4 ms·
These aren't symbolic, they're literal neural and retinal references externalized. This is one of the most commonly understood subfields in the Paleolithic ht
by mallowdram 1y ago
These aren't symbolic, they're literal neural and retinal references externalized.
This is one of the most commonly understood subfields in the Paleolithic
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2743395 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2743395
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entoptic_phenomenon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entoptic_phenomenon
- dboreham 1y agoI clicked and read. This is bonkers wrong. They're definitely not that.
- mallowdram 1y agoAre you pretending to know? This is an entire field of study, Paleolithic cave art references and phosphene phenomena, there's hundreds of papers about this. We can verify the scales on cave walls and the distance to optic, literally where someone could stand to reexperience the entoptic. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287487106_Does_the_Nervous_System_Have_an_Intrinsic_Archaic_Language_Entoptic_Images_and_Phosphenes https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287487106_Does_the_...
- BrenBarn 1y agoIt is true that this is a hypothesis that has been made, but it's a reach to say that "we know that's what these are".
- mallowdram 1y agoIt's not simply hypothesis, it's already at the theoretic stage, empirical evidence has been gathered from two fields. Any scientist knows that there are never conclusions, there are only regularities pointing to correlations within limits. These limits have been reached by matching scales.