If you want to open your 3rd Eye...

duendy said:
hah...not surprised yer bored. you just think yerself yer just a load of chemicals init?

Ah, would that be the

lsd_3d_mid.jpg


.. talking duendy?
 
(throws arms up in te air in shcock awe and horror)....like i dine know LSD was a chemical. at least i have had IT PHLO-GENIUS...
annnd as usual, your clever-head gotten ahead of itself prusuumin

so to explain. yes i am very aware that one can imbibe chemicals to change consciousness. such as ciggies, cannbis, aspirin, wine, food, chocolate, sugar. coffee, alcohol, and psychedelics. this we know.
but this doesn't mean to see that consciousness is PRODUCED BY chemicals.
 
About the aliens invading ones yeah there not anymore. The luck. Guess ya know.
 
Guys...try some DMT or Psilocybe mushrooms. Kick the LSD.
Treat it as a spiritual journey or quest and you will discover. Just mess around and get messy results. Either way, there's more to life than questioning and analysing since this can only involve our intellect. Our intellect is limited, but our feelings are infinite, they cannot be spoken or explained to the extent that they deserve.
It obviously cannot be that creation itself thought, " oh, let's just put that here and that there...."
It is an expression, an expression of itself.
 
leopold99 said:
i don't know duendy
certain chemicals can indeed affect your consciousness
you have misunderstood soemwhat leo...
maybe my typo

let me make it clearer then. YES, taking chemicals DOES change consciousness--ie., food, coffeee, alcohol, tea, ciggies, sugar, ...and activities and emotions like love, hate, sex, etc....this is so

but because taking certain chemicals does change consciousness and certain emoions etc. tis does NOT man that chemicals and activities PRODUCE consciousness. what consciousness IS is unknown. mateialist ideology will claim consciousness is an epiphenomenon of complex matter. but tis is only theory. and there is the 'Hard Problem' (David Chalmers)--which exlores SUBJECTIVE consciousness

so summarizing. yes chemicals, emotions, a blow to the head, and brain disease--as in REAL disease, not what te mental health myth claimsis brain disease--all Do for sure change consciousness. But this doesn't mean they PRODUCE consciousness
 
bigal said:
Guys...try some DMT or Psilocybe mushrooms. Kick the LSD.

me)))))hmmmwell, in a way you cannot now get kosher LSD, cause what it was origially cut with is very rare/hard to get apparently. but i have to say the LSD experinces i had years ago when 15--m first psychedelic experiences were utterly profound and life changing and turned me onto Nature, after paterns and culture had driven into me a big city semantic fukup--i u get me?

Treat it as a spiritual journey or quest and you will discover. Just mess around and get messy results. Either way, there's more to life than questioning and analysing since this can only involve our intellect. Our intellect is limited, but our feelings are infinite, they cannot be spoken or explained to the extent that they deserve.
It obviously cannot be that creation itself thought, " oh, let's just put that here and that there...."
It is an expression, an expression of itself.
yes i agree. and nice to have you around for support...hehe. nice to meet you.
 
From experience I would say that a drug induced altered reality is actually lower and slows down the progression of conciousness. You will be a million times better if you never try drugs. Maybe in a million years the drugs will enable progression but the drugs avaliable today only lower it.
 
yes leopold, you control your chemicals by controlling your consciousness.

LeeDa, I don't know, it definitely sped mine up. DMT is in your brain right now, it is in most, if not all living things. If you've been through a relentless conditioning program since birth as most of us have, drugs can fix it quickly.
 
leopold99 said:
if chemicals can affect conciousness doesn't that mean it is chemically related?

Your confusing 'affecting' with 'producing' which are not the same

"If the matter of the brain (neurons, molecules, atoms, etc) is WHOLLY insentient (without the slightest trace of consciousness) then how is it possible that such matter could 'produce' an ENTIRELY NEW from of existence? namely the SUBJECTIVITY of consciousness?"
(Christian de Quincey--private communication)
 
duendy said:
Your confusing 'affecting' . . .
you might be confusing my meaning duendy

my meaning is
if chemicals can affect conciousness then conciousness is related to chemicals

that is my meaning
 
leopold99 said:
you might be confusing my meaning duendy

my meaning is
if chemicals can affect conciousness then conciousness is related to chemicals

that is my meaning
ahhaha of course. but this doesn't mean chemcals PRODUCE consciousness.....
what we got. we have matter-energy, matter energy will include ALL forms of matter-energy INCLUDING atoms, quarks, and checmicals.
qnd we have consciousness. although they--matter-energy and consciousness are ALWYS togther yet they are distinct. consciousness isn't 'IN' matter-energy like say brain is in te skull, rather consciousness is how matter-energy feels inside
so i dont know hwy you persist wit this. i sense you are trying to claim tat chemicals someway produce consciousness, as in epiphemononalism. is that right?....
we believe rathe brain is like a transFORMER OF consciousness. NOT a producer
 
duendy said:
so i dont know hwy you persist wit this. i sense you are trying to claim tat chemicals someway produce consciousness, as in epiphemononalism. is that right?....
not at all
frankly i do not see how chemical reactions can produce thought processes
but it must

so do you want to talk paradox?
 
leopold99 said:
not at all
frankly i do not see how chemical reactions can produce thought processes
but it must

so do you want to talk paradox?
it's only 'paradox' if you see a dualism between consciousness and matter-energy, and/or claim either matter/energy or consciousness is more significant than one another.
 
This thread has turned into. A Bashing thread. If anyone has been thinking why I haven't posted in this thread after the initial post it was for that reason.
 
a) No body was thinking about that Muslim.
b) What do you expect? This is sciforums, not the Royal Society
 
Back
Top