Herewith are my ideas and I hope you may see them without that rash, smug, arrogant attitude scientists have towards us ‘little people’.
My concept of Nothingness. I approach it by looking at any entity or object. The more I focus on any particular spot on the object, the less I see.
Therein begins the paradox.
The more I try to focus on an object [say a cat], the less I can relate to the image I am supposedly seeing. I say ‘supposedly’, because ultimately when one focuses most intimately on any entity, one ultimately sees nothing.
As I back away from the observed object, I regain my vision. I find, therefore, the constituents of any observed entity are composed of nothingness, or a plural of nothingness.
You see already, language difficulties arise here because this field I’m discussing is not in the general parlance of linguistics. Nevertheless, I can say that any observed object is the summation of the ‘nothingnesses’ [yes, I’m ‘creating’ the plural of ‘nothingness’] that are its constituents.
But there is more in these counter-intuitive ideas I’m proposing.
I correspond with British philosopher Sir Roger Scruton and he wrote to me saying one of mind’s ‘distinctive feature’ is its ‘intentionality’. I wrote back saying that I must kindly disagree with him. If anything, chaos, randomness is the predominant feature of the mind. Let us think of this. To what degree are we conscious of our mind and to what degree are we unaware/unconscious of our mind and of its acts? I say, a majority of all our feelings, acts, behaviors, language, emotions are created by the unconscious.
Let us take the physical side of our bodies. Think of the numberless motions going on inside and outside that are being done without us knowing of them.
- Examples of actions of our body: You are sitting and having a pleasant conversation with a friend of yours. How many times does your body shift during the conversation? And to be far more specific, how many times does your hand move for no reason [meaning, there was no causative factor, such as an itching or because your hand was uncomfortable]? The answer is: there are a numberless amount of movements. Who controls these movements? It’s your unconscious.
- Examples of actions of our mind: How many times do you notice you say words you did not intend to say? How many times do you notice you feel emotions you do not wherefrom they arose? How many times do you notice you laugh, yet you do not know why? These are all examples, of the unconscious controlling and acting on your behalf.
These questions go to the heart of the inquiry raised by Sir Roger, that is, on ‘intentionality’. For the latter must assume some ‘entity’ being in control. I propose intentionality is primarily a provenance of the unconscious.
Now I would like to get to the essence of my theory on the Mind and how it is connected to Reality.
When we blank out, what happens to our mind? Well, by definition, when blanking out, we see, smell, sense, remember, think, hear and feel – nothing. I propose in that state of mind, our mind, our sense of ‘Self’ is functionally rendered extinct or eliminated. In other words, our mind/sense of Self/’I’ becomes functionally as the nothingness itself.
When we see an object or when we think of an object and if we are totally concentrating on that action, then, our mind, our sense of the ‘I’, our sense of our ‘Self’ is also eliminated. We become as the observed image or thought. Suppose I think of the image of a cat. Suppose I am fully focusing on that image of the cat.
Here is the key, controversial point: Suppose I am so focused on seeing the image of the cat, I am therefore thinking, sensing, feeling absolutely nothing else. Now, I propose that in that time-frame, the Observer’s mind, that which is only thinking of the image of the cat, becomes the image itself.