The reason I mention this is to place a different spin on traditional exploration. Instead of trying to "find" anything, why not instead recognize, in the most simple of terms, how we come to understand anything at all (i.e. the process by which we know) and see what that might tell us about reality instead? Recognizing the self-evident truth that objective content and perception are logically inseparable has vast implications on reality in and of itself, and it can even tell us a hell of a lot about things that we haven't explored or don't know about yet.
The funny thing about perception is that it occurs in the mind, and from this lofty perch of conscious liberty, Man declares his right to
ignore objective content seemingly "at will"...
Mind is the first and most direct thing in our experience (objective content). This makes memories the best, perhaps the only criterion of personal identity.
SourceBy
virtue of his reason, Man recognizes a thing with his mind; however, thinking is not an automatic function and the act of focusing one's consciousness is volitional; furthermore, No concept Man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of his knowledge.
Source"Thinking is man’s only basic virtue, from which all the others proceed. And his basic vice, the source of all his evils ... [is] the willful suspension of one’s consciousness, ... the refusal to know. It is the act of inducing an inner fog to escape the responsibility of judgment—on the unstated premise that a thing will not exist if only you refuse to identify it, ... Non-thinking is an act of annihilation, a wish to negate existence, an attempt to wipe out reality ... By refusing to say “It is,” you are refusing to say “
I am.” By suspending your judgment, you are negating your person. When a man declares: “Who am I to know?” he is declaring: “Who am I to live?”"
SourceThe problem of how we access our memories is one of the most difficult in psychology. Dr. Stevenson found that some child memories relate to a previous existence. This additional problem can only be solved by postulating the survival of some part of the mind beyond physical death. If there is no death of mind, then what is the source of mind?
"It is strong confirmation of any theory that proofs converging from many and varying classes of phenomena unite in establishing it".--The Hon. Robert Dale Owen
Now, consider the fact is that this Grandmother managed to write a 200-page book EVERY 3 WEEKS FOR YEARS, hundreds of books in total. How was this prodigious output, covering such a wide range of topics, possible? Please do not be too quick to reject the truthful answer, that she scribed DIRECTLY for our Heavenly Father, exactly as stated. There probably has NEVER been a scribe so well connected — including all of the great ones acknowledged in all of the holy books.
Source for Phoenix Journals