Now friends, if you have been following along with this extraordinary, One time opportunity to access your very own transhuman cephscope in compelling acts of introception Once Upon a Time Called “Right Now!”, you might be wondering just what It is that can be glimpsed through said cephscope. After all, even early users of the telescope had a hard time convincing their brethren that by pointing the thing at the cosmos, anything, like the Galiean moons, could be glimpsed. So you can be forgiven, even encouraged, in your skepticism. Franklin Merrell Wolff, whose terminological technology of “introception” functions as the very software of the cephscope, offers the already mentioned and highly compressed answer: “Consciousness-without-an-object-is.”
Now this is a definition that is at once operating through negation and affirmation. If we behold the cephscope and introcept, FMW tells us, “we” behold no objects whatsoever. Now, to those of us moving freely about the world of matter, this may seem like nada at all. But this Nothing, FMW insists, is hardly lacking: objects are the very interruption of consciousness-without -an-object, like that pesky country station that keeps crowding out the songs you try to stream from your Ipod over your car radio. Here FMW is close to another relatively unknown American sage, Alfred Pulyan, who remarks that the ego, on the prowl for objects, is the “penny that blots out the sun.” Tiny, insignificant, not worth much, and in the fracking way. Like a penny, the ego can be eminently useful, but it is by no means all-that-is, and often blocks our view of reality.
But recall the affirmation that goes along with the negation of being “without-object”: For “Consciousness-without-an-object”, despite being without objects, and blocked by our ordinary consciousness-with-objects, most definitely IS. This Isness can be encountered only by focusing consciousness away from the world of objects. We might, for example, look beyond the planets, the stars, the galaxies, parasecs and light years of stuff, back to the Big Bang, if we find such a model useful. Beyond the cosmos of objects and its 13.7 million year drama, we just might glimpse consciousness-without-an-object. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word as of yet had no object.”
But in mobius’s limited experience, the cephscope works better when the mind focuses back onto the mind rather than the world of objects. Indeed the cephscope can be part of a way of realizing there is an “inner” landscape as well as an “outer” one in this here mobiused world. And what one beholds is not this or that, but That, the condition of the appearance of any objects whatsoever. It is appropriate that FMW refers to this historically “divine” thought with the Greek term noos. FMW tells us that if we introcept, we get our noesis on:
“Now for terms, the word which best fits this type of knowledge is a term derived from Greek sources; it is the word „noetic‟. We‟ll proceed now to a consideration of the meaning of this term. The word noetic is derived from the substantive form noos—a highly important and perhaps the most important philosophic term in Greek usage. It is to be found employed by the pre-Socratic Greek thinkers as well as by Plato and Aristotle themselves, and by the post-Platonic thinkers such as Plotinus.” (FMW, An Abstract of the Philosophy Part 13 of 14)
Why believe FMW? You’re just going to have to take a look through the cephscope yourself, because if “consciousness-without-an-object-is”, it IS a consciousness-without-words, beheld in the eloquence of silence. Very quietly now, in stillness and surrrender, just say yes to the noösphere!