 40 secs to get clarity on which it is. That is....if you want to skip the peacock story at the beginning. Ha! Enjoy.

  "The power of settings, the power of priming, and the power of unconscious thinking, all of those are a major change in psychology. I can't think of a bigger change in my lifetime. You were asking what's exciting? That's exciting, to me."

THE MARVELS AND THE FLAWS OF INTUITIVE THINKING: Edge Master Class 2011

Daniel Kahneman

[9.12.11]

See Also:

• The Old Wise Man

Geometry Expressed, Hidden In Ancient Design

If the late character of our sources may incite us to doubt the authenticity of this tradition, there remains that, in its spirit, it is in no way out of character, as can be seen by reading or rereading what Plato says about the sciences fit for the formation of philosophers in book VII of the Republic, and especially about geometry at Republic, VII, 526c8-527c11. We should only keep in mind that, for Plato, geometry, as well as all other mathematical sciences, is not an end in itself, but only a prerequisite meant to test and develop the power of abstraction in the student, that is, his ability to go beyond the level of sensible experience which keeps us within the "visible" realm, that of the material world, all the way to the pure intelligible. And geometry, as can be seen through the experiment with the slave boy in the Meno (Meno, 80d1-86d2), can also make us discover the existence of truths (that of a theorem of geometry such as, in the case of the Meno, the one about doubling a square) that may be said to be "transcendant" in that they don't depend upon what we may think about them, but have to be accepted by any reasonable being, which should lead us into wondering whether such transcendant truths might not exist as well in other areas, such as ethics and matters relating to men's ultimate happiness, whether we may be able to "demonstrate" them or not.See: Frequently Asked Questions about Plato by Bernard SUZANNE

Academy was a suburb of Athens, named after the hero Academos or Ecademos. The site was continuously inhabited from the prehistoric period until the 6th century A.D. During the 6th century B.C., one of the three famous Gymnasiums of Athens was founded here. Moreover, it is recorded that Hippias, the son of Peisistratos, built a circuit wall, and Cimon planted the area with trees which were destroyed by Sulla in 86 B.C. In 387 B.C. Plato founded his philosophical school, which became very famous due to the Neoplatonists, and remained in use until A.D. 526, when it was finally closed down by emperor Justinian.

I relay some thoughts I have had with regard to an emergent process.  I think it incorporates a view I have about the geometries hidden in nature that are designed toward expression of some of the historical understanding of this need to apply "fundamentals."  These constructs are in  ephemeral states of existence as if expressed as an idea.  As idea, these become matter orientated views as "a method of approach."

 Learning to identify the schematic usage of geometrical design as an inherent basis of expression, was to understand that intent had this basic design as a malleable feature in the nature of probabilistic outcomes of experience?

In order for us to understand this "world view" as applied to the nature of the reality, it is assumed such fundamentals(all basic models) reveal some of the ways in which we will adopt the reality as expressed?  We are active participants regardless aren't we,  which might mean, there is still some room with which to form, "a more comprehensive view of the type of fundamentals" necessary for such a world view?

IN that sense, the basis of geometrical exploration, as a set of possible outcomes, was to see schematically, that such usage was necessary in understanding what Einstein was able to reveal once adopting, Grossmann's realizations.

By pointing toward Riemann's realization, and this underlying framework of experience as a possible outcome of a universal expression, showed the way to this projector type of geometry, as a dynamical view of this "gravitation inclusion," as a process toward forming that intent.

So of course historical analysis became an important function for me so as to look at the way in which such a historical school,  might have used this method in order to attain the desired student. One who would  face the continuing  search for  such fundamentals. Of course nothing said this is "set in stone." I am laughing right now.  I will use such a structure so as to show you this method.

This was revealed to me in the statement of Hameroff and Penrose, as a process in the cyclic expression of the universe. Using, geometrical design. Looking at emergence as geometrical underlying process of the universe in expression. This was to see an underlying format of constructive phases of experience.

So, not by the idea that such singularity as the nature of such expression, but that by such intent, is an outcome toward the nature of the geometry as dynamical views of as, K minus or plus, as metric aversions of the dynamical process of out comes as the universe in such expression?

While I cannot say for certain, these are the tendencies of Plato, in my thoughts it was for him, to seek and define reality in pursuance of foundation building blocks. Although too, it may not  be true to today's world, it was sufficient then to describe reality as it contained the "ancientness of belief" about an astronomical processes that existed in nature.

While again it may not have been the best way, it reveals some deeper thinking about alchemist methods as they were adopted and transformed. This  in Greek culture of the philosophers arose from one generation to the next.  It then became a method by which one could internalize transformation.

Such model building was to build the ideological,  by the discussing of these analogical methods to purify oneself of the grossness of nature embedded within the material world?

 How much finer such methods then  but to distillate the process for what begins as to it's beginning,  exists as a some, " Prima Materia."  This then became matter defined as the grossness of our experiences,  could lead from any asymmetrical notion of this symmetry in the beginning?

Logic is the art of thinking; grammar, the art of inventing symbols and combining them to express thought; and rhetoric, the art of communicating thought from one mind to another, the adaptation of language to circumstance.Sister Miriam Joseph

The quadrivium comprised the four subjects, or arts, taught in medieval universities after the trivium. The word is Latin, meaning "the four ways" or "the four roads". Together, the trivium and the quadrivium comprised the seven liberal arts.[1] The quadrivium consisted of arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy. These followed the preparatory work of the trivium made up of grammar, logic (or dialectic, as it was called at the times), and rhetoric. In turn, the quadrivium was considered preparatory work for the serious study of philosophy and theology.

So while it may be fleeting that such a design may indicate the unification of the Trivium with the Quadrivium, such a completion was inherently significant not just for the presence of adaptation in any school.

Intuitive knowledge is free from partiality or dualism; it has overcome the extremes of stressing subject or object. It is the vision of a world-synthesis, the experience of cosmic consciousness where the Infinite is realised not only conceptually but actually. (p233) Lama Anagarika Govinda, Creative Meditation and Multidimensional Consciousness, 1977

In my thoughts such a design was necessary as  to impose a "model design" that indicated that such adaption in Plato's school amounted to something so solid? A method.

Such integration was necessary so as to realize that such a model built was to survive not only the objective world as a solid,  but was also to realize that such unification could exist within ourselves. Bringing together this liberal arts as a measure of success was to delineate each subjective facet of experience so as to realize that one could transcend the material world, by such realizations which may have took one back to the beginning.

While in this sense artistic expressionism of Raphael's picture in the heading of this site, such a realization was to signify that such a pursuat was necessary and represented the coming together of Aristotle and Plato in the very centre of that world. It required us to become closely associated to the "beginning point" of what was allowed in terms of what is self evident as an inductive deductive process of unfolding.

This was our internal teacher/student dialogue that becomes necessary in order to proceed with dealing with the  truths as they come to us in our realizations.

It was the uniqueness of the individual to which although each truth revealed it's successes with regard to that individual's development, in the larger scheme of things,  it asked us to proceed with a method so as to deal with the science of life? To be inquisitive, but grounded in this teacher/student relationship so as to move forward and experience the world.

See Also:

• Music in Plato's Academy

About Knowledge

"As to you, Life, I reckon you are the leavings of many deaths, No doubt I have died myself ten thousand times before." "Leaves of Grass" by Walt Whitman

Justified true belief.....does it matter what knowledge could exist in or about knowing that all knowledge exists out there somewhere and that you only have to access it? How do you do that?

Our attempt to justify our beliefs logically by giving reasons results in the "regress of reasons." Since any reason can be further challenged, the regress of reasons threatens to be an infinite regress. However, since this is impossible, there must be reasons for which there do not need to be further reasons: reasons which do not need to be proven. By definition, these are "first principles." The "Problem of First Principles" arises when we ask Why such reasons would not need to be proven. Aristotle's answer was that first principles do not need to be proven because they are self-evident, i.e. they are known to be true simply by understanding them. See:The Arch of Aristotelian Logic

What is self evident for you at the time......your accumulating experiencing with an inductive/deductive relationship at the time and what arises at that moment. It is a conclusion about and is what connects you to the answer?

Betrayal of Images" by Rene Magritte

                    Probabilties
                 (The Fifth Dimension)
                         |
                         |
                  Idea of the pipe
                        / \
                       /   \
                      /     \
                 Picture of the pipe
                    /         \
                   /           \
                  /             \
               The real pipe and form  
 

It may not mean something to someone else but it is an opportune time for you then and now. You provide the "access point" when you ask the question. That's why you see the "?" mark.

Awareness of the development of the constitution as it applies to all human beings in a free and democratic society was thought to imply that the deduction of its principles should arise in what can be gained from it? What is arrived at and about what is being "self evident" too and for all people? So "the draft" in language was very important to one's constitution. Not just to a country, but in a person too. You see?

Knowledge then is about what you learn at this time.....could be the measure of the whole life...or could be a measure of the moment in time. This is of value to you. This is about that which is of measure when it is weighted against something of great meaning to you? How do you value that knowledge?

This is what will be remembered.

 Polymath

The diversity of one's knowledge can overlap many areas. Such trends in the sciences are seeing such benefits from cross pollination of the trades(aspect of the different areas of the sciences) as applied to those different sciences.

 For example it is known that condense matter physics is of importance to theoretical approaches as a sign of the process toward identifying first principles? One may use string theory to push back perspective to the beginning time?

 Can one use philosophy to better manufacture the question? Sean Carroll thought it might be of use to coordinate the developmental positions with regard to science and philosophy to produce a clarity in developing the question?

When you see in many ways you see where many things connect?

 Sir Isaac Newton was very proficient at doing this. You may not have liked his alchemy and thought it an ancient way, but he cared about the way he related to people.

 He wanted to improve his condition so he knew that with his diversity of knowledge with and about the structure of the planet,  that the structure of himself,  lead to something very philosophical about his being. "To combine things" to make himself a better person.

What Is Déjà Vu?

***

Déjà vu (French pronunciation: [deʒa vy] ( listen), literally "already seen") is the experience of feeling sure that one has already witnessed or experienced a current situation, even though the exact circumstances of the prior encounter are uncertain and were perhaps imagined. The term was coined by a French psychic researcher, Émile Boirac (1851–1917) in his book L'Avenir des sciences psychiques ("The Future of Psychic Sciences"), which expanded upon an essay he wrote while an undergraduate. The experience of déjà vu is usually accompanied by a compelling sense of familiarity, and also a sense of "eeriness", "strangeness", "weirdness", or what Sigmund Freud calls "the uncanny". The "previous" experience is most frequently attributed to a dream, although in some cases there is a firm sense that the experience has genuinely happened in the past.^[1]

Contents   1 Scientific research 1.1 Links with disorders 1.2 Pharmacology 1.3 Memory-based explanations 1.4 Parapsychology 2 Related phenomena 2.1 Jamais vu 2.2 Presque vu (Tip of the tongue) 2.3 Déjà entendu 2.4 Reja vu 3 In popular culture 3.1 Film 3.2 Television 3.3 Radio 3.4 Theatre 3.5 Music 4 See also 5 References 6 Further reading 7 External links

 Scientific research

The psychologist Edward B. Titchener in his book A Textbook of Psychology (1928), wrote that déjà vu is caused by a person getting a brief glimpse of an object or situation prior to full conscious perception, resulting in a false sense of familiarity.^[2] The explanation that has mostly been accepted of déjà vu is not that it is an act of "precognition" or "prophecy", but rather that it is an anomaly of memory, giving the false impression that an experience is "being recalled".^[3][4] This explanation is supported by the fact that the sense of "recollection" at the time is strong in most cases, but that the circumstances of the "previous" experience (when, where, and how the earlier experience occurred) are quite uncertain or believed to be impossible. Likewise, as time passes, subjects can exhibit a strong recollection of having the "unsettling" experience of déjà vu itself, but little or no recollection of the specifics of the event(s) or circumstance(s) they were "remembering" when they had the déjà vu experience. In particular, this may result from an overlap between the neurological systems responsible for short-term memory and those responsible for long-term memory (events which are perceived as being in the past). The events would be stored into memory before the conscious part of the brain even receives the information and processes it.^{[citation needed]}

 Links with disorders

Early researchers tried to establish a link between déjà vu and serious psychopathology such as schizophrenia, anxiety, and dissociative identity disorder, and failed to find the experience of some diagnostic value. There does not seem to be a special association between déjà vu and schizophrenia or other psychiatric conditions.^[5] The strongest pathological association of déjà vu is with temporal lobe epilepsy.^[6][7] This correlation has led some researchers to speculate that the experience of déjà vu is possibly a neurological anomaly related to improper electrical discharge in the brain. As most people suffer a mild (i.e. non-pathological) epileptic episode regularly (e.g. a hypnagogic jerk, the sudden "jolt" that frequently, but not always, occurs just prior to falling asleep) it is conjectured that a similar (mild) neurological aberration occurs in the experience of déjà vu, resulting in an erroneous sensation of memory.

 Pharmacology

Certain drugs increase the chances of déjà vu occurring in the user. Some pharmaceutical drugs, when taken together, have also been implicated in the cause of déjà vu. Taiminen and Jääskeläinen (2001)^[8] reported the case of an otherwise healthy male who started experiencing intense and recurrent sensations of déjà vu upon taking the drugs amantadine and phenylpropanolamine together to relieve flu symptoms. He found the experience so interesting that he completed the full course of his treatment and reported it to the psychologists to write up as a case study. Due to the dopaminergic action of the drugs and previous findings from electrode stimulation of the brain (e.g. Bancaud, Brunet-Bourgin, Chauvel, & Halgren, 1994),^[9] Taiminen and Jääskeläinen speculate that déjà vu occurs as a result of hyperdopaminergic action in the mesial temporal areas of the brain.

 Memory-based explanations

The similarity between a déjà-vu-eliciting stimulus and an existing, but different, memory trace may lead to the sensation.^[5][10] Thus, encountering something which evokes the implicit associations of an experience or sensation that cannot be remembered may lead to déjà vu. In an effort to experimentally reproduce the sensation, Banister and Zangwill (1941)^[11][12] used hypnosis to give participants posthypnotic amnesia for material they had already seen. When this was later re-encountered, the restricted activation caused thereafter by the posthypnotic amnesia resulted in three of the 10 participants reporting what the authors termed "paramnesias". Memory-based explanations may lead to the development of a number of non-invasive experimental methods by which a long sought-after analogue of déjà vu can be reliably produced that would allow it to be tested under well-controlled experimental conditions. Cleary^[10] suggests that déjà vu may be a form of familiarity-based recognition (recognition that is based on a feeling of familiarity with a situation) and that laboratory methods of probing familiarity-based recognition hold promise for probing déjà vu in laboratory settings. Another possible explanation for the phenomenon of déjà vu is the occurrence of "cryptomnesia", which is where information learned is forgotten but nevertheless stored in the brain, and similar occurrences invoke the contained knowledge, leading to a feeling of familiarity because of the situation, event or emotional/vocal content, known as "déjà vu".

 Parapsychology

Some parapsychologists have advocated some unorthodox interpretations of déjà vu. Ian Stevenson and a minority of other researchers have written that some cases of déjà vu might be explained on the basis of reincarnation.^[13][14] Anthony Peake has written that déjà vu experiences occur as people are living their lives not for the first time but at least the second.^[15]

 Related phenomena

 Jamais vu

Main article: Jamais vu

Jamais vu (from French, meaning "never seen") is a term in psychology which is used to describe any familiar situation which is not recognized by the observer.
Often described as the opposite of déjà vu, jamais vu involves a sense of eeriness and the observer's impression of seeing the situation for the first time, despite rationally knowing that he or she has been in the situation before. Jamais vu is more commonly explained as when a person momentarily does not recognize a word, person, or place that they already know. Jamais vu is sometimes associated with certain types of aphasia, amnesia, and epilepsy.
Theoretically, as seen below, a jamais vu feeling in a sufferer of a delirious disorder or intoxication could result in a delirious explanation of it, such as in the Capgras delusion, in which the patient takes a person known by him or her for a false double or impostor. If the impostor is himself, the clinical setting would be the same as the one described as depersonalisation, hence jamais vus of oneself or of the very "reality of reality", are termed depersonalisation (or surreality) feelings.
Times Online reports (see semantic satiation):

Chris Moulin, of the University of Leeds, asked 95 volunteers to write out "door" 30 times in 60 seconds. At the International Conference on Memory in Sydney last week he reported that 68 percent of the volunteers showed symptoms of jamais vu, such as beginning to doubt that "door" was a real word. Dr. Moulin believes that a similar brain fatigue underlies a phenomenon observed in some schizophrenia patients: that a familiar person has been replaced by an impostor. Dr. Moulin suggests they could be suffering from chronic jamais vu.^[16]

 Presque vu (Tip of the tongue)

Main article: Tip of the tongue

Déjà vu is similar to, but distinct from, the phenomenon called tip of the tongue, a situation when someone cannot recall a familiar word or name, but with effort one eventually recalls the elusive memory. In contrast, déjà vu is a feeling that the present situation has occurred before, but the details are elusive because the situation never happened before.
Presque vu (from French, meaning "almost seen") is the sensation of being on the brink of an epiphany. Often very disorienting and distracting, presque vu rarely leads to an actual breakthrough. Frequently, one experiencing presque vu will say that they have something "on the tip of my tongue".

 Déjà entendu

Déjà entendu, (literally "already heard") is the experience of feeling sure that one has already heard something, even though the exact details are uncertain and were perhaps imagined.^[17][18]

 Reja vu

The feeling something that has happened or is happening will happen again, possibly in the near future, possibly in the distant future.

 In popular culture

 Film

Déjà vu provides a plot point in The Matrix, a 1999 science fiction-action film written and directed by Larry and Andy Wachowski. The protagonist, Neo, glances at a black cat and comments that he has just experienced déjà vu. Those with a knowledge of 'The Matrix' and its internal workings state that déjà vu means something within the Matrix was altered from its prior state and is referred to as a "glitch".
The 2006 science fiction film Déjà Vu revolves around a US federal law enforcement officer using an instrument called Snowhite to view the past 4 and a half days of anywhere in the world (limited radius as permissible by the program) in order to solve a murder and a terrorist bomb attack on a ferry that was being boarded by about 500 citizens and military members.

 Television

Déjà Vu was the third episode of the second season of Monty Python's Flying Circus, a British comedy program. Michael Palin plays a television host with the problem.^[19]
The concept is explored in the episode 119 of Garfield and Friends in the Orson's Farm segment.
The final episode of season 1 of Charmed, called "Déjà Vu All Over Again" sees Phoebe Halliwell reliving the same day over and over again at the hands of a demon named Tempus.^[20]
Déjà Vu is also a recurring plot element on Fringe. In the Season One episode, "The Road Not Taken", Olivia described the experience of déjà vu to Walter after she briefly experienced an alternate reality as the result of being a Cortexiphan subject. In the Season Two episode "White Tulip", Olivia experiences déjà vu while investigating the apartment of a time traveler who reset the timeline.
Déjà Vu is also a plot element in the "Mystery Episode" of the television series Supernatural where Sam Winchester wakes up in the same day as a result of being trapped in a time loop.

 Radio

Déjà Vu is a 2009 radio play by Alexis Zegerman in French and English co-produced by BBC Radio 4 and ARTE Radio.

  Theatre

Déjà Vu is a 1991 stage play by John Osborne.

 Music

Below is a list of artists who have referenced Déjà Vu in their work.

Main article: Déjà_vu_(disambiguation)#Music

 See also

• Capgras delusion
• Intuition (knowledge)
• Jamais vu
• Phenomenon
• Precognition
• Presque vu
• Psychological repression
• Psychology
• Rapport congruency

 References

1. ^ Berrios, G.E. (1995). "Déjà vu and other disorders of memory during the nineteenth century". Comprehensive Psychiatry 36: 123–129.
2. ^ Titchener, E. B. (1928). A textbook of psychology. New York: Macmillan
3. ^ "The Meaning of Déjà Vu", Eli Marcovitz, M.D. (1952). Psychoanalytic Quarterly, vol. 21, pages: 481-489
4. ^ The déjà vu experience, Alan S. Brown, Psychology Press, (2004), ISBN 0-203-48544-0, Introduction, page 1
5. ^ ^{a b} Brown, Alan S. (2004). The Déjà Vu Experience. Psychology Press. ISBN 1841690759.
6. ^ Neurology Channel
7. ^ Howstuffworks "What is déjà vu?"
8. ^ Taiminen, T.; Jääskeläinen, S. (2001). "Intense and recurrent déjà vu experiences related to amantadine and phenylpropanolamine in a healthy male". Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 8 (5): 460–462. doi:10.1054/jocn.2000.0810. PMID 11535020. edit
9. ^ Bancaud, J.; Brunet-Bourgin; Chauvel; Halgren (1994). "Anatomical origin of déjà vu and vivid 'memories' in human temporal lobe epilepsy". Brain : a journal of neurology 117 (1): 71–90. PMID 8149215. edit
10. ^ ^{a b} Cleary, Anne M. (2008). "Recognition memory, familiarity and déjà vu experiences". Current Directions in Psychological Science 17 (5): 353–357. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00605.x.
11. ^ Banister H, Zangwill OL (1941). "Experimentally induced olfactory paramnesia". British Journal of Psychology 32: 155–175.
12. ^ Banister H, Zangwill OL (1941). "Experimentally induced visual paramnesias". British Journal of Psychology 32: 30–51.
13. ^ Fisher, J. (1984). The case for reincarnation. New York: Bantam Books.
14. ^ Stevenson, I. (1987). Children who remember past lives. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.
15. ^ Anthony Peake Is There Life After Death? The Extraordinary Science of What Happens When We Die Arcturus Publishing Limited, 2012 ISBN 184837299X
16. ^ Ahuja, Anjana (2006-07-24). "Doctor, I've got this little lump on my arm . . . Relax, that tells me everything". London: Times Online. Retrieved 2010-05-01.
17. ^ Grinnel, Renée (2008), Déjà Entendu, PsychCentral, retrieved 04-10-2011
18. ^ Mental Status Examination Rapid Record Form
19. ^ "Monty Python's Flying Circus: Just the Words - Episode 16". Ibras.dk. Retrieved 2012-03-23.
20. ^ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0539356/

 Further reading

• "What is déjà vu?". Psychology Today. 2010-01-05.
• Draaisma, Douwe (2004). Why life speeds up as you get older. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521691990.
• Hughlinks-Jackson, J. (1888). "A particular variety of epilepsy "intellectual aura", one case with symptoms of organic brain disease". Brain 11 (2): 179–207. doi:10.1093/brain/11.2.179.
• Carey, Benedict (2004-09-14). "Déjà Vu: If It All Seems Familiar, There May Be a Reason". New York Times. Retrieved 2010-05-01.
• Ratliff, Evan (2006-07-02). "Déjà Vu, Again and Again". New York Times. Retrieved 2010-05-01.
• "When déjà vu is more than just an odd feeling". The Ottawa Citizen. 2006-02-20.
• "UGH! I Just Got the Creepiest Feeling That I Have Been Here Before: Déjà vu and the Brain, Consciousness and Self". Neurobiology and Behavior. 1998.
• "The Tease of Memory". The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2004-07-23.
• "The Psychology Of Deja Vu". Science Daily. 2008-11-19.
• Herbert, Wray (2008-10-23). "And I feel like I've been here before". Psychological Science.
• McHugh TJ, Jones MW, Quinn JJ et al (July 2007). "Dentate gyrus NMDA receptors mediate rapid pattern separation in the hippocampal network". Science 317 (5834): 94–9. doi:10.1126/science.1140263. PMID 17556551.

 External links

• Deja Vu : Scientifically Explained | Medchrome
• Chronic déjà vu - quirks and quarks episode (mp3)
• A new theory that links déjà vu to Near-Death Experience — by Anthony Peake, 2006.
• The Skeptic's Dictionary
• How Déjà Vu Works — a Howstuffworks article
• Déjà Experience Research — a website dedicated to providing déjà experience information and research
• Nikhil Swaminathan, Think You've Previously Read About This? Scientific American June 8, 2007
• Deberoh Halber, Research Deciphers Deju-Vu Brain Mechanics MIT Report June 7, 2007
• documentary about DEJA VU: TEMPORAO

***  

See Also:

• What are Memories made up of ?
• Subcarrier-Index Modulation OFDM

First came the heterodyne. The principle of "beats" or difference tones between simultaneous audio pitches was well known since antiquity, but Reginald Fessenden in 1901 was the first to apply the principle to radio transmissions [3]. Originally both radio frequencies were to be transmitted, received with two antennas, and combined in a detector. Later a local oscillator was substituted for one of the transmitter-receiver combinations and the heterodyne as we know it was born. Fessenden himself coined the term, from the Greek heteros (other) and dynamis (force).Who Invented the Superheterodyne?