Morphology of reality

Reality gets a form through our thinking, it only comes into being through our thinking. This form is not rigid, but would like to be for efficiency reasons.

So if I have formed an opinion, e.g. that an object I am about to lift is probably heavy from all my experience, and then it is light, I am surprised and possibly correct this pattern or question it. I change the morphology of the impression.

The mind likes to work unobserved, embedded in space and time, and usually produces reasonable results that at least seem to ensure survival. To observe the thought process with a superior instance contradicts the immersive, embedded being of thought: even caught in our thoughts, we find it difficult to leave the dimensions of thought, or to observe and even analyze thought simultaneously from a superior dimension.

Our thoughts are individualists, we think they belong only to us and are loners, however the thoughts of many people in a group, a region, a culture, a nation form a meta-thought, the Zeitgeist. The zeitgeist forms the average of the common thought forms and helps us to build reality, to form our impression of reality.

One aspect of the zeitgeist is the feeling of life, a feeling which is strongly formed by the expression of reality through the used foreign/mother tongue.

Foreboding in turn arises from open thinking, an open connectedness with the thinking outside our body, the big whole.

To protect against overload there is the fading out, the defusing of impressions, so much so that they fade away or are no longer consciously perceived. With calming of the mind, the disturbing and unreal variety of things disappears.

What is this multiplicity? How much multiplicity is there? Is there only one reality or many?

The multiplicity of realities – potency, potentiality, potentiality

Reality is not reality, but potentiality

When we change our views, we could also say we change our reality, or we change into another potential reality. So, for example, if you break a habit and only drink non-alcoholic beverages, for example, then in that reality you never drank alcoholic beverages. It’s as if you’ve switched to a different rail track that was previously parallel to your track and unused by you. Potentially, however, it was always there. So you can imagine the realities lying next to each other, which are multidimensional on their part.

A parallel reality beside mine brings me nothing at all, only the change in that is interesting and the question whether it needs a switch to change to the new track or whether that always goes abruptly, as in the change (quantum leap) from electron shell to electron shell of Nils Bohr (that is described by me in more detail in an article about quantum physics).

A change is not so difficult, if one understands that it is a jump and not a switch. There is the saying, “You have to close one door before the next one opens”, this illustrates the multiverse theory quite well, why? By the closing of a door bound energy is released, which now can be used like with the electrons for the shell jump, for the quantum jump, for the reality change.

On the other hand, one can also take away the possibility of the reality change, to close oneself before the possibilities which offer themselves at every time. This above all by being “closed”, for example by functional fixation. What does this mean?

Well, for example, if one sees a thing only as such and closes oneself to the meaning of this thing for other purposes, then one does not come up with innovative solutions that reshape reality. One notices this with the solution attempt of tricky puzzles.

Who still knows Mac Guyver from TV, who was able to free himself from any situation, no matter how difficult, by using inconspicuous objects in new ways with each other?

The method, known under the term “reframing” is ultimately quite simple: first they decouple the object from its imprisonment in their thinking and see it detached from its previous purpose, thus opening up the probability space with its potentialities. Now comes the decoherence, the condensation to a new variant from the potentialities and thus a reality change that can contribute to problem solving. A new meaning has been created.

Some people know this from everyday life: Many electrical devices have a tiny hole for “resetting”, for resetting to factory settings. I, at least, need this function again and again, as it is often the only way to get a device to work as intended. This hole is often too small for a ballpoint pen and so you take whatever is nearby, for me it’s the old paper clips. A bent up paper clip (decoupled from its function as a paper clip, it is just a bent piece of wire) fits so bent up and thus straight, through the hole and provides enough stiffness to press the reset button inside.

A paper clip lying on the table, now bent open, has completely lost its meaning as a paper clip, but is now a device for resetting hopelessly muddled electronics. The paper clip has been “reframed” in our thinking.

So if we can deform the elements of our reality, what effect does that have on the composition of all these reality(ies) into a world picture, our world picture?

Perception is always made unambiguous for us. This had reasons that were important for us in survival, the ambiguity of a situation is undesirable and could end fatally. We see this today in simple experimental setups and know it from the well-known “tilt image effect”, where a drawing is perceived either this way or that way, but both perceptions cannot take place at the same time.

In contrast to our perception, our world view does not have to be congruent in a situation. Our worldview may well combine different worldviews into one overall picture, and the individual components of the picture may even contradict each other. In another article on balanced identity, I elaborate on this idea.

The individual world pictures and the overall picture determine what we perceive.

This is a very fascinating insight, we seem to get out of our system with it, we seem to be able to shape the “matrix”. To expand or change the perception, we have to work on our world view, this then has the desired repercussion on the perception.

Changing our worldview is supported by cultures and their institutions as long as it serves them and restricted when it threatens them. Just think of gender roles and gender tolerance, the understanding of gender in the respective cultures and nations.

The digital filter bubble, the preselection of information from the outside world by filters of the digital industry leads to the reinforcement and solidification of existing interests instead of the awakening and discovery of new areas of interest. Ultimately, the individual’s worldview is solidified by services and authorities, to their self-serving goal of controlling, dominating, and exploiting the individual.

The worldview is the stage of our perception on which it moves freely and performs its process of thinking. The more freedom we allow ourselves, the more creativity and childlike, not yet blocked thinking we preserve or train ourselves, the more successful we are in the continuous reshaping of our worldview and thus also of reality.

Language is an expression of a world view, but about that in another article.