Creative Memory

  Going beyond the views of the input pathways, into a new larger view of memory, one may address an issue of change. When memory cannot locate through the eyes or another input pathway, a selection in memory, then the memory can tell us that change has occurred. At this point we can begin to understand time.

 Beyond time, there is an idea that allows us to consider how we may use memory to construct new memories, which were not provided by the input pathways. This is our creative memory capacity. If one can experience this new memory without the need of the input pathways, then this is a rudimentary division of what we might call imaginary memory. Imaginary memory, would not be symbolically possible for another to select from their visual views, but would rather require constructing an imaginary memory.

 However when this imaginary memory, can be ever selected on the input pathways - then this imaginary memory may be a source of input/output creativity.

The View and Selection

  A view is a selection space, which the mind may extract selections from. It is like a prospect for which things may be mined or extracted. What the mind does with those selections, depends upon the selections methods that operate on those selections. For example, if the eyes at any given time, have a view, the view itself is the current selection space under view. If symbolism were limited to the selections under this view, the symbolic space would be limited by what the eyes could select from that view. The possible selection methods would be unable to go beyond that view. However one of the features of the eyes is that of focus, rotation and translation of this view. From the view point of the mind, at first, these changes would lose any selections not present in the view by which the mind was limited - because of the eyes. Before quantum mechanics, perhaps, it was seen that these operations would not change the world, but only the view itself.

 To control the eyes, one could make decisions for reasons in the view of the eyes, but if the selection does not exist in the view of the eyes, then it may not fully describe the nature of vision as it is seen by practical experience with one's own mind or others. It would appear then, that searching is not a problem of the selection methods of the selections in the view, but of selection methods of a different view not bound to the view of the eyes. Thus searching assumes that the selection could be beyond the view of the eyes, and may be a basis for the control of the eyes themselves.

 Combining selection spaces one has been exposed to by the eyes before, could be called memory - and provides an expansion of what this input pathway can provide at a given view. So in this way - we might expect symbols to be applied to not first the view, but the memory itself, or in the case of one method of selection, the view first, then the memory, requiring one to know how to alter the eyes, so that the selection may be made.

 The problem however, with the eyes, is that the memories formed outside of the view, may require the movement of the eyes themselves. Rather than the change of the eyes relative to a stationary body, the eyes cannot reach the view without the change of the stationary body. Thus movement of the eyes requires the body to know about memories bound to not only the change of eyes, but the movement of the eyes themselves. This requires more extensive memory, expanding the need for memory and the potential way symbols are used.

 The prime way to consolidate views, cannot be to see all views with the eyes at once, but rather seeing in a more general way that does not require the eyes until they are necessary for selection methods on the view of the eyes. Seeing must go beyond the eyes, and train the body to find selections which cannot exist without the use of change of view.

 This leads us to memory as a larger view, broken up into both orientation of the eyes, but also of the body itself. Memory expands the view of the mind and thus the more the body can expand its memories - it may expand the possible selections it may need to decide upon - and perhaps the selection methods themselves.

 The mind's view would then be a larger view than the eyes, because of memory, and the capacity to extract selections that were once selected in a different view of the eyes. If these memories never had a reason to change, then the memories of the mind would be limited by the capacity to store those memories, select from those memories, and in the case of visiting them not by the memories but the eyes, a need for directing both the body and the eyes to accomplish this. But as we already may know, things do change, leading to a sense of time, by which the memories may no longer apply to what the eyes can see.

Description

  The fundamental problem of symbolism is that of selection. When there is more than one thing under view, symbols may solve the problem of selection by use of a symbol or set of symbols, in addition to a selection method which combined with the associated symbols, producing the selection.

 The number 1, is used instead of "number" because there are more than one of "number" to select from. Like wise, "number" is used because it is assumed there are other selections possible besides "number". While the symbols are not enough, as they are selections of their own, the brain appears capable of providing many selection methods, which may use symbols completely differently. This sheds light on the possibility that language is not a single entity in the brain - processing symbols, but rather a source of decision using symbols as a basis for selection or decision.

 The advantages of symbolic thought, provided by our language capacity, goes beyond what the eyes can do, or the ears, perhaps because these inputs from the outside world, are in a sense the source of selections but do not provide the extensive selection methods which are necessary for decisions.

 Born without the ability to understand symbols, one still has selection methods, which may use the selections and selection spaces, from all input pathways as a basis for decision, however one can appreciate at some point, the growth that symbolic selection methods have - in both internal and external ways of expanding the process of decision in the mind - or brain. Symbolic thought is not just a way of helping other human beings understand how to make decisions - but serves as a useful capacity for the individual alone. In other words, people outside of the mind, (other minds) would benefit from the help from the way symbolism can solve problems of decision. One of the reasons the benefit is both for the mind and outside minds, is that the possible decisions are so large that symbolism is a method by which we may organize and manage the world from its parts.

 The uniqueness of objects in the world, as determined by the input pathways of vision, sound, touch, smell and any other internal sense, can limit the need for symbolism. If there were only one object in view of all these inputs, there would be a default selection, that has no competition for selectors in the mind. But often the case is not the limit of input pathways, because normally the input pathways have already turned the world of possibility into many selections, selection spaces and ultimately providing a need for symbolism. One can argue that to the degree our input pathways can extract things to select from our environment, the need for symbolism would grow.