Mirror Reflections, Photographic Images and Perception
Topics:
“Mirror Reflections, Photographic Images and Perception”
“Evolution of Photography and Sound Technology”
“Does Peanut Butter Cause Acid Reflux? ”
“How and Why Elias Expresses an Emotional Attitude”
“The Importance of the Inclusion of Emotional Expression in Transcripts”
Sunday, November 20, 2022 (Private/Phone)
Participants: Mary (Michael) and John (Rrussell)
(Audio begins partway through session)
JOHN: My whole thing is, if I look in the mirror – and we talked about this some sessions ago – I’m generally satisfied with how I look and I like how I look. If I look in the mirror, then I’m like, “Hey, I look pretty good!” You know? (Laughs) And I like my expression, but when it comes down to a picture it doesn’t capture what I know of myself in the mirror.
ELIAS: That’s because of perception. And in that, your perception of photographs is that they’re not actually true to your actual image.
JOHN: Oh.
ELIAS: But that’s simply because they don’t match your perception otherwise. But in that, I would also say that this is something that is very common, that people look at photographs, and for the most part most people don’t like their appearance in photographs. And the reason for that is that it doesn’t match what their perception of themself is.
JOHN: Yeah. Does a photograph capture in some manner the perception of the person who’s taking the photograph?
ELIAS: The photograph simply replicates the individual; it isn’t necessarily influenced in itself by you or by the individual that is taking the photograph. What I would say is, what happens is then the (pause) image that you see is actually (pause) THAT being what is colored by perception. Therefore what you see is going to be different from what the photographer sees or what someone else sees, but everyone’s view of a particular photograph will be colored by their perception at the time.
JOHN: It captures —
ELIAS: Therefore, you could look at a photograph of yourself and you could be expressing that you very much dislike it. Another individual can look at the identical same photograph and they could express the entire opposite.
JOHN: Can I make an analogy? Because I’m thinking of perception and light and, you know, everything in relation to the things that you generally talk about, what if there were twenty different people or a thousand different people, and they all have the same thing on their computer screen, and I came in and I said… Or let us make it simpler. There’s a few people, right? They all have a computer monitor – they all have their OWN computer monitor – and I’m coming in and I’m saying, “I’m going to take a screenshot of that monitor and it’s going to be this number of pixels, this number of height pixels and it’s going to appear relatively in this middle portion of the screen.” And I take the picture and that’s the picture, and it’s going to appear different on everybody’s monitor.
ELIAS: Correct.
JOHN: Okay. That’s not a very good analogy the more I think about it, because there’s a lot of holes in it but I’m thinking about it in the right way. Okay.
ELIAS: What I’m saying to you is (pause) it’s going to appear differently on everyone’s monitor only because they’re going to see it differently.
JOHN: Yeah. And their monitor will be tuned differently and all that stuff.
ELIAS: Mm… it’s more about each individual and what they see.
JOHN: Interesting.
ELIAS: Therefore, let me express it in a different manner. You could have all of those individuals and you could have ONE monitor; therefore, there’s only one picture.
JOHN: Yeah.
ELIAS: And every one of those individuals will see it differently.
JOHN: Right. But in actual fact, I do have my own picture that I’m creating with my perception, and somebody else has… well, what that same picture IS, but they’re creating it in their perception and… something like that.
ELIAS: Precisely.
JOHN: Yeah.
ELIAS: Yes.
JOHN: So that’s why I constructed my analogy of everybody having a different monitor, because I could have a curved monitor, somebody else could have a square monitor, somebody else could have a rectangular one. My colors are set up differently maybe on my monitor. Somebody else may have blue light blocking and so their view of the picture’s going to be different. In day-to-day parlance, on top of that they’re going to have their own individual opinion of the photograph, which does include perception, right? So both of those things are happening, right? There’s a maybe subjective, fundamental who-you-are happening in relation to you’re seeing the photograph, and then there’s more the closer-to-the-surface opinions and beliefs and things like that that shape your opinion of a photograph.
ELIAS: Correct.
JOHN: Both components. Okay. All right, I think I’ve got it.
While we’re talking about light capture and things like that, the photography has been… it’s like a 19th century technology that hasn’t changed a lot, and that’s probably something that can and will change substantively over the next hundred years.
ELIAS: No, actually I would disagree.
JOHN: Interesting.
ELIAS: I would say that photography has evolved considerably.
JOHN: Ah!
ELIAS: And that the equipment that is used in photography has evolved tremendously.
JOHN: Yeah. But it’s still… Like they’re all… You could argue that they’re all incremental improvements, right? I mean we’re still capturing light on a lens rather than capturing light by some other means that may be more efficient.
ELIAS: (Pause) Somewhat. Yes.
JOHN: Mm-hm. I’ve always felt that the same can be said of sound reproduction technology, right? I mean, it’s just (laughs)… My speaker cone is not all that different. Sure, incrementally it’s a heck of a lot better with better materials and all of that stuff versus a brass horn on a wax cylinder from the 19th century, right? But it’s still fundamentally the same thing, right? There has to be a better way of sound reproduction that does not involve necessarily this vibrating physical medium with electrical signals, right? I mean, there’s (laughs) got to be something else that’s more efficient and more robust.
ELIAS: Eventually.
JOHN: Eventually.
ELIAS: I would say.
JOHN: Yeah.
ELIAS: But I would also say that THAT has evolved tremendously also.
JOHN: Correct.
ELIAS: That your technology for reproduction in relation to image and sound has expressed a considerable leap in its evolution.
(Section deleted)
JOHN: I have a couple of questions. One quick question was: I get a little heartburn sometimes in the afternoon, and I can’t help but wonder if that’s due to peanut butter?
ELIAS: And why would you be assessing that?
JOHN: Ah, because… I don’t know. After I eat it I get a little bit of, like, heartburn. It’s almost like I can feel peanut butter in my chest.
ELIAS: (Laughs) Do you engage it after you eated (sic) it?
JOHN: Sorry?
ELIAS: Do you feel that after you eat it?
JOHN: Yeah.
ELIAS: Then what I would say is, experiment. Stop, and if you have no heartburn then incorporate it back into your diet and observe whether you have heartburn or not.
JOHN: Ah.
ELIAS: And what I would say is, it’s very possible.
JOHN: Okay.
ELIAS: It’s likely the fat.
JOHN: Interesting. Do I consume too many fats in general?
ELIAS: Not necessarily.
JOHN: No. Okay.
ELIAS: No.
JOHN: I didn’t think so. I think my diet is overall pretty good. I like to cheat and have my fun meals, but it’s okay.
ELIAS: Yes.
JOHN: Okay.
(Section deleted)
JOHN: I had a question I’ve always wanted to ask you, and I think I’ll probably have more of these as time goes. (Elias laughs) One thing I wondered…. If we’ve got about ten minutes I could cover both of them, but… You know, we’ve been having sessions for a number of years, and I know that you utilize emotion – when I say emotion, I mean in common parlance, so you know, your vocal inflection, how quickly you speak, interjecting laughter or any sort of – what’s the word I’m looking for? — that communicates or conveys those sorts of things that are common in human interaction. And I guess my question is, how precise are you about that? There is often a need to be exceptionally precise, or there’s often a desire to be exceptionally precise, or we ARE exceptionally precise in communicating as humans on earth? (Laughs) And you may not be able to reproduce that level of precision that we do in physical focus, though —
ELIAS: In relation to inflection and emotional attitudes?
JOHN: Yeah, inflection, emotional attitudes, all of those minutiae that go into voice communication.
ELIAS: Actually, I would say that for the most part I’m likely more accurate than most of you, because you add into conversations and interactions emotional attitudes, let us say, that are incorrect in relation to what you’re expressing. Therefore, you might be uncomfortable, and rather than expressing that you’re uncomfortable, you’ll laugh. (Pause)
JOHN: Yeah.
ELIAS: Which then conveys to another individual that you may be interacting with somewhat of a dismissal of what you’re expressing, and therefore it’s misleading.
JOHN: I follow you. I follow you. Interesting.
ELIAS: Therefore in that, I would say that when I’m expressing an emotional attitude, let us say, such as laughter, I’m expressing that in an appropriate context.
JOHN: Okay. And you express it knowing how the other person will perceive it and likely interpret it.
ELIAS: Yes.
JOHN: Okay. Okay. And when we have transcripts rather than audio, or if one is reading a transcript, the words themselves can stand alone.
ELIAS: They can. I would say that it’s always beneficial if the transcriber is also including some note, let us say, about what is occurring between myself and the other individual, because that generates more of a personal effect, which most people respond to better.
JOHN: Okay.
ELIAS: Because you are emotional beings, and therefore in that, that’s something that even in written form there is a factor that is important that that’s included.
JOHN: Okay.
ELIAS: When it’s not, the people lose interest in what they’re reading.
JOHN: Would it be simple enough for you to say a few sentences about the importance of emotional quality in communication but maybe don’t include any of the emotional additives at all? I’m curious to experience what that would be like.
ELIAS: Offer an example.
JOHN: You know, you add emotional additives to – as we were just talking about, right? – to what you’re saying. And if you were communicating to me or at me without those emotional additives, I would be interested in hearing what that sounds like in experiencing what that feels like.
ELIAS: I’ve been doing that with you in this conversation.
JOHN: Oh, you’ve been doing… Okay! Interesting. Because I remember in the Seth material there was a segment where the description sounds very boring and you lose interest, and I haven’t lost interest (laughs), so… But maybe I’m just interested in the topic, and so…
ELIAS: I understand. But this is what I was expressing to you, that even in written form, if there is no inclusion of any emotional expression, then the reader will lose interest relatively quickly.
JOHN: Yeah. Yeah.
ELIAS: Because you are emotional beings, and therefore that’s how you express yourselves, that’s how you listen, that’s how you hear. And when that isn’t included, the individual that is the listener or the reader has a tendency to wander in their attention.
JOHN: Mm.
ELIAS: Which is also the reason that I encourage the transcribers to be including those factors in the transcriptions, to be sharing pieces of emotional expressions that will keep the reader engaged.
JOHN: It’s remarkable that here I am, speaking to… If I really thought about it, I don’t even know if I believe it sometimes! (Laughs) I don’t mean it in the common sense of the word; it’s hard to believe that you’re you and I’m talking to somebody that’s —
[The timer for the end of the session rings]
ELIAS: I very much understand what you’re expressing. I would say that that is very understandable, that it would be challenging to believe that you’re actually engaging a conversation with a disembodied entity. (Pause)
JOHN: Yes.
ELIAS: It’s very understandable, because no one has returned from the dead. Therefore because of THAT, I would say that it’s something that you believe because there is enough evidence that tells you that what you are engaging is real and true and correct. But I would say that other than that, it’s very difficult to actually consider such an expression, (chuckles) because it’s not something that you have proof of in regard to anyone who has returned from the dead.
JOHN: That will change during the course of the Shift and veils dropping, if my understanding is correct.
ELIAS: It’s not that individuals will return from the dead but that already you are moving in a direction in which those veils are thinned enough that people are engaging with the dead more readily, and that, yes, is definitely a significant change in relation to how you perceive living and dead.
JOHN: And you’ve been communicating without any of those emotional additives?
ELIAS: In this conversation?
JOHN: Yeah, in this part of the conversation.
ELIAS: For the most part, yes.
JOHN: Okay, interesting. I actually found it kind of cool. (Both laugh) Yeah, it’s just sort of like… It almost FORCES me to focus more, and it makes it sort of more sci fi or, … you know. I don’t know.
ELIAS: I understand. (Chuckles)
JOHN: Yeah. This is fantastic, Elias. Thank you.
ELIAS: You are exceptionally welcome, my friend. I shall greatly be anticipating our next meeting, and I express tremendous, tremendous encouragement to you. I shall be expressing my energy with you as you engage with the other individuals at your job and with your questions.
JOHN: Thanks very much.
ELIAS: In tremendous love and affection to you, my dear friend, as always, au revoir.
JOHN: Au revoir.
(Audio excerpt ends after 26 minutes)
Copyright 2022 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.