Infinite Consciousness and The Divided Brain. I’d like to suggest that we might be living in infinite consciousness unless someone can explain why I might be wrong? The word atom comes from a Greek word to mean indivisible. Over time people looked deeper and found smaller divisions and they continue to delve into this mystery today. As far as I can understand, there seems to be no boundary or edge to the universe. If you study any (I think) body of knowledge or craft, there’s infinite potential for deeper learning and refinement. Take history for example and you’ll find revisions, updates, new evidence, theories and counter theories. Certainly seems to be no end to philosophical or political debate or artistic or musical creations. I can’t quite understand why everyone seems to act as if we live in a material world when the only constant seems to be that narratives and stories keep changing. I guess it’s certainly possible that one day a static body of knowledge could be discovered but so far it seems that every theory is updated at some point and when you look into a particular field of study yourself it seems to expand limitlessly.
An infinite oneness couldn’t experience anything except infinite oneness. So it limits itself or divides itself so that it can experience the other. The only thing the infinite lacks is limitation. There’s a kind of trick in jazz improvisation where if you start a solo simply and hold back you have a lot more room to expand and explore interesting co-creative territory (between dynamic unpredictable band mates) compared to if you play fast and loud from beginning to end. I think there’s a kind of analogy here for all games and activities, that limitations allow us to explore more broadly or something.
I find this video incredibly interesting, I think it sums up a lot of what I found frustrating about studying Anglo-American philosophy.
https://youtu.be/dFs9WO2B8uI
At one point he says something like, the left hemisphere of the brain is like the Berlusconi of the brain because it controls the media. My understanding of this is something like, the left hemisphere tends to divide everything into constituent parts and promote what’s useful and demote what’s not but based on a left hemisphere evaluation of what’s useful. I think this can get us into the kind of trouble where we end up thinking that a future state like being rich and comfortable is good and everything should be sacrificed (present moment, health, fun, the natural environment) in pursuit of that imagined future state. Whereas the right hemisphere might be generally content to experience all emerging phenomena. (This is probably an oversimplification). So the left hemisphere categorises, decides what’s good and bad and promotes it/argues for it based on it’s propensity to divide everything and choose between these divisions. Not only does it decide what we want and don’t want but it decides that we’re supposed to be deciding what we want and don’t want. And there’s also a claim that the left hemisphere’s become more dominant over time so it seems to be harder and harder to break out of it’s grasp.
Perhaps we can explore anything in infinite depth and can determine our own frameworks/containers. Perhaps this is an easier way to live? 🤔
I link infinite consciousness and the divided brain because the left hemisphere seems to want to see the world as made up of divided components/static components but it might be biased towards it’s own tendency while also having a tendency to control narrative generally (consider when analytical philosophy demands that an essay must contain premises and conclusions vs an essay which might present contrasting or complimentary considerations for example). And it might also be that somehow the world is infinite and finite so good that we have a brain that can explore both sides of the coin in some sense.
You can read my other post about infinite consciousness here: https://timmyfunnell.com/2022/09/10/infinity-vs-finity/