It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pseudo-Philosophy and Mysticism

page: 11
15
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: scratchmane


It might be irrational, to you, but you do not Know if the universe is conscious, you Believe, it seems, that only an organic entity can exhibit consciousness.

There is a massive gap between knowledge and belief. Many believe in different things, but they remain beliefs.

To me you appear as a believer. Am I wrong?


You are wrong. A "believer" isn't an apt description of me or anyone else unless you provide what I believe in. A believer in what?

There is no gap between knowledge and belief. The two are not opposites. The opposite of belief is doubt. The opposite of knowledge is ignorance. We know that living organisms are conscious. We know that non-living non-organic entities are not conscious. I do not doubt this knowledge; I believe it, and justifiably so. We are not ignorant of these facts. It's up to you to believe or doubt them, and hopefully offer some sort of justification as to why you do.




posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate


science is an additional means to acquire or achieve a chosen end


Which obviously means a direction.
Science doesn't provide guidance in life? what about social science? medical science, what about science in agriculture.
Humanity simply has a direction, guided by scientific knowledge, obviously knowledge is limited, something is added or taken away while humanity progresses.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: Semicollegiate


science is an additional means to acquire or achieve a chosen end


Which obviously means a direction.
Science doesn't provide guidance in life? what about social science? medical science, what about science in agriculture.
Humanity simply has a direction, guided by scientific knowledge, obviously knowledge is limited, something is added or taken away while humanity progresses.




An automobile does not tell you where to go. The car helps you get to somewhere you have chosen, faster.

Science does not tell anyone what to do. Once a goal has been decided, science can often help to achieve it.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   
People attach qualities to "consciousness", where nothing really exists. You can speak at length about an ambiguous concept with no clear basis, like "universal consciousness", and in the end you're just saying nothing.

The fact that no one can even explain consciousness as such should be a towering red flag. A red flag signaling to us that, perhaps, we are missing the point entirely.

The people who speak about consciousness seem to imply some kind of "divine free will". Or maybe, some height of self-awareness and logic. Sorry, but that's not what I see in the world. Much of our existence is patently unconscious. We fade into it every night when we go to sleep. People take drugs and put themselves into an unconscious stupor. There is delirium in all it's forms. We start out as wailing infants and end our days as addled old men and women. Our judgements are false more often than they're right. Much of what we do is habitual and compulsive, and some of it is utterly senseless. To what extent can that be reconciled with our being these immaculately "conscious" agents? Where is this divine free will and self-awareness?

Perhaps we need a new definition of consciousness. It looks to me like the term has been hijacked and debased by sophists, as the OP would call them. People are saying they know the depths of the ocean after observing a goldfish bowl. I wouldn't for one second trust some babbling new-ager to tell me what I am and what the world is made of.

I don't think strict physicalism is necessarily the answer to this sophistry, but there are definite contradictions with what these people say and it deserves to be called out.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Talorc

If you want to start exposing sophistry, I say start with your own, that's the mark of a truly enlightened philosopher...



The people who speak about consciousness seem to imply some kind of "divine free will". Or maybe, some height of self-awareness and logic. Sorry, but that's not what I see in the world. Much of our existence is patently unconscious.


You observe much of "our" existence is patently unconscious. Perhaps you are right. But you have made three critical mistakes. Firstly you think consciousness can only be what you have observed it to be in others, without acknowledging you cannot possibly know everyone and that you are ignorant. Secondly by not realizing that being unconscious by definition means there is a greater reality that we are unconscious to. Third, you unconsciously acknowledge that there is a higher self awareness and logic available, by pointing to its opposite.


edit on 10-9-2015 by nonjudgementalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: nonjudgementalist

What higher reality? Reality implies that there's just one, there's just the truth, nothing "higher" or "lower". So can we observe reality or can't we? Should be careful how you answer that.


I don't claim to be enlightened, unlike some other people. I'm well aware of being just another thing stumbling about in the dark.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: scratchmane


To me you appear as a believer. Am I wrong?


You are wrong. A "believer" isn't an apt description of me or anyone else unless you provide what I believe in. A believer in what?

There is no gap between knowledge and belief. The two are not opposites. The opposite of belief is doubt. The opposite of knowledge is ignorance. We know that living organisms are conscious. We know that non-living non-organic entities are not conscious. I do not doubt this knowledge; I believe it, and justifiably so. We are not ignorant of these facts. It's up to you to believe or doubt them, and hopefully offer some sort of justification as to why you do.


Well said.

You said earlier:


The requirements of being a body is that it has a boundary, is finite and moves as one. I'm not sure if any of these requirements are yet discoverable.


So all animals are conscious, seeing that they have a body. What about the sunflower? It has a body and it reacts to outside stimuli, it follows the sun. Is it conscious of the sun?

You are not sure, ...yet discoverable, this, to me, seems like you have left a little wiggle room.

Dark matter

According to this, the universe is structured similarly to the structure of the brain, or the very least neurons.

As above, so below?


Max Planck, the 'father' of quantum theory has said:


I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.


and


As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.


Planck who was/is a tower in the scientific community said these things.

I am curious, what do you think of these statements?

Did Max just lose his mind and went bonkers?
edit on th2015-09-11T08:56:41-05:00Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:56:41 -0500am302015-09-11T08:56:41-05:000809am9 by scratchmane because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Plato's theory of forms is untenable, and it was pretty much refuted by his pupil Aristotle thousands of years ago. It's interesting to note that the more empirical approach to philosophy, such as is found in Democritus, Lucretius or Epicurus, is still relevant even today.




Either way.. philosophy as you understand it is just a waste of time. Metaphysics as you understand it is just a waste of time. You can't help but pour your scorn on mysticism saying it has never amounted to nothing.. but using your partial criteria that goes for philosophy too.


Philosophy has branched into science, politics, education, etc. It is the foundation of our knowledge hitherto. Mysticism has branched into, well, nothing. Philosophy as you understand it is just a waste of time because apparently you do not understand philosophy.


It is apparent you and some others here do not understand mysticism, due to lack of experience or perhaps due to closing oneself off to, or not allowing oneself to experience higher forms of states of mind, or for some, spiritual journeys. By virtue of others' experiences here on ATS and their sharing their similar extraordinary experiences and states of mind, we know these states to be concrete reality for us - we that have higher creative brain function (even Einstein ventured into daydreaming to solve complex scientific problems), psychic abilities, empathic healing abilities, etc. These intanglibles that defy scientific explanation.
edit on 11-9-2015 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: scratchmane



So all animals are conscious, seeing that they have a body. What about the sunflower? It has a body and it reacts to outside stimuli, it follows the sun. Is it conscious of the sun?


Not in any human sense. We cannot even begin to imagine what its like to be a sunflower.


According to this, the universe is structured similarly to the structure of the brain, or the very least neurons.

As above, so below?


No. That is an image of a computer simulation, not the universe. Neurons resemble plants more than anything else.



Planck who was/is a tower in the scientific community said these things.

I am curious, what do you think of these statements?

Did Max just lose his mind and went bonkers?


Newton was an alchemist and believed in a coming Biblical apocalypse. Aristotle believed women have fewer teeth, and slaves have a “slavish nature”. It’s fallacious to take something on someone’s word, or consider them infallible just because they are smart.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight


It is apparent you and some others here do not understand mysticism, due to lack of experience or perhaps due to closing oneself off to, or not allowing oneself to experience higher forms of states of mind, or for some, spiritual journeys. By virtue of others' experiences here on ATS and their sharing their similar extraordinary experiences and states of mind, we know these states to be concrete reality for us - we that have higher creative brain function (even Einstein ventured into daydreaming to solve complex scientific problems), psychic abilities, empathic healing abilities, etc. These intanglibles that defy scientific explanation.


Sounds like the first paragraph of the OP. I am quite used to this argument by now. “This is the way things are, I promise. You only have to experience it”. You can keep your experiences.

We’ve all had mystical experiences. Some have been near death, some have become ill, and some simply have poor sleep. But what to you are higher states of mind are to me lower states of mind. These experiences to you are extraordinary; to me they are quite banal and self-centred. Anyone can take a narcotic, manipulate their sleep, or have some sort of feverish episode or stroke and experience what you and others experienced. Frankly it’s quite boring and clear indications of pathology rather than spirituality. What to you is higher creative brain function is to me a castration of creative brain function, laziness, and the inability to control one’s mind and imagination, only to become a slave to them. It is a retreat from reality as opposed to an understanding of it.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: InTheLight


It is apparent you and some others here do not understand mysticism, due to lack of experience or perhaps due to closing oneself off to, or not allowing oneself to experience higher forms of states of mind, or for some, spiritual journeys. By virtue of others' experiences here on ATS and their sharing their similar extraordinary experiences and states of mind, we know these states to be concrete reality for us - we that have higher creative brain function (even Einstein ventured into daydreaming to solve complex scientific problems), psychic abilities, empathic healing abilities, etc. These intanglibles that defy scientific explanation.


Sounds like the first paragraph of the OP. I am quite used to this argument by now. “This is the way things are, I promise. You only have to experience it”. You can keep your experiences.

We’ve all had mystical experiences. Some have been near death, some have become ill, and some simply have poor sleep. But what to you are higher states of mind are to me lower states of mind. These experiences to you are extraordinary; to me they are quite banal and self-centred. Anyone can take a narcotic, manipulate their sleep, or have some sort of feverish episode or stroke and experience what you and others experienced. Frankly it’s quite boring and clear indications of pathology rather than spirituality. What to you is higher creative brain function is to me a castration of creative brain function, laziness, and the inability to control one’s mind and imagination, only to become a slave to them. It is a retreat from reality as opposed to an understanding of it.


So, you understand all that is reality? Please enlighten us.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight




So, you understand all that is reality? Please enlighten us.


I never said nor implied such a thing. Enlighten yourself.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   

No. That is an image of a computer simulation, not the universe. Neurons resemble plants more than anything else.


Yes it is a simulation, based on scientific research and findings. well I think it is.



It’s fallacious to take something on someone’s word, or consider them infallible just because they are smart.


You didn't really answer my question, but skirted it.

So all scientific findings, you choose not to take seriously, because you haven't discovered it your self?
Your example with the MRI, whose word have you taken?
It seems to me, that unless you have made the discovery your self, or acquired direct knowledge your self, it is fallacious?
Which measuring stick do you use, to ascertain whether something is true or not? Whether you should take someone at their word or not.


Planck: As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such.


Clear headed science. What reason do you have to question him(Planck specifically)?

You seem like a smart human. You are fallible(correct me if I am wrong on this!)
If you are fallible, it means your point of view can be wrong.

If you can prove that anything at all exists 'outside' of consciousness please do so.

The thing is; Any proof you come up with, can only be viewed via consciousness. Any words on a paper is seen 'in' consciousness. We as humans can not go behind consciousness, we use it to navigate those things which appear in our consciousness.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: scratchmane


You didn't really answer my question, but skirted it.


No I do not think Planck was crazy.



So all scientific findings, you choose not to take seriously, because you haven't discovered it your self?


I’m not sure I said that. Conclusions need to be backed up with some sort of reason, or it is only an assumption. To assume an assumption is true is presumption, which is synonymous with arrogance. If one cannot provide the route through which he has arrived at his conclusions, he therefor has no reason to conclude.



It seems to me, that unless you have made the discovery your self, or acquired direct knowledge your self, it is fallacious?


Assertions made without argument or evidence, yes it is fallacious.



Which measuring stick do you use, to ascertain whether something is true or not? Whether you should take someone at their word or not.


Grammar, logic, rhetoric, common sense, observation, experimentation, replication, and often trust.


Clear headed science. What reason do you have to question him(Planck specifically)?


He has provided no evidence or argument. All he asserts is his authority. Share the evidence and arguments and I will question them instead.


If you can prove that anything at all exists 'outside' of consciousness please do so.


“Consciousness” is a nominalization of the adjective “conscious”. An adjective describes something, it isn’t itself something. In this case, it describes the human organism. You’re speaking about it as if consciousness wasn’t a nominalization, but something else, as if things can be inside or out of it like some sort of container or spotlight. Unfortunately such a view is nonsensical. I think the grammar is confusing you.


The thing is; Any proof you come up with, can only be viewed via consciousness. Any words on a paper is seen 'in' consciousness. We as humans can not go behind consciousness, we use it to navigate those things which appear in our consciousness.


Words on paper are viewed via the body and in relation to the body. Things do not appear “in consciousness”. They appear outside of our bodies and in relation to our bodies.

Try it. Move your body further away from the computer until you cannot read the words even though you can still see them. The words are still “in your consciousness” but cannot be read. How is it possible that the words are in your consciousness but you are unable to read them?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: scratchmane

We can't get to the wizard behind the curtain, basically?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: scratchmane

We can't get to the wizard behind the curtain, basically?


Yes, we can, just pull back the curtains (the veil).



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 03:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

“Consciousness” is a nominalization of the adjective “conscious”. An adjective describes something, it isn’t itself something. In this case, it describes the human organism.

To be 'conscious' - is to be 'awake' or 'aware'. 'Consciousness' is 'awareness'.
Can you prove that anything exists outside 'your' awareness?


You’re speaking about it as if consciousness wasn’t a nominalization, but something else, as if things can be inside or out of it like some sort of container or spotlight.

'Awareness' (consciousness) is the 'space' that things come and go in. A thought arises and then is gone, a sensation arises and then is gone, a sound appears and then is gone. All that arises is made of nothing other than awareness.
Awareness is not a thing - it is everything.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain




To be 'conscious' - is to be 'awake' or 'aware'. 'Consciousness' is 'awareness'.
Can you prove that anything exists outside 'your' awareness?


Everything exists outside of awareness. I'll prove it again. Awareness is a nominalization of the adjective "aware", which describes something but isn't itself something. It is a word—that's it. It describes something that appears to be awake and alert. We can do this to any adjective. We can also add the suffix -ness to "awake" and say everything "exists in awakeness" or "alertness" as well, and we'd be basically speaking about the same nothing as consciousness. We can do this to a whole host of words and believe that they are actually things and substances in the world. Happy becomes happiness, ugly becomes ugliness, and so on. But when you speak of happiness or ugliness you are not speaking of some magical dust that is floating in the air, you are speaking about happy or ugly things, bodies, objects, or phenomenon. This is paramount to a superstition of words and grammar you are selling here, and it is very prevalent given all the rhetoric around consciousness.


'Awareness' (consciousness) is the 'space' that things come and go in. A thought arises and then is gone, a sensation arises and then is gone, a sound appears and then is gone. All that arises is made of nothing other than awareness.
Awareness is not a thing - it is everything.


Completely false.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

I suggest we return to philosophy and metaphysics, or we band together and advocate for a new board, Pseudo-Philosophy and Mysticism, at least so we can refrain from trampling all over human history.
I agree, but I'd call it the Woo woo forum. I ignore much of the rubbish I see here masquerading as philosophy these days, claims based on 'higher meditation' arguing 'souls' and 'karma' as confirmed factual reality. It's lame and dumbs down ATS in my opinion.

Half the threads here should be in 'Religion Faith and Theology' in my opinion. The 'spiritual' folk may bleat "Oh it is not religious!" but the spiritual claims all require faith, and I for one am bored with reading woo woo stuff pretending to be philosophical debate.
It is for the same reason I ignore the 'Religion Faith and Theology' forum.



posted on Sep, 15 2015 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You obviously havnt tried smoking salvia... I had a friend that spent decades being a hill... Your imagination could definitely get you to believe you are a sunflower if u really wanted to... Probably on '___'... Funny how talorc thinks drugs lock you in when they are called mind expanding drugs... But I guess those terms are subjective



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join