3-D Mind

April 11th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The experience of being human seems to be intimately connected to the physics of the space in which that being feels itself to be embedded. There is an uncanny match between the formulation of space articulated in the axioms of naive physics, roughly approximating Cartesian/Newtonian physics, and the feeling of being.This feeling of being might be described as a sense that one’s body is a single object with a clear boundary, existing at a single location in an extended 3-dimensional space, a feeling which is also extended to the mind, and the feeling that one is a singular entity, reasonably whole and separated in space from other entities, exactly here, precisely now. Studies on the early development of knowledge in babies and children (Baillergeon, 1994; Spelke, 1998) seem to indicate that the cognitive and perceptual apparatus driving these feelings is hard-wired. We know, however, that this perception of space and being is inaccurate. We learn from particle physics that these solid bodies are mostly empty space, our materiality consisting only of widely separated energetic particles blinking randomly in and out of existence. We learn that space itself is not as it appears, but is n-dimensional, curved, and worm-infested. We know that matter and energy are interchangeable. We know that consciousness and intention does not precede action but rather follows it, like a slick politician riding the wave of public opinion (Libet 2004), and we are told that subjectivity itself is an ideological effect, our most phenomenologically real feeling of self constructed by the projections and pressures of culture (Althusser 1998).

The degree of correspondence between Newtonian/Cartesian space and the intuitive understanding of being-in-space as captured in the informal axioms of naive physics requires explanation. I am suggesting that this correspondence is an inevitable feature of the embodied nature of naive experience and the largely embodied nature of scientific enquiry up until the time of Newton and Descartes. When the unaided human sensory system is the primary tool for examining the world, the model of the world is likely to reflect the experienced model of being.

Althusser, L. (1998) “Ideology and ideological state apparatuses.” Eds. J. Rivkin & M. Ryan. Literary theory: An anthology. Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 1998. pp. 294-304.

Baillargeon, R. (1994). “How Do Infants Learn About the Physical World.” Current Direction is Psychological Science 3(5).

Libet, B. (2004). Mind time: the temporal factor in consciousness. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.

Spelke, E. S. (1998). “Nativism, empiricism, and the origins of knowledge.” Infant Behavior and Development 21(2): 181.

And now I am taking my 3-D body to the bar….

Posted in Althusser, Baillergeon, Conference Abstract, Libet, Benjamin, Phenomenology, Space, Spelke, Elizabeth, Up | No Comments »

The View from Everywhere

April 15th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Normal waking consciousness is a located phenomenon supported/created by sensory organs which orient the normal conscious mind as a point or body in 3-dimensional space. This is particularly evident when considering the visual sense, which transparently places the individual at the centre of space and arranges the furniture of the world in relation to that central location, (although it is likely that the proprioceptive sense is even more potent in this positioning of consciousness).

A common feature of the experience of ‘enlightenment’ is a weakening of this sense of a located consciousness such that one feels oneself distributed across, and in some cases in union with, a wider environment than a point or body.

A more everyday version of this extension of the located self, which gives a suggestion of the phenomenological changes which take place in moments of enlightenment, can be found in the experience of binocular vision. The distinct difference between a two dimensional image and a 3-D space parallels, in a small way, that between 3-D space and the expanded field of consciousness experienced by the enlightened mind.

Nagel writes about ‘the view from nowhere’ in his critique of empirical objectivity, seeming to indicate a visual metaphor in which knowledge which is assumed to have a viewpoint is accorded the unique distinction of seeing everywhere and everything, like a giant omniscient eye hovering over the otherwise horizontal plane of usual (viewpointed, perspectival) knowing.

Posted in Centre, Consciousness, Nagel, Thomas, Space, Up | No Comments »

New Spectacles

April 16th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Today is Easter Sunday, and for some reason my mobile isn’t working so I’ve not been able to ring home and wish the children Happy Easter. I’ll try to borrow someone’s later maybe. There are no papers this morning so I’m sitting in my hotel room right now, writing this on my laptop, and squinting a little because my spectacle prescription is out of date and the words on the screen are distinctly fuzzy (if that isn’t too oxymoronic a thing to say).

Which sets my thinking about the first pair of glasses I ever got, when I was about 12 I suppose. Up until that point I just assumed that everyone else saw the world as I did; that things not only became smaller as they moved away but they also became indistinct. I also believed that this was not a feature of my dodgy perception, but a property of the actual material world. I truly thought that beyond a distance of a few hundred yards from my head the world was an undifferentiated mass, and it was only within my orbit (and presumably the orbit of other humans) that the parts emerged from the whole. If I don’t get my prescription renewed and get myself some new spectacles I may have to re-embrace that worldview.

Posted in Perception, Seeing, Space, Story, Subjective | No Comments »

Be. Here. Now.

April 28th, 2006 Fred McVittie

For the purposes of this paper, presence will be regarded as primarily a spatial concept. That is, the degree of presence demonstrated by an entity is found to be proportional to the degree to which that entity may be said to have a single distinct location in space. Following the logic of Egginton in ‘How the world became a stage’ (2003), this presence functions as a replacement for subjectivity as the authenticator of being. Therefore to have presence is ‘to be, there’. To occupy a point is space (not to be partially there, not to be elsewhere, to be in that place only.)

There are a number of (metaphorical) properties associated with this located being-in-space, some of which have a particular relevance for theatrical or other type of performance. If a person has presence then they demonstrate attraction, magnetism, they are compelling, motivating, they catch your attention (attention is something to be caught), they ‘have what it takes’, they are likely to be the ‘centre of attention’ and to ‘knock em dead’. It will be noted that there is a telling correlation between the concept of spatially authenticated presence and the abstract concept of a force or energy. The structure of this correlation of metaphors will be described and some revealing entailments introduced.

Egginton, W. (2003). How the world became a stage: presence, theatricality, and the question of modernity. Albany, NY, State University of New York Press.

Posted in Conference Abstract, Performance, Presence, Space, Theatre | No Comments »

The Three Dimensions of Embodied Space

May 11th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The sense of three-dimensionality that comes with binocular vision and so called ‘depth perception’ is usually assumed to be co-existant with the three dimensions of cartesian space. That is, when we perceive the world in 3D, those dimensions are the dimensions of height, width, and depth, all at right angles to each other, which demarcate the cartesian grid. However, it is proposed here that the three dimension of visual, embodied, space are in fact not co-existant with these dimensions at all. It will be shown that that the dimensions of perception are in fact:

1. A line drawn between the eyes
2. A line drawn between the left eye and the object at the focal point
3. A line drawn between the right eye and the object at the focal point

The three lines, forming a triangle of perception linking the viewer to the object, demarcate the three dimensions of embodied space. This presentation will discuss the implications of this revisioning of space in terms of an understanding of consciousness.

Posted in Dimension, Seeing, Space | 1 Comment »

Spurious Flapdoodle?

May 12th, 2006 Fred McVittie

I’ve been re-reading some of my recent posts, and I can’t help wondering what the status of some of these papers might be. the one I posted yesterday on the 3 dimensions of Cartesian space, when I look back on it, seems completely spurious, but I know that when I heard the paper itself it was very compelling and well supported academically. If I get the opportunity I’ll try to track down the presenter and get a copy of the full paper.

Posted in Dimension, Flapdoodle, Space, Story | No Comments »

Human Physics and Being at the Centre

May 13th, 2006 Fred McVittie

I have found some notes that I made at one of the workshops I got to, although I don’t honestly remember much about it (truth be told, I’m not absolutely sure I actually went to it, but I have the notes so I suppose I must have).

Stand in the middle of a field, or on a hilltop, and look around.
Forget for a moment everything that you have been taught about space, everything that you know about your place in the world, lose your hard won objectivity for a moment, and trust only in the evidence of your senses.

Where in the world are you?

If you are scrupulously honest you will have to agree that you are (whatever ‘you’ are) standing in the absolute centre of a disc, under a bowl of sky. The horizon line describes a circle, a wheel with your self at its axis, and the universe of heaven above you is equidistant from the point you alone occupy. You are surrounded by the world and the rest of the world retreats from you; the trees close by are larger than the trees in the distance. Those near the perimeter of the disc are the size of an eyelash. Hold out your hand and it is larger than the largest of those trees. You can hold the entire sun in your hand and extinguish its light by putting that hand in front of your eyes.

This centrality is an integral element of the folk physics of subjectivity. A first person account of being-in-the-world.

So there you are then.

Posted in Centre, Exercises, Space, Story | No Comments »

Tri-ocularity and Enlightenment

May 14th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The difference between looking with one eye and looking with two is a difference we call ‘depth perception’ (the difference that makes a difference). This difference is so dramatic, so markedly different from single eye vision because it corresponds to a literal widening of the location of the perceiver far beyond what might be imagined. The space between the left eye and the right is only around 2 inches, and yet the impact on vision is profound. Monocular vision positions the viewer precisely at a particular point in relation to a 2 dimensional field of view, the opening of the second eye extends that location across an area of 3 dimensional space. The second eye effectively transforms consciousness from a point phenomenon (literally a point of view) to a regional phenomenon. This begs the question, what would be the consequences of the opening of another eye, separated more widely in space from the other two? Inevitably the location of the self in space would become more widely distributed as the region occupied by the eyes, and inferred by the triple parallax, extended. With enough eyes, widely enough separated, the location of the self in space would become co-existent with the space itself. At that point we would be everywhere.

Posted in Dimension, Seeing, Space | No Comments »

Personally Speaking

June 18th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Speaking from the first person and relying predominantly on subjective knowledge and personal experience has a bad reputation in the sciences and in philosophy. These knowledge gathering and validating systems pride themselves on objectivity and the third person position; a way of looking at the world as a collection of objects which can be stood apart from and regarded from this shared, experimental, differentiated distance.

A number of recent, and not so recent, publications suggest however that this objectivity may not be the only game in town, and that there is a renewed interest in subjective, first-person accounts, and the reality that is constituted by these accounts.

This paper will consider some of the pragmatic benefits for knowledge acquisition and for personal well-being that might be accrued from the deliberate adopting of the first person position and temporarily, and strategically, abandoning objectivity.

Posted in Knowledge, Objectivity, Space, Subjective | No Comments »

Flying through the Space of Thought

June 23rd, 2006 Fred McVittie

The kind of processes we refer to when we arrange out thoughts, and the type of psychological gestures we make in order to move through our thoughts, suggests that cognitive organisation makes heavy use of a metaphor of space. The metaphor of the mind as a kind of spatially extended domain is one of the most important and robust mental structures. This space of thought roughly corresponds to Cartesian or Newtonian space, a fact which is evidenced in the language we use to talk about the contents and processes of our minds (streams of consciousness etc) and also in techniques for cognitive enhancement such as mnemonic systems like the method of loci, which uses the construction of elaborate storage spaces, so-called ‘memory palaces’, to enable easy retrieval of facts and ideas.

A significant departure from this schema is our ability to make intuitive leaps, or simply to allow our thoughts to hop from one topic to another without apparently crossing any intervening space. A number of subsidiary metaphors attempt to explain this phenomenon; William James, in addition to referring to the ’stream of consciousness’ also describes consciousness rather as a bird in flight. He says, ‘Our psychic life has rhythm: it is a series of transitions and resting-places, of “flights and perchings”‘ (PP 236). Also, a common feature of Buddhist meditation teaching is an attempt to tame the ‘monkey mind’, the tendency of consciousness to jump uncontrollably from one branch of knowledge to another. Both these metaphors invoke an image of space which, whilst still Cartesian, is not empty and unstructured but is somewhat like a forest. A space in which knowledge forms grow, interpenetrate, and spread, allowing a smooth linear passage from one to the next, but also a space through which it is possible to swing and swoop, catching knowledge on the fly.

Baby swifts leave their nests at a few weeks old, launching themselves on their first flight without any tuition or preparation. They then spend the next two years of their lives on the wing. It may be interesting to speculate on the possibilities of maintaining extended periods of flight in cognitive space. Staying airborne, like the swift, in the spaces between one idea and another.

Posted in Buddhism, James, William, Knowledge, Meditation, Metaphor, Mind, Space | No Comments »

Space and Relation

July 16th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The family of concepts articulating how one entity is described in relation to another entity are generally known by the term ‘Relationship’. This term, and the concepts it covers, are inherently abstract, and is therefore understood through a metaphorical mapping from a concrete concept; one that can be directly experienced by the sensorimotor system of the human body. All relationships are understood through a conceptual mapping of the concrete concept of space. Different types of relationship are understood through mappings of the various dimensions of experiential space.

  • Status, amount, and quality use the vertical dimension (high status, high quality, high turnover)
  • Affection, necessity, and safety use the dimension of proximity (close friendship, distant possibility, near miss)
  • Mereology (part/whole relations) use the dimension of containment (”I am in the club”)
  • Temporal relations use the in front/behind schema (”the week ahead”, “the worst is behind us”)

Posted in Embodiment, Metaphor, Space, Time | No Comments »

Space and the Now of Presence

July 28th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Our consciousness of the past, the present, and the future uses radically different cognitive correlates and processes, and this difference is tied up with the relationship between consciousness and space. Our consciousness uses imagination, in different ways, to access the past and the future, whereas our consciousness of the present has no need of imagination; perception and awareness are sufficient. This difference between being conscious of an imagined past or future, and being conscious within a non-imagined, experienced present is revealed in the different relationship to space (and time) that our consciousness of the present has when compared to our consciousness of memories or predictions.

When we share space and time with others we may not (cannot) share the same memory or imagined future; our bodies occupy the same small area of space but our memories and imaginings of the future are widely disparate and radically different. The present, however, is not disparate, and all our presents are very similar. The present is in the room with us; is the room with us. We are present together in space and time and have a shared experience of it (with only minor perspectival differences). Space, time, and consciousness of present experience, what might be called ‘awareness’ or ‘presence’ are therefore co-extensive, and in all likelihood, identical.

Posted in Consciousness, Presence, Space, Time | No Comments »

Virtual Knowledge and Theoretical Entities

August 7th, 2006 Fred McVittie

A body of theoretical knowledge is constructed partly through a process of inference. Ideas and concepts refer to the shape and texture of the knowledge body, and its motion through cultural or psychological space, but do not actually comprise that body at all. The effect of the presumed body of knowledge on the surrounding environment is noted, perturbations in the motion of observable entities is considered and measured, our most reliable instruments and power of feeling is put to the task.

“To my thinking” boomed the Professor, begging the question as usual, “the greatest triumph of the human mind was the calculation of Neptune from the observed vagaries of the orbit of Uranus.”
“And yours,” said the P.B.

(Samuel Beckett (1906-1989), Irish dramatist, novelist. First published in 1934. More Pricks than Kicks, p. 67, Grove Press (1970). “The P.B.” is a character in the novel called The Polar Bear.)

Posted in Beckett, Samuel, Knowledge, Space, Theory | No Comments »

Love and Proximity

August 31st, 2006 Fred McVittie

There are many forms of love; of one’s country, one’s God, ones’s partner, child, team, and love of oneself. The behaviour and structure of these loves is obviously different but some features of all these loves are inevitably the same (otherwise they would not all be referred to by the same name). One of these underlying similarities is the use of the metaphor of proximity to describe the strength of the emotional bond. We associate the emotion of love with a sense of ‘closeness’ to the object of that love, and of the loss of love with an increasing distance. When we cease to love someone we say that we have ‘grown apart’, or we may act ‘distant’. An ultimate extent of proximity may be that the loved one is so close that the psychological and ego-based boundaries which usually separate us, the subject, from the object of our affection cease to exist. It is a cliche that lovers ‘become one’, but a cliche which refers to a metaphorical fact. This proximal fusion is also writ large in the logic of religious devotion; the ‘divine union’ of Christianity, the ‘advaita’ of the Upanishads, etc.

Posted in Love, Religion, Space, Unity | No Comments »

Space Mind Metaphor

September 6th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Space is a key concept, perhaps the most important key concept, in Naive Physics. Remembering that Naive Physics is an extended field of knowledge that includes mental entities such as consciousness (Smith 1994) it is not surprising that our understanding of the mind itself in turn draws on spatial metaphors to structure that understanding. In other words, the Naive Physics of cognition imagines the mind as spatial. We talk of consciousness being ‘raised’, (following a general metaphor GOOD IS UP), and we may think of ourselves and other people as being ‘broadminded’ or ‘narrowminded’. Techniques, experiences, and chemicals for altering the state of one’s mind positively are routinely referred to as ‘mind expanding’. Generally these metaphors rely on two further assumptions about the mind, both of which are also features of naive science.

Dualism - that the mind is radically separate from the brain, possibly to the extent that it can have independent existence (as in the pre-psychological notion of the immortal soul).

Vitalism - that the mind is composed of a non-material, ‘ethereal’ substance which is often conceptualised as gaseous or liquid, (c.f. ‘flow’, the ‘oceanic’, ’streams of consciousness’ etc).
In this formulation when we talk about the mind we conceive it as a vital substance existing within Newtonian/Cartesian space, centred on the person.

With these two features in place, when we use spatial metaphors to talk and think of the mind we imagine this fluid mind-stuff, centred behind the eyes, as expanding and contracting; flowing from one part of the body to another and capable of extension outside of the body through processes we refer to as concentration, focus, attention, etc.

Posted in Dualism, Liquid, Metaphor, Mind, Smith, Barry, Space, Vitalism | No Comments »

The Extended Space of the Illuminated Mind

September 7th, 2006 Fred McVittie

One of the most common experiences of the mind is that it is an object, like other objects in the real world, located in space, and existing at, or centred on a particular point. We routinely intuit our consciousness and cognition to be located in this single place, exactly here, precisely now. This point is also usually felt to be located at the centre of lived experience; we are the centre of our little worlds. However, there is another conceptual understanding of the mind which uses a very different spatial metaphor, this understanding relating to a correspondingly different form of consciousness to that of the little world and the central point. This formulation does not imagine the mind located within space, or even as somehow expanding, contracting, or moving through space, but rather that space and mind are, in some way, co-terminous. Space, in this model, is not an inert, unstructured void in which the mind occupies a distinct bounded region, but space is mind. Most commonly found in developed metaphysical systems, this metaphor reverses the Kantian proposition that space is a function of mind. The notion of an identification of mind with space as opposed to mind existing at a singular point in space correlates with states of consciousness often referred to as ‘enlightenment’ (which is itself a metaphor for the existence of a brightly lit space in which knowledge is visible). This enlightened space/mind features in a range of metaphysical practices and religious traditions including ‘divine union’, ‘advaita’, and which Newberg (1999) generalised as a sense of ‘Absolute Unitary Being’ (AUB). It may be said to be part of the perennial philosophy indicated by Huxley and others. Neurological evidence for this relationship between space, mind, and a sense of AUB comes from the work carried out by Michael Persinger who used ‘Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation’ (TCS) to affect part of the brain which contribute to our sense of physical location in space. When subjects were affected in this way their subjective experience was of feeling a sense of unity with the world.

Posted in Enlightenment, Huxley, Aldous, Kant, Immanuel, Light, Newberg, Andrew, Persinger, Michael, Space, Unity | No Comments »

Space and Dualism

September 11th, 2006 Fred McVittie

As Bloom (2005) says, we are all ‘Descartes Babies’, or ‘natural born dualists’, believing in spite of the evidence in some kind of ineffable soul, spark, or spirit to contrast with the material body and physical world. However, we can only conceptualise this soul through through the meagre (but powerful) tools provided by evolution, which includes an inability to conceive of abstraction except through the use of embodied metaphor. As Lakoff et al demonstrate, we understand the abstract in terms of the concrete. Since the mind is pehaps the ultimate abstraction; we can only conceive of it by analogy to embodied experience. In other words, whilst our naive psychology may provide the experience of a cartesian duality, we can only think of the ’spiritual’ component of this duality in terms of the physical, the Res Cogitans in terms of the Res Extensa.

Posted in Bloom, Paul, Dualism, Soul, Space | No Comments »

Mind and Space

September 12th, 2006 Fred McVittie

“Space is all one space and thought is all one thought, but my mind divides its spaces into spaces into spaces and thoughts into thoughts into thoughts. Like a large condominium. Occasionally I think about the one Space and the one Thought, but usually I don’t. Usually I think about my condominium.” - Andy Warhol, In Perspective

The spatial model of the mind in which mind and space are coterminous is found is (primarily non-scientific) discourses such as the writings Genpo Roshi (Big Mind), a concept adopted by Ken Wilbur and others, and reflected in some of the writing of Alan Watts, ‘I have no other self than the totality of things of which I am aware’. Here other concepts of mind which utilise spatial metaphors, central point, focal point, ectoplasm, are ignored or suppressed in favour of the MIND IS SPACE metaphor, with its consequent entailments. The prioritisation of this metaphor is associated with the condition of enlightenment.

Posted in Enlightenment, Mind, Space, Warhol,Andy, Watts, Alan, Wilbur, Ken | No Comments »

Metaphors of Mind: Object, Substance, Space

September 12th, 2006 Fred McVittie

  • Because of the limitations of an embodied cognition, all abstract thought is inherently metaphorical in nature.
  • Mind is a deeply abstract concept, as Claxton says, ‘ you can’t put it up against the wall and take a photo of it’, therefore mind can only be thought of (and spoken of) in metaphorical terms.
  • There are a large number of metaphors for the mind and particular mental functions, and these can be grouped into three general categories (which sometimes co-exist, as for example the metaphor of mind as a cloud).

  • Object metaphors (machine, body, book, computer etc),
  • substance metaphors (solid, gas, liquid)
  • spatial metaphors. This last set of metaphors variously imagines mind as existing as a point phenomenon at the centre of lived experience (core, essence etc), a focal point experience associated with the contents of consciousness, a ‘global’ phenomenon in which mind is synonymous with the totality of space.

Posted in Claxton, Guy, Cognition, Metaphor, Mind, Object, Space, Substance | No Comments »

Being in Three Minds

September 14th, 2006 Fred McVittie

At any moment we are simultaneously in three mental ‘locations”

  1. The entire contents of our awareness comprises our ‘field’ of consciousness. We occupy the whole of this field simultaneously. Much of this may be pre-conscious.
  2. We occupy the contral point in this field. This point may be experienced as contentless; a place to stand; the axis around which experience moves; the core of the self.
  3. We are the focal point of our consciousness. The moving, streaming individual momentary content of consciousness; the place on which the spotlight of consciousness is trained.

These three modes/elements of being can be enhanced using different exercises.

Posted in Centre, Mind, Space | No Comments »

Space and Buddhism

September 15th, 2006 Fred McVittie

‘Space is the precondition of all that exists, be it material or immaterial form, because we can neither imagine an object nor a being without space. Space, therefore, is not only a conditio sine qua non of all existence, but a fundamental property of our consciousness.
Our consciousness determines the kind of space in which we live. The infinity of space and the infinity of consciousness are identical. In the moment in which a being becomes conscious of his consciousness, he becomes conscious of space. In the moment in which he becomes conscious of the infinity of space, he realises the infinity of consciousness.’ (1969)

Lama Anagarika Govinda, The Foundation of Tibetan Mysticism, 1969

Posted in Buddhism, Consciousness, Space | No Comments »

Metaphors of Mind

September 18th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The use of metaphor to describe and conceptualise mind is inevitable because of its inherently abstract nature. As Guy Claxton puts it (referring specifically to the unconscious), ‘you can’t put it up against the wall and photograph it.” This use of metaphor in cognition and in natural language is not only a feature of ‘commonsense’ descriptions of the mind (Barnden), but also structures academic and scientific thought on this subject. As has been noted by Barnden, Pasanek, Lakoff, and others, there are a large number of metaphors for mind and mental processes including, animals, architecture, garden features, war, weather, and writing. (Pasanek); for the purposes of this writing, this list will be collated into three key groups; objects, substances, and spatial metaphors. It can be demonstrated that all of the metaphors listed can be allocated to one or more of these three groups, or derived from combinations of the groups.

Posted in Barnden, J. A., S. O’Nuallain, et al, Claxton, Guy, Lakoff, George, Metaphor, Object, Panasek, Brad, Space, Substance | No Comments »

McGinn’s Space of the Mind

September 22nd, 2006 Fred McVittie

McGinn’s (1997) problems with relating an unextended consciousness to an extended physical world; res cogitans to res extensa, stem from an inherent dualism of his position, a dualism not of matter and mind but of a distinction between mind and the contents of mind. This dualism is, in turn, derived ultimately from the space metaphor which McGinn draws on to frame the concepts he uses. He interestingly uses the example of the mental image of a ‘yellow flash’ (presumably of light) to indicate that such thoughts do not have extension, and that therefore mind is similarly non-extended.

… it takes up no particular volume of space; it has no shape; it is not made up of spatially distributed parts; it has no spatial dimensionality; it is not solid.

However, this image, like all images of light, only makes sense within the context of a larger unspoken metaphor of space. In order for us to understand his reference to a yellow flash at all we have to conceive it as a spark of light, and like all such phenomena, real or imagined, light requires a source, a point in space from which to be emitted. It also usually requires an object on which to fall and most definately an empty space through which to radiate. Without the latter there simply is no light, the concept is incomplete and incoherent. In claiming that the image is unextended he is artificially limiting the parts of the metaphor which he claims as ‘mind’ to the yellow flash, ignoring the fact that the metaphor demands that the spatial entailments also must be considered as similarly constituting the mind. Not only the object at the centre of McGinn’s image, the yellow flash, is mind, but also the objects illuminated (the ‘contents of consciousness’) and the space within which light and objects exist.

McGinn, Colin.
1995. Consciousness and Space. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2: 220-30. Reprinted in Shear (1997).

Shear, Jonathan, ed.
1997. Explaining Consciousness. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.1

Posted in Consciousness, McGinn, Colin, Metaphor, Mind, Space | No Comments »

Central Source of Mind

September 22nd, 2006 Fred McVittie

The concept of mind structures consciousness in such a way as to allow us to experience it in a number of spatially extended ways, particulary as a point of source, a point of focus, and a space. A very common entailment of the point of source metaphor is one in which this source is taken to exist at the centre of the body or head. This imaginary location for the source of self (and the self as source) allows for a correspondence with related concepts such a Damasio’s ‘core self’ and essentialist intuitions about the ‘real self’ which is typically recorded as lying ‘deep inside’. The phenomenological fact that this association of source with centrality represents normal waking consciousness is evidenced through its variants, in which the source is felt to be located elsewhere other that the centre, away from the centre of the body or even outside of the body completely. Such experiences typically constitute unusual states of consciousness. We find this spatial relocating of the source of self and consciousness in a wide variety of contexts, from ‘astral travelling’ in which the sense of self is felt to roam away from the body to other ‘dimensions’, and more prosaically in video games, which often place the location/source of self and agency above and behind the avatar body (e.g. the Grand Theft Auto series). It is also felt in the everyday procedures of image management and the self-conscious sensations which accompany these procedures. This in no way supports the notion that such located consciousness has any physical reality, either inside the head or body, or outside it, but the consistency with which such spatial concepts appear suggests that they are part of the universal phenomenological condition of embodied embedded consciousness.

Posted in Consciousness, Damasio, Antonio, Mind, Space | No Comments »

Coherent metaphors and Efficacy

September 25th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The effectiveness with which we are able to deal with a situation or problem depends significantly on the the type of consciousness we bring to that situation or problem. Some situations require highly focussed, unselfconscious thought, others require a high level of self-monitoring, etc. In order to gain access to these different cognitive states, and benefit from their application, it is necessary to have a coherent and intelligible ‘map’ of the various states one might put oneself in, and how these states relate to each other and to external features of the world at large. Given the abstract nature of cognition and consciousness it is inevitable that such ‘maps’ are metaphorical (as indeed is this description, in its use of the term ‘maps’). One such ‘map’ of the various states of consciousness utilises the metaphor of space.

An important aspect of this metaphorical mapping is that the users of the metaphor function more effectively, i.e. are able to enter subtly different states of consciousness more readily, when they are presented with the entire map outlining all of the states, not when they are introduced to it piecemeal. It is more effective also when a consistent metaphor is used throughout. For example, to talk about one form of consciousness as if it were a substance (e.g. a flowing liquid) and another as a spatial location (e.g. being ‘centered’), clearly mixes the metaphors and does not provide a single coherent structure for the various concepts to inhabit.

Posted in Consciousness, Consilience, Metaphor, Performance, Space, Training | No Comments »

Knowing is Seeing

September 29th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The language that we use to articulate knowledge varies according to the form that knowledge takes, the way of knowing, that we are referring to. When we refer to objective, 3rd person knowledge, that which seems to have a clear existence outside of ourselves accessible to independent observers, we use the language of vision; we say that we can see that the knowledge exists. The vision metaphor for knowing conceptualises knowledge as concrete, discreet objects, and places these ‘objects’ of knowledge outside in the world and in social space. The vision metaphor therefore necessarily entails a particular use of spatial metaphors. Entailments of this ‘knowledge as objects in space’ metaphor include such terms as ‘clear’ and ‘lucid’ when expressing the obviousness of the knowledge; the implication is that the metaphorical space between ourself and the knowledge object is transparent. Also, we tend to use terms associated with light, such as ‘illuminated’, ‘enlightened’ etc. to indicate the acquisition of this sort of knowledge, as if the space around us had suddenly become brightly lit, revealing objects of knowledge that were previously hidden from us in the darkness.

Posted in Knowledge, Language, Light, Seeing, Space, Transparent | No Comments »

Spirituality (Definition)

October 9th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Spirit - an emotional response corresponding to love, compassion, awe,etc. in which the experience of the emotion is conceptualised as a physical entity. This (metaphorical) entity is usually conceived of as an invisible ether permeating space, or sometimes as space itself, and is often given the attribution of agency or intentionality (God).

Posted in Agency, Emotion, God, Metaphor, Space, Spirituality | No Comments »

Felt Knowledge (Exercise)

October 26th, 2006 Fred McVittie

  1. Shift the location of sensory awareness to different points in the body; feel oneself inside the foot, the chest, the arm, the head.
  2. Distribute sensory awarness across two or more locations in the body and try to feel oneself balanced between those areas.
  3. Feel sensory awareness moving through the space of the body.
  4. Vary the scale of sensory awareness in the body, from a point to the entirety of the space occupied by the body.
  5. Feel sensory awareness extending beyond the space of the body, into the space surrounding the body.
  6. Vary the scale of sensory awareness of space outside of the body, from a point to the entirety of space outside of the body.
  7. Feel sensory awareness of the space both inside and outside the body, the space permeates the inside and the outside of the body. Feel the entirety of space.

Posted in Attention, Exercises, Proprioception, Sense, Space | No Comments »

Space is Everywhere

October 30th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Space, like mind, does not stop on the inside of objects, or on the outside of objects, but permeates everything and everybody.

Posted in Mind, Space | No Comments »

The Boundaries of Self

November 4th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The boundaries of the self are not given and may be placed at any possible location within a continuum stretching from a point of focus to an entirety of space. Within this continuum there are a number of ‘natural’ configurations which serve as default boundaries, the most significant of these probably being the body. We feel ourselves located within, or co-extensive with the body, and it is the body we point to when we indicate ourselves (interestingly, we usually point to the chest when indicating ourselves, rather than the head). The body acts as a liminal zone, rather like the tide-line on a beach, that the self routinely expands and contracts across according to the different states of mind we occupy and the different situations we find ourselves in.

Reduced ability to mobilise the extension/contraction of the self across the tide-line of the body may indicate less than optimal functioning, possibly even pathology. For example, we routinely extend our sense of self to include members of our immediate family, our local community, our country (patriotism), even the land itself; an inability to perform this extension is indicative, at the very least, of self-centredness or self-absorption.

Administration of the boundaries of the self may come from the conscious control of such extension by the mechanisms of mind, as when we consciously undertake procedures to expand our minds, or it may come from outside, in response to circumstance and context. Unwanted attention may cause our sense of self to contract, to retreat behind the barrier of the defensible body. Welcome attention may cause our sense of self to expand such as to include those around us.

Posted in Boundary, Embodiment, Self, Space | No Comments »

Attending to Attention

November 13th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Although attention can be visualise/conceived as an energy, for this exercise we are going to imagine it as corresponding with a spatial location, specifically the centre.

Select an object or person in the room.
Move your head and eyes such that that object is exactly in the centre of your field of vision.
Imagine that the object is at the centre of the world it occupies, just as it occupies the centre of your visual field.

The type of looking appropriate to this exercise is one of ‘attending’ or active waiting. Allow the object of your attention, the object occupying the centre of attention, to be pregnant with your waiting. Give attention to the object like a cat giving attention to a mousehole. Let nothing happen but the waiting.

Posted in Attention, Centre, Exercises, Seeing, Space | No Comments »

Being There: Presence, Space, Metaphor.

November 21st, 2006 Fred McVittie

Presence, however the term is applied, always assumes the idea of Being There. That is, it combines certain assumptions about the nature of Being, with others assumptions about the concept of Thereness, and supports the intuition that Being is intimately connected to concepts of space. It is impossible to consider Being without adding, soto voce, a Being At, or a Being There.

There is locational and spatial, and the Being There of presence similarly assumes this spatial dimension as a metaphor for its ontology. Presence assumes a geography of space, and in so doing, becomes in thrall to the entailments of this metaphor including boundary, direction, level, extension, separation, relationship, division etc. All of these concepts demand the existence of space, contribute toward the structure of space as a concept, and are meaningless in the absence of space.

Posted in Metaphor, Presence, Space | No Comments »

Make Room (Exercise)

November 25th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Stand or sit in a place where you can watch something approach; a person, a vehicle, on object. See this thing in the distance and be conscious of the space it is taking up in your visual field. As it approaches observe the changes that you are making and that you are experiencing. As it grows larger feel yourself making room for it in your awareness. Feel yourself giving the object space, almost as if you are moving part of yourself aside to allow the object to exist more fully. Feel the space of your mind open to accommodate the object as it approaches. Let the object fill the open space of your mind.

Alternatively, instead of having the object approach your self, try the same cognitive process as you yourself approach an object. As you move toward the object of your attention feel your mind making more and more room for that object. Feel the contents of your mind moving aside; feel yourself moving aside, to open up a greater and greater space for the object. As you get close to the object let it fill the open space of your mind. Try it with a person. Try it with someone you love. Try it with someone you don’t love.

Posted in Attention, Exercises, Love, Space | No Comments »

Physical centres

November 28th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Although the term ‘centre’ is used metaphorically to indicate a certain psychophysical state, (closely related to the concept of ‘essence’), it is only meaningful as a metaphor because of the fact that it is mapped from physical, embodied experience. The nature of the human physiology and sensorium creates an experience of centredness from which the more abstract uses of the term ‘centre’ take their meaning. This embodied experience of centre involves the following physical centres of experience:

  • Weight centre (in the abdomen/tan tien). This corresponds to the centre of gravity, the point of balance we routinely experiece (particularly as children) when moving, standing, sitting down, lying etc.
  • Base centre (in the feet). This is the feeling we have in our feet when we stand still, or almost still. Although this feeling is not usually brought to consciousness, it we attend to it we can feel the weight of our bodies registering as small shifts of weight around a central point beneath our feet.
  • Visual centre (look around. You are in the middle of the world. Where exactly is the centre of your visual world). The way the human visual system works orients each of us in such a way that, in whatever direction we look, we see the world as retreating from us. Distant objects are smaller than close objects and we are the centre of this retreat. Also, we often see a horizon line extending all the way around us, describing a circle with ourselves at the centre. We may even experience the sky above our heads as a bowl or sphere (as many cultures have in the past), and our self as occupying the exact centre of that sphere.
  • Auditory centre (close your eyes and listen. You are in the middle of what you can hear. Where exactly is the centre of your auditory world). As with the Visual Centre, we also experience the sounds we hear as being ‘around’ us, with the roundness having an axis in the centre of ourselves.

Posted in Centre, Embodiment, Sense, Space | No Comments »

One Space

December 4th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Space does not stop at the boundaries of objects and people, but penetrates and permeate everything and everyone.

There are no holes in space, and there is only one space.

When I move through space, space moves through me.

Posted in Boundary, One, Space | No Comments »

Thinking from the Centre.

December 17th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Thinking from the centre.

  • Sit comfortably in a chair and close your eyes.
  • Imagine yourself sitting exactly as you are and where you are.
  • Breathe.
  • Place your consciousness at the front surface of your body.
  • Breathe
  • Place your consciousness at the back surface of your body.
  • Breathe
  • Place your consciousness at the left side of your body.
  • Breathe
  • Place your consciousness at the right side of your body.
  • Breathe
  • Be aware of the top of your head.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the soles of your feet.
  • Breathe.

You have identified the dimensionality of the body in space.

  • Be aware of the space in the room in front of your body.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space in the room behind your body.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space in the room to the left of your body.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space in the room the right of your body.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space in the room above your body, up to the ceiling.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the floor beneath your feet.\
  • Breathe.

You have identified the dimensionality of the room you are in, and made a connection between this space and that of your body.

  • Be aware of the space in front of your body that is beyond the room, all the way to the horizon.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space behind your body that is beyond the room, all the way to the horizon.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space to the left of your body that is beyond the room, all the way to the horizon.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space to the right of your body that is beyond the room, all the way to the horizon.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space above your body that is beyond the room, extending infinitely into space.
  • Breathe.
  • Be aware of the space beneath your body that is beyond the room, extending through the Earth, and infinitely into space.
  • Breathe.

You have identified the dimensionality of all space, and made a connection between that space and your self.

Posted in Breath, Consciousness, Exercises, Space | No Comments »

Ghosts in Space

December 21st, 2006 Fred McVittie

When we think consciously about space we often imagine it as Newton may have imagined it; as an effective emptiness; an absolute nothingness that existed distinct from matter and the body and spread uniformly without regard to the events of the world. Space, in this understanding, is the neutral backdrop against which experience and action takes place, it is not implicated in that experience and action. This imagination of space affects our felt relationship to space; we do not, typically, consider ourselves to be part of space, or to have an affect upon space, but simply that space is the void between one body and another. When we move, we imagine ourselves passing through this emptiness like a ghost passing through the walls of an empty house. We are dead to this space.

Posted in Imagination, Newton, Isaac, Space | No Comments »

Thinking and Falling

February 2nd, 2007 Fred McVittie

The act of falling is not an attribute of the object that falls, but includes the object the origin, the destination, the path through the air, and all other aspects of the event. Similarly, a journey is not meaningful only in terms of the person making the journey, or of the place travelled toward, or of the place departed from. The act of seeing includes the eye, the brain, the space in front of the eye, the space inside the eye, the object, and all other aspects of the event. The act of thinking includes the object of that thought, the subject of that thought, the imaginary space that thought occupies, and all other aspects of that thought.

Posted in Cognition, Space | No Comments »

Are you in Space?

February 5th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Exercises to test whether one is spatially located.

  • Do objects in the distance move more slowly than objects close up?
  • Are distant objects smaller than close objects?
  • Does the apparent shape of objects, their geometry, change as you move around them, or as they move around you?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then you are a spatially located being.

Posted in Exercises, Space | No Comments »

The Poetic Imagination

March 23rd, 2007 Fred McVittie

The functioning of the mind as described by the theories of Embodied Cognition are radically different from that associated with more blandly ‘computational’ models. The idea that cognition is merely, or even only, the wielding of symbols and the arithmetic calculation of weightings across connectionist networks is replaced by a view that looks out across the mind as a landscape of poetic imagination, not dissimilar to that explored by Bachelard in ‘The Poetics of Space’ and other works. The structure of thought, even the most banal or apparently rational, is underpinned by the methods of poetry and art; metaphor, metonymy, and synecdoche are essential elements in the grammar of cognition.

Posted in Cognition, Imagination, Metaphor, Poetics, Space | No Comments »

‘Empty’ Space

May 11th, 2007 Fred McVittie

The division into inside and outside that is created by the inscription of the circle, the making of the mark, must be preceded by an earlier state. The void, or nothing from which the somethings of the world emerge. Modern vernacular intuitions about the nothingness of the void are coloured by the version of empty space formulated by Newton and which is still the most common way of conceiving space and nothingness.

In the Newtonian universe, space in the inactive and inert substrate on which the events of the universe are enacted. In this emptiness, Newtonian space has no other role than to provide this arena for action, and is essentially a simple measure of the distance sparating the really significant material of the cosmos. Even the fact that objects are themselves extended in space and have the dimensions fathomable as height, width, and breadth, this is simply an indication that the components of the object, or different parts of the object, have some kind of empty measurable distance between them. This distance or extension in space has no other significance than that of separation. It is not even possible to claim for Newtonian space and the kind of ‘nothingness’ that it signifies that it is the binary opposite of ‘something’. For Newtonian nothing to be part of the binary pair with substance or materiality would be an important promotion. As the opposite of something, that kind of nothing, that kind of empty space would be and indispensable part of any cosmic creative story. But it cannot be said of Newtonian space that is is the opposite of something. It is not even the lack of something, marked by the paradoxical but significant presence of absence. It is simply an inauspicious blankness, devoid of relevance, power, relationship, history, and meaning.

This understanding of nothingness, exemplified by our concept of ‘empty space’, is prevalent in much of our thinking, and when we talk about ‘nothing’ it is the inert and featureless nothing of the impotent concept of space that we refer to.

Posted in Dualism, Space, Zero | No Comments »

Tension

May 22nd, 2007 Fred McVittie


The speed of light is the tension of space.

Posted in Light, Space | No Comments »

????????????????????????

May 23rd, 2007 Fred McVittie

????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????

Posted in Consciousness, Space, Time | No Comments »

Space of Sound, Space of Sight

May 26th, 2007 Fred McVittie

‘Space’ is a concept which one can construct through the operation of a number of senses, primarily kinesthetic, but also visually and acoustically. The multiplicity of sensory modes through which space is evidenced has the effect of multiplying the number of spaces that we can imagine; when I close my eyes,’space’ does not disappear, but is transformed from a multimedia display to a purely sonic space, populated by the sound of birds and traffic, each sound located in and travelling through the space that it simultaneously occupies and realises. The multi-modal potential of space allows it to act as an organisational aid for the imagination. The dark space of sound allows for the perceptual projection of the visual imagination. The silent space of sight is an imaginary auditorium for the projection of subjunctive voices.

Posted in Imagination, Sense, Space | No Comments »

The Space of Sound

May 26th, 2007 Fred McVittie

The operation of the visual sense is dependent upon the movements of the body such that the perception of an object involves not the simple passive viewing of that object but the active engagement of the muscles and motor nerves. Seeing is ‘enactive’ (Noe, Regan et al 2005)in the sense that, without movement and the kinesthetic awareness that accompanies movement, no seeing would take place. This understanding of visual perception allies it to another sensory mode, that of olfaction, which also requires that movement take place in order for it to function fully. If we smell something, typically we move our head and neck, craning to find, not the essence of the odour, but its source or its ’shape’. These features of a smell, the shape and the trail to its source, are completely real features which are completely inaccessible if we remain still and ‘let the smell come to us.’ Both vision and olfaction therefore lose part of their nature if we do not interact physically and kinesthetically with them, and the part that they lose is their presence in extended space. Without moving our own bodies through space, the objects that we see and smell are themselves evacuated of space and extension.

The acoustic sense is somewhat different however. It is possible to remain completely passive, not making any external movement of the body whatsoever, and still experience sound in a spatially extended way. Sitting quietly in a room with good music system, or an old Dansette record player, or with the TV on and children playing noisily in the garden outside. With eyes closed and only the rise and fall of breathing, the space of sound is everywhere, all around.

Posted in Hearing, Noe, Alva, Seeing, Sense, Space | No Comments »

Centre of the Cosmos

May 29th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Stand still
Stand in the place where you live.
Imagine the centre of the Earth beneath your feet.
You are connected to that Centre.
Gravity pours through you toward that Centre.
Space flows down and around you toward that Centre.
All this is true
As you stand, imagine the Centre of the Earth, the Centre of Space
Moving upward through your feet and into your body.
Imagine the line connecting your centre to the Centre of the Earth contracting and shortening.
Place yourself at cosmic centre and draw cosmic centre into yourself.
Make yourself the Centre of the Cosmos.

Breathe.

Posted in Centre, Cosmology, Exercises, Space | No Comments »

Empty Yourself

May 29th, 2007 Fred McVittie

  1. Empty your perceptions into the world. See vision as including the objects of vision.
  2. Empty your attributes into the world. You are not what you have, what you look like, what you can do, what you have done, or what you will do. The secrets that you tell no-one are not you. The part of you that others see, but which you are unaware of, is not you. The part of you that is hidden to yourself and to the world is also not you.
  3. Empty your body into the world. Space runs through you and through everything and everyone.

Posted in Perception, Seeing, Space | No Comments »

Mind at Large

May 29th, 2007 Fred McVittie

To paraphrase Einstein, the strange thing about the mind is that we can understand it. Here we are, with mental capacities forged by evolution to solve the basic problems of hunting and gathering, and yet we claim to be able to have an understanding of the most ineffable concept imaginable, the font of all perception and conception, the metaprogrammer, Nasrudin’s Donkey. Perhaps, in this context, ‘understanding’ should be interpreted not as an act of uncovering and revealing, but as an act of construction or creation. Our understanding of Mind is inevitably organised and limited by our access to it, an access provided by the senses and the sensory processing systems. To this extent, if the term ‘Mind’ means anything at all, it might as well stand for some single general principle, the ‘mind-at-large’, and what we think of as our individual minds and viewpoints is the product of limited access by the creative senses. Just as there is only one space and our bodies are the constructions of material processes which articulate a particular region of that space.

Posted in Evolution, Mind, Space | No Comments »

Middling

June 25th, 2007 Fred McVittie

We live at the centre of our own experience. We are reminded of this fact every time we stand in a field or on a beach and look around. Surrounding us is a disc of land and sea, with ourselves as the axis of this disc. Our earliest conscious memories, or rather, the memories which became part of our consciousness, and our earliest experiences which have left no trace in consciousness but nevertheless live on in our unconscious, contain the image of this disc. And in the longer and more ancient narrative of the human species, this experience of finding ourselves standing at the centre of a circle with the world laid our around us, diminishing with distance, has been felt by every single one of our ancestors, and lies at the heart of our consciousness and of our selves.

Posted in Centre, Consciousness, Evolution, Space | No Comments »

Horizon of Experience

June 26th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Imagine that all knowledge, both that we can directly experience and that we cannot, as existing on the surface of a globe, a globe as large as the Earth itself. Now imagine yourself standing on a plain on that globe, or on a savannah, or on the beach. Perhaps you are watching a sail diminish into the distance as it catches the wind from the coast. You are standing at the centre of your experience, and at the centre of all that there is, and all that it is possible to experience. A zone of embodied understanding. Close by you on the sand are the objects and events which you have the most intimate experiential knowledge about. You can touch, taste, smell, hear, handle, caress, weigh these objects in your hands and feel their textures. Your knowledge of them is direct and embodied. More distant objects, the lighthouse, the sail, like the tree at the bottom of the garden and like the moon, are still available to you, but less so. You can see the sail and hear the wind flapping the canvas, but cannot touch it or taste it from where you are.

As our thoughts and perceptions strain to see the ship as it approaches the limits or our zone of embodied understanding we find a natural boundary, a horizon beyond which our direct understanding cannot reach. This limit is the horizon of human experience bordering the zone of embodied knowledge. Beyond this horizon lies all the knowledge of this world that is outside of direct experience and that we can only access using indirect means.

Posted in Horizon, Knowledge, Space | No Comments »

Calculating the Volume of a Hypercube

July 2nd, 2007 Fred McVittie

Imagine a point on the wall in front of you.

Imagine that point extending laterally to a length of about 2 metres. You are imagining a line of 2 metres.

Imagine this line extended upward into a second spatial dimension. Imagine it extending to a height of about 2 metres. You are visualising a square of 4 square metres.

Imagine this figure extended outward into a third spatial dimension. Imagine it protruding from the board about 2 metres. You are visualising a cube of 8 cubic metres.

Imagine this figure extended into a fourth spatial dimension. Imagine it protruding into that dimension about 2 metres. Are you imagining that? Can you imagine that? I can’t.

Although some may claim to be able to visualise such a four dimensional hypercube, I am sceptical about this claim. There is no adaptive reason why we would possess this ability, and the parsimony of evolutionary necessity suggests that this ability would not persist if it did somehow emerge. We are adapted to function in a physical world appropriate to our size, and do not have the physical or mental affordances to manipulate extra-dimensional entities. Just as our fingers are not equipped to handle atoms and molecules directly, so our minds are not equipped to handle concepts beyond the ken of medium sized objects moving at medium speed.

Interestingly, although this shape may be beyond our sensorial imagination, we can ‘imagine’ this hypercube mathematically. Knowing its measurements we can calculate with some degree of certainty what the ‘quadratic volume’ of this unimaginable object might be. Following the logic of the progression from a one-dimensional line to a two-dimensional square and to a three-dimensional cube, in which at each stage we have calculated the length, area, or cubic volume by multiplying the extensions in each dimension together (2 x 2 x 2 etc), so we can calculate the hypervolume in quadratic metres by adding this extension to our multiplication. We can say that the volume of this inconceivable shape is

Posted in Evolution, Imagination, Mathematics, Space | No Comments »

The Fearless Circle of Pascal (exercise)

August 13th, 2007 Fred McVittie

  1. Place a person at the centre of your gaze.
  2. Imagine a circle around that person’s feet, as if they are standing on a large dinner plate.
  3. Make that circumference larger so they are standing at the centre of a circle that is the size of their outstretched arms, say 5 - 6 feet in diameter.
  4. Make the circumference larger still, and keep enlarging it until the perimeter of the circle reaches the point where you are standing.
  5. Imagine the circle around the person with yourself at a point on the periphery of that circle.
  6. Enlarge that circle even more so that it extends beyond you and you are completely enclosed within it.
  7. Widen the circle around the person until it extends beyond the room, beyond the local area you are in, right out to the horizon.
  8. See the person standing at the centre of their world, a world which stretches away in all directions to the horizon, and see yourself in that world. Notice how close you are to the person.
  9. Extend the circle around them beyond the horizon, and keep extending without end or boundary, concentrate on the action of extending the circle, not on any end point to this extension. Notice how close you are to the person.
  10. Never stop.
  11. Repeat this exercise with a thousand people.
  12. Repeat this exercise with a rock, an animal, a tree, a star.
  13. Repeat this exercise with the thing you love the most and the thing you most despise.
  14. Never stop.

Posted in Centre, Exercises, Horizon, Space | No Comments »

God’s Hand in Flatland

August 18th, 2007 Fred McVittie

A 3D object, say a sphere, in a 2d space would appear as act of magic, appearing and disappearing as if from nowhere and apparently contravening all the known laws of 2 dimensional physics. A more complex object, a human hand for example, would appear not as a single object but as a number of separate, disconnected entities, each finger appearing alone (in cross-section as a rough circle). However, there would be interaction, communication, and apparent communion between these entities. The appearance would be of distinct, individual, intentional interacting entities.

Posted in Flatland, God, Hand, Space | No Comments »

Origins of Spatial Mind

August 18th, 2007 Fred McVittie

The metaphor of MIND IS SPACE may lie in our ability to construct imaginary ‘representations’, or three dimensional maps of the space we occupy. An ability which is probably assisted by the consilient simultaneous mapping produced by the different senses, particularly hearing and proprioception. Many animals seem to be able to carry some kind of map of their local environment in their minds and which gives them information about their location, and an ability to plan and predict actions within that space. It seems a short step from this memory of real space to the subjunctive spaces of prediction and planning, and then to those in which imagination may play a part. Once a space contains imagination there seems no reason to prevent the imaginary from overrunning the space and thereby transforming it from a map of the real to a realm of purely conceptual thought.

  • The real forest becomes a forest in the mind.
  • Traces and fears of monsters in the real forest become traces and fears of monsters in the forest in the mind.
  • The forest in the mind has imaginary monsters behind each branch.
  • The imaginary monsters breed and produce strange and beautiful mutants.
  • The mutants clear part of the forest and build a city.
  • The city contains a library with all the works lost at Alexandria.

Posted in Imagination, Metaphor, Mind, Space | No Comments »

Visual Processing of Information

August 18th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Much information accessed via the senses is processed by the visual centres of the brain, even when the information itself is not primarily visual. For this reason we might speak of the ‘visual processing of information’, rather than simply the ‘processing of visual information’. The latter implies a method of treating data which is neutral with regard to its origin in any particular sensory mode and a distinction in the data itself according to those origins, whereas the former acknowledges that, whatever sensory channel information may arrive from it is essentially of the same type. It is the way of processing this information which renders it ‘visual’ ‘auditory’ etc. (This is confirmed by the experience of synaesthetics). An example of this is when we conceive of temperature as being ‘high’ or ‘low’, in which instance we are treating sensory information which is purely tactile by mapping it onto an imaginary visual space, almost as if we are looking at a graph of temperature or the rising and falling of liquid in a thermometer. It might be said that this is purely a metaphor and is of no relevance to brain science, however, as demonstrated by Lakoff and Johnson, such use of metaphor is the stuff of cognition, not simply the poetic icing on the cake. Metaphors are instantiated in the networks of the brain such that when talking about temperature as being ‘high’ we are effectively utilising visual networks, and it is this supervenient use which underpins the metaphor.

Posted in Johnson, Mark, Lakoff, George, Metaphor, Sense, Space, Supervenience, Synaesthesia | No Comments »

Seeing Flatland with Enactive Vision

August 18th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Edwin Abbott’s fantasy novella ‘Flatland’ tells of a world which is composed not of the three dimension of Cartesian space we are used to but of only two dimensions. This land is visited by an outsider from the world of 3D space and the story explores the many implications of such a visit, and indeed of the peculiar debt one’s version of reality holds to the number of dimensions in which one is lodged. One particular aspect of the description concerns the ‘vision’ that the inhabitants of Flatland might have, what they would see as they move about. Here Abbott betrays his own highly situated understanding of how space is viewed and conceptualised. He describes vision within Flatland as essentially one-dimensional such that an inhabitant, living as they do on a plane, would see only a single line, possible gradiated in colour or luminance, and from this one-dimensional perspective would infer the contents of their environment. This is, effectively, a mapping not of how we in three dimensional space see that space, but of how we see representations of the space we inhabit. When we look around us we do not see a two dimensional surface suspended in front of our eyes, but rather see ‘into’ that space and ‘occupy’ that space visually. We are able to do this because vision is not simply a passive mechanical process in which patterns on the retina because pictures in the head, but is an active, interactional process. Our eyes are constantly saccading and scanning the world, an exploration which is aided by the movements of the head, neck, body etc. and all of these movements, correlated with the changing patterns of light and colour coming in through the eyes, builds up a 3D model of space through which we move. In this way vision is ‘enactive’, as Noe and Regan put it. This process is supported by the other tricks we have of modelling three-dimensionality: binocular vision allowing for parallax viewing of objects and spaces, heuristic cognitive tricks such as the ’smaller things are further away’ assumption, and the ‘distant things are blurry’ strategy. If only these last two techniques for the mental modelling of 3D space was available to us then there would indeed be little difference between looking at a perspectival painting, photograph, or movie, and looking into ‘real’ space. The first two strategies, and particularly enactive vision, make it a vastly different experience.

Assuming the inhabitants of Flatland were not restricted to the basic space-modelling techniques of ’smaller equals more distant’ and ‘distant equals blurry’, and had some version of enactive vision (which is more applicable that the parallax technique of binocularity in that it does not require two eyes), then they would not see the world around them as a one-dimensional line. Their visual processes would allow them to construct some version of a two-dimensional map of their space, into which they could see and which they would feel themselves as occupying.

Posted in Abbott, Edwin, Seeing, Space | No Comments »

Language Space

August 20th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Newtonian space is conceived as infinite, still, unmoving, and constant; an arena within which the events of the universe take place but which is unaffected by those events. It is the experience of Earth-bound room-inhabiting mammals applied to the cosmos. As I lift this coffee cup to my lips the space between cup and hand and mouth remains neutral; there is no sense that it bends and shapes itself to accomodate or promote that activity, any more than the screen on which these words are being typed is bending to allow their deposition. Having said that, maybe the onscreen real estate is undergoing some kind of transformation that the void that includes myself and my coffee is not. Looking back (up) at the words and sentences which precede this one I have to admit that the space that they occupy is meaningful in a way that the space below, invisibly white, is not. And it is not simply (?) because the words are meaningful, but rather that a space of meaning has come into being through its articulation. Each small cluster of black marks on the screen is separated from every other but there is an order and a poignancy to their separation. The law of white spaces prises apart one meaning from another and places them here and there as motes of language floating in the air, but this ‘hereness’, this ‘thereness’, the air between, is a product of the prizing, and is rife with the tension of the act. The smoothness of the space below is not gradually acquiring the stratiation of the space above but otherwise staying the same, it is more that space is gradually appearing as the word-objects appear; there is no organisation of pre-existing space (the space of meaning) but the creation of that space. Each word has an attractive power which draws the eye away from the interstitial spaces, but with a little effort it is possible to note the presence, the flow of this elemental whiteness between the shadows of the language, and all the time we attend to this background we feel the tug of the words. It is hard to resist and we might find ourselves reading a word or two here and there. Our name appears in print and we gravitate toward it, our eyes falling through the white space toward the darkness of the name. Gravity is suicide and the meaningful space which language has created is also responsible for the dark force inherent in the mark.

Posted in Language, Space | No Comments »

Harding’s Trompe L’oeil Space

August 20th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Douglas Harding’s ‘naïve’ seeing requires, or at least significantly benefits from, a Western paradigm of looking which is passive and camera-like. This is possibly promoted by a familiarity with experiences which respond to this paradigm, particular repeated exposure to 2-dimensional representations of 3-dimensional spaces. Such images utilise those mechanisms of the visual system which are the most passive. In looking at a 2D image and seeing it as 3D one is relying on the perceptual cues of perspective, blurring with distance, overlapping of objects such that nearer objects obscure those objects which are further away. Facilities of depth perception which are not used are parallax vision, which uses the binocular system of the eyes to judge distance, and the ‘enactive’ vision technique in which the movements of the eyes, head, and body provide depth information. These latter techniques are both active and require an understanding of perception which is very dissimilar to camera-vision. Both these latter techniques are necessarily suppressed when carrying out the experiments which form the core of Harding’s work, in favour of a kind of seeing which is more akin to looking at a trope l’oeil painting of the world than at the world itself.

Posted in Harding, Douglas, Naive, Perception, Seeing, Space | No Comments »

The Earth is Flat

August 20th, 2007 Fred McVittie

As Primack and Adams not in ‘View from the Centre of the Universe’, the model by which scientific revolutions proceed by large scale ‘paradigm shifts’ is flawed. Kuhn’s model, postulated that occasionally there are major changes in the way that science understands (all or part of) the world. At these times, and the most commonly-cited example is the Copernican revolution from an Earth-centred solar system (or universe) to one centered on the Sun, the old order of theories, models, diagrams, and mechanisms, is dismissed in favour of the new. In Kuhn, it is a necessary consequence of this revolutionary overturning that what went before it becomes wrong and that apostles of the new, (after moving through a brief period of being heretics) become keepers of the new flame and upholders of the new truth. Old is wrong, new is right.

According to Primack and Adams, a more accurate understanding of what happens during these times is not a replacement of one truth by another, but rather the re-interpretation of the data of the world such that it applies to a wider set of circumstances and covers a larger set of phenomena. So, by this understanding, the Ptolomaic model of the Earth-centered universe is not ‘wrong’, it is instead a special limited case of the Copernican model. It is worth noting in passing that the Copernican model tends to promote an understanding of the universe which is as partial in its own way as the Ptolemaic which preceded it. A casual interpretation of the Sun-centered model seems to indicate a stationary star orbited by moving planets, but of course, in relativity, nothing is stationary in absolute terms and by most accounts the Sun itself is hurtling at several thousand miles an hour in the direction of Andromeda, with the planets around it like the loose reins of a horse. Copernicus put his thumb on the Sun and momentarily arrested its wild flight and, in doing so, revealed a pattern in the relationship of the movement of the planets, but the Copernican map is not of the real solar system, any more than a 2-dimensional map of the Earth is an accurate rendition of the real globe. It is more a graph or schematic showing the pattern of relations he discovered.

In many cases it is preferable to work with the assumption that the Earth is stationary and central rather orbital and peripheral. When we make appointments or set or watches we do not consider this as stating the location of the Earth in its orbit around the Sun, or the number of degrees through which it has rotated. We refer to sunrise not Earthfall and we watch the Sun go down over the ocean, not the Earth turning its face away into the darkening night. For most purposes the Ptolemaic model of the universe in which Earth is the centre of attention is sufficient. This is not to say that when we use such Earth-centered concepts we are using a kind of lazy shorthand, or are being inaccurate. When the application of the Ptolemaic paradigm is limited to specific uses such as these it is as accurate, and more efficient, that the Copernican.

On the even more local scale of vernacular or ‘folk’ experience, we can even extend this notion of overlapping or simultaneous paradigms to include the apparently self-evident wrong-headedness of flat Earth theory. The Earth in its entirety is not usefully considered flat, and any depiction of the Earth which too closely resembles a 2-dimensional map is demonstrably inaccurate. However, in day to day life we routinely work with the assumption that it it indeed flat, and are rarely proved wrong. When we measure a room prior to fitting a carpet, or stake out the foundations of a building, we do not take the spherical nature of the Earth into account. It would be perfectly possible to include the curvature of the Earth in our calculations but since this difference would be insignificant (smaller by far than the variations in the landscape itself) it would be foolish to do so. It is at this level that ‘folk knowledge’, or Naive Physics, and the paradigms which make it up, become available as accurate, relevant theory.

Posted in Knowledge, Naive Physics, Paradigm, Primack, J. & Adams, N., Science, Space | No Comments »

Being One Eyed

August 20th, 2007 Fred McVittie

We spend more time than any species in history looking at 2-dimensional surfaces representing 3-dimensional spaces. Screens, pictures, posters, prints on t-shirts, photographs in papers and magazines, and artwork on the side of buildings, vehicles. Painted, projected, hung, drawn and appliqued, almost every flat surface around us has been exploited for the display of fictional depth. The depth cues used for this trickery are particular and incomplete; in place of focus have blur, parallax and proprioceptive cues are entirely absent. The 3D space shown on our surfaces are not fully experiential but are the 3D as witnessed by a being with one eye, fixed in one location, removed from the space into which is gazes.

Posted in Perception, Space | No Comments »

Seeing Double

August 20th, 2007 Fred McVittie

The concept of ‘dualism’ involves an experience of being in which the world is separated into two parts or materials. These are variously designated as ’self and other’, ‘body and soul’, ‘body and mind’ and ’subject and object’. The normal experience of the act of seeing gives strong reinforcement to such dualism because of its structure. From a naïve standpoint, vision seems to involve the operation of two major component parts: the seer and the seen, together with conditional components which support the act, most notably the space which lies between seer and seen and across which seeing operates, and the light which must be present if seeing is to happen at all. The self-evident obviousness of such a structure, combined with the aid to this kind of thinking that some scientific support for its validity provides, inevitably forces one to conclude that the location of ’self’ within this system is with the ’seer’ and that everything else that is ’seen’ is ‘other’: that ‘mind’ only exists at the location in space occupied by this seer and the rest is inert matter, including the ‘body’ one sees when one looks down or indeed the body of another person. Here is the subject, there is the object. Vision, as described here, is the objectifying sense par excellence, and remembering that up to 40% of brain activity is comprised of the visual processing of information it is not surprising that, as Paul Bloom puts it, we are ‘natural born dualists’. Since so much of our brain activity is taken up with visual processing, a fact observable by noting how much of our cognition and language relies on visual metaphors, we have an inbuilt tendency to constantly reproduce the conditions under which dualism thrives.

Any move toward achieving non-duality must inevitably confront this difficulty or find ways to minimise its effects. Clearly one way is to develop a set of techniques which privilege non-visual ways of being in the world and which do not have this this tendency to spatialise and objectify. However, many traditions do attempt to offer ways of finding non-duality which rely on the concept of ’seeing’, or which make extensive use of visual and spatial metaphors despite the inherent difficulties. Such methods work because of a number of strategies which have been found which circumvent the duality-producing tendency of vision.

One way this has been achieved is through the building up of an identification or association not with the ’seer’ in the structure of vision but with some aspect of the conditions in which seeing operates, usually light or space. We intuitively associate ourselves with the position of seer, feeling our self as existing at the place where the looking is taking place or coming from. This intuition can be broken down however, allowing us to change the location of such identification, at least partially. In fact we routinely modify the location of our identification, extending it to cover our family, team, country, or species, swelling with pride when ‘we’ have taken our first step, scored a goal, turned green and pleasant as an English springtime, or evolved an opposable thumb. Alternatively we may shrink our identification to include only our head, our brain, our consciousness, placing the I deep inside and casting everything else out into the over-there-ness of objective space. We also habitually and non-mystically move ourselves away from ourselves whenever we see someone in pain; we wince in empathy, placing part of ourselves momentarily in their shoes and neuronally mirroring their being. It is a comparatively small step from these everyday resizings and relocations of the self to an identification with the non-self components of vision mentioned above. When we feel ourselves to be, not the subject or object in the visual equation, but the space in which these entities appear, we are adopting the space as ourselves and feeling the singularity and non-duality which comes with that territory. This is particularly potent if we have an understanding of space not as the emptiness which lies between the stuff of the world but as a continuous substrate which permeates every-thing and (so physicists would attest) at the deepest level comprises everything. Similarly, the development of a close association with light, the other great condition for the functioning of vision, can also allow one to avoid objectifying dualism which still utilising the power of visuality.

Some practices, particularly activity-based ones, find a non-local location for self in an identification with the affordance connection between ‘here’ and ‘there’, between this thing here called ‘I’ and that thing there called ‘it’ (or ‘you’). An affordance connection draws on that faculty of our minds which synchronises our perceptions with the actions required of the object of those perceptions. So, for example, when we see a chair we do not simply see a collection of wooden geometrical shapes assembled in a particular way, we ’see’ the sitting opportunities offered by this object. Similarly, when we see a tool with a handle we ’see’ its graspability. According to Gibson, this recognition of affordance is not some rational act carried out by the conscious mind once visual perception has taken place, rather it is completely embedded within the perceptual act, preceding such analysis as geometry or the recognition of a particular material. When we see something, the first thing we see it how we should interact with it, and this seeing is an unconscious, embodied, felt sense. The other more formal aspects of objects relating to their shape, size, colour, etc follow this primary active perceptual response, and it is these secondary perceptions which most clearly separate seer from seen, subject from object, self from other. A form of ’seeing’ or ‘being’ which foregrounds these primary affordance relations between perceiver and perceived may reduce the dualism which normal seeing tends to promote. So Herriman, writing about Zen and Archery, can claim that non-duality is achieved when the archer ceases to exist as an individual separated from the bow, arrow, and target, and begins to exist as the action which coheres these disparate elements into a unity. This singularity is a result of an identification by the archer not with his self as distinct from the activity, but with the affordance structure which makes these elements one.

Posted in Affordance, Dualism, Enlightenment, Light, Non-duality, Space | No Comments »

Between Seeing and Touching

August 20th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Visual objects are distant from us and are located in external space. Felt objects are so close to us as to barely have ‘location’ at all.

Different visual objects (or concepts imagined metaphorically as objects) occupy different spatial locations, and changes in these objects are conceived as changes in location. Different ‘feeling objects’ or simply ‘feelings’ are difficult to dimensionalise spatially and changes in feelings are not conceived as changes in location but as changes in intensity or some other property which is not spatial (colour, temperature, size, luminance etc).

Between feeling and seeing the senses of hearing and olfaction are nested with intermediate orders of spatial extension and specificity. When we hear a sound we can turn in that direction, or point at it with a fair degree of accuracy, but it is likely that there also be a large amount of fuzziness in our pointing. We may know intellectually that sound may be emitted from a point, but our hearing of that sound is more smudged. It is an entity which has blurred boundaries, which does not exist in a single region of space but seems to flow from a region. The main direction of that flowing is toward the listener and the sound fills the space between this loosely defined region over there (and here the listener makes a vague hand-waving gesture indicating the space outside of their body that is particularly full of the sound) and the sound in here (and here the same listener makes a very precise pointing gesture toward the inside of their skull). The sound out there falls away from its source in some event and loses whatever singular identity it ever had (if it ever had any identity at all) forming chords with all the other sounds of the world. With eyes closed I (and you) can hear these chords, and while I can separate them in space I usually don’t. If I separate them at all, and again I usually don’t, I separate them in time, with one chord following another in a neverending sequence of conscious being-in-sound. The spacetime of sound is not the empty, crystal clear space of objectifying vision, but the fullness and vibratory connectedness of a single piano string.

Posted in Feeling, Metaphor, Object, Perception, Space | No Comments »

The Logic of Front and Back

September 1st, 2007 Fred McVittie

It is a fact of our incorporation into these particular bodies that we see the world is specific ways.

One of the inevitables presented by the specifics of our embodiment is that our world is divided into two parts: a part in front that we are aware of visually, and a part behind us which we are not. Standing still with eyes open the world in front of us presents itself to us in a way which is radically different to what exists at our rear. The space in front of us appears brightly-lit whereas the space behind us is in darkness (an unusual kind of darkness, but darkness nonetheless). Before us all is visual clarity and objective reality. Behind us all is slightly mysterious, the subject of guesswork, subjective responses, fallible memory, and unknown fears. Before us is the path and we feel the choices we make with each step. These steps are ours and we can see where we are going. The path behind us is beyond our control and anyone or anything may be following us. Monsters and murderers attack from behind. In front of us is the future and when we move of our own volition it is into that bright space of the future that we take a step. Behind us is the past, another country and they do things differently there. Retreat is always a bad idea and no-one likes to be backed into a corner.

Posted in Cognition, Embodiment, Space | No Comments »

Enlightenment from Sensory Collapse

September 16th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Enlightenment (or something like it) can be aided by the process in which visual and auditory sensory experiences are transformed into tactile or proprioceptive experiences. This shift in sensory engagement from the seen to the felt collapses the (conceptual) space which radically separated seer from seen, replacing it with contact. In metaphorical terms this collapse involves a remapping of concepts from sources based in the visual (and auditory) to sources which are located next to, or inside of the body, rather that ‘over there’.

Posted in Enlightenment, Metaphor, Sense, Space | No Comments »

Default Components of Mental Imagery

September 16th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Mental imagery, regardless of the varying forms which it may take, always involves the presence of three necessary elements. These are:

? The imaginary mental space in which the image appears
? The location within that space from which the image or scene is observed: the mental viewpoint.
? The direction of the imaginary gaze from the mental viewpoint, probably toward a particular point on the image or scene.

The second and third elements are variable and likely to fluctuate widely during the observation of a mental image. The viewpoint may move in or out, embracing more or less of the scene, or it may move around the space allowing for different viewpoint on the image. Also, the direction of the imaginary gaze may flicker from one point on the image to another, much as the eye flickers over an object in actual vision.

Posted in Imagination, Seeing, Space | No Comments »

Language and Objects

September 17th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Or ability to give names to the objects, events, actions, and properties of the world may have had some odd and unpredictable effects on the development of consciousness. It seems likely that, in the historical narrative of language development, the first fully established and culturally shared language elements or words were those for concrete objects and entities: man, tree, mountain. And even is this word/object connection was not primary in the development of the species, it is certainly our first introduction to formal language acquisition as children. Our story books and primers and full of brightly coloured pictures of apples and zebras with the corresponding label firmly attached alongside. This building of language on a foundation consisting of the naming of things has the inevitable effect of forming a very close association between the ontology of words and the ontology of things. Words, and more critically the concepts which those words exemplify, only feel ‘real’ when they have the properties of identifiable objects.

One significant property that is possessed by all objects is that they each have a location in space. Every entity we give the word ‘tree’ to is found at a particular location; ‘There is a tree’ we might say, indicating that location. The attachment of words to things means that when we point to these things we seem also to be pointing to the place where the word and the concept is. We know intellectually (even if we are wrong) that the conceptualisation is taking place in our brain, but it feels like the tree, and the concept of the tree, are over there.

This also applies (although perhaps less so) to actions and attributes: concepts which are realised linguistically not as nouns but as verbs and adjectives. We can easily point to (something) red or (someone) running and the end point of this pointing is a particular location in space. Again, we do not feel that the object and the concept are separate, the action or attribute somehow out there while the concept is ‘in here’. We experience both concept and ‘object’ simultaneously and holistically as existing at that location.

There are some concepts however which do not, and possibly cannot, be easily conceived of as occupying a particular spatial location. Many of the concepts we have words for simply cannot be pointed at (or more accurately, cannot be pointed at easily. I may argue that we often modify our concepts to allow some form of pointing to be possible). Such unlocatables include emotions (which we might try to locate in the body, but are never entirely satisfied when X marks that particular spot), interpersonal, political, and institutional structures such as ‘the law’, ‘art’, and ‘nationality’, and pretty much any word/concept ending in ‘-ness’: happiness, consciousness, etc. Obviously these ideas, whilst they may be attributed to particular classes of entity or behaviour, do not have concrete referents and cannot be pointed at. We might point at a person who seems to exhibiting consciousness, or at a painting on the wall of a gallery, or at a policeman that we know is involved is somehow ‘upholding the law’, or at a nationalist symbol such as a flag, but we cannot point to the thing itself. Moreover, when we point at these things, we do not feel entirely sure that we have identified the place where the concept is really happening. ‘The Law’ is not part of the adjectival property of a policeman in the way that ‘red’ is a property of a pillar box, ‘art’ seems to be somehow larger or more variable than its single instantiation may suggest, and the design of flags may change without that affecting the concept. When we try to point to such concepts we feel as if we are constantly missing, when we point we miss the point one might say.

Regardless of the inherent impossibility of attributing such abstract concepts with a specific location in space, the unconscious tendency we have to attempt such attribution, a tendency built on the foundations of an early association of concepts with concrete objects, means that we nevertheless often make the attempt. A concept without a location is felt as less real than one with such a location. Abstract concepts have no location in space. To make our abstract concepts seem real we give them a location artificially. Intuitively real concepts involve the marriage of the conceptual and the perceptual, and sometimes, in order to keep it real, such marriages are not made in the Heaven of material objects but are arranged on the Earth of abstract ideas.

Posted in Abstract, Language, Object, Space | No Comments »

No I in Vacuum

September 17th, 2007 Fred McVittie

The I of the self cannot exist in vacuo, but only emerges in relation to an environment and the objects, including other selfs, that make up that environment. One can sense this by imagining oneself bereft of any of the sensory stimuli which constantly emerge from that environment; blindfold, silent, no taste in the mouth or smell in the nostrils, no texture or temperature registering on the surface of the skin. Even the senses that we would normally be unconscious of are absent; the constant but invisible pull downward of the limbs under the force of gravity has to disappear, as it is a telltale sign of the presence of an Earth beneath our feet. Any movement of our bodies would also have to stop, as the inertia and momentum of all movement gives information about the laws of a universe we are trying to forget. Even the sounds and turning of the interior of our bodies would need to be quelled, as the also are felt as other than our self, easily confirmed by listening to our breathing for a moment. When we do this we find that in addition to this internal sound there is also a listener, and if we want to keep only the listening I we must mute such interior sounds and the felt sense that accompanies them: breathing, heartbeat, digestion, creaking of joints and stretch of muscle.When everything is still and dark, and there is only the chatter of our own thoughts to keep us company, still we are not alone, still we are still here, because we are re-minded by this chatter. The motion of the mind, presumably echoing unlawful chemical movement in our brain, is as much an environment as the world we have banished. We have set ourselves the task of isolating the self, and to do this, all the psychaic objects of the mind must also be cast aside. In order to isolate the thinker, we must strip it of all the thoughts which obscure it, like clouds over the moon.

If we have followed this prescription scrupulously, (and if we are meditation adepts we may have gone some way down this road), then we will have felt the self slipping away with the disappearance of the world. Without the containing pressure of the environment, the I boils away into space and leaves no trace of itself behind. When everything is gone then the I is gone also.

Posted in Embodiment, Self, Space | No Comments »

Knowledge, Substance, Proximity

September 17th, 2007 Fred McVittie

We indicate different types and different status of knowledge using a range of metaphors. One of these is proximity, in which we indicate knowledge which we feel most sure about by conceiving of it as lying close to or in contact with the body, whilst more impersonal, and possibly contested knowledge tends to be conceptualised as remote.

A second gradient of different ways of knowing is that of the different sensory mode through which that knowledge is metaphorically conceived, with ‘felt’ knowledge, drawing on metaphors of touch, having a subjective quality, with the kind of personal certainty which accompanies ‘feelings’. Observed knowledge, using metaphors of sight, lies at the outer end of the spectrum and is seen (sic) as objective and existing apart from the individual body in intersubjective space. The certainties of objectivity are social and interpersonal and may not be ‘felt’ as certainties at all.

These two metaphor sets correlate with one another such that proximal knowledge, lying close to the body, is usually ‘felt’, whereas remote knowledge, separated from the body and located in objective space, is ’seen’. Felt knowing is subjective and seen knowledge is objective.

Posted in Feeling, Knowledge, Metaphor, Seeing, Space | No Comments »

Threshold of the dark room (exercise)

September 24th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Stand at the threshold of a door which leads into a garden, a street, or into any open space, ideally on a day which is bright and sunny. Turn so your back is to the outside world and you are facing into the room. Position yourself so that you can just make out the door frame at the very edge of your peripheral vision, then move forward very slightly so that the door frame disappears and is replaced by the frame of your own eye-sockets. Stand perfectly still. You are looking out from a space which is infinitely vast, and filled with light.
Try to really ’see’ the bright whiteness of it all around,extending in all directions above, below, left, right. Imagine the lightness and the whiteness extending backwards to infinity behind you.

Posted in Exercises, Light, Space | No Comments »

Garfield Space

October 3rd, 2007 Fred McVittie

The world before our eyes is objective space and we can/must imagine that space as having a centre. Hear we all are, standing in a vast circle and all looking inwards towards the centre of the circle. There before us is shared space, there is the space of objects, triangulated, confirmed, peer reviewed, double-blind tested, felt from every angle by every being in the circle. These objects are carved out of the gaze of all of us in the circle of science, and so sharp is our vision that there is no subjectivity clinging, messily and unkempt, on the surface of the objects. There is the light, there is the clean white world.

And here we are, facing into the circle with arms outstretched, like novelty Garfields stuck onto the surface of a great glass sphere. Behind us, individually and collectively, is the gathering dark which is the source of our vision, in front of us is the brightly-lit cave-like interior of the objective world.

Posted in Boundary, Perception, Space | No Comments »

Existential Zugzwang

October 5th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Borges writes about the infinite library of Babel, in which all possible volumes are contained All combinations of characters are combined in the books of this library, so all arguments are made, all thoughts expressed, all narratives told and retold. This universal library, which seems at first fist to be pregnant with promise, is a dystopian vision however. The sheer number of books is so vast and the overwhelming preponderance of books which contain only gibberish, or untranslatable cryptographs, or which are written in dead languages, means that the chances of locating a text which is even readable, let alone useful, approaches zero. The librarians of this hellish repository have long since lost faith in ever finding meaning in their universe of books; they are a dying breed, prone to suicide and existential angst.

There is no evidence that such conditions afflict artists in this world, at least notyet. And this is despite the fact that creative practices have been compared to the wanderings one might make within a space similar to the library of Babel, as indeed has the natural creative processes of evolution and adaptation. Dawkins notes that ’searching for something within a sufficiently large conceptual space is indistinguishable from creation’. By inference, artistic creation is a kind of searching through the conceptual space of all possible artworks, with the work of the artist being akin to that of an explorer or colonist; each innovation a beachhead, each artwork a landmark, each genre a new found land.

A significant difference between the aimless wanderings of the librarians of Babel and the evolutionary perigrinations of the natural world is that whilst the former are cursed to go without map and compass, the evolutionary journey of exploration is significantly guided. Every step that life has taken has been accompanied by the ‘warmer, warmer’ whispering of the environment, such that these steps never lead to random and meaningless places, which is the curse of Babel. Evolution never lets any creature evolve to a location in conceptual space where it makes no sense; there are no existential zugzwangs in the natural library of possibilities. This is not to say, of course, that individual beings are not doomed to die, possibly alone and unloved. Not is it suggested that evolution has any kind of ultimate goal, there is no equivalent in evolution of the divine book at the centre of the library of Babel that Borges describes as ‘a great circular book, whose spine is continuous and which follows the complete circle of the walls.’ Each step in evolutionary history falls on the spot which is appropriate at that moment. The journey is always at an end, each point is the centre and the end of creation as it exists at that moment.

The travels of the artist through conceptual space does not fall neatly into either of these schema. The individual artist is neither doomed to a lifetime of unguided search, which would entail the relentless production of random artifacts. nor is there an environmental voice calling forth these artifacts by winnowing each step and thought.

‘From a computational point of view, evolution is simply a special kind of search algorithm. Some argue that for evolution to be considered creative, it must traverse its search spaces in a creative manner, i.e. it must be innovative or efficient in its search. Exhaustive search and random search are examples of noncreative techniques. Evolutionary algorithms are good examples of creative search.’
http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/P.Bentley/BEC6.pdf

Posted in Art, Borges, Jorge Louis, Centre, Creativity, Evolution, Space, Writing | No Comments »

Brightly Lit Space: Behind the Eyes (exercise)

October 14th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Fix your eyes on a point directly in front of where you are sitting. Without moving your point of focus, try to shift your attention and awareness to one or other side of your visual field. You will be able to detect movement and you will sense what is there but you will not be able to determine details or colour. Gradually move your awareness backward, away from the centre of your gaze, to the full extent of your peripheral vision. You may be aware of a darkness, or you may feel the existence of a point beyond which your awareness meets resistance, this is because we associate awareness with physical seeing, and since the movement of the eye is limited to the frame of the eye socket this association tends to carry over and affect how we use attentional awareness, even though the same physical limits do not apply. Try to continue the backward motion of the point of awareness into this darkness or beyond this imaginary limit. Move your visual awareness right back so that you are attending to the area behind your eyes. At this point, notice that you are no longer attending to a space that is in darkness, but a space that appears to be brightly lit, a light behind the eyes. If you give close attention to this space you may find that the light behind the eyes begins to take on form and colour, and as if waking from a dream, you may find you are looking at the world again. The room you are in is back, illuminated and radiant.

Posted in Enlightenment, Exercises, Light, Perception, Space | No Comments »

Hello Darkness, My Old Friend (exercise)

October 16th, 2007 Fred McVittie

You are standing still and looking out through your own eyes at whatever the world is placing in front of you at this moment. Standing in a field is good, but anywhere will do. Without changing your position, try to change your interpretation of what you are looking at, or rather, where you are looking from. Try to imagine that you are standing at the edge of a space which is infinitely vast, and inexpressibly dark, and you are looking out of this space. The world in front of you is brightly lit, and everything in it is clear and visible and knowable. You can just make out the periphery of the dark space behind you at the edge of your vision, a blurred black border around your sight which extends outwards and backwards as far as your informed imagination can reach. Feel the darkness of the space behind you and alongside you.

Now turn around so that you are facing into the darkness that you felt a moment ago. See how bright the darkness is, and how much it contains. See how the stuff of the world extends into the dazzling dark, shrinking with distance, so that at the furthest extent of your vision everything is infinitesimally small, and how, beyond that point, all is a single blurred whole. Notice also, that in turning around you have created a new dark light space, bordered in black where your eyes meet the world. You may wish to turn back around to remind yourself how full of light and space and matter that place behind you really is. Turn again, and again. Wherever you turn you find yourself looking into the heart of the astounding darkness which surrounds you.

Now close you eyes and feel the darkness close over you and include you in its embrace. There is nothing to fear here. Hello darkness, my old friend.

Posted in Exercises, Imagination, Perception, Space | No Comments »

Knowledge, Proximity, Imagination

November 6th, 2007 Fred McVittie

‘Imagination is our capacity to organise mental representations (especially percepts, images, and image schemata) into meaningful coherent unities.’ (Johnson. 1987: p.140)

In ‘The Body in the Mind’ Johnson reminds us of the Platonic categorisation of modes of cognition, in which the validity of knowledge is seen to vary according to how one approaches its collection. Most valued is knowledge acquired by intellection (noesis), in which the unchanging ‘essence’ of the knowledge is grasped. At the bottom of the scale of knowing is imagination (eikasia) in which only ‘images, shadows, reflections’ (p.142) are apprehended, not the essential knowledge itself.

This structure of distinction, it can be noted, also arranges knowledge across the spectra of proximity and the senses, locating the essence of knowing close to the body where it can be ‘grasped’, and the less secure knowing offered by the Platonic imagination placed at some remove where only its surface appearance, or even only traces of that appearance such as a shadow, can be apprehended. Interestingly, there is no suggestion within this scheme of the later association of closeness/’feltness’ with subjectivity, or of distance/visibility with objectivity. In our current understanding,as revealed through the metaphors we use, we give a great deal of credence to objective knowledge described in visual terms and located figuratively at a distance in interpersonal space. We correspondingly give less credence to subjective knowledge described in tactile terms and located up close and personal (even though we may intuitively ‘feel’ this subjective knowledge as more ‘real’ than the objective knowledge of intersubjectively validated visual knowing). This modern value distinction between the subjective and the objective does not appear in Plato’s categorisation.

Posted in Essence, History, Imagination, Knowledge, Metaphor, Plato, Proximity, Space, thesis | No Comments »

Desert, Dazzling Light (kitchen)

November 22nd, 2007 Fred McVittie

When I relax and look at the world I have the strange feeling that it is not inert, passively accepting my gaze and allowing itself to be simply captured by my eyes, but rather that it is alive and active. Between typing these sentences I am looking around a kitchen and the whole room, including the appliances, the furniture, the windows, the cups on the draining board, even the space itself, seems vibrant and strangely alert. I have no sense that the room has ‘consciousness’ or ‘agency’ and there is none of the feeling of a predictive psychology that accompanies the presence of another human being (or animal), I do not feel that the room is ‘thinking’. The feeling is more like the experience one has in the presence of a corpse, or a dead animal, but without the morbidity of that encounter. Here is the palpable presence of undirected, sourceless, intentionality. I feel it all around me right up to the surface of my skin and touching my eyes, balancing and continuing the personal sense of the presence of my own mind at this side of those eyes.

Posted in Death, Light, Liveness, Sense, Space | No Comments »

Darkness at Noon - Objectivity and Undeniability

November 23rd, 2007 Fred McVittie

A common metaphor for the acquisition of knowledge is that of ’seeing’. When we want to refer to such gaining of knowledge we might explicitly say ‘I see’, meaning that we have such an understanding. As noted elsewhere, this visual metaphor for knowing also confers object-like status on the knowledge itself and we intuitively begin to treat it as if it were some kind of object that can be ‘grasped’, ‘acquired’, and ‘transferred’, or might be ‘hard’, ‘robust’, or less positively ’slippery’.

The visual metaphor for knowing also has a number of significant entailments which figure within the structure of the metaphor but which may be less obvious. Firstly there is the requirement that these ‘objects’ of knowledge exist in some kind of conceptual ’space’, usually external to the body (obviously, or we would not be able to ’see’ them), and secondly that this space be illuminated. This latter point is evidenced in our references to being ‘in the dark’; we use this and similar phrases when we want to indicate that we know that certain facts (knowledge objects) are ‘out there’ but we cannot see them.

Some types of knowing are conceptualised without the use of the visual metaphor, and in these cases some other sensory mode is usually referred to. So for example, when we want to indicate that we understand what a person is saying but do not want to simply agree with their viewpoint (sic) we might say ‘I hear what you’re saying’. By using an auditory rather than a visual metaphor we have acknowledged the existence of the facts the other person is claiming sight of but have not awarded those facts the full objective status that would be implied by saying that we also ’saw’ what they meant. We are acknowledging the existence of their words, but holding back on accepting the truth claims that those words make. To this extent we might say that (metaphorical) seeing is believing, whilst (metaphorical) hearing has something of the status of rumour; a good indication of what the other person thinks they know, but no guarantee of authority.

Other metaphorical senses used as labels for knowing have similar partial status; ‘felt’ knowledge is usual personal and tacit, and the defining feature of that form of knowing we call ‘taste’ is that it is not ‘out there’ in interpersonal space at all but is inside the body, inside the mouth. Strangely, these up close and personal (or even internal, interoceptive) forms of knowing, whilst they may not have the interpersonal and social authority of ’seen’ facts often have a feeling of personal authority which exceeds the objective. Whilst we may rationally understand that ‘feelings aren’t facts’ as the AA mantra goes, at the same time there is an undeniability of this type of felt knowledge which is often lacking in the objective. Many of us will have had the sense that, whilst all the (objective) facts about a certain phenomenon say one thing, our guts say something else, and that ‘gut feeling’ has a authoritative quality which is hard to overcome.

Obviously these acts of knowing that draw on non-visual metaphors have different, and usually lower social status than the objective knowledge of the seen. In any official context, or in any claim for the authority mentioned above, it is visual, ‘objective’ knowledge which holds sway. For this reason it is not surprising that when we wish to imply that our ideas should be treated as authoritative we tend to use visual metaphors to frame those ideas. Any politician who argued that his opponents ideas were invalid because they were ‘not to his taste’ would get short shrift from those who argued that the truth of such ideas ‘could easily be seen’.

Occasionally the visual metaphor is used to articulate a belief about the status of knowledge which is not easily shared, or which has ambiguous status, and this is most clearly revealed in the language around enlightenment and spiritual experiences. Typically, a person experiencing some kind of epiphany or divine revelation would claim that this experience constitutes the gaining of knowledge or insight, usually a particularly significant or transformative insight which seems to have something to say about the external world. To this extent it requires an objective explanation. Also, such experiences tend to have a quality of undeniability about them; it is rare for a person having such an experience to doubt the reality of it, in the way one might doubt the reality of a contestable fact. To this extent such experiences also demand an explanatory form which indicates the felt certainty of that knowledge. For these reasons, any desire to communicate this experience and share the knowledge thus gained would require that this communication use sensory metaphors which convey the most authority, which as already noted tend to be visual metaphors with all the entailments of space and light that go along with them. (This paragraph has already mobilised some of these metaphors as exemplified in words like ‘enlightenment’ and ‘insight’). They would also require the use of metaphors which convey the ‘felt’ sense of the experience, with all of the self-evident undeniability of the closely-held belief, (again the idea of a belief being ‘closely held’ indicates the mobilisation of an appropriate metaphor, and the unavoidability of using such metaphors in writing and thinking about these concepts). The requirements of a form of expression and conceptualisation appropriate to these experiences inevitably lead to paradox; one must find a way of thinking and speaking which simultaneously evokes the metaphorically exterior space in which objects of knowledge gain their interpersonal authority, a space which is illuminated and translucent, but one must also suggest the darkness and contact of the internal space which give an undeniably sense of phenomenological truth. This necessary paradox may help to explain why some authors, when trying to articulate the enlightenment state (or cognate conditions) use apparently oxymoronic terms such as ‘the dazzling dark’, or possibly in the case of alien abduction, a strange set of (probably confabulated) experiences in which similar symptoms to enlightenment are featured, the light emitted by the aliens or the ships has been described as ‘white, but dark white’.

Posted in Belief, Darkness, Feeling, Grasp, Hearing, Knowledge, Light, Metaphor, Objectivity, Seeing, Sense, Space, Taste | No Comments »

Dread Cthulhu Waits

December 10th, 2007 Fred McVittie


The organism called life exists in all dimensions. It’s heart is at the centre of the universe and has a single beat; the pulsating bang from which all emerged. It is tentacled and octopus-like, extending its arms through the bodies of all organisms, rising and falling, living and dying, disposable cellular conduits through which Cthulhu manifests. Here is the being out of Eden, rampaging through the circuits of space and time; an alchemical marriage of DNA and geometry.

Posted in Cthulhu, History, Space, Time, Writing | No Comments »

Light as a Metaphor

December 14th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Although light is intangible and uncontainable it nevertheless has a rich significance in the world of thought. This is possibly because the perception of light is a key component of the visual sense, which is the dominant mode in human sensory awareness, with up to 50% of the processing power of the brain being given over to vision. Light underpins out ability to see and therefore, despite its ephemeral nature, is central to our conceptualisation. The important position of light as a concept is revealed in the metaphorical uses it fulfills, and significant connections are evidenced between the different phenomena to which the metaphor of light is applied.

Light metaphors tend to be applied to the various abstract phenomena broadly understood as ‘knowledge’, and particularly, the acquistion of said knowledge. This is exhibited most clearly (sic) when we say that we ’see’ what a person means when we want to indicate that the knowledge that the person is pointing us to is objectively available to us also. We also refer to the gaining of knowledge as ‘illumination’ or ‘enlightenment’ and support the metaphor with reference to ‘light bulb’ moments, ideas ‘dawning’ on us, ‘flashes’ of inspiration, etc.

The source of the light metaphor is, as noted, the role of actual visible light within visual perception. Even though light itself cannot be easily seen, it is necessary for seeing to take place; when we look at a tree we do not see the light filling the space between the tree and our eyes, we ’simply’ see the tree. However, since the absence of light is also the absence of sight, this natural concurrence gives light something of the status of an embodiable phenomenon. We feel that it is a concrete, sensorially available entity, even though in actuality, when distinguished from the objects which it illuminates, it is exposed as a deeply abstract concept beyond the horizon of direct experience.

Posted in Enlightenment, Illumination, Light, Metaphor, Perception, Space | No Comments »

The Space Between the Stars

December 26th, 2007 Fred McVittie

There is an interesting tendency within evolutionary psychology to treat the human condition as partly determined by the fact that our embodied self seems to be straddling two distinct phases in history. We have the brains and bodies of pre-industrial, illiterate, stateless, stone-age hunter-gatherers, but these bodies are embedded in an industrial, literate, society with well developed state institutions. The apparent disparity or mismatch between these two phases is held to account for some of the anachronistic feelings and behaviours that we indulge in today including religion, tribalism, and racism. These phenomena are seen as either appropriate survival techniques for pre-industrial social animals, or as early attempts to respond to the uncertainties of existence when life was, as Hobbes described it, ‘nasty, brutish, and short’. This disparity between our stone-age psychobiology and our information-age environment is also used to explain the difficulties we have in accepting newer ideas such as quantum theory, evolution, and relativity. These theories, since they would have served no useful purpose to our pre-industrial ancestors, do not figure in the structure of our consciousness and are therefore not intuitively obvious or ‘graspable’. It is only through the often deeply counter-intuitive tools and procedures of scientific enquiry that such concepts are able to be generated or discovered. It may be that our attempts to explain the complexities of nature using the rough and ready tools of intuitive commonsense has been a contributor to the construction of false beliefs and myths. The universe, as JBS Haldane put it, may be ‘queerer than we can suppose’, and our tendency to operate within the limits of our suppositions causes us to make errors when dealing with phenomena beyond human scale.

Whilst it is undoubtedly correct that such a gap exists between the mechanisms of mind and the phenomena that we try to investigate with those mechanisms, this simple division into two phases, then and now, pre-industrial and post-industrial, may be just too simple. Unless we strongly favour a model of evolution which is punctuated to an extraordinarily high degree, with long periods during which very little change took place, allowing time for a relatively distinct psychobiology to form, then we have to acknowledge that our ancestry contains more than hunter-gatherers. We would have to recognise that our history also contains traces of earlier lifeforms, and that the shadow of these ancestors also falls across today’s world. In addition to a phylogeny associated with tribal hunter-gatherers we also have, in the symphony of our thoughts and actions, echoes of apes which foraged in small family groups, solitary tree-dwelling marsupials, amphibians, aquatic ocean-dwellers, bottom-feeders, nematodes, slime moulds, unicellular bacteria, free-floating chemical soups, clay crystals, chemical compounds, elements, atoms, stardust, and the space between the stars.

Posted in Evolution, History, Life, Space, Time | No Comments »

Light and Space

January 17th, 2008 Fred McVittie

The key role that light plays in our metaphorical conceptualisation of knowing is linked to other elements or entailments of the overall schema KNOWING IS SEEING. Seeing is dependent upon the medium of light for its functioning, and closely related to this is the space which the light occupies and which allows for both the separation and the containment of the object of vision. In order to see something that thing must exist in a brightly lit shared space with ourselves, it must be separated from us within a prescribed distance, and it must not be obscured or occluded by other things. Only when all these conditions are met can the act of seeing take place. The relationship between the components of this schema, light and space, is such that they are inextricably linked; we cannot divorce the space from its illumination. A space which is totally dark, in visual terms ends at the surface of our eyeballs. A visually extended space, on the other hand, is defined by the extent to which it is flooded with light. The conscionable space ends at the limits of the light, and while we might suspect the space continuing into the shadows there is a distinctly different ontology to such a space; it is ambiguous, impenetrable, filled with the absence of lightness.

The conceptual metaphor KNOWING IS SEEING which derives from the phenomenology of sight similarly echoes this tangled relation between light and space. To know something is to recognise its existence out there in the illuminated space beyond our eyes, and we invoke the metaphor whenever we say ‘I see’ when we really mean ‘I know’. Also, the limits and entailments of the metaphor transfer to our conceptualisation of what knowing is. If the object of our knowing is too close to our self the elision of the spatial separation also banishes the light and we can no longer claim to have this kind of visual knowledge. An object held against the heart ceases to be visible, and similarly with objects of knowing, when we are too personally involved the object ceases to have the objectivity which light and distance conferred upon it. It is barely an object at all and seems to be part of our selves, part of our subjectivity.

Alternatively, if the object is too metaphorically distant from us we may have great difficulty seeing it at all. We may sense that it is partly hidden in shadow and it may even inherit an eldritch strangeness from the darkness toward which it leans. At such a remove the object of knowing becomes part of occult knowledge, secretive, hidden and the property of the gnostic.

Posted in Darkness, Knowledge, Light, Metaphor, Proximity, Space | No Comments »

Here is Knowing.

January 18th, 2008 Fred McVittie

You are standing at the centre of a space and at the centre of a pool of light. The light is all around you and may even be inside of you. You may even be the source of that light. Because of the light and the space you are able to ’see’ objects which are within that pool of light, although they cannot be too far away. Beyond a certain distance they grow indistinct, shadowy, and vague. At some remove, within a certain proscribed range, these objects are clearly visible, not only to yourself, but also to others who are near you in this illuminated space.

Should this object pose any kind of threat, because of the distance and the space between yourself and this object of sight you are in no immediate danger. The sight of it may suggest a threat in the future or may be a precursor for some other kind of reaction but this sight alone cannot harm you. No-one ever died from just looking at something. Similarly, the object cannot profit you just by its being simply visible. At that distance you cannot eat it, drink it, have sex with it, shelter under it, wrap yourself in it to keep warm, or use it as tool of any kind. It’s existence may be interesting or informative but it can not be life-preserving. There is therefore no urgency about the object; no life or death decision rests on its precise identification or the appropriateness of its naming. The object is perennially ‘over there’ in the communal space beyond the touch of a hand and the press of skin.

This is not a static space however. Objects can move and we ourselves can also move and as we do so the proximity we might have to objects changes. And with those changes in relative location come other changes in relationship, in salience, and in sensory availability. As we approach the object it moves from being removed to being within our grasp, and we might make use of this availability and place our hands around the object. Here it is man-handled and its affordances are measured against our grip, a larger object may give its weight to our hands and arms and be difficult to embrace and even harder to move. It is now up close and personal, and we would be advised to pay closer and more personal attention to its properties and its motives. It may fall and crush us; it may poison us on contact; we may be eaten alive or pushed over the edge of a cliff. This is the distance at which accidents happen and that which we can touch is not something we can be blase about. If we can touch it then it may touch us, possibly in ways which are unwelcome and life-threatening. Alternatively it may respond to the touch of our outstretched fingers with the softness of a lover’s cheek, thrilling us to the core and drawing us closer. It may, at this distance, release perfume at our touch; the tang of orange and the heavy scent of musk, and again we would be foolish to ignore these tender pleadings. Instead of being dangerous there is the promise of rapture. Whether attractive or repulsive, the source of pain or delight, at the range of touch these objects become significant in a way which is ours and ours alone. No onlooker is offered these promises and threats; there is no sharing of this proximal and intimate space and only by standing on these shoes, at this exact spot in the centre of space and light, and only by being this close to the object can this exact experience be obtained. The salience of the moment is mine and mine alone.

Inside the orbit of our arms the object is not only within our grasp but also beyond our last defence. Any opportunity we may have had to ward of this entity is gone; the blow of an enemy, the unwanted sexual advances of an undesirable fellow human, the slings and arrows of fortune both outrageous and exhilarating, and impact with the body is certain. The space between the object and ourselves is now completely elided and there is only the darkness of direct contact. It is here, at the level of the skin, that all of the drama of human being takes place. Any entity which cannot protect its boundaries from invasion and intrusion is dead in the water. Any being which resists merging with the objects of nourishment and reproduction is similarly stultified. All life is here, and this surface, this superficial envelope should be a major focus of attention and care. What touches, what goes in, what comes out, is a matter of life and death and is not the subject of inconsequential, interpersonal, rarified, distanced debate. In fact there can be no debate; no matter where you stand and however well lit you are you cannot feel these blows and penetrations. They are mine and only mine.

Some of this contact, this pressing, is strong and shakes my balance, moving me away and relocating the centre of myself, my space, my light. Other contacts are more to the point and puncture the skin with surgical precision. Still others both consume and are consumed, passing behind the boundary and making contact with inner spaces and inner sense. Once inside I can feel these objects, if I can feel them at all, only with my gut and the with my heart. They may have a taste which is salty or sweet, and they may weigh heavily inside me. These entities have become entirely secret and no other person can truly know of their existence at all. Even I myself may lose touch with them in the space inside. They are not clearly bounded and seem to merge with the internals of my own body so that I no longer can be sure where I end and they begin. In fact I may start to wonder if I am in total no more than a collection of interior objects, forgotten and assimilated, like the fruit I ate last month which is now transformed into skin cells, but which nevertheless feels like my skin, and the milk I drank as a child long ago became bone and is now far away in the shells of sea creatures; my bones, my self. Internal space, dazzlingly dark

Posted in Grasp, Light, Proximity, Space | No Comments »

Modes of Sensory Knowing

January 28th, 2008 Fred McVittie

Knowledge (or knowing) is not a singular type of entity with clearly-defined parameters, rather the objects or entities of knowledge are conceptualised as existing along a continuum from ‘objective’ at one end to ’subjective’ at the other. This paper will propose that this distinction, and the continuum which it articulates, is derived from a single metaphorical schema through which the abstract notion of ‘knowing’ is grounded in the sensory experiences of the body.

The guiding metaphor for human knowing is derived from the experience of human sensing. The structure and details of our sensory embodiment provides the schema with which the abstractions of cognitive meaning-making is rendered comprehensible and conscious. The overall schema has particular entailments which carry over into our organisation of knowledge such that different types of knowing are associated with differences in the organisation of human sensory awareness. The visual sense has characteristics which distinguish it from the sense of touch, and both these sensory modes have differences from the sense of taste, and the differences in these characteristics provide a metaphorical template for differences in knowledge. Some of the differences in these modes, and which carry over into their metaphorical application to the structure of our concept of knowledge, include:

  • Distance/Proximity - The different senses are able to operate at different distances from the body. (Allied to this is the feature of Salience, in which proximity to the body indicates increasing salience; it is a necessary feature of human cognition that objects or events which occur close to, or at the surface of the body should have a high level of relevance)..
  • Intersubjectivity - Some sensory modes operate in shared public space (seeing being the paradigmatic public form), whilst others operate purely in relation to a single individual (as exemplified by taste).
  • Substantiality - Some sensory modes provide information which appears clearly bounded (as with a visualised object) whilst that provided by other modes is blended, suffuse, or indistinct (sounds or smells for example).
  • Vectoriality - The information provided by some sense seems to offer a direction from which it arises (or a vector for the intentionality which locates it) whereas that provided by other senses seems not to offer this extension.
  • Spatial Orientation - Related to Vectoriality, some senses suggest a particular alignment or spatialisation in which some information is more available than others. This is particularly evident with vision which only operates in a forward direction. (The detailed particularities of visual awareness suggests a number of other particularities which we do not have space to discuss here).

These characteristics, which mark the differences between the different sensory modes, can be shown to map onto the metaphorical schema that we use to understand and structure our concept of ‘knowledge’.

Posted in Abstract, Embodiment, Knowledge, Metaphor, Perception, Sense, Space, thesis | No Comments »

A Gene’s Eye View

January 30th, 2008 Fred McVittie

It has been estimated that the human genome contains around 24.000 different protein-encoding genes, which are the key carriers of the information which constitutes the ‘recipe’ for human life. This number is considerably less than was originally estimated and demonstrated the versatility and combinatorial power of these relatively few building blocks.

Of these 24,000, the vast majority are found in all human beings, with only a few minor variants effecting the genetic differences between individuals and groups. The amount of genetic information shared by every person on Earth is around 99.99%. In addition to this, the majority of this gene pool is not only flowing through humans but also through the phylogeny of animals and non-animal lifeforms; primates share somewhere in the region of 97% of our genes, lobsters and spiders around 70%, bananas between 50 and 60%, and yeast has about 30% of its genes in common with our own.

In addition to the genes found only in humans, there must be many more which code for non-human features of other lifeforms; the wings of birds and insects, the carapace of a tortoise, the compound eye of fly, the spinneret of a spider. Let’s say that the total number of genes found everywhere in the any kind of lifeform at any one time in history is 100,000.

It is reckoned that there are between 1.4 and 1.5 million named species of lifeform on the planet, but this number reflects only a small percentage of the actual number, which has been estimated in excess of 10 million. In addition, the division of life into species is not an exact science and does not reflect the distribution and multiplicity of genetic orderings that actually take place, or the changes that have occurred in that ordering in the past. The 100,000 characters in the total gene pool have been assembled into many more sentences than any of these numbers suggest. So this comparatively small number of genes is spread out across a vast spectrum of animal and plant life, each gene threading its way across species boundaries, sometimes spanning the globe and taking up residence everywhere and in everything, and sometimes confining itself to small niches of existence. The cell wall is a physical structure found in almost all lifeforms, and the gene sequence which contributes to the formation of this structure covers the globe. One vast pulsing gene being whose natural environment is the body of every living thing on the planet. The gene sequences for less distributed or more ideosyncratic features, opposable thumbs, toxic skin, night vision, consciousness, occupy only limited regions within this living landscape. Sometimes these tiny communites of genetic expression take hold within their environment, spill out of their niche, and spread through the time and space of the living world.

Posted in Evolution, Genetics, Space, Time | No Comments »

The Visible Structure of Knowledge Space

February 24th, 2008 Fred McVittie

When we talk about ‘knowledge space’ we are almost invariably talking about ‘objective’ knowledge. That is, knowledge which has something of the quality of an object, that can be seen clearly, approached, and possessed. The metaphor used to conceptualise this kind of space and the knowledge objects it contains, are usually visual metaphors, (as already used in the preceding sentence). Put another way, we conceive of space, particularly shared interpersonal space, as primarily determined visually, with discreet objects placed within that space and globally available for anyone with eyes to ’see’. As a metaphor for knowledge this space requires that knowledge appears globally visible as equally discreet knowledge objects. This understanding of knowledge space predetermines the structure of any knowledge which can ‘appear’ within it.

Posted in Knowledge, Metaphor, Space | No Comments »

Why Up is Good

March 17th, 2008 Fred McVittie

The superior access to knowledge that is implied by the use of height metaphors may also contribute toward the forming of a well-established metaphor which associates height with the abstract concept of ‘value’ or ‘goodness’. This is usually expressed within the conventional syntax of Conceptual Metaphor Theory as UP IS GOOD. Like all such metaphorical mappings this draws upon routine embodied sensorimotor experiences to structure and articulate what would otherwise be inconceivable; values such as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are easily experienced in the particular but as general terms they make no impact on the senses, and can therefore only be conceptualised through the use of an organizing metaphor.

Evidence for the existence of the UP IS GOOD metaphorical mapping can be found in the extensive use of terms relating height to positive value or quality; we speak of ‘high value’, ‘high quality’, and ‘high performance’, and positive progress is usually considered as movement in an upward direction. When we wish to cite the ultimate authority we might refer to a ‘higher power’, or in more Earthly terms to someone who is at the top of their field, the top of their game, or the height of their success. We indicate value in commerce by saying that sales are up, production is up, employment is up, and profits are up, and we show this elevation on graphs and charts. We reach for the stars, climb the career ladder, move up the league, reach the top of the charts, and if we are churlish we might look down on those who are not at our level. In all of these instances the metaphorical correspondence between height and positive value is clear. In all cases UP IS GOOD. This consistency, in which positivity in many different areas is expressed using the same organizing metaphor, is strong evidence for its being grounded in a single experience or a small set of related experiences, ultimately originating in a common feature of our embodiment and the affordances it offers in relation to the environment in which it is embedded. Further evidence of the coherence and non-arbitrary nature of such an embodied metaphor is the fact that there is a complementary set of organizing metaphors which relate lack of height to negative value, expressible in the standard syntax as DOWN IS BAD. This is revealed in the badness of being ‘down in the dumps’, ‘beneath contempt’, ‘low on the totem pole’, a member of the ‘lower classes’ or possibly even the ‘underclass’, or ‘under the weather’. This correspondence in the relationships GOOD IS UP and DOWN IS BAD is a clear illustration of the non-arbitrary nature of these conceptual metaphors. The dimension of height, together with possible movement in this dimension, is an ‘image schema’ which structures a wide range of value-related concepts.

The most often cited origin for this schema refers to the common experience of acquiring and using material resources. In accumulating some kind of valuable resource, firewood for example, it is an obviousness that the more of this resource we accumulate the higher the pile will be. It follows from this completely embodied and indeed ancient fact of life that the pile of firewood which is high will have more value that one which is more lowly. Similarly, the height of a pile of fish, fruit, dead rabbits, projectile-sized rocks, gold, or any other substance which confers health, survival, or status, is a direct measure of the value of that pile. In terms of value, when it comes to the height of a pile of desirable material stuff, UP IS GOOD. This unambiguous and intuitive fact provides the concrete source from which we can structure, organise, and conceptualise the relative values of non-concrete entities such as ‘performance’, ‘esteem’, ‘profits’, ‘social status’, or ‘mood’. We may not be able to literally pile our achievements up and compare them to the pile of the guy next door, but when we use height-related terms to carry out such an evaluation that is, metaphorically, what we are doing.

Posted in Dimension, Feeling, Metaphor, Schema, Space, Up | No Comments »

An Imagined Universe

April 7th, 2008 Fred McVittie

“In your heart you know it’s flat”.

Primack and Adams begin their book ‘The View from the Centre of the Universe’ with the following line.

“In their hearts, most people are still living in an imagined universe, where space is simply emptiness, stars are scattered randomly, and common sense is a reliable guide. In this imagined universe, we humans have no special place and often feel insignificant.” (Primack 2006, 3)

They then go on to construct a convincing argument that one of the possible causes of the ills which plague contemporary societies is the lack of an imagined universe which does have a special place for humans, and in which we might not feel this insignificance. However, I suspect that hiding in this quotation is a conflict between different ways in which we actually imagine the universe and our place in it, and a possibly ideosyncratic use of the term ‘common sense’.

The universe which they refer to, the one which causes such anomie and existential angst, is, I would argue, not the universe of common sense at all, nor is it the one that lives in our hearts. Rather it is one which has only been brought into existence through the finding of science within the last 400 years. The universe of endless de-centred, inhuman emptiness is not one in which we routinely live, and to the extent that we have ‘internalised’ it at all then it lives as an objective fact in our minds and our libraries, not as felt experience at the core or heart of our being.

Posted in Centre, Cosmology, Imagination, Science, Space, Universe | 3 Comments »

Sublimation

April 9th, 2008 Fred McVittie

In chemistry, a substance is said to undergo the process of sublimation if, on heating, it changes state from a solid to a gas without passing through an intermediate state of liquidity. Observing sublimation in action is a relatively rare experience, confined primarily to chemistry students or, historically, to alchemists, and a prototypical experimental demonstration might proceed as follows:

A small amount of a solid substance is placed in the bottom of a test tube and the test tube is then held over the flame of a bunsen burner. For a few moments nothing happens, then a thin vapour may be seen issuing from the substance (or maybe not). This vapour may be seen to rise up the tube and, when it reaches the cooler regions at the top, deposits itself as a solid on the glass sides of the tube (1). With some substances there is not even the telltale trace of vapour to mark the passage of the substance through the intermediate space; it may appear to simply diminish in presence at one location and accumulate in another, higher place. This is the literal, ‘embodied’ sense in which the term ’sublimation’ can be experienced, and as noted is not an experience that many will have had. Nevertheless, this process of sublimation has extensive use as a metaphor and the structure of this metaphor links it to the wider imaginary landscape within which knowledge makes sense (and the senses make knowledge). The relationship between this particular metaphor to the wider imagination, and indeed why such an apparently arcane experience is appropriate in this case, can be revealed by an analysis of the various uses of the term outside of its specific scientific or alchemical context (2).

The term ’sublimation’ appears in Freudian psychoanalysis, and is most usually applied to the practices of artists. He writes that “Among the instinctual forces which are put to this [civilizing] use the sexual impulses play an important part; in this process they are sublimated.” (Freud, S. 1966. 27). This “process” “consists in the sexual trend abandoning its aim of obtaining a sexual component or a reproductive pleasure and taking on another which is related genetically to the abandoned one but is itself no longer sexual and must be described as social. We call this process ‘sublimation’, in accordance with the general estimate that places social aims higher than the sexual ones, which are at bottom self-interested.” (Freud, S. 1966. 429)

Note the use in this passage of terms indicating differences in elevation, and the unstated values associated with different ‘levels’. The originating substance of sublimation is placed ‘at bottom’ and is narrowly concerned with the self and the sexual body. The products of sublimation however are given the wider and more lofty perspective of the social. The metaphorical schema underpinning this image, in addition to its narrative of alchemical transformation, also makes use of the UP IS GOOD association discussed elsewhere. The view from the top of the test tube or alembic vessel takes in the houses and gardens of one’s neighbours.

The particular goodness of this sublime position, particularly when it becomes the precipitator of art, is, for Freud, not unclouded with potential problems. For Freud the libidinous and thanatoid drives of the ego, constantly under the whip of id and superego, ideally found release in the delights of sex and the void of death. But for those of us who are wedded to either celibacy or self-preservation these drives must send their energy elsewhere and the destination of choice for artists, writers, and other creative inadequates, is to exhaust them upward in the vaporous evanscences of art, the social function of which, for Freud, is questionable. He describes the artist as “…originally a man who turns away from reality because he cannot come to terms with the renunciation of instinctual satisfaction which it at first demands, and who allows his erotic and ambitious wishes full play in the life of phantasy.” (Freud, S. 1911. 24). This is an image of creativity in the arts as the steam above the factory; energy lost to the environment as uncontainable and useless gas. This unruly, and possibly even toxic, waste is deposited as solid accumulations on our gallery walls and the shelves of our libraries without even passing through the hydraulically practical liquid stage of useful procreation or of turning the wheel of life into the mulch of death. As is evident from the tone of these sentences, to Freud (as to Plato before him (3)) the product of arts practice was a deviation from the intended use of these drives. It is interesting to note that Freud, in keeping with the necessity of maintaining consistency in the utilisation of his image schema, (although he may not have thought of it in those terms) described the alternative to sublimation as ‘repression’. The workings of the steam-driven psyche act upon the unwanted desires such that instead of being evacuated to the air they are pushed underground. The verticality of the psychic dimension is retained, along with a notional position of the self, in the form of the ego, at ground zero. Repressed material enters the confines of the dark, whereas the sublime expands upward into the light.

This characterisation of sublimation as the cause of, at best, harmless vapourware, is obviously not one that tends to be shared by artists and those in the art industry more generally. For the cognescenti, the alchemical transformation that marks the change from the solid and indeed stolid experiences of this fallen world into the elevated condition of high art is little short of miraculous. This process, including the airy gap across which the substance disappears and reappears, bears the marks of the magickal, reminiscent of an earlier, more theological age. As Peter Harrison reminds us “Some of the practitioners of alchemy also wished to claim much more for their chemical experiments that that they merely signified Divine activities or theological doctrines. Thomas Tymme, the English translator of Calvin’s commentary on Genesis, believed that God had actually used alchemical processes to create the world, bringing it forth from an elemental chaos ‘by his Halchemicall Extraction, Separation, Sublimation, and Coniunction’”. (Tymme, 1605 in Harrison, 2001). As the base material of God writ small, the paint diminishes from the palette and recongeals in angelic form on the canvas; inconsequential ink evaporates from the pen and rises unseen to trace the shape of sounds across the page. The dull and profane solidity of matter passes invisibly upward to become a second solid, a bright and sacred work of art permanently glimmering in the empyrean of the cultural imagination. This is the alternative take on sublimity favoured, and most clearly exemplified, in the work of the Romantic poets; Wordsworth for example, uses the term ’sublime’ or its derivations twenty times in his ‘Prelude’, each usage referring to some kind of elevated state which, it seems fair to say, he never articulates well, which is probably the point, since almost by definition the Romantic sublime is forever an inarticulable idea beyond expression in the charnel-house language of fallen flesh.

For Edmund Burke, whose Enquiry into the Origins of our Ideas on the Sublime and Beautiful (1757) and for Kant in his Critique of Aesthetic Judgment (1790), the sublime finds its place within the glossary of formal aesthetics, and this place illuminates the intuitions of the Romantic poets and those painters of the period who similarly aspired to this transcendent position. Interestingly, the sublime of Burke is aspirationally more lofty even than the social overview suggested by Freud. He distinguishes the sublime in art from that which is merely ‘beautiful’. The judgment of beauty, he claims, “has its origin in our social feelings, particularly in our feelings toward the other sex, and in our hope for a consolation through love and desire.” http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-570785/sublime

The production of the sublime, on the other hand, may require the mobilisation of cthonic forces which one would be hard-pressed to consider social;

“Whatever is fitted in any sort to excite the ideas of pain, and danger, that is to say, whatever is in any sort terrible, or is conversant about terrible objects, or operates in a manner analogous to terror, is a source of the sublime; that is, it is productive of the strongest emotion which the mind is capable of feeling.” (Burke, E. 1757/1998. 50)

What is more, the view from the ground, when looking up into the eyes of this sublime horror is similarly enlarged. To feel oneself the object of that terrible subject is not the detached aestheticism one feels in the presence of beauty. The height of beauty is merely that of the pedestal, whereas sublimity touches the void, and the only appropriate response, as Burke notes is one of astonishment.

“Astonishment, as I have said, is the effect of the sublime in its highest degree; the inferior effects are admiration, reverence and respect.” (ibid. 53)

It is irresistable at this point to note in passing that one, ideosyncratic etymology of the term sublime traces it to the latin super limas, which means ‘above the slime or mud of this world’. (Beattie, J. in Monk, H. 1935. 129), although Monk does comment that Beattie’s contribution is “chiefly memorable” for its “etymological aberrations.”

To return to the ground on which we began, this term ’sublimation’ has its technical origins in the laboratory and marks this odd and counter-intuitive transformation in which the intermediate stage is invisible. Instead of seeing physical change one sees upward motion, disappearance and reappearance. This chemical act is not the first use of the term however, and if we are to get to grips with the meaningfulness of the concept in its full embodiment we may need to go further back. Without wishing to evoke etymology as explanation, it is worth noting that the origins of the word ’sublime’ lie in the Latin ’sub lintel’, indicating a metaphor to do with thresholds, entrances and exits, passage across, through, or under a significant boundary. To ’sublime’, in what may seem an overly literal sense of the phrase, would mean to pass from one location to another, very different type of location; leaving the cell in which one has been confined, stepping out of the darkness into the light. The identification of the metaphor in which STATES are understood as LOCATIONS has been well explored (Lakoff & Turner. 1989. 3) and this use of the concept of the physical threshold, a transition zone in which there is no perceptible and identifiable space in which change can be observed, merely the demarcation of a line of difference, is evidently an entailment of that overall metaphor.

It seems to be a consistent theme in much writing, unfortunately beyond the scope of this piece, that part of the human condition is to be a dweller on the threshold, without definition other than as a liminal interface between the inside and the outside, the fallen and the risen, the sublimated and the repressed, the day and the night. As Samuel Beckett put it:

“Perhaps that’s what I feel, an outside and an inside and me in the middle, perhaps that’s what I am, the thing that divides the world in two, on the one side the outside, on the other the inside, that can be as thin as foil, I’m neither one side nor the other, I’m in the middle, I’m the partition, I’ve two surfaces and no thickness, perhaps that’s what I feel, myself vibrating, I’m the tympanum, on the one hand the mind, on the other the world, I don’t belong to either.” (Beckett, S. 170. 34)

(1) Almost all gasses, if frozen, will pass from solid to gas without passing through a liquid phase if the atmospheric pressure is kept very low. There are some substances however which are solid at room termperature and that undergo sublimation at atmospheric pressure. These include include phthalic anhydride (1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid anhydride), which is widely used for making paint resins. Another is terephthalic acid (1,4-benzenedicarboxylic acid), which is used form making polyester. The most common substance is probably napthalene, which is the active ingredient in mothballs. Some substances, iodine for example, appear to undergo sublimation but this is actually a different process involving an oxidation and reduction reaction.

(2) Thomas Timme, in his epistolary to Duchesne’s 1605 ‘Practise of chymicall and hermeticall physicke’, wrote, “Then shall yee see the sublimated substances clinging to the sides of the glasses”

(3) In Plato’s ideal and noble Republic, poetry and the arts were to be banned, partly because of their status as imitations (and therefore further distancing man from the light of ideal forms), but also because they cause excessive and unnatural emotions and appetites to be aroused, that is, to ‘rise up’. (Republic X.595b-608b).

References

Beckett, S. (1970). The Unnamable. New York, Grove Press.

Beattie, James. (1783) Dissertations Moral and Critical. London, 1783). Quoted in Samuel H. Monk, 1935.

Edmund., B. (1998). A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Freud, S. (1966). The Complete Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis. . New York, Norton.

Freud, S. (1989). Formulations Regarding The Two Principles in Mental Functioning. The Freud Reader. P. Gay. New York, Norton: 301-306.

Harrison, P. (2001). The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, G. and M. Turner (1989). More than cool reason : a field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago, Ill. ; London, University of Chicago Press.

Monk, S. H. (1935). The Sublime. A study of critical theories in XVIII century England. New York, MLA.

Posted in Light, Matter, Space, Substance, Up | No Comments »

Cross-modal sensory mapping.

April 13th, 2008 Fred McVittie

The analysis of texts which use sensory mode based metaphors, i.e. that refer to ‘touch’, ‘taste’, ’see’, in a non-literal way, shows that there are a number of consistent patterns within this usage, including patterns of relations between the sensory modes. For example, Shen & Cohen (1989) demonstrate that within poetic texts there is a predictable and coherent use of what they refer to as ’synaesthetic’ metaphors, in which the properties of one sensory modality is mapped onto the other. They give the example of phrases such as ’sweet silence’, and point out that in phrases such as this the modality which they refer to as ‘lower’, i.e. closer to the body, in these cases the sense of taste or touch, is mapped onto the ‘higher’ or less proximal sense. Also, the ‘higher’ sense which forms the target of this metaphor is usually less accessible, less easy to ‘grasp’. So, in the case of ’sweet silence’, the higher and more ethereal auditory quality of silence is referred to using the more delineated, accessible, and proximal sense of taste. Although it is not stated in this article, it is hard to miss the metaphor of elevation which is also being deployed in order to give form to our understanding. Not only are the metaphorical senses ordered across the dimension of proximity and distance, (with the access that such proximity entails), and not only are they distinguished in terms of substantiality, with some being easy to grasp whilst others are harder to get a handle on, but they are also arrayed vertically, with some metaphorical sensory modes appearing more elevated than others. Tasting and touching happen locally and at ground level, sight gives us a wider, but less tangible view, and audition (including listening to the sound of silence) extends that view backward and forward and into the future and the past. Shen and Cohen do not make mention of the part played by olfaction in this schema, but it is likely that given the ubiquity of phrases such as ’strong smell’, or ’sharp odor’ demonstrate that it also figures within the overall structure. In these two possible examples the olfactory experience, which has the characteristics of ephemerality and extension which make access difficult, is understood in terms of the tactile, base-level, and proximal senses of strength and sharpness.

Shen, Y. and M. Cohen (1998). “How come silence is sweet but sweetness is not silent: a cognitive account of directionality in poetic synaesthesia.” Language and Literature 7(2): 123-140.

Posted in Cognition, Grasp, Hearing, Knowledge, Metaphor, Proximity, Seeing, Sense, Silence, Smell, Space, Synaesthesia, Taste | 2 Comments »

Before and After the Book

April 29th, 2008 Fred McVittie

There is a book on the table in front of me right now (The Craft of Thought by Mary Carruthers) and it seems to be a solid object. I know it is mostly composed of space, but that isn’t really important since it doesn’t change my experience of it. The knowledge that the book ‘contains’ is something different though.

There must have been a time when knowledge didn’t live inside books, but inside the fragile containers of human bodies. If you wanted to know something you would travel to the point in space where that human body was located and if you were lucky they would convey the knowledge that they contained to you somehow. It would be important, needless to say, to travel to that point in space during the short window of time that the person was alive, awake, conscious, and compos mentis.

Sometime after that time someone must have got the idea of recording the knowledge that they had in some way; maybe by carving it on a stone or writing in on a scroll of some sort. If you wanted access to the knowledge then you would still have to travel to the point in space where the scroll was but the window of time would be potentially larger. In some ways though, the scroll would have to be given the same special treatment as a human possessor of knowledge; it would have to be protected from harm, safeguarded against fire and the ravages of time etc. It would be a pretty special kind of object.

Maybe then someone got the idea of making copies of the scroll so that the knowledge could exist in more than one place at the same time. That would be quite a leap forward. The same knowledge would now exist in more than one point in space, and the destruction of one of these instantiations would not mean the total loss of knowledge from the world.

Print publication would extend this process even further, such that every time knowledge is put into book form it would, to all intents and purposes, become immortal. All publications (with ISBN numbers) are archived in the British Library, with the security which that implies, as well as appearing in book shops and the shelves of readers. The immortality of the knowledge is ensured partly by the treatment accorded to individual copies of the book but more significantly by its distribution. When knowledge is repeated across thousands of instantiations across the world it is extremely difficult to destroy.

It has been said (although I don’t know by whom, or whether it is true), that if you are in a city you are probably no further than eight feet away from a rat at all times. In a book culture it is likely that you are similarly no further than, say, thirty feet away from some books. Not all books obviously, but I would be surprised if there was not a bible within that kind of radius most of the time, and possibly a dictionary or other reference book of some kind. Some knowledge, even though it appears in books, seems to exist almost as a field, distributed across populated space, with the individual books that instantiate it being simply temporary devices which allow it to appear. When one book, or a thousand books, fall apart or are destroyed, the knowledge is still instantly accessible through the medium of all the other books which contain it.

Thanks to Project Gutenberg and similar endeavours it is now possible to access almost the entire history of the world’s writing through screens. Knowledge that lived in books, and across the field of books, now exists across the field of space and ubiquity is almost total. As I sit here typing I am within inches of all the knowledge that has been inscribed and digitised and can access it instantly. Truly ubiquitous, this knowledge is everywhere available. In fact, I am not even inches away from that knowledge; the wireless network that links this laptop to the access point on the wall is radiating that knowledge through space and through me as I type these words. When I summon up a page of the Gutenberg Bible, that information is in the room and is inside my body and the walls of the room and in my coffee cup and everywhere within the 20feet radius covered by my local network.

Changes in technology, social organisation, and epistemology itself mean that knowledge has changed its spots. Whereas once it was uniquely located at a particularly point in space for a very limited period of time, now it is everywhere and forever. From being identifiable as a distinct and temporal object is has transformed into a distributed and atemporal field. Nothing is lost, nothing is forgotten, nothing is burnt, silenced, made mute by dementia or death. The evolution of publication is almost complete and the pages of the book spread holographically across the space between atoms and stars. This blog is more permanent and more ubiquitous than any work of print.

This does not mean that the book itself ceases to be important as an idea; it still carries the symbolic significance it inherited from its history in the individual scroll, and ultimately the individual body of fragile human beings. This symbolic significance is evidenced by the continued popularity of book-burning; no knowledge has ever been lost by the burning of a book, but since as an action it represents the destruction of a speaking position and a human speaker, the symbolic value of the action is maintained.

Posted in Blog, Carruthers, Mary, History, Knowledge, Object, Space, Time, Writing | No Comments »

Gendlin’s Vast Space

April 30th, 2008 Fred McVittie

The technique of ‘focusing’ developed by Eugene Gendlin aims to optimise performance and psychic health through the use of mental and physical imagery and schema. Emerging out of phenomenology and Rogerian counselling, focusing invokes an awareness of the body and its responses and maps these onto cognitive states. One interesting feature of this technique is its use of the metaphor of ’space’ in organising the understanding of certain states, and the relation of these to the person.

The first stage in the process, what Gendlin refers to as the first ‘movement’, involves the clearing of a ’space’ in one’s mentation by proposing the question, to the body, that ‘everything is fine’. This is immediately followed by a kind of active listening; the utilisation of the ‘felt sense’, to detect what responses the body makes to this proposal. Typically, to the experienced focusser, the body then presents a set of sensations and feelings, usually vague and unformed, which represent in corporeal form those aspects of being which are ‘not fine’. It is almost as if the body is replying to the original proposal made by the mind and saying “you think everything is fine? What about this?”

This prompting of a bodily response in which issues or problems normally considered to be entirely cognitive events are identified within the space of the body allows these events to be considered separately from the mental space of their arising. The technique subsequently involves the detailed identification of these issues out of the rather ill-formed initial felt response such that these issues begin to take on the ontology of objects external to the site from which they are viewed, almost as if they are outside of oneself. They can then be ‘put down’ or ‘put aside’ or ‘held up for view’, moves which only make sense as part of the overall schema in which entities which began as (possibly painful) phenomena lodged within the core of the self are redefined as objects outside of that (version of the) self and which one can take a more ‘objective’ viewpoint of. Simultaneous with this objectification of problematic concepts is the identification of self with the space in which such objects appear. There is a feeling that one is not coterminous with the thoughts and feelings one might normally be ’subject to’, that is, those located within what are normally thought of as the bounds of the subject. Instead the sense is of oneself as an emptiness, a calm immensity, or a kind of illuminated void.

Gendlin, E. T. Focusing. Second edition, Bantam Books, 1982.

Posted in Attention, Boundary, Dualism, Gendlin, Eugene, Non-duality, Psychology, Sense, Space, Void | No Comments »

Barthes Multi-dimensional Space

April 30th, 2008 Fred McVittie

In ‘Death of the Author’ Roland Barthes refers to a text not as ‘a line of words releasing a single ‘theological’ meaning (the ‘message’ of the Author-God) but a multi-dimensional space in which a variety of writings, none of them original, blend and clash.’ The dimensionality that Barthes is referring to here is, presumably, the tissue or fabric of language (and quotations) which make up the text. In making mention of the concept of ‘dimension’ he invokes the idea of a space, in this case a space of connection, deferral, and difference. Within the terms of the metaphor of this blog however, it might be more useful to talk about the ‘three-dimensional space of writing’. In this imaginary space there is horizontal extension away from the body and there is vertical extension. The objects of knowledge which are created by some of the writing are positioned at some distance in the horizontal plane, whilst some are positioned closer. Distant objects are most clearly delineated and bounded, separate from contamination by the body of the subject. Closer objects of knowledge fall within the reach and grasp of the hand, and are given affordance and malleability by their proximity. Objects inside the body cease to be objects at all, and acquire the properties of subjecthood.

The vertical dimension offers a vantage point from which a greater span of space might be panoptically available, and this elevated position offers the possibility of overview unavailable from ground level. The higher ground also suggests a more rarified, convergent, ’spiritual’ view, from which the irrelevant details disappear in favour of the grand plan.

Posted in Barthes, Roland, Dimension, Knowledge, Space, Up | 1 Comment »