On being Exterior, your views ?

[Mark A. Baker]

Selection bias.

And so?

Selection bias doesn't either disprove or discount data, it merely illuminates a difficulty innate to the proper analysis of it.


Mark A. Baker

[Hatshepsut]

And so?

Selection bias doesn't either disprove or discount data, it merely illuminates a difficulty innate to the proper analysis of it.


Mark A. Baker

Mathematically speaking of course......

[Mark A. Baker]

It had been remarked by David Mayo that it is sort of a misconception that a being can be 'in' anything anyway. So I guess you have to ask yourself what it is that is 'in' or 'went in' or 'can't go in' or is 'being trapped' etc. It is a mass or an identity or something the being is identified 'with' or has created that went in...even if its just perhaps a very subtle nuance or substitute for himself.

The idea of "interiorization" or "being interior" is a consideration which a being may hold. So are the related ideas of "exteriorization" or "being exterior". They reflect relative states of mind. They are also genuine subjective experiences. They also occur "on a gradient". A person can be "gradiently exterior", just as he can be "gradiently interior". Two ways of viewing the same subjective mental phenomena.

What tends to be addressed in auditing about "exteriorization" are underlying fundamental considerations which a being may have which apparently result in compulsive "interiorization" or "exteriorization" phenomena. The fixed or obsessive considerations which the being may hold are the actual difficulty.


Mark A. Baker

[Mark A. Baker]

Mathematically speaking of course......

Are you cheeking me?




Mark A. Baker

[uniquemand]

Analyzing some data, while excluding mountains of contrary data, is a good recipe for believing in fairy tales.

[Hatshepsut]

The idea of "interiorization" or "being interior" is a consideration which a being may hold. So are the related ideas of "exteriorization" or "being exterior". They reflect relative states of mind. They are also genuine subjective experiences. They also occur "on a gradient". A person can be "gradiently exterior", just as he can be "gradiently interior". Two ways of viewing the same subjective mental phenomena.

What tends to be addressed in auditing about "exteriorization" are underlying fundamental considerations which a being may have which apparently result in compulsive "interiorization" or "exteriorization" phenomena. The fixed or obsessive considerations which the being may hold are the actual difficulty.


Mark A. Baker

I really got that Mark!

Yesterday I was looking over something in me that was inflamed again. And oooops....what da ya know...steadfast considerations...held in place... by an engram or two or three. But now why would that be my chronic dramatization of choice?

[Pepin]

The idea of "interiorization" or "being interior" is a consideration which a being may hold. So are the related ideas of "exteriorization" or "being exterior". They reflect relative states of mind. They are also genuine subjective experiences. They also occur "on a gradient". A person can be "gradiently exterior", just as he can be "gradiently interior". Two ways of viewing the same subjective mental phenomena.

What tends to be addressed in auditing about "exteriorization" are underlying fundamental considerations which a being may have which apparently result in compulsive "interiorization" or "exteriorization" phenomena. The fixed or obsessive considerations which the being may hold are the actual difficulty.


Mark A. Baker

Why is it Mark, of all the people who post about these things on ESMB, YOU seem to be the only one who "GET'S IT"

I still hold to the view that being two feet behind the body is defacto exterior.

[uniquemand]

Perhaps he's the only one of us who really feels like rehashing it.

[Mark A. Baker]

Perhaps he's the only one of us who really feels like rehashing it.

Except for the simple observation, U, that I'm not the one who starts these things. Nor am I especially interested in lengthy, heated arguments over the matter. My primary interest in these threads, such as it is, lies in clearing up the many popular misconceptions about philosophy, spirituality, the nature of mind, and subjective experience generally.

I learned long ago not to confuse considerations of "measurable phenomena" as being "objective reality". ALL knowledge is "of the mind", and as such it is innately subjective.

Additionally, I might add, you seem always to be quite eager to "enter the fray".


Mark A. Baker

[uniquemand]

Oh, I'm happy to jabber about most things, yes.

There does come a point where people just need to review the thread, though, rather than ask an already answered question again.