Hi Peter,

Yes, it is all about the diorama in our head, that is our knowledge,
rendered by our perception system, which is isomorphic to the external
world via our senses.
When you think about it, the brain could render the knowledge at any point
in the chain of visual perception, including possibly only representing
knowledge of the image on our retina.  Our brain just normally represents
knowledge of whatever is immediately upstream from the eyes, before the
chain enters the body.  But in the case of this image of yours, since the
painting is perfectly aligned with the light that would be coming from
behind it, it 'seems', or is rendered by our perception system as if it was
knowledge that actually existed beyond the painting.

The only reason people think red is associated with light, is simp[ly
because light is the last point in the chain, before it enters the body.
But of course, if you put a red green inverter immediately after the
retina, grenness is then associated with red light, proving redness has
nothing to do with the light.

Also, we don't perceive the knowledge our perception system renders,
including it's intrinsic colorness qualities.  Perception is done from
afar, and results in knowledge, This knowledge is different.  We
directly apprehend it.  If we 'perceived' our knowledge, that would be the
same as the cartesian theater homunculus, which results in an infinite
regress of interpretations of interpretations, or perceptions of
perceptions, the physical definition of redness never being defined,
anywhere.

Again, for a description of the difference between perception and direct
apprehension see the description starting at 4:55 into this video.
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1N6IL5-5FM46wCVy5r4iAVA0X-2DLWVcdN9ss_view&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=uokb4SAEFUgWbwSD_C6210ag-TJ9nUWQS4Q6o-MGxtU&s=A6gl6LUP0JhkMw4QRoEzcxKOZ9bteb-Rke4NN_-7V-4&e= 

Brent















On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 6:58 PM Peter Lloyd Jones <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> This discussion leads me back to Rene Magritte’s painting, The Human
> Condition.
>
> Do we perceive what is out there or do we perceive our perception of what
> we perceive?
>
> The painting in front of the window is of what is outside the widow that
> is directly blocked by the painting. But what is outside the window is not
> really outside the window as the window and what is outside of it are also
> just part of the same painting.
>
> Is this an image of Mind 3 narrating what Mind 2 is doing?
> P
>
>
> Peter Lloyd Jones
> [log in to unmask]
> 562-209-4080
>
> Sent by determined causes that no amount of will is able to thwart.
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1