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.
You have to trust yourself.
Relying on other people to figure everything out for you and assure you it is true can only get you so far.
You can't play "trust the right person" forever, eventually you are going to have to think critically about your own consciousness using...your own consciousness.
You seem to have a grip of the scientific understanding of "sources and evidence" but you are ignoring the primary document that is your own existence/consciousness for the only real evidence.
Originally posted by sirnex
I do not subscribe to the belief that evidence is composed solely upon shared agreed upon personal experiences. Here is why:
Originally posted by sirnex
I am asking for such evidence in which I can pass judgment upon as being true. Claiming it's just something you have to understand or that we are that evidence is not true evidence, but a cop-out tactic used in such manner to avoid researching the problem and producing such evidences in favor.
Originally posted by Jezus
Originally posted by sirnex
Your stating as a matter of absolute fact that we can never discover a fundamental aspect of reality that exists for all things because the human species is too arrogantly ignorant to step outside it's perceived box in which to possess the capacity to someday have a better ability to logically, reasonably and more accurately describe reality as it exist from the viewpoint of all things in reality rather than around an arrogantly assumed anthropomorphic assumption that the human mind arises solely because of our one insignificant species.
Well the idea that reality exists outside of perception is an assumption based on speculation. We can never "discover" something outside of our "perceived box" unless we leave it.
Now that is a discussion about Out of body experiences.
And you must have gotten a little confused writing that bold part at the end. YOU are the one that seems to believe the human mind arises solely because of the human brain. The truth is quite the opposite. The "human mind" just like any mind, is eternal. The only difference between human conscious and any other consciousness is the physical vehicle it happens to be inhabiting at the moment.
The mind is eternal, the human species arose solely because of the mind.
The mind is the catalyst for evolution, pushing our physical vehicles to the current state.
Originally posted by sirnexLimiting future knowledge with current technological limitations.
You are correct in that science will soon allow us to understand and possibly induce Out of body experiences (in some ways it already has). However, even when that point happens we will be trusting to a certain extent that people are perceiving what they claim. Logically we have already proven the separation of the human mind from the brain and OOB experiences but because of the innately abstract state of mind we will never be able to scientifically prove that another person has consciousness. Two people could have an OOB experience together and confirm to the rest of us that they each have consciousness but this is not scientific proof.
Originally posted by sirnex
Well, that's just cute... Do you place humanity at a special place in the universe to assume the the beginnings of the universe is centered around *only* human consciousness and arose only through human consciousness? That is such a bold and brazen extraordinary claim.
Quiet the opposite.
The human species is just one possible vehicle for our eternal entities to enter. It was created by evolution interacting with the variables on Earth. The driving force for evolution is the observer's response to reality.
It is not *only* human consciousness that the Universe is centered around, it is consciousness in general. You can speak of the human brain but human consciousness is a temporary state of consciousness, we have always been consciousness but we have not always been human.
Originally posted by sirnex
I don't accept assumed speculations depicted as absolute facts. Unless you have substantial evidence that indicates and verifies a significant special place for humanity in the universe as well as a beginning of the universe through human consciousness only, then we can neither assume that the universe is due to human consciousness and not the consciousness of an alien from the Andromeda Galaxy.
Good.
So you agree that their is no reason to speculate on an objective Universe.
The idea that a reality exists outside of human consciousness is an assumption based on speculation.
Science is a sharp edge of consciousness but to pretend that our organized observations are some how free of the restraint of subjective perception is delusional.
Well the idea that reality exists outside of perception is an assumption based on speculation. We can never "discover" something outside of our "perceived box" unless we leave it.
Now that is a discussion about Out of body experiences.
And you must have gotten a little confused writing that bold part at the end. YOU are the one that seems to believe the human mind arises solely because of the human brain. The truth is quite the opposite. The "human mind" just like any mind, is eternal. The only difference between human conscious and any other consciousness is the physical vehicle it happens to be inhabiting at the moment.
The mind is eternal, the human species arose solely because of the mind.
The mind is the catalyst for evolution, pushing our physical vehicles to the current state.
You are correct in that science will soon allow us to understand and possibly induce Out of body experiences (in some ways it already has). However, even when that point happens we will be trusting to a certain extent that people are perceiving what they claim. Logically we have already proven the separation of the human mind from the brain and OOB experiences but because of the innately abstract state of mind we will never be able to scientifically prove that another person has consciousness. Two people could have an OOB experience together and confirm to the rest of us that they each have consciousness but this is not scientific proof.
The human species is just one possible vehicle for our eternal entities to enter. It was created by evolution interacting with the variables on Earth. The driving force for evolution is the observer's response to reality.
It is not *only* human consciousness that the Universe is centered around, it is consciousness in general. You can speak of the human brain but human consciousness is a temporary state of consciousness, we have always been consciousness but we have not always been human.
Good.
So you agree that their is no reason to speculate on an objective Universe.
The idea that a reality exists outside of human consciousness is an assumption based on speculation.
Science is a sharp edge of consciousness but to pretend that our organized observations are some how free of the restraint of subjective perception is delusional.
How can you claim that evidence is not composed solely upon shared personal experiences when that is the only reality that we can even discuss?
What you want is some sources of people you can believe are intelligent and logical who have organized their observations.
To discuss consciousness you have a primary document that no one else exactly has.
No matter how much we organize these observations science itself is "composed solely upon shared agreed upon personal experiences" simply because their is nothing else.
Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by sirnex
Optimism does not replace factuality no matter how many may think otherwise. We may one day transcend our limitations it is true. Notice I said, MAY transcend. But, right now, we ARE limited and to pretend otherwise is extremely unrealistic at best.
Originally posted by sirnex
I've asked for evidence for the self proclaimed explicit knowledge of reality and that the mind is separate from body.
Originally posted by sirnex
Limiting future knowledge with current technological limitations. I don't accept these arguments as they imply knowledge of future discoveries. If you can prove you have all knowledge of future discoveries in regards to consciousness then I can determine the validity of this statement.
Originally posted by sirnex
This is not an issue that I have raised and thus is pointless and meaningless to me at this time.
You folks eh? I am not one telling someone what is and/or is not true or possible friend. Before you launch into and more self-gratifying monologues. I am merely pointing at our current level of knowledge is all we have and to pretend we are above it is silly.
Which includes the factual backing to declare the existance or lack there of a "god"/higher power/deity/whatever. It's simply not there either way and simply because we might in the future somehow prove one way or the other is not an factually based argument.
The best evidence is your conscious experience.
You don't need anything else.
However, to help in this understanding you could research brain damage studies, memory studies, and dream studies.
This will help to understand that the brain is specialized and mechanical but is not the receiver of the conscious experience.
That mind receives the signal.
Understanding the innate abstract characteristic of consciousness doesn't require any knowledge of future discoveries.
Now, science will eventually (as it already is) allow us to understand the nature of out of body experiences but this will not make consciousness provable on a scientifically level only a logical level.
You should definitely research out of body experiences.
Avoiding this subject while trying to discuss consciousness will never allow you to comprehend the nature of the mind.
Abstract thought is not something to be afraid of.
You are looking for the "answer" from scientists but not everything is so simple.
You can research the physical structure of the brain but this will only take you so far, eventually you are going to have to think critically if you really want to understand the fundamental aspects of reality.
I got the sudden feeling that you are just being satirical...
Are you trying to represent a biological robot that doesn't actually have consciousness?
Anyway, if your for real you really have to get over your fear of abstract concepts.
Waiting for scientists to explain reality for you is going to take quite along time. Science deals with the physical world, but if you won't take the scientific implications to the next level than you can't discuss consciousness.
Your claim that you can not observe your own conscious experience as evidence of reality is bizarre to say the least, especially since that is the only evidence you have...