There is no soul and no afterlife.
- Thread starter G0D
- Start date
- Status
wayne_92587
Registered Senior Member
Re: Re: Babeling-on
pick one assertion and we can discus it.
pick one assertion and we can discus it.
Re: Re: Re: Babeling-on
~Raithere
Let's start at the top.
Although I find the wording to be somewhat redundant I agree that the first sentence is accurate as a quality of consciousness. But from what do you infer the existence of something beyond the "Material World" and what is it?
~Raithere
Sppokz,
Try -
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9, ahh a triangular block
10,
11,
12 – ahh magic.
How about building a house with a single brick, at what level of complexity will magic occur?
How about increasing the atomic weight of an element, at 6 magic occurs since that is carbon and life appears, at 14 (silicon) computers seem to take on a life of their own.
How about the internet? This began with 3 systems in 1968, by 1988 it had 500 systems, by 1998 it had become a worldwide phenomenon and had changed the nature of business and communications for the whole planet.
Wherever we look there appears to be thresholds of complexity which give rise to unique ‘magical’ phenomena. Why wouldn’t the neural complexity in the evolution of the brain be any different?
Construct a cube with 2 sticks.
Try -
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9, ahh a triangular block
10,
11,
12 – ahh magic.
How about building a house with a single brick, at what level of complexity will magic occur?
How about increasing the atomic weight of an element, at 6 magic occurs since that is carbon and life appears, at 14 (silicon) computers seem to take on a life of their own.
How about the internet? This began with 3 systems in 1968, by 1988 it had 500 systems, by 1998 it had become a worldwide phenomenon and had changed the nature of business and communications for the whole planet.
Wherever we look there appears to be thresholds of complexity which give rise to unique ‘magical’ phenomena. Why wouldn’t the neural complexity in the evolution of the brain be any different?
ahh
perhaps like two different chemicals combining and giving rise to a new property that is not inherent or discernible in them individually? (or something like that)
perhaps what i described is commonplace and is not a valid comparison with objects gaining self awareness due to evolving complexity
perhaps like two different chemicals combining and giving rise to a new property that is not inherent or discernible in them individually? (or something like that)
perhaps what i described is commonplace and is not a valid comparison with objects gaining self awareness due to evolving complexity
wayne_92587
Registered Senior Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Babeling-on
True it was redundant, with intent.
What is it ?
Reality created by the Imagination.
Freedom, boundlessness, emptiness, nothingness, the Singularity of Time and Space, Illusion, lies, misconceptions of truth, deception, guile, duplicity.
Ugliness, Evil, the past, the future, thoughts ideas as to the potentiality of Reality, Reality that could be, Reality as it should be.
Names given to non-existent Realities, non-Be-ings, Illusion.
Imaginary Realiities, Fantasies, Graven Images of Reality.
Man has a sense of Realities that he is not able to put into words. Free Will as an example.
What is Free Will?
Man's would not exist if it were not for his sixth sense, the Imagination, Freedom of Mind, Free Will, that is able to conceive of, that is sensible to Realities that do not exist as a Material Reality, Reality that exists only as a potentiality of Reality.
The Consciousness of the Flesh is sensible only to the Reality of the moment, the Here and Now.
Time is Temporal it is not a Physical Reality.
True it was redundant, with intent.
What is it ?
Reality created by the Imagination.
Freedom, boundlessness, emptiness, nothingness, the Singularity of Time and Space, Illusion, lies, misconceptions of truth, deception, guile, duplicity.
Ugliness, Evil, the past, the future, thoughts ideas as to the potentiality of Reality, Reality that could be, Reality as it should be.
Names given to non-existent Realities, non-Be-ings, Illusion.
Imaginary Realiities, Fantasies, Graven Images of Reality.
Man has a sense of Realities that he is not able to put into words. Free Will as an example.
What is Free Will?
Man's would not exist if it were not for his sixth sense, the Imagination, Freedom of Mind, Free Will, that is able to conceive of, that is sensible to Realities that do not exist as a Material Reality, Reality that exists only as a potentiality of Reality.
The Consciousness of the Flesh is sensible only to the Reality of the moment, the Here and Now.
Time is Temporal it is not a Physical Reality.
wayne_92587
Registered Senior Member
table salt
wayne_92587
Registered Senior Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Babeling-on
An Illusion is a Reality, a lie is the Truth.
If an Illusion were not a Reality, the Illusion would not exist.
If Lie were not the Truth the lie would not exist.
An Illusion is a Reality, a lie is the Truth.
If an Illusion were not a Reality, the Illusion would not exist.
If Lie were not the Truth the lie would not exist.
I cannot demonstrate it. This is very annoying but it's the nature of things. The best I can do for research is introspection, exploring what states of consciousness are provably possible.
Depict the experiences? I don't think it's possible to depict an experience. However it is possible to be in a state of consciousness in which one feels oneself to beyond the physical world and in which all else seems to be a mental construct. One has a strong sense that everything is part of one consciousness, which in a way is oneself, and that this is an alternative and truer way of understanding the phenomenal world than our normal way.
I could talk about bliss, emptiness, oneness, happiness and stuff, but those sort of words don't mean anything without the experience. I'm too lazy to have gone very far down this road, but I've done enough to know that these states of consciousness are possible, and that they are not mystical. They are just what's always there behind the distractions of ones mind, and that you don't have to be a monk to experience them, just a conscious being.
I think that we have to accept that consciousness can exist in the absence of physical complxity until we have some evidence that it isn't. That's just open-mindedness. If a thing can't be shown to be impossible then we must accept it is possible for the time being.
The one thing personal experience does seem to demonstrate is that thinking is not necessary to an experience of existing, and that one doesn't have to be an ageing monk to prove it to oneself. Human consciousness is at least capable of being a much simpler thing that our normal mind/matter experience of it.
That doesn't prove anything about physical complexity of course, since I am a complex physical entity. Still, it shows that simple states, states that would not require such complicated brains, are at least possible.
Sorry I didn't reply earlier everneo, I missed your post before.
~Raithere
It's still creation from nothing. At some point there was a change from the experience of nothing to the experience of something.
But you're referring to the spectrum of perception as applied to an existent reality. If existence is dependant upon consciousness then from where did these perceptions come from?
I disagree. We can differentiate a conscious brain from one that is comatose or one that is dead by monitoring its activity. We are just not sure of what the precise mechanisms are necessary to support consciousness.
~Raithere
I find that it is true in a gross sense. Unless you have some reason(s) to believe otherwise. Up front; I do not find NDEs to be conclusive of consciousness after 'death'. These experiences could easily be put together after the fact in the same way that dreams are.
~Raithere
From above responses i understand that you mistook my post for implying that consciousness creates reality. I am not getting into that now. Existence of reality is not denied but the observation & perception of the existing reality, is limited,defined & confined by our inherent ability / inability, imposed by our physiological & physical restrictions.
By monitoring you will know whether the brain or its specific part is active or not. Monitoring does not reveal whether those activities are real cause (or effect *but again i am not getting into that now* ) of Consciousness. I am afraid you have still yet to prove, objectively, the consciousness, not the activities of the brain.
Last edited:
There is no scientist alive who would claim to be able to detect consciousness in any state. What they would claim is that they can detect behaviour which appears to be identical to those who we assume to be conscious. They would lose the jobs if they suggested more. (And what everneo said).
I agree about NDE's, although we don't know the truth about them yet, and they're better than no evidence at all.
- Status