My pareidolia knows no bounds.

Paradigm is an example or pattern. Ironic that the actual paradigm that exist it that "THINGS ARE PATTERNS." A person or table or any so called object or thing, is a pattern, very similar to a whirlpool being a pattern. Each comes out of the flow and goes back into it when it can no longer maintain it's integrity and so called, disappears or dies. Also interesting is the PAREIDOLIA is a double pattern and not a "thing",(which is a single pattern). This is what enables pareidolia to "escape" the laws of physics. An object must look the way it does for function and survival reasons. Pareidolia is not bound in this way as it is a "double pattern." One whirlpool is a pattern. Three whirlpools looking like a face is pareidolia, a double pattern. They serve no intrincic purpose in and of themselves, except as art, metaphysics etc., or even to lead the way to people arriving at a new understanding and new paradigm.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Stoat</i>
<br />In the case of paradigm shift, I think our subconscious minds present to our conscious minds, more of the information that would normally be screened out. The object being to create a new more stable paradigm. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I hadn't really thought of it this way, although in art that may be exactly how it worked. I think, though, that it's more likely the other way around, where the conscious mind, through a long series of everyday occurrences, "dictates" the paradigm shift.

There are many examples to choose from. Take the paradigm shift of selling PCs directly to individuals, built personally for them (Michael Dell's "invention"). If we view it from subconscious &gt;&gt; conscious, it sort of makes it seem like "he stepped in it". I find it easier to believe that it was a conscious "scratch and claw" kind of thing. First he decides: hey, I can build a computer myself; hey, I can build alot of them; hey I can buy the parts and sell them directly to people and screw the middle man; hey wait a minute, why not let the people call me up and tell me exactly what they want in it, and so on.

Or take Bob Dylan. Over the course of his life, he's brought about quite a number of paradigm shifts, while constantly re-inventing himself. One might think that he had periodic "inspirations" emminating from his self-conscious. But again, as in the example of Dell, when you read his life story, you find that there were a million "steps" along the way, where he was a "sponge" absorbing anything and everything along the way. But, you could be right about parts of it, though. When Dylan was interviewed by Ed Bradley last year, Bradley asked him, "Does he ever look back at the music he's written with surprise?"

"I used to. I don't do that anymore. I don't know how I got to write those songs. Those early songs were almost magically written," says Dylan, who quotes from his 1964 classic, "It's Alright, Ma."

"Try to sit down and write something like that. There's a magic to that, and it's not Siegfried and Roy kind of magic, you know? It's a different kind of a penetrating magic. And, you know, I did it. I did it at one time."

Does he think he can do it again today? No, says Dylan. "You can't do something forever," he says. "I did it once, and I can do other things now. But, I can't do that." --Bob Dylan

But, then he admits that he had been writing songs since he was a teenager, so who's to say he didn't just "peak" at that point in time.



rd

rd- The conscious mind, the intellect and thought is mechanical, ("time" is necessitated, as is memory). The unconscious mind, revalations, intelligence, art and intuitions may also be mechanical but on a deeper and more subtle level, (they are instantaneous and may transcend memory). If there is anything which transcends mechanics it is the latter. A paradigm shift must also come from the latter, or it is a mere mechanical extension of previous paradigms.

I'm not with you Fred, "They serve no intrincic purpose in and of themselves, except as art, metaphysics etc., or even to lead the way to people arriving at a new understanding and new paradigm." To paraphrase, they have no intrinsic purpose other than to change everything.

I think here we have to look at paradigm in its broad brush strokes, it's our world view. it will contain more sophisticated individual and group paradigms but these will have been shaped by the overarching broad brush paradigm. In short, a child can become a scientist and question the paradigm but nevertheless have been shaped by that self same paradigm, which allows science in the first place.

As for how our conscious and subconscious minds interact, I'm sure that it's on an equal partner basis. Writers often say, that they enter a "zone" where their characters simply dictate their lines to them, or they become the character. A character will say to them, "look, I speak fluent Russian, I know all about stamps. Go off and learn these things for the book." I think that suggests a two way street between the conscious and subconscious mind. I also think that this internal debate is largely screened out, in much the same way as our brains screen out the view of the side of our noses. (The brain uses that info to work out where the eyes are looking)

Really, I don't think that we have to go into too much detail on this yet. As is, there is enough to suggest that it might be fruitful to device and run some experiments.

Stoat- "Art," "meta-physics," (which everything is, only physician call "meta-physics" what they want to dismiss) serve no "useful pupose" because the "physicians" (doctor-priests) have made sure we must go thru these middle men and be middle men ourselves. According to my admitedly limited knowledge (as do we all except Witten it seems) of "M-theory" physical experiments are no longer possible or needed. There may be nothing at all. There may be no "final solution," (pun intended) and "final scientific answer" and "formulae" at all. It might be all a Parmenidian plenum (at least grivity makes more sense here than Einsteins curved space) and Philosophy and Science and everything are one, the way they were before fragmented thought led to more fragmented thought to the point where thought has become as cancerous as the rest of cancer which is running rampent like the roads and urban sprawl which is not sustainable. It might be time for an "artistic, intuitive, enlightened paradigm to transcend science (the new religion).

Talking about two way streets. If we go back about three billion years then early life from both the Earth and Mars, could jump ship. The small stuff would hitch a ride on the solar wind outbound, the larger stuff would fall in under gravity. So we sent colonists that were small and very tough. Mars sent colonists that were more complex but also more delicate.

Now the idea of panspermia fell to the wayside somewhat, largely due to the problems of lifespan over large distances. There's no such problem between our two planets though. Further, little work had been done on just how tough these little chaps in fact are. There are also indications that life can mine zpe. Mars could have had a genetic pool that stood it in good stead for its atmosphere loss. So we're related[8D][]