Hatonn and one mind

[rva_jeremy]

It is simply a matter of perspective. You will find this kind of inconsistency across Confederation messaging, because (A) they are coming from a very different ontological and phenomenological experience than we are (in other words, their experience is full of "things" that we can't conceive of, and similarly, ours is full of "things" they at least have trouble reckoning with), and (B) terms like "mind" aren't even as concrete as we think they are using them in exactly the sense we normally use them. For example: does mind have a material basis? If not, does it exist? Is it an illusion? Is it an epiphenomenon of evolutionary and biological imperatives? Even modern psychology, philosophy, and neuroscience plays fast and loose with mind -- the issue is not whether it IS this or IS that, but what looking at it LIKE this or LIKE that can usefully tell us about this mystery. We should afford the Confederation the same flexibility to go beyond our A=A logical definitions! In fact, I'm not sure how much it helps to reconcile this logically. It might be more spiritually operative to instead abide within the inconsistency, and let it draw us to the deeper questions.

Great question though, I love Hatonn!