Oh, I suppose it's even worse than that. I'm saying we don't even know how "knowledge storage" works, let alone which implications it has for various metaphysical underpinnings of the models of understanding we're employing. But staying on the functional level might indeed suffice at any rate. Calling this "abstract" seems like sort of a reversal of things, though. The first-person perspective is primary to everything else, but sometimes that gets forgotten, due to the way modern (mainstream) discourse works. The _actual_ abstraction, in this sense, would be starting to chop up bodyliness into subsections each with their own agency. That's what removes us from what's given. But again, this is not a common/mainstream way of talking about these things, so it might seem strange. The philosophical field is ripe with these sorts of considerations. Basically, it's super hard to get properly past dualism (to "stomp it out", as it were), but there are traditions that work very hard to do just that.