I moved my last post from the "We are not always thinking" thread to start this thread because its subject matter, although not contrary to the "not thinking" thread took me into a different direction, that of looking at the nature of thinking. Both Dennis and Cahoot's responses are included.
Pam: A thought that came to me just a few moments ago is that the language of reasoning is the language of identity, the language of Self. I can tell you I am a mother but that is a dead wood, a nothingness thought. Now, if you ask me why I had children, or why did I have two children and not ten children and I choose to answer you, all of a sudden, I come alive, I am reasoning (languaging) Pam-as-a-mother into reality. And, included in that reasoning-reality, and perhaps Diebert this is what you were getting at with your capstone-pyramid-image, is everything contained in consciousness that supports that particular revelatory moment of Pam-as-mother: feelings, memories, projections, etc. A revelatory moment of unseen causes and conditions that of course can never be duplicated, this is the wonder and glory of the language of reasoning: no two are alike.
What I posit from the above is that the language of reasoning has nothing to do with truth and everything to do with what is being made real. In other words, when you give me your reasons, you are giving me your reality. It could be said that a conversation between two reasoning minds enlightened as to the true nature of reasoning is having fantabulous mental sex and that every reason given is a beloved child born of perfect love.
Dennis: Ponzi scheme?
Cahoot: There is only one reality.
Memories are changing constructs.
Memories of intent are interpretations relative to the one reality, and reasoning applied to memory provides the interpretation, which affects cognition of the present.