a new code processor

I've been stumbling on some very interesting videos tonight and something clicked in my head. why can't we fully understand eachother and our feelings? why do we believe we have separate realities and observations?

I want to establish that the code for what we feel or sense is already there. The only thing we are missing is a sufficient means of delivering and processing this information. The closest thing we have to decoding and understanding this mystery is through our 5 senses.

I have no idea at the moment what this new processor should be, what it looks like, or even if there needs to be a new one. I guess it's just something to have floating just in cause I've sparked your imagination

I've gathered this little burst of inspiration myself from watching videos on complexities of DNA and it's binary "code"

"why can't we fully understand eachother and our feelings? why do we believe we have separate realities and observations?"

-Because our points of reference are different. You will never see the world through my eyes and therefore never see exactly what I see.

"I want to establish that the code for what we feel or sense is already there."

-There is a possibility of some common "code" used by the human mind. However, the mind is constantly changing and developing its own ways of dealing with information. As the mind develops, areas of the brain can even switch how they operate. An example of this is the change in function seen between children and adults. Different people literally do not think the same.

You raise a good point. In general, we all feel the same feelings and react similarly to similar stimuli, and therefore have definite common ground. But like Ryuzaki says, we don't all think the same. As we each have separate experiences and exposure to differing stimuli, our individual ways of reacting or coping begins to diverge.

We are all more alike then it seems. Each living out our lives with different mind frames and thought processes, yet still having that genetic basis which is so similar.

quote:

---

-Because our points of reference are different. You will never see the world through my eyes and therefore never see exactly what I see.

---

If we were able to convey those points of reference and those 'indescribable' feelings and experiences in the first place, I would understand exactly what you're seeing/saying.

see, since we're so used to believing that our own realities can only be understood by ourselves, it's hard to think what it would be like if I did understand exactly what you were trying to say what you truly feel about something.

It isn't so much about imagining what it would be like, I am saying it is fundamentally impossible. Even if there was a way to create a bridge between our minds in real time or otherwise you would still react and analyze the stimuli differently than I and therefore have an entirely different experience, based upon your genetic difference and your conditioning.
The only way for you to experience, in its entirety, what it is like to be me, you would have to be me. Which, essential you already are. But that's getting onto a more religious tangent than I am willing to go here.

quote:

---

we don't all think the same. As we each have separate experiences and exposure to differing stimuli, our individual ways of reacting or coping begins to diverge.

---

Is this because of social constructs? Because if that's so, that doesn't/shouldn't affect us genetically for a more advanced code processor. does/should it?

I'm trying to word this in a way that will describe my 'understanding' of this topic lo and behold these words I'm typing are insufficient. Imagine if we were to have a new way of conveying and receiving 'information'. This would include a means to communicate and fully understand our experiences and share them with others. Sure we may still act differently to each of these stimuli, but the understanding of those experiences would/can still be established.

Think of it this way:

Two people are born at the exact same time, under the exact same physical and social circumstances. One person grows up witnessing peers being abused and sees their pain and suffering and as a result becomes more empathetic to those with less fortunate lives. The other person is abused by their peers, to no fault of their own and as a result becomes unsympathetic toward peers.

You can apply this to social constructs or even simply random events that occur in a persons life. If a person loses an arm in an accident, their life and way of thinking will no doubt be drastically affected.

Even small events can change our moods and create a wide variety of differing points of reference.

It's like I said, we all have this practically identical, somewhat linked core to us, yet we have all diverged into different people and places. Humans want to diverge, they crave individuality.

While I was reading these posts I thought it was kind of funny that you are already using the necessary code and processor to achieve exactly what you are talking about. The code is language and the processor is our brains.

Have you ever read or heard someone speak words that spoke to your innermost being? If we didn't all experience very similar emotions all of the time then we wouldn't have words like anger, sadness, happiness or grief.

I reckon the reason it seems so difficult to give words to emotions is because it is difficult. Do you think Beethoven created his masterpiece the first time he played a piano? Words are tools or rather outlets for our soul (being, life-force, whatever you think it is) to project itself through. Each one of us is given a crystal clear picture of these emotions and feelings which could never fully be communicated through any tool. It's too indirect. We don't commend the great poets, the great composers, the great painters for their perfection of their manifestations but rather for how close they came to it.

Perfection is within each of us, for if it wasn't, how would it be possible to distinguish the [i/]quality[/i] of anything?

the code is relatively new to us and its from outside of us.

the reason we have different perspectives is because we process the code differently. everything we see is an object or at least part of some bigger object. we see these objects from light reflection. within the reflection is raw information. we process this information. but of course nothing is perfectly the same. our processors aren't perfectly identical. the information constantly streaming at us has more to it than what we obtain. there is the issue. the human race is lacking in some area of the mind and cant decipher this hidden cache of information. when we see an object we "should" be hearing things with our inner voices. a language understandable by all with the ability to perceive it. Philip K. Dick believed he obtained some of the hidden information. i suggest everyone to read VALIS. its a big answer to this question

quote:

---

there is the issue. the human race is lacking in some area of the mind and cant decipher this hidden cache of information.

---

Hmmm so what I'm thinking now is ... maybe we don't need a new processor, but rather to utilize the one we already have. I mean we're an infant species... I can only imagine how our processors are going to be, if we last that long, thousands of years from now.

But then the questions arises, how can we start to do that?

umm 1984 anyone if we all thought and could understand the same then we wouldn't have the intalecullity to accually understand things from a different view point making the advansment of technolgy and philosophy nearly inpossible "newspeak" i beleave orwell calls it and if you want to veiw somones emotions then maybe you should look inside yourself