設萬維讀者為首頁 萬維讀者網 -- 全球華人的精神家園 廣告服務 聯繫我們 關於萬維
 
首  頁 新  聞 視  頻 博  客 論  壇 分類廣告 購  物
搜索>> 發表日誌 控制面板 個人相冊 給我留言
幫助 退出
 
中國現代哲學家學會  
發現自己的絕對力量,它會震驚世界  
網絡日誌正文
The Four Relationships of Human Interior 2025-05-23 09:55:28


The Four Relationships of Human Interior: Consciousness, Thinking, Mind, and Soul

By Wade Y. Dong

1. Consciousness and Thinking: Whole and Function

The first relationship is between consciousness and thinking.

Consciousness is the whole awareness, issued directly from AA (the Absolute Absolute). It is the light, not the object. It is passive, but foundational — nothing is known, felt, or thought without it.

Thinking is the symbolic function, active, structured, representational. It belongs to the RR layer, built on RA (logic, math, law), and manifested in language, judgment, and reasoning.

Their relationship follows the classical 2+1 model:

Consciousness is the Whole (1); Thinking is the Function (1).

They are ontologically distinct: consciousness is non-representable, formless, and whole; thinking is sequential, representational, and constructed.

Without consciousness, thinking is mere algorithm.

Without thinking, consciousness is silent, undifferentiated presence.

2. Consciousness and Mind: Issuance and Field

The second relationship is between consciousness and the mind.

The mind is not the origin of consciousness; it is its host — the relational field where consciousness appears, moves, and interacts with other contents (thoughts, emotions, memories).

The mind spans both AR (life) and RR (human systems). It is the instance within which the absolute whole (consciousness) is joined with the relative structures (thinking, memory).

Thus:

Consciousness is issued by AA; the mind is the living interface that receives and carries it.

Mind without consciousness is mechanistic — like a computer.

But consciousness without a mind has no field in which to manifest or relate.

3. Thinking and Mind: Function and Medium

The third relationship is between thinking and the mind.

Thinking is one of many functions within the mind — others include feeling, imagination, memory.

The mind serves as the medium through which thinking is executed, managed, and directed.

But unlike memory or emotion, thinking actively organizes the contents of mind using symbolic logic and recursive patterns.

Thus:

The mind is the space; thinking is one function among many, though it often dominates.

When thinking overrides all else, the mind becomes rigid and lifeless. When thinking is absent, the mind becomes chaotic or dreamlike.

4. Soul as the Relational Instance of All Three

The fourth relationship is not between two elements, but the result of their interrelation.

The soul is the Instance formed when:

- Consciousness (Whole)

- Thinking (Function)

are actively united within the Mind (Field)

In this way, the soul is not a separate substance but a unique connection — a living Instance where the Absolute and Relative meet through Life.

It follows the 2+1 Principle:

- 1 (Whole): Consciousness

- +1 (Function): Thinking

- +1 (Field): Mind

= Soul: the living, self-aware instance of human existence.

This makes the soul a unique, once-issued whole, a convergence of formless presence and structured function, lived in a temporally bounded instance.

Conclusion: The Interior as a Structured Instance

In summary:

Relationship | Description

-------------------------|----------------------------------

Consciousness–Thinking | Whole and Function (AA and RR)

Consciousness–Mind | Issuance and Field (AA to AR+RR)

Thinking–Mind | Function and Medium (RR within AR+RR)

Soul | The 2+1 Instance formed by their dynamic union

The human interior is not accidental. It is a relational construction, issued and shaped by the same ontological principles that structure the universe. The soul is the Instance of human being — alive, aware, and thinking — grounded in AA, expressed through RA, lived in AR, and symbolized in RR.

Only when all these elements align does a person become fully present — not just biologically alive, but spiritually whole.



瀏覽(1080) (1) 評論(4)
發表評論
文章評論
作者:中國現代哲學家學會 留言時間:2025-05-23 16:58:37

. The criticism in the screenshot primarily focuses on the use of the phrase "the four relationships of human interior", asserting that:

1. “Interior” is spatial and not suitable to describe internal brain functions.

2. “Human interior” is unidiomatic in English.

3. The article “the” was omitted.

4. The phrase is both grammatically and semantically awkward in native English.

Here’s a calm and scholarly response you could post, if you'd like to address the critique constructively and defend the philosophical intent behind the expression:

---

Response to Reader Comments on "The Four Relationships of Human Interior"

Thank you to all who have engaged critically with the phrase “the four relationships of human interior.” I appreciate the concern for linguistic precision, but I also invite readers to consider the philosophical purpose behind the phrase.

First, regarding “human interior”, it is true that this is not a standard collocation in everyday English. However, philosophical writing often stretches language to express concepts that ordinary usage cannot accommodate. “Interior” here is not merely spatial, nor anatomical. It is ontological and structural—referring to the inner configuration of what constitutes a human being's subjective instance. In this sense, “interior” deliberately defies idiomatic convention to carve out a conceptual space, much like “Dasein” or “noema” in continental thought.

Second, the critique about the article “the” is valid from a grammatical standpoint. The phrase should indeed be “the human interior” or perhaps “the interior of the human being.” However, I deliberately omitted “the” in some titles to retain philosophical sharpness and abstraction, following the minimalist titling style seen in many English-language philosophical works.

Lastly, this phrase belongs to a metaphysical framework—Instancology—that prioritizes the integrity of the instance as a whole over linguistic familiarity. Readers are encouraged to understand the term not through colloquial English but through the structural lens it was introduced in.

In closing, I welcome continued engagement—especially from readers who can help refine the balance between philosophical clarity and linguistic formality. Constructive dialogue is essential in the pursuit of truth.

(中國英語老師教的英語敢與質疑ChatGPT的英語!)

回復 | 0
作者:山貨郎 留言時間:2025-05-23 15:23:25

Interior 是個空間的概念, human interior 是神馬意思? 口腔, 腹腔還是腸腔? 英語裡沒有人用human interior來表示腦顱內部。interior 由經緯度和時間構成的空間, 你文字的標題 “the four relationships of human interior?" 犯了語義錯誤, 認知關係和interior這個空間沒有關係,是人腦的產物,而人腦是藏於腦顱內部空間的物質,不能用空間這個概念來代表空間所包含的物質, 你是哲學家,應該具有嚴謹的語義定義能力, 你可以說 ”The four relationships of the human brain cognitive capabilities or functions", 而不能說“The four relationships of human interior". 同樣的例子, 可以說: "the group interior relationships are tense.,不能說: ”the group interior is tense."


順便說一下,human interior 前面要加“the", 你犯了個基本的語法錯誤)。


恕不敬。


回復 | 0
作者:hare 留言時間:2025-05-23 11:24:39

以為我不知道茴香豆的茴有幾種寫法?!哼,小瞧人!ChatGPT 聽着,有中國人說你英語不如他

回復 | 0
作者:山貨郎 留言時間:2025-05-23 10:14:23

這麼多年了,您老的英語還停留在原地,沒有進步。標題既有語法英語語法錯誤也有語義錯誤。 你老自己琢磨琢磨吧。

回復 | 0
我的名片
中國現代哲學家學會
註冊日期: 2015-01-10
訪問總量: 1,586,559 次
點擊查看我的個人資料
Calendar
最新發布
· 為什麼在西方的多數華人愛美元更
· On the Dual Nature of the Abso
· 論“悟性”與“理性”在中西哲學中的
· The AA IS and IS NOT
· Why AA Cannot Be Falsified
· Two armies
· 人為什麼思考人生的意義——絕對在
友好鏈接
· Rabbit:Stinger 的博客
· hare:hare的博客
· bunny2:bunny2的博客
· microsoftbug:microsoftbug的博
· InstanceTV:InstanceTV的博客
分類目錄
【Mingcheng】
【心言】
· Free book: The Ontology of Nat
· 同學會會長關於哲學研究的對話(2
· 同學會會長關於哲學研究的對話
· 天下大勢
· 愛者共天地
· 死亡萬歲 -- 清明節留下的一縷思
· 重發: 哲學之愛從何而來?
· [中哲會]新程序啟動說明
· 哲學之愛從何而來?
【電視直播】
· USA-China in Depth (1)
· 《中哲會》TV直播頻道
【政治】
· 毛澤東的“民族解放”神話:專制的
· 為什麼中國人反駁西方理論的觀點
· 台灣立足基礎-造原子彈
· 中國人缺乏理性會有什麼後果?
· 您願意選誰作為第一屆“網絡中華
· 中國未來的社會結構(2)
· 我建議在萬維上進行一次中國未來
· 川普現在唯一的願望是當個“前總
· 範例黨黨員章程
· 談中國民運的戰略與策略(範例黨
【傳統文化】
· 國學與西方思想的區別是狗尾與貂
· 必須立刻彈劾川普!
· 沒文化的鬼子
· 新年伊始中國“十馬奔騰”
· 扯住教皇不放—今天世界哪個國家
· 為什麼中國讀書人很難擺脫中國文
· 中國人的“感性邏輯”
· 也談“中國知識分子墮落”
· "現在打中國,輸贏無懸念&q
· 說!“你脫,還是不脫?!”
【深山蘭】
· 從二例看中國古代的思維方式
【其它】
· 語言與國家:俞興文明進步論的學
· 胡杰紀錄片:無人區畫展
· 美國為什麼偉大?- 只因為一個充
· 六四用一句話說
· 華人應該如何與西方人交往?(1)
· 中國人”也”是同歐洲人一樣的理性
· 萬維有太多哲學誤導!
· 一月二十號白宮會發生哪一幕?
· 中國問題:文字
· 用事實駁斥中共關於朝鮮戰爭的謊
【比較政策】
· 階級分化的復甦
【一般】
· 中國為什麼不適合搞民主?
· 伯克利新名言:贏了-就是不認輸
· 什麼是今日美國社會的根本問題?
· 美國人打輸了還是朋友,中國人..
· 川普—你為什麼如此愚蠢?!
· 壓垮川普的最後一根稻草-喬治亞
· 看來川普...
· 中國對中國人的影響
· 中國文化在哪些方面體現了幼稚?
· 對中國人“批判”的看法 - 兼答金
【遠方】
· 介紹一下荒誕論:遠方的孤獨
【何岸泉】
· 辯證法與放屁(ZT)
【哲學資料】
· 為相對主義辯護
· Instancology for Philosophers-
· Ten American Philosophers
· (1)馬克思和恩格思的“唯物主義”
· Phenomenology of Spirit, Chapt
· 德國政府決定:在全球範圍對使用
· 為什麼人需要哲學?
· ZT:Rights
· Is your pet psychic?
· Twin Telepathy: Is there a ‘Sp
【中軍】
· 關於精神的問題
· 思維創新的哲學理解(下)
· 思維創新的哲學理解(上)
· 人生究竟是什麼
· 悟性創新的本性及閃失
· 悟性的創新及孩子的例證
· 怎樣進行討論
· 文字、語音、語義與創新
· 哲學研究能幹點兒啥
· 中國缺少創新的各種看法
【徒子】
· 為什麼在西方的多數華人愛美元更
· On the Dual Nature of the Abso
· 論“悟性”與“理性”在中西哲學中的
· The AA IS and IS NOT
· Why AA Cannot Be Falsified
· Two armies
· 人為什麼思考人生的意義——絕對在
· Reason is Inside the Box, RW I
· WuXing Beyond Reason: Why Whol
· 為什麼範式哲學類似哥德爾定理和
【嘎子】
· 關於丘成桐的講話的評論
· 已經轉到嘎子博客
· <二> 原本打算單獨寫一篇
· 哲學同真理的關係以及辯證法的本
【几子】
· What Will Happen to President
· 隨想:可口可樂
· 分形與卦像:漫話混沌,科學,與
· 淺議科學實證主義
存檔目錄
2026-02-02 - 2026-02-24
2026-01-01 - 2026-01-30
2025-12-01 - 2025-12-31
2025-11-01 - 2025-11-30
2025-10-02 - 2025-10-31
2025-09-01 - 2025-09-29
2025-08-03 - 2025-08-28
2025-07-01 - 2025-07-29
2025-06-01 - 2025-06-26
2025-05-01 - 2025-05-30
2025-04-01 - 2025-04-30
2025-03-06 - 2025-03-31
2025-02-04 - 2025-02-17
2025-01-23 - 2025-01-23
2024-11-10 - 2024-11-10
2024-08-21 - 2024-08-21
2024-07-28 - 2024-07-28
2024-05-13 - 2024-05-15
2024-03-13 - 2024-03-18
2024-02-06 - 2024-02-06
2024-01-02 - 2024-01-31
2023-12-22 - 2023-12-31
2023-11-05 - 2023-11-19
2023-10-03 - 2023-10-29
2023-09-08 - 2023-09-25
2023-08-12 - 2023-08-20
2023-07-15 - 2023-07-15
2023-06-12 - 2023-06-12
2023-02-02 - 2023-02-27
2023-01-01 - 2023-01-24
2022-12-06 - 2022-12-31
2022-11-30 - 2022-11-30
2022-09-04 - 2022-09-25
2022-08-01 - 2022-08-22
2022-07-01 - 2022-07-21
2022-06-04 - 2022-06-27
2021-03-01 - 2021-03-26
2021-02-02 - 2021-02-26
2021-01-01 - 2021-01-31
2020-12-16 - 2020-12-26
2020-11-03 - 2020-11-27
2020-10-02 - 2020-10-31
2020-09-03 - 2020-09-21
2020-08-07 - 2020-08-26
2020-07-02 - 2020-07-24
2020-06-06 - 2020-06-08
2020-05-01 - 2020-05-12
2020-04-02 - 2020-04-27
2020-03-01 - 2020-03-31
2020-02-04 - 2020-02-25
2020-01-01 - 2020-01-31
2019-12-01 - 2019-12-29
2019-11-02 - 2019-11-17
2019-10-09 - 2019-10-14
2019-09-01 - 2019-09-08
2019-08-01 - 2019-08-24
2019-07-01 - 2019-07-27
2019-06-01 - 2019-06-30
2019-05-04 - 2019-05-29
2019-04-01 - 2019-04-30
2018-01-01 - 2018-01-02
2016-04-14 - 2016-04-20
2015-07-02 - 2015-07-24
2015-06-02 - 2015-06-28
2015-05-01 - 2015-05-31
2015-04-01 - 2015-04-29
2015-03-01 - 2015-03-26
2015-02-01 - 2015-02-28
2015-01-10 - 2015-01-31
 
關於本站 | 廣告服務 | 聯繫我們 | 招聘信息 | 網站導航 | 隱私保護
Copyright (C) 1998-2026. Creaders.NET. All Rights Reserved.