This chapter is about the structure of perception, or how perception selects this or that. It objectified while hiding its process of objectification. Technology stands for this selection, which is always-already there, an impossible-to-observe-at-once, a je-ne-sais-quoi inside which life unfolds. Our position in technology continues to alter ways of making sense. We increasingly co-create meaning instead of simply adopt and reproduce it. Sometimes this happens consciously, mostly not.
Selection is dependent on language, or any means man uses to verbalize life. In all cases, most people love to produce language, thereby delineating this or that, which relates more or less clearly to a fear or desire for the inclusive/exclusive social or self versus other people. Anyone enunciating a fourth possible dimension to life, is referring to this threefold itself as the storyline, the meaning. It forms the perfect aggregate of abstractedness.
It is observable as threefold through the supporting invisible fourth corner, forming the all-unifying tetrahedron. Therefore, the threefold itself can be self-referential, and thus one reflective step up, which means the three dimensions are doubled. Thus, visualized from this first reflective – and thus second – plane of observation, we have to differentiate at least (3 doubled plus 1 witnessed lower plane) 7 dimensions. Together with the first observational plane of 3, this makes 10 dimensions.
The mind experiences liminality or a desire to be in two places at once, and now also observes 11 dimensions as it allows for a second reflective pivot onto the third observational plane. At this observational plane, however, one can differentiate (7 doubled plus 2 past witnessed planes) 16 other dimensions. Together with the first two planes of 10 and 3, that adds up to 29 visualized dimensions.
The mind now makes room for a third reflective pivot to the fourth observational realm differentiating, to imagine 30 dimensions, which in turn makes for (16 doubled plus 3 witnessed planes) 35 dimensions. Together with the first three planes of 3, 10 and 29 this gives 77 visualized dimensions.
The mind is not able to prevent a chaos from intruding the liminal thought process at this fourth plane of observation. The fourth pivotal point gives (35 doubled plus 4 witnessed past planes) 74 dimensions, which, together with the first four planes of 3, 10, 29 and 77 would give visualized 193 dimensions.
The digits of this 3-10-29-77-193 add up to 3-1-2-5-4, and thus to 6. The forgotten step, the one left unmentioned after the first threefold became a fourfold, is the narrational or past/future sequence the mind starts automatically intuiting at the second pivotal point, since it repeats the first step of reflection. This would change the sequence to 3-10-30-78-194. These digits add up to 3-1-3-6-5, and thus to 9. We could interpret this as a sign that using the three dimensions of social, selection and time for determining a decimal ordinal system of abstraction leads to the number 9 for infinity. However, the visualization of our reality in numbers is a hard ordeal. We should leave it behind for instead that which works.
One could imagine that, in a sane world of simplicity, face-valuing every other number or word in the universe, three dimensions are invisible without eight and so ten dimensions, and the real counting or complexity begins only after that first step, which isn’t even a step at all. Also the last or fourth reflective pivot is non-sensical since the step is impossible for 99 percent of humanity. This leads to the sequence 3-1-(2+5=)7 and 3-1-(3+6=)9.
How man lives together with the burden of automated and ‘smarter’ computation as though computing is there to assist him, therefore, is not only ridiculous, it obstructs natural evolution. Man’s aim is not to be humane but to help adjust and configure the all-too-humane and thus blurry definitions of reality, to gain a view of ever more bewildering opportunities for evolutionary development as a people.
To account for these steps, here follows an explanatory diagram.
By way of the first reflective pivot we are able to see from the second plane of observation, and the refraction that occurs leaves us in principle with eight particular interferences. Only seven of these are perceivable. The invisible interference is us, is the law/bodymind as the closed individual future (death). We immediately realize that its opposite, economy/DIY as the open collective past (akasha, collective unconscious, etc), must now be capable of revealing itself. The total indeed adds up to 7 + 3 = 10 dimensions. Please note how the bold eightfold represents these 10 dimensions.
Now let’s see how we can describe the reflective leaps by way of hinges several different systems onto each other.
Here I have hinged them onto Milarepa’s system of worldly emotions, the MBTI system, as well as Arthur Young’s process theory, in a way that the eight earlier dimensions attain a double-layered everyday practical life meaning (i.e. ‘reflecting scientist’ is vague while an ‘upset empiricist’ speaks to the imagination). By seeing persona through the webs, high school students become capable of choosing between typical roles they can assume. Let it be clear that this model conveys typical roles and is meant to uncover otherwise unseen personality fixing through mediatized living. In this second reflective state or at this third plane of observation we find indeed the (double 8) + 10 + 3 = 29 dimensions. Please note how the combination Milarepa-MBTI forms an eightfold representing these 29 dimensions.
For the third step, we could make use of Luhmannian and Learyian epistemology, or what they thought ‘had’ to be true for society. Luhmann was quite radical in his epistemological assumptions, as well as in building the subsequent framework explaining their repercussions. In this diagram one finds Luhmann’s symbolically generalized media, operating through the binary. Luhmann’s and Leary’s epistemological assumptions form the next two columns, and its sum is expressed as frame for a sane society.
|Luhmann binary (symbolically generalized media)||Luhmann||Leary||FRAMES|
|Structural Coupling / Binary Codes||Neurological Knowhow||Structures Must
|Cosmic Consciousness||Learning Everyday||Everything is Known|
|Society/Self = Autological Terms||True is what you think is True||Everything is Meaningless|
|Only Differences Differentiate||I Make/Am A Difference||Contributions To
A Perfect World
|‘Man’ requires definition||I Will Last Forever,
Or Die Trying
|Self Owns God|
|networks||friends/foes or: information/
|Consciousness Externalizes The Brain’s Information||I am Free, You are Free, we can join forces or go our own way||Home is Anywhere|
|Re-Entry||Create Own Openings||Freedom is Determination|
|Unfree from Norms||Love and Do As You Like||Presence
For The World
From this diagram, one can read the 74 dimensions, as the eight symbolically generalized media are really 8 binary codes laid out as a 16-fold epistemological framework. Together with the eight frames and 3 witnessed lower planes this leads to the 35 dimensions for this plane of observation. Adding the earlier 3, 10 and 29 this makes 77 observable dimensions. Note how this last eightfold represents the total of these 77 dimensions.
Of course, we only observe the eight from the first pivotal reflection now as a multilayered eight. There is really no other way to make sense of the diagram at this stage. At least one can see how the first and second and third eight are structured. One could go on devising structures for the next plane of observation, but this would not benefit the analysis. This distinction is important to keep in mind: one could go deeper in abstraction, there could be levels of abstraction that go infinitely deeper than these three, but they would remain incomprehensible to humans. More important than finding the deepest abstraction in the computation of systems of meaning, is therefore being accurate in our computation of the first few levels, and to try and grasp how computation does not observe meaning itself: it merely calculates it.
The planes of abstraction as presented here are open to discussion. It is only part of my own epistemological belief system that emotions, and in particular, these emotions are less abstracted than this belief system itself. For this reason, the reflective pivots are important to mention as their own dimension, adding to the number of dimensions for each plane. It now becomes clear that higher abstraction equals higher uncertainty. Indeed, the number of observable dimensions equal the amount of uncertainty. We can now express uncertainty as a function of level of abstraction. Note that this uncertainty does not mean that we are uncertain ourselves about whether our own abstractions are accurate (on the contrary). Instead, it means we find less and less overlap in comparison with how other people, knowingly or unknowingly, abstract their worlds.
Even if you don’t follow the above calculations, is there still a point? There are countless other ways to arrive at the same numbers through the triadic or triune method, as will be shown below. For most of us who use this without really knowing it, let alone why, what is the next step? I would suggest that playing with these categories trains the mind and brain for ESP purposes. I realize this is a lot to claim, and I take back about fifty percent of it, since the other fifty relies on irrational intuiting of Friesian immediate knowledge.
One part must remain hidden in the process of visualization or imagining our existence. It is usually called the fourth dimension enabling a perception of the triad. The fourth dimension is sometimes referred to as time. Unfortunately, this doesn’t contain any real meaning. Instead, it’s love. In some ways at least, since love, or emotion, is known to make one (more or less) blind. Jung’s Lover archetype can be paired, therefore, with the invisible Matrix dimension in Mark Deuze’s program. It is also the metaphor being itself the metaphor, or Marshall McLuhan’s argument that Aristotle had to ignore this position of obsolescence. This led McLuhan to surmount that the medium is ultimately the message itself, even though part of that particular power of media was related to this medium having been ignored for so long. Synecdoche or pars pro toto as the first visible part of the metaphor, aligns with Deuze’s Panopticon dimension below, as well as with Jung’s King archetype. This alignment clarifies how the perception of the writer must have been at the moment of writing. Metonymy builds the strongest logical relation to Jung’s Warrior type and Deuze’s Wikiality dimension. Irony, lastly, functions as Jung’s Magician type and Deuze’s Truman Show Delusion dimension. This is shown in overview below. in which all the beforementioned 77 categories are featured.
|Social Trust||Episodic Trust|
|John (Eagle)||Matthew (Lion)||Luke (Man)||Mark (Ox)|
|Black Bile / Melancholic||Phlegm / Phlegmatic||Blood /
|Yellow Bile / Choleric|
(Conze 1951)Samskara (congealing)SamjnaVedanaRupa
|Plato||Perception of Shadows||Reason||Opinion (faith)||Understanding|
|Newton||Acceleration||Control||Observation (position)||Velocity (change)|
|McLuhan||Metaphor (Retrieval)||Metonymy (Obsolescence)||Synecdoche (Extension)||Irony
|Luhmann||Meaning||Selective Realm||Social Realm||Temporal Realm|
|0° of freedom||1° of freedom||2° of freedom||3° of freedom|
|Lakota Indian (Storm, 1972)||East (Eagle)||North (Buffalo)||West (Bear)||South (Mouse)|
|Hermann (1989)||Right Cerebral||Left Cerebral||Right Limbic||Left Limbic|
|Latour (1991)||Signification and Meaning||Being||Social Bond||External Reality|
|Arguelles||7th Mystic Point||Plane of Mind||Plane of Will||Plane of Spirit|
|Helen Fisher (2007)||Negotiators
|Builders (serotonin)||Explorers (dopamine)|
|Blank||Being||Open / Closed||Individual /
|Past / Future|
|Psi||Alien contact / Psychokinesis /
Cognition / Discarnate Contact
The import of this overview lies not only in creating a possible dynamic for the purpose of visualization, but also in attaining a non-shifting frame of reference, remaining in place regardless of how an author may have defined the elements within his theory. This frame of reference, once detected and to a certain degree controlled, can be called the initial skill or synchronicity, and forms the starting point for the so-called psicopter. This skill will then allow any person to develop, slowly but surely, the desired ‘wholly other’ communicational abilities integrated in the psicopter.
Let it be clear, at this point, that the real power of the psicopter comes from ‘reading between the lines’, or the unmentioned, unlabeled distinctions between the four categories. There are not three but four such distinctions if one assumes circularity. By leaving them unlabeled, they are protected. They work through remaining unseen. In the following training procedures, it is important to keep in mind that we have no name for the distintions that distinguish the four categories from each other.
Ken Wheeler’s frequency dimension leads to counterspace being a kind of distancing from space into instantaneous transmission. This fits with the alien contact dimension, for which we have to think of ways to disappear, not socially, but before God.