ExploringReality

What Is Context? ⚠️

137 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

How does this relate to my questions above? What is your experience of context? What do you "hold" it to be?

Words and context are fleeting and limited. They arise and disappear in the mind. But the essence behind all words, the love, which is reflection of pure being that connects is the Self / Being itself. 

True understanding transcends language and is the direct awareness of the reason behind the creation of words.


"It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Human Mint said:

Probably, but it's always worth to investigate even more. If I ever have the answer I'll def share them

Whatever contributes to the discussion - including doubts and questions. What comes to mind whenever you look into 'context'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Whatever contributes to the discussion - including doubts and questions. What comes to mind whenever you look into 'context'?

For example, I can have a negative reaction when someone says something to me. But then I understand more about that person, so I can review their attitude with different perspective, and the context broadens. That is what I understand for recontextualization, and I don't see why you could not extrapolate it to meta levels.

But at the same time, it is you who decides to have more or less context, thus why I emphasize on the mind. I don't really have doubts that reality is my own mind, although to a certain extent I do when it comes to everyday living. It would take so much more to embrace it as much as possible. It is just a question of how much will it take me.

Does any of this resonates with you? What do you think context is? Is context and assumption interconnected?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

This one is really troubling me. I don't know what it is at all.

I get an impression in my mind it is like the background that defines the foreground. 

I like the analogy.

Quote

Invisible but causal. The tricky part is it doesn't show up as part of the 'thing', but it determines how the 'thing' shows up. No separation between the thing it gives meaning to but co-arises with it. Like a paradox - separate but together.

That seems to be going in a real direction.

Implicit, yet present throughout any given event, process, or activity - perhaps in how it is interpreted.

The recipient and the content.

The operating system and the applications.

A social setting and the subject of discussion.

In a sense, we already recognize context in many situations. Yet there also seems to be a deeper aspect to it.

12 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Damn it, it was Wittgenstein, not Heidegger. Wrong German-speaking philosopher. Language got me there, heh. Maybe because I'm not fluent in Western philosophy, or German 🫠

Thanks for the context.

12 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

So by the above, context is the condition of possibility for a thing to be what it is?

Sounds good! "Condition of possibility for a thing to be what it is." The condition of possibility seems synonymous with 'space.'

But what would the thing be in this case? Without context, wouldn't the thing simply be whatever it is in itself? Contextualizing it would provide a different way to relate to it. For example, pouring water (let's call this the 'content') onto the floor (the context) is different from pouring water into a vase, a printer, a dam, or a shoe - yet the water remains essentially the same in all those cases, does it not? Just some considerations.

Take a squiggle like freytfs. Prior to applying context to it, we could claim it is what it is in and of itself - that thing (freytfs). When the context or possibility of language is added back, that nonsensical drawing can be made sense of as a 'symbol' (implying it is now being recognized as something that is "languaging," even if it doesn't make sense in any particular language). What if I told you the word was Norwegian? That would likely change how you perceive it - maybe you'd want to check its original meaning (I just made it up, by the way.)

Bringing up language might be muddying the waters, I think. Where's @Water by the River?

Quote

But then, looking at it ontologically - appearing is being - but then this contextual thing only appears within a field? FUCK 

No context - no thing?

WHAT 

WHAT

:P

Can we change our context of living life from 'self-inversion' to 'self-expansion'?

Edited by UnbornTao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James123 said:

Words and context are fleeting and limited. They arise and disappear in the mind. But the essence behind all words, the love, which is reflection of pure being that connects is the Self / Being itself. 

True understanding transcends language and is the direct awareness of the reason behind the creation of words.

Thanks for that. Are you saying that the mind is a context?

Edited by UnbornTao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Human Mint said:

For example, I can have a negative reaction when someone says something to me. But then I understand more about that person, so I can review their attitude with different perspective, and the context broadens. That is what I understand for recontextualization, and I don't see why you could not extrapolate it to meta levels.

But at the same time, it is you who decides to have more or less context, thus why I emphasize on the mind. I don't really have doubts that reality is my own mind, although to a certain extent I do when it comes to everyday living. It would take so much more to embrace it as much as possible. It is just a question of how much will it take me.

Does any of this resonates with you? What do you think context is? Is context and assumption interconnected?

Nice, thank you. Your first paragraph does resonate. About your second one: just be careful not to confuse a belief with an insight. We don't need to believe in anything - especially when our experience tells a different story. It's better to leave it as an open question until one becomes personally conscious of what's actually true.

I'm not clear on that yet. For now, it goes something like this: the space, possibility, or condition that determines how a thing - or a set of things- "shows up" for us. I'm also not exactly sure what "showing up" means here.

Any given context brings forth sets of assumptions with it, as I currently see it. Among other things, context may give rise to a world of assumptions within a particular subject. It might actually be what allows for a group of inter-related assumptions to exist. What is it to contextualize something?

An example of a profound context I've used before: the self determines how your experience is held by you - like the operating system of experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Thanks for that. Are you saying that the mind is a context?

Anytime my brother.

Yes, The mind is a context.


"It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, James123 said:

Anytime my brother.

Yes, The mind is a context.

Got it. And what does it mean that it is a context? You said words and context arise and disappear in the mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Got it. And what does it mean that it is a context? You said words and context arise and disappear in the mind.

Imagine every thought triggering another, forming a vast network.

For example, by thinking we have a body and a brain, and believing it. That's how we create our so called reality.

Each thought sparks the next.

As I said before, the mind is a context.

But when you go deeper, you see that the mind, the universe, context, enlightenment, and every word are all just thoughts.

And when one simply observes these thoughts, one clearly sees that truly there is nothing there. 


"It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James123 said:

Imagine every thought triggering another, forming a vast network.

For example, by thinking we have a body and a brain, and believing it. That's how we create our so called reality.

Each thought sparks the next.

Wouldn't 'system' be a more accurate term for that?

Quote

As I said before, the mind is a context.

But when you go deeper, you see that the mind, the universe, context, enlightenment, and every word are all just thoughts.

And when one simply observes these thoughts, one clearly sees that truly there is nothing there. 

We could also stay grounded, since it's tempting (and easy) to extrapolate. In any case, if we agree that what you said above might be better described as a system, with the mind as its context, what exactly are you saying when you claim that the mind is a context? The space where thoughts occur? Is that how you see context? Or perhaps as the possibility for the existence of thought (since we're using 'mind' as an example of context here.)

Edited by UnbornTao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Wouldn't 'system' be a more accurate term for that?

Yes, "system" is accurate too, like matrix 😊 

9 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

what exactly are you saying when you claim that the mind is a context? The space where thoughts occur?

Mind is thought that appear in consciousness or Truth, however, when closely observed, there is actually no thought therefore no mind.

6 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Is that how you see context?

Yes.


"It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ExploringReality What about my definition is lacking? 

"A dynamic, nested possibility space, shaped by constraints and defined by perspective."

Edited by Joshe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Any given context brings forth sets of assumptions with it, as I currently see it. Among other things, context may give rise to a world of assumptions within a particular subject. It might actually be what allows for a group of inter-related assumptions to exist.

Interesting thought here. Maybe it can be seen as, for example, in communication: the context of a communication being the substrate of multiple frames of assumption coherently merging - to facilitate understanding of a set of symbols (as opposed to things).

That is - looking at it purely as context within the social domain. 

Bit off track, side thought


Deal with the issue now, on your terms, in your control. Or the issue will deal with you, in ways you won't appreciate, and cannot control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Interesting thought here. Maybe it can be seen as, for example, in communication: the context of a communication being the substrate of multiple frames of assumption coherently merging - to facilitate understanding of a set of symbols (as opposed to things).

That is - looking at it purely as context within the social domain. 

Bit off track, side thought

Upon re-read this sounds like telepathy. 

I suppose the benefit to telepathic connection and communication would be context is transmitted along with the 'distinction'. Less misunderstanding.

Sort of like the entirely of what is 'Christmas' being sent - the tree, the ham, the turkey (fucken yum yum, its obviously lunchtime in Australia), the reason for celebration: birth of Christ (hearsay, goddamit) . As opposed to describing Christmas along with the historical context in a linear method using language. 

Anyway back to the topic - apologies. This one was with @Carl-Richard in mind :P 


Deal with the issue now, on your terms, in your control. Or the issue will deal with you, in ways you won't appreciate, and cannot control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Joshe said:

@ExploringReality What about my definition is lacking? 

"A dynamic, nested possibility space, shaped by constraints and defined by perspective."

It's not wrong but there is a philosophical tension here. 

It's a model of context but, a way of looking at it but doesn't pin it down. It's a context dependent frame of looking at context because the context depends on epistemological perspectives, frames, space ect... It does reflect a perspective of context but doesn't necessarily grasp the essence of Context. It's a contextual statement, therefore not any final truth about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Natasha Tori Maru

Let's imagine a gun to our heads, lol for shits n giggles. What is context? Am I thinking about this correctly? What am I missing in my inquiry? Am I thinking about this properly?

Any image, ideas or ways of explaining the true nature of context is within a context. Dannmm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We think and talk through a fractal  labyrinth colored field of any possible context, but what is context itself for itself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ExploringReality Holographic 

Is there context to a slap in the face?


Deal with the issue now, on your terms, in your control. Or the issue will deal with you, in ways you won't appreciate, and cannot control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now