======================================================

The fairy tale of the "thinker" and its thoughts, a master and a slave

======================================================

"OUT THERE" and "IN HERE"

The human species adapted to a "thinker" and  "knower" inner universe, so to speak, as the living universe "out there" is translated into a mental *mini-universe* in an "in here" illusory world of things and ideas in the tiny corner of the head,

The development of the human species into the modern age is complex. Eons of slow evolution by natural selection and also by human thinking bypassing natural selection.  The capability to think takes the human brain beyond the 5 sense organs territory into a world of imagination and imagemaking that radically transform natural environments.  

Things refer to what is material and ideas refer to what is imagined.  Things and ideas being seemingly separate, naming and names are bridges to connect one to the other, as both things and ideas share the same body and brain, the same language, the same symbolic thinking, so on. Which may explain ongoing question on which came first, things or ideas. Or when "mind" (the word is not the thing) appeared.  

The world of  "in here" is private to an individual body, and as such, perceptions, understanding,  communications, etc,  are also private to that individual. So life as a human can be full of potential intricasies, but also potential anomalies. Especially because the human species development is different from other species as it takes much longer, with different stages, from the unborn to new born infant to adulthood.

Despite modern technology providing the opportunity for people to be "in touch" with one another, seemingly or obviously the opposite is also true. That the same technology can at the same time also promote opportunity for conflict in a world divided - naturally and not -  by individualities; by the grip of pleasurable experiences; by aspirations, especially for the more and the better; by competition between human nature and the bag of morality; by languages, environment, races, ethnicities, beliefs, economy, politics, education, wealth, so on and on. As such, the state of the world is also greatly one of separation in the same species, for its adapting thinking to thinking "in here" is what life is.  As such, transforming "in here" into a separate universe, rather than the mini-universe being a private tool for navigating life.

In a large, divided world, there is the urgent need to see it without separation because, as the contextual saying goes, "no man is an island" (again, the word is not the thing).     

Below (A-D) is an "in here" example of a mini-universe as a tool of dominance.  Maybe this example is an extreme example but maybe also a very common thinking anomaly in the human species. Clearly seeing an anomaly in oneself, the self-revelation might free an individual from a corruption of thinking.

THINGS AND IDEAS

Before the human species developed thinking, the evolution of the brain and the material ruled what is living. As the sense organs and perceptions evolved, these dominated the evolution of "reality".  The conception of things and ideas must have waited for thinking to evolve, else there is also no sense of separation as there nothing to separate, no sense of past, present, future, no idea of an individual, group, culture, categories, etc. Maybe images and inklings of imagination that is materialistic led to the evolution of "intelligence" into the process of thinking, the use of memory, languages, communications, ideas, so on, opening doors to complex evolutions, and expansive world of  "in here".

As the evolution of languages led to the radical progress of social communications, information are shared widely in its different forms, especially words. Perception of words can create problems however in the private worlds of "in here" because of the distinction between things and ideas.. "Understanding" things are quite simple but interpretating ideas can be complicated. So perception of a word referring to something material is a lot simpler than when it is referring to an idea. 

One can easily grab, own and talk about a thing. 

A caveat about words is "the word is not the thing". This however is  commonly unknowingly overlooked as it is quite obvious so even the brain is not adapted to give warnings when a word is perceived as a thing rather than what it represents - when a word talking is a word walking, so to speak. Maybe a good test of reality is to ask oneself what is it like to experience a word, especially esteemed words like "Self", "consciousness", "mind","me", "I",  category words from the bag of morality, etc. As it is a fact that human experience can be strongly biased by what is pleasurable, by what is the more and the better, by what one likes to hear, etc.  As such communication, inner or external, can be deceptive unknowingly. Not a simple "reality" problem because as the world turns, words are also used as tools of persuasion. 

A - "I AM."  Indeed?  An eye-closer?

Crudely, an idea of the *existence* of an I by an I.  To the question "where is the I?"  begging for an answer: in the where is a place: "in here", in the what is a thing, and in the who is the naming by I of itself : Self.  The materialization of a human in the paradox of thinking to think itself into "existence", the idea as a separate thing in the illusory world of "in here".

Thus also, in the materialization of the "Self" is an adaptation by humans to be the center of the "in here" mini-universe and as such, the ghost is born in the machinery of thinking, so to speak.

B - "I AM GOOD, I AM RIGHT"...a concrete conclusion?

Values are not "out there" but are "in here" as idealistic measurements. When "I AM!" is onto the-more-and-the-better, a catch with precious value for the identity of the Self, hardly nothing better than from the bag of morality: "I am good, I am right".  

The assertion by the self-centerred I is concrete, and as such is presumptous. It can not come as a living conclusion but from a materialization from ignorance and arrogance.  Is "I know" not far behind in such knowing,  especially when also cognizant of names and naming?  

C - "I WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU.  JUST DO WHAT I TELL YOU"....a promise?, with intent of total control?

The human species social order is a ladder - upper and lower, top and bottom. young and old, so on. Unfortunately, what may be natural ladder - when one's climb upper is as normal as a descent lower, being the sky is the sky as the ground is the ground - to the Self the position or responsibilities in the ladder is pyschologically and factually of "importance", especially in the valuing of "success".    But be it what it may be......

In human social orders, an ordinary commitment between individuals is common: between parents and children;  the rich and the poor;  employer and employees;  politicians and whoever;  businesses, governments, royalties, tribal leaders, authoritarians, and their followers, their "own" people, so on. As it is, any intent to dominate may be unknowingly not obvious, like master/slave human relationship, And  may be, surprisingly, by "I am good, I am right". 

D - "I DO NOT WANT TO SEE YOU HERE!. DON'T EVER COME HERE."...an articulation or outburst?

On to an extreme of  "the word is the thing":  the master asserting its total ownership of the usefulness of the slave.  The  assertion self-protected by grabbing and owning "I am good, I am right" from the bag of morality as a thing. Asking for the meaning of the words is meaningless as the master wears "I am good, I am right" with authority, as a license or badge, so to speak. 

In this case, the situation is one of total control of a master over a thing, its slave, which is not a matter of "understanding" what morality is. So in its rigid situation, the slave is asking for trouble in saying anything the master does not want to hear as it is a threat to its control.  And when a bad situation becomes worse the response to anything it does not want to hear is the same: "I don't want to see you here, don't ever come here."  Such an outburst to get rid of the slave because the slave's presence has become unbearable.  

The reaction is to deny the slave its name and presence at the least. A direct and simple reaction, not because of contradictions in a mindset. So it is also not hypocrisy. Rather it is normal and natural as it follows the state of mind that is in delusion, and indeed it is self-delusional.  In a natural state of a sickness of being self-trapped, the master is a slave to itself. As such, self-slavery and the master is one - nowhere to go, the self-slave state of the master is in control . 

As such to see oneself in this state is an eye-opener,  a waking up to one's reality - though not quite simple when in a grip of a strong conditioning.   

E- ALL THERE IS  - a living "out there" universe?,  or a static "in here" mini-universe?

The paradox of the nature of thinking: the living presence of "out there" into the "living" identities and recognitions of "in here",   "out there" universe into "in here" mini-universe,  all-there-is into the Self. And so on. In short: the living presence into a dead thing. The nature of thinking transforming the living universe "out there" into the imagination of an "in here",

Yet all is well, as it appears it is all mind.  There is science doing its thing, and to know it all.  There is spirituality, a god doing it all and knowing it all.  

Yet still, what is missing is what is always is - the untouchable and unknowable,  not of things and not of ideas. for it is not of the mind, not "in here", just "out there", wordless.  Unreachable by the senses what, who, how,where, when, and by something from the blue, the why of imagination. It does not matter, never mind - such "reality".

A look outside is a path to nowhere. It is the price to be wordless. 

The energy of the Self is the energy of experiencing the Self. The Self can live its everyday life as a knower, as an owner, a master, a giver, a lover, a seeker of knowledge, a seeker of eternity, a success, or whatever.  But still as always, the Self being a slave to itself,  the thinker and its thoughts in the illusion of the Self, into a delusion by the Self.