Main Loop

November 8th, 2006

Beneath these intentions, these tendencies, actions and reasons lies a complex tangle of biochemical processes, neurocomputational methods, quantum mechanical properties – or whatever the current explanatory fad happens to be. I persist in attempting to convince myself that I – my self, my conscious, my will – am in control, am authoritative, and maintain ascendancy. However the more effort I put into this belief the more obvious it becomes that it is untenable or at least paradoxical.

“But according to whose logic?” One may ask. Quickly I respond: “why to the only relevant logic, my logic.” Just as quickly it dawns upon me that I have once again fallen into the trap. For if we suppose that I am not in control of my reality and further suppose the supposition that I am in control of my reality is illogical it appears inconsistent to hold that “my logic” is the relevant logic when my logic is not “mine” at all but, from our first presumption, must be the logic of the reality imposed on me. This notion, this imposition of a reality, is this at all sensible or has there been some misstep taken in the core of my thinking to lead to such a contradictory statement? Although, perhaps it is not contradictory. Perhaps a clarification of terms is necessary. My reality is the world and the things as it and I perceive them. It is inescapable, it is ever present, and it is apparently poetic. Would reality be any less imposed upon me if I were a brain in a vat being fed sensory stimuli by some sort of machinery? It seems that it is a question of influence. How much influence can I have over the reality, how much interaction do I have with this reality?

The question then is not what is real but why is it real?

[December 5th, 2009 - I've now decided the question doesn't exist, can't be asked, or doesn't matter]