Been thinking for a while there is an illusion about consciousness, that tends toward and tends faith in a picture of clarity. The illusion is in the projections that incline the idea that some view is right in that it is what of rightness would be arrived at with similar ‘clarity’. A sort of Right Thinking correct view that is thought to be shared by similar clear-mindedness perhaps anywhere it exists. It’s ‘a vision’, presumed singular, shared ‘view’ perhaps.

It’s not restricted to religion, probably doesn’t even originate with religious tendings.

A ‘model consciousness’, that there is one to aspire toward and there’s a reward system for patronizing it.

It’s a Right Thinking place where contradiction and paradoxical requirements don’t give individuals headaches, and don’t result in adverse attention (amongst their own). It’s a trodden and tested view and path, top-of-the-line pragmatists live there.

How much are the projections of consciousness tended by Right Thinking?

Yes, I agree. Something I’ve found hard to define, but I call it Activist’s Conceit. The feeling that their belief is so self-evident that it needs only to be articulated to the doubter for them to accept it. It is assumed therefore that anyone who disagrees does so out of ignorance and not out of experience or intelligence or even some higher level of understanding.

I find it particularly with people who hold opinions I used to hold, but have since come around to the opposite position. They begin the argument that I take my position through ignorance and they need to somehow correct me. When the situation is I have often studied the issue in more detail and I know more about it than them.

..and yes, it is not just religion.

>It is assumed therefore that anyone who disagrees does so out of ignorance and not out of experience or intelligence or even some higher level of understanding”

The territory was more not of agree or disagree, for the moment, no, something else, more of appearances maybe. Not sure.

>I find it particularly with people who hold opinions I used to hold, but have since come around to the opposite position. They begin the argument that I take my position through ignorance and they need to somehow correct me. When the situation is I have often studied the issue in more detail and I know more about it than them.

Not so much opinions was were was going, but suppose that is an aspect. Perhaps more the automated going to ‘Ideal Central’, the locus of rightness, even correctness, the high-ground, quickness in bringing it home there.

The flipside to intention understated, the creativity in the dissemblance of mechanism and device, the wanting circumspection sharing the inverted.

I’m thinking there is a great amount of sense uniformity (tending perception) that is very similar across the species, like sight, hearing, taste, smell, that involves on spatial orientation, touch, and downstream I suppose regards composites even beauty, and much more. However some assumption regards these and the composites generated must be incorrect in detail but tend a force from (some automated, some strategic)generalizations that generate contempt, of sorts.

Let’s call what I’m talking about the ‘illusion of a monistic consciousness’, for the moment, crude as it may be.

It’s easier IMO to look outward for shared views that get postively reinforced than it is to consider what generated such things from the perspective of device/s and mechanisms.

Rather than the muddiness of the internal, a look elsewhere seems to bring on a range of inexplicable competencies. A special magic as the social field is broadened, and weirdly the competencies seem to expand with the extent of the social field embraced.

I suppose I’m in the territory of the inverted anxieties of ‘the hungry for normal’.

Something of the ideological apparatus simulate (‘represent’ might be a bit of a stretch)the projections of consciousness, all three, school, media and church/religion.

Consciousness is a projection system IMO.