oxford dictionary: meme is an idea that is passed from one member of society to another, not in the genes but often by people copying it.
in my previous post one-time limerence or touch of divinity I gave insight into a conflict between psychological or rather psychiatric evaluation of a mental state that is objectively “troubled” but subjectively not, and my personal discovery that plato and some others (ficino, bruno) describe such condition as divine madness, theia mania.
when i talk about the propagation of the selfish meme, i offer an additional view upon evolution. i clam that cultural evolution (all forms of art, ideas and religious tradition that persist throughot centuries), when it becomes a biological necessity for the person – host – materializing them (performing action), is rooted in the (meta)physical reality which resides upon geometric rules that we access via consciousness. why should this be true?
“let no one ignorant of geometry enter!” is a phrase that was engraved at the door of plato’s academy. i thought of geometric evolution of consciousness before i encoutered this information, so it merely came as another spike of motivation for me to continue to elaborate my understanding of how functions of consciousness truly are governed.
important aspect of the whole story is that the whole picture cannot only be described and understood cognitively – it truly needs to be experienced in the first person perspective, integrated and felt. if you were to live in a world which appears to feel the same ever since you were born, there wouldn’t be any sudden motivation to understand it and describe it – it’s just as it is and have always been. since i my eyesight have opened to another layer of reality (to be more precise, layer of unconscious motives), i have a strong explanation to explain it to my previous self, which was incomplete, blinded, seeking meaning – completeness.
to have a better understanding, please look at the explanation of plato’s symposium where he describes what happens – in his words – “to a soul” (in my view, aspect of consciousness) “once the true nature of love is revealed“. i was mind-boggled how abstractio explains that what i felt and thought after the event which catapulted my mind somewhere i didn’t know it’s possible to be perceived. I assume that metempsychosis and transmigration of souls are somewhat similar concepts that used to be considered far more usual than today, when people have a demand to think in purely physicalist terms.
now i will shortly refer to the idea of design underlying reality (the map on which the ruliad resides, the map which is parsed via consciousness) by mentioning semantic priming. these fun experiments clearly show how the storyteller (first person perspective), the one that creates the unique story of our life, isn’t very accurate or up-to-date when it comes to explaining our decisions.
it seems that consciousness is that one string parsing the ruliad – a bundle of all possible branches – which creates the illusion of free will, i. e. that things are not determined. it’s only through the story that we have an impression of actually being the agent with decisive power.
in an experiment, people were shown photographs of strangers, but right before they were shown a word for a split of a second, so fast that they didn’t have the time to notice what was written. nevertheless, these words managed to have impact on their choices and behaviour. if we were never to ask those people why did they prefer one photograph over the other, there would be no conflict – even they wouldn’t know that they were “manipulated”, they would just continue with their lives. instead of consciously knowing that right before judging a person to be apeealing or unappealing they were shown words “philantropist” or “thief”, they might have elaborated that they don’t like the colour of someone’s sweater.
what i’m getting at is that there is this design in which we live in by automaticity. it is a set of all possible rules – the ruliad, which i already linked on the homepage.
by becoming more aware of ourselves, we can start having a kind of a 2.0 interactive relationship with the design by creating chances which don’t necessarily follow the most probable designed path.
for example, you go to a store and start salivating over some unhealthy snack. instead of following the design where you thoughtlessly fulfil your craving, you can become aware that 1) you actually don’t need it, and that 2) it isn’t good for your health – think long-term and simply not buy it. hard decisions are good because we learn and we grow. this example can extend over multiple behaviours.
the point being, through self-awareness and self-reflection we can step aside from the neurochemical basis that impacts our behaviour. let’s end with a little reference to what i’m talking about:
consciousness, sentience and gut feelings have to do with water and gravity. there’s some literal truth in the feeling of being pulled towards something or someone. I strongly believe it all has to do with the search for quantum gravity. we just need to shift the way we look at it.
therefore, in the following posts I’ll pay some attention to the second brain, i.e. ENS (enteric nervous system) and gut feelings, the idea of how it is linked to gravity, so stay tuned.
Thoughts on Evolutions 
Leave a comment