When I say “Neural Protocols”, I mean the things such as “If this neuron fires, all of its connected neurons fire”, or “If one of THOSE connected neurons fires, then ITS own neighboring neurons are inhibited (due to neurotransmitters etc)”, and “..Which makes it easier for some other ones to fire, which may then excite or inhibit their own neighboring neurons”, etc etc….
Now, when I mean “Meta-Protocol” or “Meta-logic”, I mean in the most basic sense something like the kinds of protocol / logic that controls these protocols / logic, though it is much more than that as I will explain below.
The first definition of Meta-Logic is that, given that there are two neuron interactions (each interaction with a presynaptic neuron sending a signal to the postsynaptic neuron) going on—neuron interaction A and neuron interaction B—then it is what A is to B’s perspective, given that A is the logic or protocol that operates between its own presynaptic and postsynaptic neurons, and the same or B.
It is what a logical “protocol” is to another logical “protocol”. It is NOT the said logic itself involved in those protocols in that sense, but what it is “like” for the protocol (A) to “be” and “change” when met with other protocols (B) that affect each other. Not what it (logic) is to ourselves in a third-person, objective perspective, but what it means and what it is to the neural interaction protocols themselves, being and changing from its own subjective sense.
= How it creates itself and maintains itself, though not being the mere”itself”
–> In invoking meta-logic, they experience each other. This happens because in order for the logic of the neurons to be meddled with using their meta-logic, they have to experience each other’s logic first. This experience is not “stored” in any conventional physical means, but the neurons’ experiences of each other (and their logical protocols) are simply invoked by meta-logic, when seen from the meta-logic’s point of view. (In other words, the meta-logic experiences the logic in order to create itself, and our consciousness is built with meta-logic—how the brain experiences itself like the meta-logic of how a neuron interaction experiences another neuron interaction, but bigger.)
= What it’s like for it to control, change and interact with it (logic) self when neurons interact and develop their logic.
The second definition is that, the meta-logic or meta-protocol is the thing in which they follow when their neural protocols meet and interact with / add up to each other, “they” being neurons.
The third definition is that it’s a private language that the neural protocols (such as those involved in neural interactions A and B) use with each other to make changes to their logic / protocols.
–> To EXPRESS changes in their protocols, which comes in the form of Qualia.
–> Its (meta-logic) nature only allows it to be present between neural logic / neural protocols involved in neural interactions, because meta-logic is literally the way in which they control & interact with themselves. Thus, meta-logic can only be described in terms of what it’s like for a neural protocol / logic (in first person POV) with one another.
Adding on, Meta-logic gets to choose how itself is represented based on “what protocol A is to protocol B”. –> What its own logic / protocol MEANS to the other’s. Thus, what it’s like to BE each other (neurons) (while interacting with one another).**
Which then evolves into what it’s like for the brain to BE itself when experiencing itself through self-translation.
One can say that meta-logic is what it’s like for the neurons to interact with each other from their perspectives (described in terms of their own beingness or what makes their being “their being”). And since the entire brain thus interacts with itself, in the end the sum of all meta-logic for the brain to interact with itself is equal to how the brain experiences itself, which is how I would define consciousness.
**(But what kind of BE-ing will each different forms of meta-logic be? Obviously, the premise is that it depends on the logic of neural protocols a meta-logic considers itself to be.)
–> It forms itself out of the most basic unit of meta-logic.
–> But how does each meta-logic know which Qualia to express itself as?
–> Each expression, in using its building blocks, relates itself in terms of other meta-logic, in order to form their own selves / Qualia. Meta-logic “draws” itself based on how a protocol / logic relates (means to) another, from. their own perspective (in terms of their own “beingness”). If logic changes, then so does meta-logic, accordingly.
The being-ness that permeates neural logic, builds itself up to different forms of Qualia with “what it’s like for neurons to be & interact with themselves according to different logical (springing from the physical) neural protocols.”
–> More specifically, it has to do with what it’s like for them (neurons / clusters of neurons) to BUILD each other up into logical protocols, not for just one cluster of logical protocols, but for the ones that interact with it too.
(Meta-logic is triggered when each neurons and their logical protocols interact with each other, which then inevitably involves evoking each of their own “beings” (both objective and subjective) when making changes to their beings, including the subjective kind of “beingness” that makes their being into “their being”. After all, it is how their own beings, both objective and subjective, experience each other.)
