What Was Old Is New Again

The pendulum has reached its highest magnitude in the direction of the mechanistic view of consciousness and is swinging once again towards the notion of the soul.

www.livescience.com...

Neuroscientists and many philosophers have typically planted themselves firmly on the materialist side. But a growing number of scientists now believe that materialism cannot wholly explain the sense of "I am" that undergirds consciousness, Kuhn told the audience.

and this time it is neuroscientists that are leading the way and it looks like it may finally be testable.

The act of being is not observable because it is the one observing. Science can only go so far because it only explains what is observed, that's why "faith" (not the religious kind) is important in my opinion, it gives you the answers that science cannot. Science only explains the reflection, not the thing that creates the reflection.

the article says consciousness may exist partly or wholly in a hidden dimension of the universe.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The act of being is not observable because it is the one observing.

I disagree. You can see it when we look at each other, especially when our eyes meet.

a reply to: intrptr

When we see each other it's only a reflection though. What's behind our eyes? That can't be seen by looking at one another, it can't be seen by opening our brains either, it's not observable in my opinion. Can I see things from your perspective or you from mine?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The act of being is not observable because it is the one observing.

I disagree. You can see it when we look at each other, especially when our eyes meet.

I think the act of 'witnessing' the one observed (observing) was missed?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: intrptr

When we see each other it's only a reflection though. What's behind our eyes? That can't be seen by looking at one another, it can't be seen by opening our brains either, it's not observable in my opinion. Can I see things from your perspective or you from mine?

With empathy, yes.

But I get the 'you never know who you're dealing with', too.

As far as identifying the you thats you, that should be easy.

Take a look in the mirror. That's what you are according to everything else in the universe but you.

The soul? Exactly what do you think of when you say that word? Some words, a story or two, or some fleeting nonsense. In other words, not much.

You know exactly what you are, but you wish to doubt it. You cannot take the fact of your being.

]

originally posted by: Aphorism
Take a look in the mirror. That's what you are according to everything else in the universe but you.

The soul? Exactly what do you think of when you say that word? Some words, a story or two, or some fleeting nonsense. In other words, not much.

You know exactly what you are, but you wish to doubt it. You cannot take the fact of your being.

Strange, when i look in the mirror, i dont see myself, i see a body.
at its 10 years it looked differently than 10 years later, and 10 years later and 10 years later and ...

but i, i was the same, the body reported this or that feelings, but i has not changed, the i is still the same.

do i see the i in the mirror, or do i see a body ?

the answer is, the i see's a body.

There is more behind seeing,something which i have learned:

to know myself in the mirror, i have to see me infront first, then to know me ? right ? - Wrong !

there is a small thing between seeing and before knowing, and it is called Judgement.

I have judged myself as this and that, there and here, and now i am beliving me infront of this Mirror.

originally posted by: Aphorism
Take a look in the mirror. That's what you are according to everything else in the universe but you.

From a distance you appear as a body but if you look closer you are trillions of cells and if you look even closer you will find that you are the space that all apparent things are moving within.


Instead of standing in front of a mirror to see what you are - right now point directly at where you are seeing from.

"Once in a while, I get shocked into upper wakefulness, I turn a corner, see the ocean, and my heart tips over with happiness - it feels so free! Then I have the idea that, as well as beholding, I can also be beheld from yonder and am not a discreet object but incorporated with the rest, with universal sapphire, purplish blue. For what is this sea, this atmosphere, doing within the eight-inch diameter of your skull? (I say nothing of the sun and the galaxy which are also there.) At the centre of the beholder there must be space for the whole, and this nothing-space is not an empty nothing but a nothing reserved for everything". Saul Bellow.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

If you look closely at a patch of your skin, that's what you're looking at: a patch of skin. If you look at the space between cells or atoms, that's what you're looking at: the space between your cells. But you are not a patch of skin nor the space between your cells.

In order to see what you are, all of you must be in view, or you will forget who is looking and what you were looking for.

If you're looking for nothing you will eventually find it. It's called giving up.

a reply to: Hombre

Remove that body, what of you is left?

Pull the eyes out of that body, what do you see now?

Remove your fleshy shroud and reveal yourself. Or keep playing pretend.

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: Itisnowagain

If you look closely at a patch of your skin, that's what you're looking at: a patch of skin.

Skin is what is seen when looking at skin - but what is it that is looking?? Have you ever seen what is looking?

a reply to: Aphorism

Remove that body, what of you is left?
- life.

Pull the eyes out of that body, what do you see now?

-dont really need eyes to see. had allready the experience to see without the eyes.

Remove your fleshy shroud and reveal yourself. Or keep playing pretend.

-reveal myself to who ? there is nobody else after. And God does know me.

And as God means life aswell, it is kept by Living.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Like I already said, look in the mirror, take a picture, ask someone else. Everything else but you already know what you are, but you refuse to accept it.

a reply to: Aphorism
Ernst Mach was an Austrian physicist and philosopher who did a revolutionary 'self portrait' - without a mirror.
publicdomainreview.org...
Which made Douglas Harding realize that from the first person perspective - he had no head!!

Have you heard of the 'headless way'?

originally posted by: intrptr

As far as identifying the you thats you, that should be easy.

The real you is not identified!! I would say the I-dent is the mark of the beast.

Prior to the concept of you - there is only what is happening.
If the concept of 'you' is identified then many other concepts will be bought into - including life and death.
There is no life or death - there is only what is happening.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

The real you is not identified!! I would say the I-dent is the mark of the beast.

I meant more you knowing who you are is simple. You know your name, memories, growing up, your experience, abilities. Thats you.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
the article says consciousness may exist partly or wholly in a hidden dimension of the universe.

What if that consciousness is singular, and YOU are merely an independent, individual extension of that consciousness?