@drhansenjr
RANT WARNING!
On the concept of “mindscape”:
I have serious issues with the concept of “mindscape” that are both linguistic and conceptual.
Some definitions describe it as referring to (if you will pardon my oversimplifying paraphrasing) “stuff that goes on in the mind.”
Yes, the “stuff that goes on in the mind” please refer to appendix 1 for more technical descriptions.
I would regard such definitions as including this “stuff” as a elements of physical reality, products of the neurological structures and activity of the brain.
They may feel like something different than physical reality since we can’t touch or see them, and since we have a very limited knowledge of how the brain manifests them, but it does not follow that because those feelings seem mysterious and because there are gaps in our understanding of them that they exist as things outside physical reality, … any more than our distant ancestors’ sense that meteorological phenomena or the presence of stars in the sky were the work of some being or force outside their physical reality.
Yes, I agreed. *I can also see where my clumsy wording, and in particular employing “vs” was a counter-productive choice in my original essay. (also see TimB at the bottom of this page)
It was a mistake, I wanted to be provocative but instead was misleading.
I will point out that I’ve never written that the “Mindscape” is outside of reality or that it’s part of a separate metaphysical reality. Though I can now see how others could have misunderstand.
I have always spoken about recognizing the profound boundary between Physical Reality and our individual and collective Mindscapes. This is about psychology, this is about us recognizing personal limitations and gaining a better perspective for the grand stage of reality that we exist within.
