ImaginationA Chapter by PaulSection 2 of The Me Primer2 Imagination This brain
of mine is difficult to explain yet simple for me to understand. I know my brain better than anyone else. I know my mind better than anyone else. I believe my brain and my mind are the same thing. When I take the time
to look for the roots of my thoughts, I am always led to the primary desires
that I have as an animal. When I break down each
individual thought pattern to explain how I got from: “hunger! food!” to: “I
don’t want to be hungry but I must earn money for food in a way that is
fulfilling for me on a psychological level, because only then can I show who I
am by putting my values first and what I am paid second but still get, as often
as possible, but not so often it is unhealthy, a nice piece of steak and good
whiskey to feed myself”; this is when it gets difficult. My desires, my basic
needs, what drives me as an animal are these primary instincts: to eat, to
mate, to rest. These are the basis of all of my thinking and I have found a way
to complicate them. Before I even get to some explanation of how I think, I feel
compelled to deal with the idea of mind. To deal with the idea that I am
somehow more than patterns of thought from my brain. I understand why I have
invented ways to explain this voice in my head, to explain the separateness
that I can feel from my body. It is a consequence of my ability to
imagine. I have
decided that the rudiments of my imagination began in response to the basic
desires, those feelings that something must be satisfied. I will give as an
example the feeling of hunger, a feeling I can share with every animal on the
planet. When I first had to think about ways to satisfy my hunger, my imagination
kicked in. As one of the slower animals in the world, and proportionally weakest
animals, I had to be inventive. The thoughts started to pile up and turned
simple instinctual desires into layers of imagined alternatives. I believe that
thinking, the act of giving context to feelings, felt alien. An otherness
developed countering my animal instincts. I needed to take charge of the
created chaos from my imagination. I turned again to imagination and I imagined
an avatar to organize, to shepherd the many runs of thought associated with satisfying
simple desires. This avatar, this voice, I call my mind. While I rationally
believe my brain and my mind are the same thing it is easiest for me to give
them separate realms. The brain is the organ. It is the well of basic desires
and sub-conscious machinations that keeps me breathing and walking without
thinking about every muscle movement. The mind is the conversation in my head.
It is the discourse that takes place while I try to make decisions. The brain
acts and reacts. The mind considers actions and reactions. The brain works in
the here-and-now and the feeling of the moment. The mind brings the past and
the future. It brings definitions to every word running through my thoughts
while trying to control feelings and the here-and-now. I find it
easiest to explain the complication of my instincts and desires by thinking of
this process like a kind of binary code. As queasy as it makes me to keep associating
myself with the world of computers, and even if neurologists and IT experts are
left bent over in fits of laughter, it gives me a framework upon which to
build. Thinking of it this way makes sense to me. I imagine that the very first
thought I had as a newborn was a 0 and the next thought was a 1 and the next
thought I had that was related to the 0 thought was an 01 and the next thought
I had that was related to the 1 thought was 10 and so on. I imagine that, after
months of my mother’s body supplying me with oxygen and sustenance, the first
thought I had when disconnected was: “not satisfied”. This “not satisfied”,
this 0, persisted until I took my first breath, “satisfied”, this 1. From this
point on all things would be measured against these feelings of wanting and
being content. Fortunately, the taking in air part was pre-programmed. I did
not know this until after the first breath but from that point on all would be
measured in terms of being satisfied or not, being hungry or not, being tired or
not, eventually being sexually aroused or not. Out of all of this would grow
anxiety and security. Only the very first need was met regularly with little
effort on my part. The only time I would think about breath again would be if
it were not there and thankfully this was a rare occurrence, though admittedly
the most anxiety-inducing of all the needs when it was not met. I would imagine
that some desire, or fulfilled desire, eventually had to take in
so much nuanced thought that it was a 010110111011110 etcetera. An amalgam of
so many satisfying things with references to wanting that it was already
getting too hard to follow the sequence. For me this is how the animal was
lost. The feeling of basic desires and satisfying them was lost in how creatively
I could fulfill my desires and rationalize why I was doing it that way. With so many
factors complicating basic desires it can seem impossible to maintain a sense
of the here-and-now. I believe this is what wild animals have always with them,
the here-and-now. It is all they know. Their thoughts are what our thoughts
came from, feelings. They have feelings of hunger, feelings of safety, they are
never tangled with the many lines of thought of past feelings of hunger and
safety. They are never tangled with concerns of future feelings of hunger and
safety and thoughts of how other animals are dealing with all of this. Even
when a wild animal recognizes the smell of a man and avoids an area, I believe
it is reacting to a smell and a feeling. I don’t believe it is picturing a
particular man and remembering having a rock thrown at its hind quarters as it
ran away and feeling sickened at its cowardice and wondering what other wild
animals think of it and perhaps how to hide this reality. I know this
is all just invention. I have not discovered the inner workings of the mind of
a wild animal. I have not discovered the exact way I complicated simple desires
as a child into the web of thoughts they are now. I have invented an
explanation for myself. This is sometimes a beneficial thing that I do and
sometimes the most damaging thing that I do when it comes to dealing with the
rest of the world. I make up explanations of how I have come to be the amalgam
of thoughts that I am now. I sometimes forget that under all of it, is an animal
wanting to satisfy basic needs. I can make myself into a demigod or a raving
idiot along the way. My
imagination lets me create; it lets me invent. I need facts to discover but I
do not need them to invent. I discover when I prove how the world
actually works, not how I imagine it works. No matter how strongly I am moved to
invent explanations of why things are the way they are, I must always know the
difference between inventing and discovering. I am talking about times when I
invent an explanation for something that perplexes me. I worry most about the
inventions to explain why I do what I do or why the
world is the way it is. I do this without any more proof than my gut feeling or
what is called common sense. There is nothing wrong with this, it has been a
mainstay of human development, but facts cannot be invented. I should always be
clear to point out when I am inventing and when I am discovering. Invention can
lead to discovery. A hypothesis can be proved with facts but I should always
be clear about my place in this process.
I must admit
that I long to create rather than discover. I must understand that when I start
inventing ways that things work, and convincing others that I have discovered
the way that things work, something wonderful or awful is due to occur. It
usually is a combination of the two alternatives. Individuals are affected
depending on their personal standing in the invented reality. For the most part
I would like to keep my inventing urge to the world of art, for music and
stories and pictures of alternative realities. Bringing invention to psychology
and philosophy, without understanding the difference from discovering, should
make me hesitate. I think Adolph Hitler was an artist. A grotesque performance artist. He had a mind for
invention. He did not seek to discover the truth, he sought to make his
invention the truth. Hitler is too depressing to use to make a point about the
two sides of this coin. I think that Sigmund Freud is a better subject. He
invented a way to explain how the mind works. This is a good example of the
ills and gains that come from this type of thinking. Few people today would use
a strict Freudian analysis of psychological issues. With his invented parts of
the psyche, however, he began a serious discussion of the workings of the mind.
He inspired discussions of the idea that therapy could be beneficial to those
suffering from anxiety or compulsive behaviors. Many ills would have been
avoided if it were recognized as much invention rather than a pure discovery. And yet, if
people did not believe it to be wholly true would it have had the same impact?
Would advancements in psychology have occurred? I don’t know. When a concept is
invented, I test it. I ask, what will the consequences be if it is made a part
of my real world? In a larger sense, what will be the consequences for each
individual. I believe history is filled with many such inventions, without the consideration of their effect on individuals. I am always
in danger of romanticizing imagination by giving it some magical aura and
making it something more than my animal brain at work. I must be on guard
against this. I must be diligent in reminding myself that this is an animal
brain that has evolved to make feelings into concepts, and twist them any way
that I want, so that I can come up with new ways to meet my needs. I do this with my advanced capacity to imagine. Behind my
house is a creek and I have observed two kinds of frogs. I must be exact here
and say that I think that I have observed two kinds of frogs. I have never
tagged them or done any real scientific research to confirm my hypothesis. I
believe I have observed two kinds of frogs near the creek. One type always
jumps in the water as soon as I approach. One type will freeze where it is and it lets me come very close to it. It relies on me not seeing it and only jumps when I am almost on top of it. Both strategies can work to keep a frog
from being eaten. I know this because both kinds of frogs are making a go of it to this day. I don’t
believe that frogs sit and think about whether this will be the time that they
jump or the time that they rely on their camouflage and stillness to keep from
being spotted. I think that different frogs are born with different tendencies.
I know that I have both strategies in my mind and
several more. I have to make a decision and I have to live or die with the idea
that the decision could be wrong. These frogs just jump at the first sign of
trouble or freeze in place. I am envious of this sometimes and thankful at
other times for the myriad of possibilities I have for escape. Of course, this
is more invention on my part. Someone already has or will discover why some
frogs jump and some freeze in place but the important thing is that I can do
more than that. I do not always react to a situation with only my feeling, my
desire to keep myself safe. I have trained myself to not be afraid of certain
things that should really have me jumping, or freezing in place, every time they
occur. I have confronted danger when it was not in my bodily best interest
to do so. I did this because I decided that running was worse for me than
taking the chance of getting my a*s kicked. Fear of looking like a coward, with
my imagined options and remedies, probably requires so much of my invented
binary code that it cannot be mapped. Hopefully I can see its root. I must
train myself to look to the root of these growths of thought, to the feeling
that is the 0 or the 1, the wanting and the not wanting. This is the point at which I can know the here-and-now
feeling of an experience. The point I can know the yearning, or being satisfied, part of a moment and deal with its ramifications most effectively. My brain has
not only evolved as an organ of my species, for all intents and purposes it
evolves every day. Mutations of thoughts change my mind constantly. I imagine
new ways to do things and the ones that work survive. Perhaps all animals do
this to some extent but I am convinced that my human animal brain does this to
an extent like no other animal. I don’t have to go with my instincts, my gut
feelings. I can create a new way of acting. I can train myself to go against my
instincts. This is what makes me accidentally special in the animal world and
why I have done so many wonderful and awful things. Who decides which are
wonderful and which are awful? I do. This is maddening to those who want
answers that cannot be questioned, that are absolute. I know for me there can
only be discovery of facts and the invention of how I want to deal with those
facts. I decide which inventions to cherish and which to abhor. © 2024 PaulAuthor's Note
|
Stats
467 Views
Added on April 24, 2017 Last Updated on January 18, 2024 AuthorPaulAboutI am writing in the Mid Atlantic area of the United States, mostly non-fiction at this time. I am a song writer as well. http://songsongsongs.com Also of interest could be- http://bookstore.trafford... more..Writing
|