I was just using "neuralese" as a placeholder for what neurologists and cognitive scientists will end up discovering as they untangle how the brain-mind works.
I agree that art is likely a means of acquiring self-knowledge as we talk to ourselves and enter that feedback loop.
We've talked about this a lot before, but the main problem I have with the mystical or monistic view of our impersonal identity as something like underlying universal consciousness is that I don't see how doing so could sustain a progressive historical development. I understand that modernity's emphasis on progress is having the opposite, disastrous effect, but at least there's a coherent picture of the existential struggle between the indifferent environment and the self-interested individual life form.
The monist may think that narrative is wrongheaded or metaphysically baseless. But what are enlightened monists supposed to _do_ with themselves? What's the basis of their morality?
I recently had a lengthy dialogue with a Zen Buddhist on this topic, in the Medium comments. You might be interested in reading it. Mind you, it didn't end so well: he got frustrated with how I was challenging his explanations. Most of it starts here:
