My view on consciousness explained with a picture

I made this picture to explain to people how I view consciousness/god/souls.

I think that consciousness interacting with our physical world is kinda similar to how when a hand is touching a wall the fingers are separate on that 2D surface (while all being part of the same hand).

For spiritual people: Does this go along with your view also?

And related to this topic I feel like sharing these NDE videos I just watched, maybe they can help you understand the picture if all this is new to you. Just watch everything about NDE on YouTube (the channel billsvideos123 is awesome) and you will eventually come to the understanding that the consciousness is separate from the body.

A playlist with some: www.youtube.com...
This is also good: youtu.be...
And of course, these are obligatory: www.youtube.com...

I wish that more people would start understanding the facts about our consciousness being separate from the body, I wonder how the world would change if everybody knew?

a reply to: ParanormalGuy

consciousness

When you stop believing

originally posted by: tikbalang
a reply to: ParanormalGuy

consciousness

When you stop believing

What are you trying to communicate exactly?
I'll admit I don't have the answers to everything, but knowing that consciousness is separate from the body is something I can know since I've experienced it myself several times.

a reply to: ParanormalGuy

"if" you ever understand what i wrote, it will make sense

Isn't it dependant on the body to formulate a consciousness. Need eyes for perception and brain to process morality. Your consciousness is the by product of nurture and the environment so separate is a strong word for me. Dependent than evolved into a separate entity I could accept.

And don't follow other people's view on this sort of subject. Everyone is wrong including myself.

a reply to: ParanormalGuy

Think of consciousness as a living concept.

A concept being an idea or definition.

Like a concept's body is made up of words (its definition), and yet concepts are within the definition/concept's body.

(I am in my Father and my Father is in me.)

Another way to understand it is like a math problem:
You have your function or will : conceive count / will is to count
Then you have the concept of that will or function: form a singular value from two or more units (addition / adding things together)
Then you have your body or image of your conception of will: 1+1=2

So then what you end up with is a trinity (1+1=2), where the will/function/spirit, measure/concept/soul, and image/body/form(ula) are all one.

These words are the image of my awareness, (body/Jesus)
my awareness is the conception of my spirit, (soul/Father)
and my spirit is my will. (spirit/Holy Ghost)

My words are the [[[image of] my awareness] of my spirit].
Father is in the Spirit (kingdom of heaven is in the spirit/people who have seen heaven were said to be taken away in the spirit), Jesus is in Father, and we're in Jesus.

The body is within the concept and the concept is within the spirit. Will to conceive/see/conceptualize is in the spirit, and the body is within the concept.

The body is the image of the soul and the soul is the conception of the spirit.


The geometry of the 3 usually shows up as a spear/phallic/head, slit/opening/body, and then water/blood/flow.

Think eye for all three things: Socket/body, eyeball/head/awareness, tears/water.
Or a mushroom/head/spore/seed, body/ground opening/socket/slit, water.
Or male/head/soul, female/body/form, blood/spirit/breath.


The head puts conception of the spirit into the body - into form - into words. The flow is outward from the spirit, like fractals or resonance patterns.

Your soul is your psyche and your psyche is made up of living-concepts of self (and reality)... like a running algorithm, where one concept is built out of another and another and so on. First you conceived of light, then shapes, then language/more fully formed concepts.

Physicality or the world outside and inside our minds (form) is like God's mental images, while our souls are more like living concepts.

That should be enough.

a reply to: ParanormalGuy

On some Meta level I agree. .

I want much more layers added to explain how information can degrade from objective (that can be stored as particles that exchange information thru entanglement between 2 cells in 2 different persons) to subjective conscious understanding (how the information gained in the cells is interpreted by the specific person/animal depending on how their brain is built up).

I am very interested in how different cultures subjective views alters how a similar experience is interpreted differently.

Ralph Waldo Emerson said basically the same thing. The book is around here somewhere but I can't find it at the moment. The gist of it was that we're like the fingers on God's hands, branched off so we can do lots of different "works" at once. But, over time we've forgotten this, to the point that we are mostly selfish and useless now.

I think that's about it. Hopefully I didn't mix too much of my own interpretation in there.

a reply to: ParanormalGuy

Looks like the Matrix V book cover.

Matrix V

a reply to: ParanormalGuy

A woman was studying forests a few years ago and discovered something I think you might find insightful for consciousness.

She discovered that forest trees are connected by the underground tendrils of fungus and called it the 'wood-wide web.' The fungus taps into the root systems and acts as a pipeline to balance out the resources between one tree and another. As one tree begins to die, the web extracts its resources and funnels them along and distributes them to trees that need them. She found that a tree being starved of air would be supported by the fungi extracting the 'air' from healthy trees and passing it through the capillaries of the struggling one. Shorter root systems are extended by being attached to the filaments of the fungus which act like scuba tanks for divers or like IV drips for hospital patients.

There's a beautiful podcast here on Radiolab that is thought-provoking.

Her name is Suzanne Simard and you can read about it here.



If consciousness really does connect us all through time and space, the forest/fungi analogy is something that makes sense. We'd be a profoundly interconnected collection of individual 'trees' with an aspect of consciousness being represented by the 'wood wide web' of fungal filaments. Consciousnesses would exist and die and their resources would be constantly transferred to new growths.

Simard makes the connection between river systems, fungal networks and neural maps. We can project those same patterns against the cosmos and see them in the structure of galaxies. If we could create a granular map of the universe, we'd expect to see the same formations.

[Disclaimer] I'm agnostic and not committed to popular concepts of what consciousness is, or could be. It still appeals to my outlook on life and makes me curious and open to learning more.

This is a great way of visualizing it! "God" is the source or hand while we are each a finger, the finger not being separate from the hand only being an offshoot of it.

Thanks for this.

Thank you for all the answers, still reviewing them before replying to any of you in specific.

I found another great video that I'm watching btw, I think this can help all the skeptics:


Another one, and I consider this as actual proof:

I think we are all different consciousnesses, an emergent property of a semi-analog meat system, and when we die, that's it.

a reply to: Bedlam

Agreed. Consciousness is largely nothing more than a ghost in the machine caused by a conjugate of various competing and overlapping "analog meat systems"

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Bedlam

Agreed. Consciousness is largely nothing more than a ghost in the machine caused by a conjugate of various competing and overlapping "analog meat systems"

That too. "I" am not singular. "I" am a sort of summation of a lot of sub-personas and high order functions.

originally posted by: Bedlam
I think we are all different consciousnesses, an emergent property of a semi-analog meat system, and when we die, that's it.

I challenge you to watch 100 videos about NDE experiences and then see if you feel the same way.

I've read and watched more than that, including experiences around OBE and the use of psychedelics to have similar experiences. And then I've noticed obvious patterns in these experiences which suggest that people do indeed leave their bodies and are not just telling ## or letting their fantasies confuse them. People ignoring all the stories of all these people are not contributing towards a better understanding towards the world and reality we live in.

originally posted by: ParanormalGuy
People ignoring all the stories of all these people are not contributing towards a better understanding towards the world and reality we live in.

On the other hand, I'd say data is not the plural of anecdote.

Understanding comes from systematic analysis of objective data. Dying people see all sorts of things - they're dying, you can't expect particularly clear thought.

Consciousness is an emotional computation triggered by your current experience compared to every other experience you've had in your life. So where is your identity located. Is your identity your stored experiences or is your identity everything outside of your mind that can triggers your emotions? Maybe your identity is more defined by the triggers than the memories.


The real question to think about is have you ever thought about what your brain is doing between thoughts? If you concentrate hard enough on this question the division between self and reality dissolves.

Nice picture, it certainly makes sense to me and I understand what you mean by it. However, what I'm more interested in would be a picture of consciousness overlapping the body.

Would it overlap the whole body or just the head? would it be spherical, cylindrical, egg-shaped, spiraled, vortex or something else? how big is it exactly? is it just a finite point inside the middle of our heads or something else?