The canon of reason as derived from the empirical limits of consciousness

The canon of reason is that formulation of reason through which rational material appears through the senses, received by the sensibility/imagination, and acted on by thoughts and actions. The question I pose here is can reason affirm this canon of reason, and if so is it limited to the extent to which our reason can affirm things as well as the limits of the information contained in the empirical.


Empirical consciousness is reality, and is that substratum of reality, which makes its appearance ontological in the particular objects of space-time. The spatiality of space-time is a matter in and of itself through which objects are capable of being sensed, imagined, and acted on through thoughts and actions. Its the fundamental force behind that which is substance, that is the empirical matter of our senses.


Its that which impresses the object on our mind, and "opens" the possibility for the contemplation of the possibilities of our own existence, and that which surrounds us. Object though is not a mere appearance in the sense that its merely something which manifests itself through the empirical senses.


Our concepts of objects though derive themselves from the empirical appearance of objects as we sense them in the construct of space-time. This concept of objects is determined by the canon of reason, and if it depends on empirical perceptions and appearances to determine itself does it negate it transcendental nature.


That is in order for the transcendental and spatial/visual to make itself known it must conform and apply itself to the collective material of the empirical world. The collective material of the empirical world is determined in a two-fold sense external to our being, that is at it is represenative in and of itself.


It is determined by the fixity of things in space, but as they are determined by the causal succession of time, which is determined by the laws of nature and causality. This said though of what use is this canon of reason as an absolute form of reason if it does not ground itself on the particular objects, which it makes possible in the first place.


Also if the laws of nature and the objects contained within are determined by a dynamic procedure in time-space of what use is this canon as a dogmatic measure to determine true and false in regards to our empirical knowledge. The information contained within the self of the empirical world seems to be limited by its own potentiality to be, which is constantly being determined in its actuality.


Causality as a law is thus just a constancy of change within the continuity of empirical items as determined by the potentiality of things as they exist in their actual form. The actual form of a thing merely self-references or "differentiates" the process of a change in an empirical being as its constantly changing internally and externally. This process is merely a random determination of events with no necessarily fixed or rational law guiding its procedure.


Its just merely the coincidence of events which gives something the appearance of being ordered in a fixed manner by a canon of reason. This is not to say that the canon of reason is merely an illusion, but our understanding of it giving us a pre-formed intuition or knowledge of the empirical world is quite ridiculous.


Its only in accordance with the random processes of the empirical world, which are being determined through environment changes, and our mental constructs that such a canon of reason can achieve any rational ends. That is to say that its conclusion in objective can only be made in a positive manner through the utility of mental constructs as they attempt to understand how the dynamics of the natural and empirical world works.


It is my opinion that our sensibilities shape many of our perceptions of what we perceive or think to know regarding the empirical world. Its important to assure ourselves that we do not fall into such a catastrophic and tragic manner of deducting the realities of the empirical world as they appear to us.


It is through that which appears that we can come to verify that which does not appear, since that which appears anticipates that which does not appear. That is to say that space and the causality of time differentiate themselves and uncover the possibilities in existence, through a dynamic process, through those objects which appear to our senses.



It is then through these appearances that we can abstract and deduct certain possibilities and necessities pertaining to the world of empirical objects, which gives us insight into the canon of reason. That said if the canon of reason manifests and and reveals itself through the appearance of things in accordance with the potentiality of the thing and the law of causality then the canon of reason limits its existence to that which appears.


There is only a random and dynamic process of uncovering that which occurs as the internal structure of an empirical being causes the appearance to change and adapt itself to its self and environment. This randomness can little be understood, but the content of this randomness can be understood and grasped by the mind in order to compile and arrange an appropriate understanding of the inner-workings of the thing as it appears to us.


That said our knowledge and information is constantly being determined in coincidence with this random and meaningless dynamic motion within time. The "limits" of the space and being within a thing are constantly adapting and changing in some cases, which makes me doubt there is a pre-fixed notion or concept of knowledge as it is associated with a particular group or category of empirical objects.


This pre-fixed notion of self is something which is merely an illusion, which the appearances of things cast upon our senses. The causal order is created through this illusion, and it is through this illusion that we can come to mentally construct particular laws and rules pertaining to the operations and inner workings of the empirical world.


This is to say that the randomness of the dynamic causality contained and determined within the collective empirical material of space-time is the determining factor to what we know, can know, and ought to know. The deduction there is a rational line of order within this dynamic process is to fool oneself with an unnecessary illusion, which will cripple one good's reason if they decide to rush after it.


All conclusions to such an order can only be made through induction and probability analysis, which seems to not fix us with a certain response to the possibility of a fixed order contained and determined by the canon of reason. This canon of reason seems to be hopelessly determined by the dynamics and constant changing continuity of the empirical world.


That is to say any pre-fixed knowledge or information contained within it seems to be self-negated by the fact that it is limited to the environmental and material changes, which occur within the empirical. Beyond the empirical all is a mere void, and not present to our senses nor capable of being determined appropriately by our reason.


That which is not within the confines of time is something which can not be causally determined, and the canon of reason is presupposed to be such a non-caused item. That said if its non-caused then why does it need to accord with the law of causality and the dynamics of the succession of time as they apply them to the empirical world in order to be known.


It seems contradictory that the pre-fixed notions and concepts of space-time contained within the canon of reason would need be determined by that which it determines. It seems that this canon of reason is something which is merely the invention of the human imagination and sensibility as it pertains to the material and operations of the empirical world.


That is the canon of reason is nothing more than a mental construct upon which we have made certain deductions or inductions regarding the information and knowledge we can come to understand in the empirical world. These deductions and inductions arise in correspondence with the dynamics of the empirical world as applied by the law of causality, which is determined by the succession within time.


The randomness of the operations and dynamics of the empirical world coincide with certain objects, which contain a distilled format of information and knowledge. This distilled format of information and knowledge is the canon of reason, which is constantly in a continuus flux of changes and adaptions in accordance with the dynamics of the law of causality.


That means that the canon of reason is not merely a mental construct, which operates as a means for our mind projecting meaning upon the illusion which is the canon of reason, but is a construct of the law of causality and the dynamics and operations of the material of the empirical realm.


That is there is no such thing as a pre-fixed canon in space-time through which we receive our information and knowledge in an absolute sense. Information and Knowledge is something which is received by the mind in correspondence with man's sensibility, and is reason's duty to make as much sense out of information and knowledge of the empirical world.


The information and knowledge of the empirical world though is determined in large by the law of causality, which does not determine itself in any uniform manner. It rather determines itself in a manner of divergence, but a manner of divergence from which it always desires to self-replicate organisms and structures of the empirical world.


This is determined in a random and meaningless manner, and it reflects the whole idea behind Schoepenhauer's will to live. The only perceived order which is brought about it is due to the fixity of things as they appear to us, which only casts an illusion upon our sensibilities of there being a rational order in space-time and the universe.


Order is thus merely an illusion which arises from the way the co-existing empirical items impress themselves onto our sensibilities, but through rational deduction we can understand there is no such order. That is there is just a variance of possibilities and actualities, which are contained within a particular category pertaining to the empirical world.


All is merely a dynamic changing and adaption of these possibilities and actualities to the potentialities contained within the thing as determined by the causal law and environmental processes. Its my final conclusion that it is through mental constructs and immediate perceptions that we can come to the illusion that there is a rational and ordered force or canon of reason behind the information and knowledge contained in the empirical world.


If there is any order its merely based on a scale of variance, possibility, and differentiation all of which are determined by causal laws and the dynamic operations of the empirical world. That is to say this order merely rests on the possibility of things as they exist, but this still does not give us any pre-formed or fixed notion or concept of order and rationality, which the canon of reason is supposedly supposed to deliever to us.



This canon of reason is merely a product of our reason in accordance with the operations of the empirical world, and the information and knowledge being determined by the causal dynamics of these operations. It has no application outside these boundaries, and means little as a concept or notion without a more specific and empirical foundation, which is grounded on our mental constructs and rational intuition.

Consciousness has limits? What would they be? What consciousness are you talking about? The observer or the observed? What mental tools are you using to make this determination?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcticwolf

Consciousness has limits? What would they be? What consciousness are you talking about? The observer or the observed? What mental tools are you using to make this determination?

---

Yes, consciousness has limits to the empirical world, and the information and knowledge contained within the empirical world is limited by the law causality. The law of causality is limited by all that it determines, and the extent to which it applies itself to the empirical orientation of things is dependent on a variety of conditions.


Conditions which are not pre-conceived by a canon of reason, but which are determined by the continuus flux of change determined by the dynamic or operations of the empirical. The consciousness I speak of is consciousness as it is understood on the basis of our own consciousness.



That it includes or integrates both the consciousness of the observer and observed not just merely as they appear in space-time, but the way they are as objects in and of themselves, that is objects of potentiality. The substance of a thing fixes itself in the appearance of a thing, but the qualities and accidents of that substance is always adapting and changing in accordance with an internal mode of operations and through different faculities.


The mental tools I am using to make this critique is based on merely a philosophical and abstract analysis. That is it involves an abstract and general critique of a general framework, and does not necessary pertain to any specific or concrete formula of knowledge, but rather a more theoretical approach to the canon of reason in the context of the empirical limits of consciousness.

The mind has the ability to observe itself. It can observe it's own mechanics. Every impression that enters the mind whatever the source or the venue may be has it's own feeling undertone associated with it. If observer is not careful that feeling be it pleasant, unpleasant or neutral will decide what happens next with the process of perception. The mind that is not watching itself does this automatically and it's not even aware of what that does to its ability to understand phenomena clearly.

The reach of consciousness is not limited to the conditioned phenomena when it is mindful, concentrated and aware. A very simple experiment is to watch one's own mind and it's reactions to the incessant flow of impressions as an impartial observer. It is apparent in that state of mind how it all works and more importantly why. The only limit there is is not being aware enough. That's not the fault of the consciousness itself, but the technique being used.

My bet is there is no limits to consciousness aside from those imposed by the mind itself.

The concept described by Geistfaust reminds me a lot of Kant, my worst nightmare during my high school years, and also at the university! But i have to think a bit about what you wrote Geist, then i'll give you an answer ;)

Reminds me of Schrodinger and his cat :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcticwolf

The mind has the ability to observe itself. It can observe it's own mechanics. Every impression that enters the mind whatever the source or the venue may be has it's own feeling undertone associated with it. If observer is not careful that feeling be it pleasant, unpleasant or neutral will decide what happens next with the process of perception. The mind that is not watching itself does this automatically and it's not even aware of what that does to its ability to understand phenomena clearly.

The reach of consciousness is not limited to the conditioned phenomena when it is mindful, concentrated and aware. A very simple experiment is to watch one's own mind and it's reactions to the incessant flow of impressions as an impartial observer. It is apparent in that state of mind how it all works and more importantly why. The only limit there is is not being aware enough. That's not the fault of the consciousness itself, but the technique being used.

My bet is there is no limits to consciousness aside from those imposed by the mind itself.

---

It can only observe its mechanics in self-reference to the nature of the empirical objects observed. The mechanics of the mind are self-conscious of themselves in a larger and broader framework of mechanics. There are modes of operations and mechanics all being determined within a co-existent space, which is determined in a quasi-linear manner within the succssion of time.


This is to say that all organisms and structures in the universe has its own self-autonomous mechanism or operation for distilling its information and knowledge. The impressions of the mind are affected by the sensibility, and this is what I was pointing out as the root cause of the flaw or glitch in the idea surrounding the idea of the canon of reason.


The canon of reason is merely an illusion, and instead most of it is utilized as a mental construct to make some sense out of the random combinations and divergences in the structures of the empirical. Phenomena is merely a tool through which we come to understand the inner differentiation of the thing, and phenomenal is the vessel through which spatiality/visuality as perceived by the imagination becomes an actuality.


All modes of existence operate off of an empirical possibility, which fixes itself on a concrete reality. This concrete reality is the essence of the substance, and is the geometrical condition through which we differentiate things into categories and sub-categories.


Angle and shape are necessary to revealing the inner possibilities and potentialities in the empirical and its space, and it is through their form that we can become conscious of the self-conscious activity within space-time. It is in this self-conscious activity within space-time that we can become conscious that the possibilities and potentialities of a thing limit the way in which the law of causality affects the thing.


That is the dynamic laws of succession and causality are limited by the possibilities and potentialities of thing. The possibilities and potentialities of a thing are impressed on us through our senses, and then discovered through abstraction and experience.


Its on the basis of experience that we can come to induct consistency in our deductions of the possibility or potentiality of this understanding applying to this particular object, its nature pertaining to itself and the greater integrable whole of its environment. I think a lot of our consciousness, whether or not it pertains to concrete consciousness, pertains to the material of consciousness, that is the empirical world itself.


I also think other forms of consciousness lead to illusion thoughts and ideals, which appear true, because they reflect reality in our mind, but are not in any actual sense. They are like the shapes and forms in our dreams or the fantasies of the madman, and this is what I think the canon of reason represents.


I am basically denying platonic forms, and claiming that the canon of reason is merely a projection of what the senses perceives in relation to the mental constructs that we utilize to grasp and categorize the information and knowledge of the empirical world around us. The information and knowledge of the empirical world around is not fixed by any canon of law within time-space, because this would contradict the framework of space-time.


At the same time due to the law of causality and the dyanmic succession of the operations and modes of the empirical within time this canon of law is not capable of existing. Instead if it is self-negated within itself, and constantly being differentiated through the actions between objects in accordance with the pressures of the environment and nature.


The potentiality of a thing is consciousness, and all consciousness derives itself from the basis of possibility, and a canon of reason is constructed or grounded merely through mental constructs organizing and assembling what the mind inducts to be right through observation and experience.


This means the canon of reason is merely a mental construct based off our our intuitive inductions and reactions to the experiences and observations of the dynamic qualities of the operations of the empirical world and the information contained within. Our individual mind is primarily a modulator of this information and knowledge, which is constantly changing in flux in accordance with beings as they are fixed and actually appear to us in our senses.


It attempts to make sense of the impressions it receives through the utility of reason, but reason can only do so much to bridge the gap between the dynamics of its own mind and the causal mechanics of thing it observes. The absorption of the information and knowledge in an appropriate manner can only come about through the mind establishing fixed boundaries and limits, because the empirical world and its operations is limited by limits.


The imagination and sensibility offers an infinite amount of possibilities and potentialities based off previous or current models of reality, but it represents merely a divergent and variant reality, which has no firm or uniform reality.



A lot our sense of the world and the judgements we make are influenced and affected by our imagination and sensibilities, which tend to give us false illusions and amphibolies of our sense of the world and the mental constructs we use to categorize and to understand it in a broader and more theoretical sense.


I think that our consciousness is limited to phenomena, and that anything that pertains to beyond phenomena is limited to the operations, dynamics, and law of causality as it determines itself in the externality and internality of phenomena.


Phenomena encapsulates all, and is a modulator between the external and internal impression of things, but also a point, which both have consequences on each other in correlation to the law of causality. The canon of reason does not apply unless it accords itself first with the operations of phenomena/mechanics of the mind, is observable to the senses, and applicable through empirical measures to things as they appear to us.



P.S. This all means that if a canon of reason existed first it would have to naturally accord with the variant mechanics/dynamics of the empirical world and mind, which sums up into the natural law.

Secondly it must make itself observable to the senses, and be limited to them. Then they must be applicable through empirical measures in accordance with rational abstraction and concrete action.

In all these cases the sensibility seems like it has a tendency to fool us, and it will, but this is the natural of everything. Its merely a random process of determining phenomenon through different causal principles, which apply and affect objects different based based on its shape, internal mechanisms, and operation within its environment.


Its impossible to not have the sensibility affect the way things impress our minds, and the way in which we organize and categorize these impressions upon our mind through reason.


Our reason and imagination form an abstract impression, which affects the way we perceive and sense the objects of the real world. All and all the canon of law as an ideal self-negates itself due to its own random blindness, much like the sensibility.

In short this means that our minds are merely modulator operators acting through the threeform spheres of intellect, senses, and sensibility. They distill information and knowledge of self through empirical means, and in relation to empirical objects. The dynamic determination of this distilled information and knowledge is random and meaningless as has been said before.


It just happens to coincide with actual and fixed phenomenal beings, which possess certain degrees and variant s of information and knowledge. These degrees and variants of information and knowledge are received in different manners and through different faculities.


That said there is a grand illusion, which is cast off regarding the nature of reality itself, as it projects itself from the sphere of the empirical. This illusion can never be dealt with by reason or properly eliminated from the sensibility, because its fixed in the random and meaningless divergence and dynamic operations of the empirical and the mind's relation to it.


Its basically a something which appears there due to the irrationality of the sensibility, but which is merely a void, which is derived and projected from the empirical by the sensibility on the basis of our own mental constructs.