Explain this to me? I'm confused?

Question

"Briefly put, the conception is that mind is the one ultimate reality; not mind as we know it in the complex forms of conscious feeling and thought, but the simpler elements out of which thought and feeling are built up. The hypothetical ultimate element of mind, or atom of mind-stuff, precisely corresponds to the hypothetical atom of matter, being the ultimate fact of which the material atom is the phenomenon. Matter and the sensible universe are the relations between particular organisms, that is, mind organized into consciousness, and the rest of the world. This leads to results which would in a loose and popular sense be called materialist. But the theory must, as a metaphysical theory, be reckoned on the idealist side. To speak technically, it is an idealist monism

Answer 1

It's jargon, meaning it is overwritten.

Answer 2

Who said that? It's been about 10 years since I've studied philosophy, but I'll do my best.

The author is saying
a) That we are living only in our own minds - we know the world from the standpoint of our mind.
b) However, he says this should not be confused with complex thoughts, but with simpler things (atomic elements of the mind)
c) You may think of an atomic element of the mind as a color, a sound, a feeling, etc... if that helps, but the author seems to believe these elements can not be known. (They come packaged into consciousness so that we can't dissect them completely.)
d) What we know as matter, things, etc..., is a relationship between these elements that the mind puts into relation. This happens so fast we are not truly conscious of it.
e) He rejects materialism on the basis what we see as matter has already been processed by the mind. A series of atomic sense data (what the author calls monads) are packaged together before we have a chance to analyze them. That's why he thinks, as opposed to materialism, that our mental reality is made up of consciousness.

It's post-modern metaphysics, whatever it is, so it's pretty abstract stuff, whatever you make of it. Best of luck to you.

Answer 3

Yes, but on a sub-atomic level there are only six things that actually exist and everything else in the physical world is a resultant composite or combination of those things. Reality is what those things create, what's actually here in physical material form right now, and not a result of the whims or fancy's of the human mind.

Indeed this reality is changeable, but it proceeds, and has structured, arranged and influenced the consciousness and thought processes of the human mind to recognize, survive and exist in this reality. In other words, overly delusional humans didn't last long in the Jungle?

To keep a mental reality in perspective, I find this "mantra" if you will, to be helpful in avoiding a state of confusion, and keeping an objective handle on reality.

Reality... is what you are, when you are, where you are???

Answer 4

the first part sounds like it's saying ''perception is a paradoxical truth'' in that it's true for each person, but not any one person's truth is the same.

then it sounds like it's saying that everyone's mind is still made up of the same stuff...atoms. ''mindstuff'' as it calls it; and that's the phenomenon -- that all minds are made up of atoms, yet not one perceives like any other.

matter and the sensible universe are defined as ''minds organised into consciousness'' and ''the rest of the world.''

then it looks back on what it just stated and says ''this sounds like it's essentially a materialistic point of view'' (meaning that thought, feeling, the mind, etc. can be explained in terms of ''just atoms'' and physical things.), but that it is indeed a metaphysical theory (mind over matter type stuff), but it must be looked at ''on the idealist side'' meaning in spite of what it ''sounds like'' it just said, it's a metaphysical theory; idealist monism, meaning unrealistic/visionary metaphysical.

Answer 5

Piddy, your verbose concepts of the mind are liberally riddled with extreme convolution of an erratically irrational nature that is wholly not reflective nor has its rudimentary basis in traditional and established philosophical precepts and prerequisites. Evidently, it is vivid and obvious that you need to primarily establish yourself as an astute scholar of authentic philosophical literature, hypotheses and theories first and foremost "before" you can be properly equipped to even begin to postulate “new” conjecture in the philosophical field.

Answer 6

It is explaining in a very convoluted way that Ultimate Reality is one universal mind. I think.

You might find this link helpful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

Answer 7

I would do some research into Zendo Meditation, monistic idealism, then (oddly enough this sounds like it could be a passage straight from this book) I'd read, Amit Goswami's "The Self Aware Universe"

Answer 8

*Yawns and Stretches* Geez take a breath. Thinking deeply is OK, but you've mixed Science, faith, fantasy, theory, and words you might offer definitions for.

I suspect NO ONE alive can truly answer what the ULTIMATE anything is, and it's relative and subjecting anyway.

Answer 9

I think the brevity has been replaced by monotony of non-existent thought processes transcribed to words without meaning.

Answer 10

I have GOOD NEWS for you ! You're completely wrong.