While the perfect description of experience is the essential of the mind-structure, it is utilized by the more-so, governing, aspects of it, making the mind-structure 'come to life'. For example, recognizing what is available and to where One wishes to go from there. This process is not a knowledge or element of the world, it is the 'eye' of the mind which navigates trough the mind-structure, defining meanings as it does. I'm not sure, but I don't really believe this process can be put into the mind-structure in any meaningful way...
On the relation between 'describing' the world and thinking.
- on place-putting oneself
I should not aim to present my ideas as 'merit' above One's understanding.
It should not be a 'promise' to other people. People are only affected by such promises if they do not know how to think.
It makes sens that the person obsessed with constantly observing Oneself would make the first like-himself-robot... Because the 'empathy'
I find it almost impossible to write while thinking. Could the mind-structure be a solution to this problem?
- brain-jolt, fainted then pee and bite, cataplexy-ish, reading near-death,
- I suppose the brain-jolt might have happened partly because of how perpacive the evokations behind the invention that led to the brain-jolt are..- that this invention is what lead me to realize that instead of finding the laws of physics, I wanted to find the laws of thought, which are related to thoughts I have had my entire life, since ever I can remember.
As all meanings are decided by experience, then, all such as ''and'' ''or'' etc, should be defined by the ways to describe experience...
Describing things as experience rather than objectifications of it allows all arguments to be easier 'accessed'
Defining everything as energy could work not only in physics but also computational fields as well, for example, I think bits or 'gates' or whatevr can be defined by energy... After all, I think energy is a logical concept rather than just physical...