ADDENDUM:
i went for a long ride today. when i started out, i had a geographical
destination in mind, but it turned out that the 'destination' i actually
arrived at was a 'cognitive' one.
during the hours i drove, i went over the stuff of my prior response, some of
which is quoted below, and found that i'd 'missed' something.
say, for instance, there're long-term trends within 'waking consciousness' and
'sleep consciousness' experience, and it's demonstrable that detectable
'directionalities' within both trends are the same. (by 'directionalities',
here, i'm refering to qualitative augmentations and diminutions, etc.)
say, qualities A and B, within 'waking conscious' experience, augment and
diminish, respecively, and qualities X and Y, within sleep conscious'
experience, augment and diminish, respecively, all in a way that's
synchronized.
it's clear that, in such dynamics, it's valid to 'interpret' 'sleep
consciousness' 'X' as being correlated with 'waking consciousness' 'A', and so,
too, with respect to 'Y' and 'B'.
so 'interpretation', with respect to such demonstrably-linked trends is
possible.
this's all in accord with the stuff of my prior discussion, quoted below (the
'trends' are linked via TD E/I-minimization; the linked TD E/I-minimization
discloses the 'waking consciousness'-'sleep consciousness' correlation), but
was not explicitly-stated.
i've experienced exactly these things with respect to stuff correlated with my
research over the course of the past two decades. (which can be verified
because, during casual interaction with some strangers-to-me, but locatable,
folks, i happened to discuss facets of the 'sleep consciousness' 'side' of
things, and the 'waking consciousness' 'side' of things has been documented,
publicly, for decades.
i only worked these things through during my ride-to-'cognition', today, and
was a bit 'startled' to see the possibilities inherent... when fully
comprehended, it's something akin to "public-key 'cryptology'" :-)
it's still the case that the important stuff remains as i discussed in my prior
post. i was just 'startled', today, to see that concrete 'interpretation' of
such trends, even with respect to abstract, 'sleep consciousness'
information-processing, is matter-of-fact do-able.
so it was necessary to post this addendum to my prior comments.
K. P. Collins
from my prior post:
my view is that dreams always have 'significance'. it's just that they occur
with respect to extremely-abstract information-processing that's, in the main,
pertaining to internally-relevant information-processing contexts.
so, when such is carried through, the notion of 'psychosis' is dispelled
because there's relatively-little necessary external ('waking consciousness')
relevance inherent... why should an extraordinarily-powerful,
streamlined-to-the-gills, internal, abstract information-processing dynamic
have mundane correlation with respect to dynamics which occur when the nervous
system is configured into an almost entirely-different information-processing
'state'?
such doesn't compute.
this leaves the question of why there's any 'dream imagery' at all?
why expend energy 'seeing' stuff that's correlated more-strongly with
internally-abstract information-processing dynamics than it is with
externally-relevant experience?
since 'creativity' hinges upon stochastic (having a random component)
activation 'states' (AoK, Ap5), and since 'sleep consciousness' has huge
stochastic dynamics within it, why waste such when it must occur in such
abundance, anyway?
so my view is that what 'dreaming' is is an efficiency which taps into the
extraordinary stochastic activation that occurs during 'sleep consciousness',
because the extraordinary stochastic activation is there, anyway, so that which
would be, otherwise, wasted, is 'sifted' for possible usefulness. when an
internally-abstract 'sleep consciousness' information-processing dynamic yields
sufficient TD E/I-minimization, transition to 'waking consciousness' is
initiated, and the lingering 'imagery' provides something to 'ponder' with
respect to externally-relevant, 'waking consciousness' information-processing
dynamics.
so, how could it be possible for 'dream' content to convey information that's
specifically with respect to externally-relevant stuff? it's derived in an
internally-abstract information-processing 'state', having an
extraordinarily-important information-processing purpose, upon which survival
depends, after all.
so when folks 'interpret' dreams, they're 'just' doing an
otherwise-uncorrelated 'analysis', and attaching 'meaning' which they choose to
attach... like a Rorschach thing... says more about the 'interpreter' than it
does about the 'interpretee' :-)
end of stuff from my prior post.
