The concept of a personal malleable reality seems frightening to most novice learners to the extent that some would deny it at first. This concept destroys the reliability and solidity of the realities they lived in. It questions their previous experiences. When a learner understands that the reality he is experiencing (or has experienced before) is just one version of reality, he would ask which one is more real?
But understanding the machinery of X would make such a question irrelevant. Perhaps, all constructs are illusions because they are just a model approximating the state of affairs in W1. Use of the word “illusions” is also misleading because all constructs are the same in nature because all constructs are the product of a unique W1 body and a unique W2 body (with different L1, L2, and L3 contents), and their differences are in how accurate they describe W1 state of affairs and how much they fulfill the preferences of the feeler (how much preferable qualitative experiences provide for the feeler). Nezman calls these realities personal constructs, instead of illusions, because they are as real as they could be for the person who is experiencing them.
Understanding the fact that reality is a construct would force a person to know everything anew, and everything begins with an accurate L2. He needs to re-evaluate content of his W2 and to distinguish between facts and values (positive and normative content). He needs to become aware of his own desires (and tastes in beauty and ugliness), as well as his own emotions (love and hatred, fears, and so on). He should become aware of his own mechanisms of escapism, addictions, and his own L1 and L3 lenses that make his reality more comfortable, preferable, or less desirable.
All in all, accepting the malleability of the reality would destroy a person’s castle of thoughts. He should deconstruct and then reconstruct his own castle of thought which is the most difficult task in the universe.
No comments:
Post a Comment