You’re right of course. I want to end up with an embodied cognition, “systems” view where there’s no in-out distinction. One of the troubles I run into when trying to describe the physicality of the imagination is that some people take it as, “AND THEREFORE, THE IMAGINATION IS FALSE”, which is the opposite direction I want to go in.
Rather, I’d say the imagination *is* all we have, and it’s also physical and very real. How to express that properly? I haven’t figured that out yet.