Logic dictates that entity A cannot be entity B, and when we come to valuate that do the representations we have from ourselves truly represent oursel
Logic dictates that entity A cannot be entity B, and when we come to valuate that do the representations we have from ourselves truly represent ourselves, in relativity with this simple logic, the answer must be “No”. The entity we are perceiving in our consciousness is combined of units of information, and is a virtual entity, similarly with our friends and foes we perceive in our consciousness even when they are not around. And these representations lack the neurological detail, everything that we know as the physical basis of our existence, every known form of self-awareness, and are immaterial in the environment. And as our sense of the environment is representational, when the external source of an individual we know is not at present, the representation of the individual we have in our consciousness does not have a mind of its own, but is the exact then active image we have from him/her, each of them produced in relativity with our own internal complexity and the dynamics of the sub-consciousness.
It must now also be acknowledged that our individuality, not the soul, is defined also in Neurological Dubai, cellural and in genetic level, i.e. that the combination of atoms in molecular level is what makes us human individuals, having the 1-2% difference in genetic level, making us unique in physical design. Yet, in the experiments done through cloning also indicate through deductions that, the distinctive observer/soul cannot be replicated however identical the genome that produces the octer reaction of combining the body were between mammals, not to mention that the combination of genes that is able to construct the individual self of us does not emerge anywhere in the entire cosmos and beyond during our existence, transcending us to those spatial co-ordinates. If the observer/soul was somehow linked between the two cloned Dolly sheep, it would have required some Cartesian receiver-transceiver device, enabling them to send and receive neural impulses from each of other in order to build collective self-awareness, but their genome had no such blueprints for it to be formed. Ego, or Das Ich (The I, or I itself) as Freud would have expressed or soul is therefore not something that can be replicated nor can it be divided to multiple bodies, forming a collective consciousness with an individual (one) ego.
In order for information to be in consciousness, it needs neurological support system that can contain information. This is the same with innate information systems in neurological level, for without qualifying and distinctive properties, the neurons and specialized receptors in various parts of the brains and for example neurons that are responsible and that enable motor tasks could not exist. Again, memory cells and for example synapses require distinctive molecular combination of atoms in order to exist and therefore units of information these memory cells and synapses contain must also have a unique molecular combination per unit of information, since otherwise contained units information should be considered as some magical meta-impulses that are contained in memory cells, identical in molecular combination, although containing different units of information. But on the other hand, energy in its form of information in neurological cognitive systems is yet without any recognizable types, i.e. that for example this waveform means “a peanut”, and this “Plato”, and the combination of these is waveforms is “Plato in a peanut” and even more, the problem of indicating which memory cell contains the searched unit of information is limited by the lack of technology of being able to scan neurons in the level of molecular combination.
The distribution of information that are combined to a representation from different areas and lobes of the brains cannot be traced in the level of finding specific units of information. But non-the-less, the way our retina deals with the individual photons is that they are translated to neural impulses and are first sent to individual neurons in the visual cortex until sent to various perception-relative regions of brains to form the big picture (V3-V5), during the content generative cycle before representations emerge to consciousness, with parallel categorical types of associated information (from dimensions of information such as color, taste, semantics, emotions, sounds, etc. from other neurological systems). Because of the technological limitations, the only way to approach this matter at hand is logic. The first logical deduction is that the brains form representations from combined units of information, with the content generated by the micro-level neurocomputation for the individual’s consciousness.
The second logical deduction is that because different areas of the brains perform different tasks with relatively different types of information, the information that consciousness receives as the complete representation of the environment is composed of units of information individual areas of the brains have processed. The third logical deduction is that brains are in constant constructive state in relativity with the information translated by senses of the environmental conditions and in relativity with the information already contained by the memory systems. And the fourth and most obvious logical deduction is therefore that the categorical increasing complexity defines the units of information that is to be used by the constructive and re-constructive behavior of our brains while building representations. The same deductions of this re-constructive behavior of our brains to build representations from units of information in diverse memory systems were made by F. C. Bartlett in as early as 1932:
“The first notion to get rid of is that memory is primarily or literally reduplicative, or reproductive. In a world of constantly changing environment, literal recall is extraordinarily unimportant. If we consider evidence rather than supposition, memory appears to be far more decisively an affair of construction rather than one of mere reproduction”
Now, in neurological representation of an individual, i.e. the molecular combination of an individual containing all the units of information, including the various information systems in the levels of individual neurons, memory cells, sysnapses, etc. and the systems and representations they produce in combination and as sums of their parts, the innate neurological composition produces the frame of value-relative constancies, with the individual genetic differences. The increasing complexity (for example growth of dendritic spines for an anatomical substrate for memory storage and synaptic transmission) after the birth in relations to the information of the environment and coping with the reality can for example exceed in such categories as motor tasks, emotional responses, learning to recognize objects by the smell value-relatively combined to them, etc. Virtual information such as representations of ethical behavior virtually extends the innate behavioral patterns and produce virtually extended value-relative behavior, increasing the complexity of the neurological representation of the self. The existing virtual information about the atomic combination of the environment, i.e. the atomic quantum reality to make the distinctive difference between the information containing and not-containing environment, chemical reactions and the laws of physics virtually extends the innate capacity on understanding the environment. Religions extend the innate nature virtually to a spiritual dimension. The information society systems virtually extend the innate group behavior.
I mention these examples because the neurological representation of an individual is extended by virtual information, that is, an individual is also the information he/she contains, adding a third dimension which is beyond the Cartesian dualism. The increasing complexity in the category of etiquette increases the neurological representation of an individual in relations with the behavior in accordance with etiquette. As the characteristics are again considered as units that are universal, the active combination of them defines that area of the neurological representation of an individual. The more one characteristic increases in complexity, the more units of information exists in such characteristic in the neurological representation of an individual. Thus, the more one virtually extends one’s innate nature in the dimension of smart business transactions, the more virtually extended the innate nature the neurological representation of an individual becomes.
Now, as it isn’t the representational self that moves in the environment, but the neurological representation of the self, it is healthy to make a clear difference between these two distinctive levels of being. The representational self is a fantasane entity, and the neurological self is the authentic manifestation of an individual. The way we move in the atomic reality is in relativity with the active neurological combination in our micro-level neurocomputation, and its dynamics are in constant state spatial shifts. These shifts and the active combination of them define exactly where we are in the mental space, and the place our physical being manifests is defined by the spatial co-ordinates we exist in in the space-time continuum of the cosmos. In both cases, where our neurological and atomic existence is located, it is the exact location we exist in.