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.

 

Proof of Soul

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 06:39 AM
link   
The only way you can prove to yourself that you have a soul is by experiencing it through meditation. The first step is understanding what consciousness is. When you look into your mind, you see images or thoughts, and the awareness that is outside of these thoughts is your "mind" and this process is called consciousness: to be aware of something, or to be aware that you are aware. Consciousness is infinite, because every time you become conscious of yourself, you create another mind or thought that is conscious of that. So if you say "this is me" you will have a self or mind that is aware of you saying this, and then if you become aware of that, there will be another mind aware of that mind, and so on infinitely.

Since consciousness is infinite, we have to understand its make-up. Consciousness is none other than the background by which all forms exist on. The screen by which the forms exist on. In Buddhism, consciousness is empty, and so this screen is emptiness, meaning it does not have inherent existence, only perpetual existence.

The difference is between infinite and Real. Infinite is something that goes on forever, whereas something that is Real is not just infinite, but something that exists infinitely as that thing. If you think of Eternity as a combination of past, present, and future simultaneously, then you have what is truly real.

Consciousness can not become aware of this, only itself, consciousness can only see or think about this Reality for but a second, after that, it becomes tied up in its own awareness and starts to see itself within Reality creating an idea of "other", this other is the principle ignorance that keeps us bound to the earth. When we overcome this ignorance, we realize what our consciousness can not be conscious of: Transcendent Reality, which is not just something that exists infinitely, like the universe, but something that is here and now forever. This is clearly the substratum of reality. The root of matter and the background all the stuff exists in, including the abstracts such as Time.

I know this might all sound confusing, and I am probably not saying this as clearly as possible, but if you have any questions I'd be glad to answer them. There's so much more to Buddhism and meditation than simply proving that the soul exists, but if you really need to know, then I guess I can try to prove it to you. Please note that I am not trying to prove the existence of God, and so bringing religion into the debate would be an irrelevant tangent.




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ancient_wisdom
 




The only way you can prove to yourself that you have a soul is by experiencing it through meditation.


The perception and consciousness you are experiencing right now is intricately tied to the brain - and what you perceive as reality in this very moment is nothing but a mental construct your brain puts together from sensory data so as to provide you with a useful simulation of reality so that you can navigate and interact with it. And it's the same brain which creates your dreams and visions. Those mental constructs you recognize as reality are highly susceptible to influence - either by pre-expectation (cognitive biases), trauma/injury, or chemical influence (dopamine, adrenaline, hallucinogens, etc) - just to name a few.

I put far more credibility in the objective and evidenced. I can say that I exist by the use of a subjectively derived system of logic - but I cannot say that "I" is a "Soul" in the same manner.



Consciousness is infinite, because every time you become conscious of yourself, you create another mind or thought that is conscious of that.


When I say that "I" exist, it's important to note that what is important is the span of time we attribute to consciousness. We don't perceive in the present, but what does exist in the present is an echo of the immediate past. This is because it takes time for an event to occur, for us to receive the stimulus, and then to construct the stimulus into perception. Consciousness is less the driver of the body, and more like the executive function which makes predictions allowing for interaction. Though the workings of the unconscious mind are not (in great majority) perceptible to the conscious mind - the unconscious mind shapes the conscious mind. Indeed, your brain must construct thoughts prior to your consciousnesses recognizing and utilizing them. When you see a face you know, but the name associated with it evades your consciousness recognition - your subconscious is working diligently trying to make that association. Hence the "tip of your tongue" moments of frustration. And even if you decide it's not important and focus on other matters, your subconscious is still trying to tease that association without you even knowing. Later on in the night, you might see something which triggers it, or hear a similar name which reminds you of it, and it may just come to you completely out of the blue for no apparent reason at all.

But you are not creating infinite consciousnesses. Rather, you are just acknowledging a non-existent mental construct of yourself which your mind projects and perceives as if they were a separate person. Further, your consciousness can be "severed in two" by severing the Corpus Callosum in your brain. You will still perceive one consciousness - but by selectively blocking sensory input to each hemisphere, an external observer can interview each hemisphere independently.



If you think of Eternity as a combination of past, present, and future simultaneously, then you have what is truly real.


The human brain is notoriously poor at understanding concepts such as infinity. Such concepts weren't useful to our early ancestors survival, and if someone thinks they've understood infinity - it merely means they've made a mental shortcut to handle a concept the brain cannot. Most people cannot even directly perceive in their mind more than six of anything without making subgroups. These might make you think you've perceived infinity, or that you understand it... but you really don't. Indeed, you'd die if you could directly conceptualize infinity - because the brain power necessary to perceive it would also be infinite. You'd die of exhaustion.



When we overcome this ignorance, we realize what our consciousness can not be conscious of


This is a contradiction. Cognitive dissidence is oft employed to make the irrational sound sublime, though I don't think you had that intent. It's merely so pervasive in our culture that we tend to pick up on it. It is the bread & butter of Illusionists & priests.



I am probably not saying this as clearly as possible


Yeah, I'm having a bit of trouble trying to follow what you're saying. Some of the statements I've made thus far may well be the result of mis-communication.



There's so much more to Buddhism and meditation than simply proving that the soul exists


While Buddhism is fascinating, and the feats of control over their body's function exerted by Zen masters are impressive - I have not yet found them inexplicable or supernatural in any fashion. Of all of the belief systems that people adopt and practice, Buddhism is probably the one that is most on-target in regards to the human mind.

Yet, I've read and learned too much about the functions of the brain - both psychological and neurological to put any credence behind claims of souls or spirits or ghosts or anything that supposedly transcends us after death. If anything can be, then it is an utter stranger to who we are that is just along for the ride. It has about as much to do with defining who we are as the carbon dioxide molecules we breath out. When we die, everything we are and ever were dies with us and dissipates into the environment like a tornado vanishing into nothingness after a trailer park feast.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


consciousness is tied not to the brain but to the heart. The brain is the receptor of consciousness, the heart is what fuels the body, not the brain.

When you are conscious of the Truth, you then realize that the Truth exists. After that, you simply know that the Truth exists, rather than having to be conscious of it or requiring your brain to continuously create thoughts regarding it. That is why it appears to be a contradiction.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by ancient_wisdom]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ancient_wisdom
reply to post by Lasheic
 


consciousness is tied not to the brain but to the heart. The brain is the receptor of consciousness, the heart is what fuels the body, not the brain.




The heart doesn't so much fuel the body, as it transports nutrients and oxygen to the body while carrying away waste & toxins. If anything, the intestines fuel the body by absorbing nutrients from the digested food into the bloodstream. Even so, some of the nutrients we need to stay healthy cannot be processed by our bodies alone. We rely on cultures of microbes which exist symbiotically inside of us for our health. These are no small passengers either, with the average adult carrying 5 to 15 lbs of them at a time, which outweighs many other vital human organs.




When you are conscious of the Truth, you then realize that the Truth exists. After that, you simply know that the Truth exists, rather than having to be conscious of it or requiring your brain to continuously create thoughts regarding it. That is why it appears to be a contradiction.


Depends on how you define "truth", as this seems to be another point of miscommunication. I understand there is an objective truth that I can be aware of and strive towards, but do not have the capability to possess or even fully understand. Most all of those who accept mechanistic and naturalistic worldviews are aware of this. From my standpoint; The truth is objective, and you exist as a part of it - not vice versa. The truth is something which must be excavated from skewed perception by multiple and repeatable objective observations.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by Lasheic]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
when you experience samadhi in meditation, you experience the bliss of meditation. That is what is then focused on.

I won't argue microbes with you, but if you think that you are a product of the universe, you are right in that the body is a product of the universe, but the fact that you have control of it means you have an advantage over your environment.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   
If you can explain to me what your interpretation of the soul is, then i'll tell you if i have one.

If you think about it as energy then everything has a soul. The universe is made of nothing but energy. Your sole is made of exactly the same thing as everything else.

If you think about it, someone in a coma is'nt dead and so still has a soul in the classic view of what a soul is.
However does that person know they have a soul if they cant conciousely contemplate one. Only we as observers can make that assumption. So as far as the coma patient is concerned they dont have one.

Maybe conciouseness is the soul.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Algebra
 


consciousness is the individual soul, the self. The transcendental Self is not exactly conscious but just simply Reality. Absolute Reality.

To experience Absolute Reality is to experience super consciousness/cosmic consciousness.

The individual soul is consciousness
The transcendental Self is Reality, neither conscious nor unconscious, but that which is. It's impossible to explain the Self, and is done through negative terminology as "not this, not that." But it can be experienced in meditation.

That is Samadhi, the state of super concentrated bliss.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ancient_wisdom
 




when you experience samadhi in meditation, you experience the bliss of meditation.


Oh, I won't argue that meditation is blissful. Plenty of studies have been done on the beneficial health effects of meditation - be it merely a moment of prayer or transcendent experience. I've found it immensely helpful to just sit quietly and attempt to completely quiet my mind immediately upon waking. It helps me focus... and the tranquility is wonderful.

Even if I don't believe anything actually transcendent is going on, the sensation of transcendence invoked can be powerful.



but the fact that you have control of it means you have an advantage over your environment.


To a degree. The only reason why we have any ability to willfully and proactively engage our local environments is because the lag time between reality and perception of reality is really quite minute. And while the brain is often compared to a computer, the operations of both are quite different. Our brains work heuristically, using jumbles of memory and perception and previous associations to infer the state of the world around us and make predictions based on that inference. When one of those predictions fails to manifest, we experience varying levels of cognitive dissidence or expectation/surprise. Going to back to the mention of illusionists I made earlier. When you see a magic trick being preformed; you would never experience that elated or troubled "break" in perception you do if you had first not predicted the outcome. Even if you didn't consciously recognize that you were making that prediction, we still do it.

Ken Kesey (the Author) said on a video I watched once that when he was teaching a writing class, he would always open with a magic trick. Because, in his words, "When you see something like that... there's a crack. You know it's a trick, but you can't figure it out. And that crack... lets in all the light. It opens up all the possibilities."

He was mentioning this in relation to the music of the Grateful Dead, which employs generous amounts of such breaks both in the music and lyrics. For instance, lines like "Ripple on still water. When there is no pebble tossed, or wind to blow." In the right atmosphere, the right state of mind, such a statement can blow your mind. It can provoke a transcendence-like state of euphoria, even without chemical assistance. Well, aside from what's already naturally in your brain.

What fascinates me, however, is why are such experiences so enjoyable? Perhaps cognitive dissonance is a motivator mechanism which attempts to auto-correct errors in perception by first triggering a sensation of uneasiness which drives you to correct or explain the conflict. If you can do so, or find a mechanism by which to cope, you are rewarded with a sensation of elation and happiness. Our emotions are some of our most primal sensations, and while they have been shaped and complicated by a continually developing brain, they still serve the same basic purposes in us as they did our reptilian ancestors. So if it seems a bit "carrot on a stick"-ish, keep in mind that our brains are no different than that of our first homo sapien ancestors, 150,000 years ago. And it was only 30,000 years ago that Cro-Magnon (cave men) and Neanderthal shared a European home. We just know more, and have made more use of that brain via enculturation.

And I wonder if, on some level, it's (in some part) that same under-laying motivator mechanism which drives the thrill of discovery in the sciences as well as the quest for magic and wonderment. Both searching for that thrill of discovery, of something new that challenges our perceptions and then fulfills them. Although Cognitive Dissonance is typically used in more present-tense scenarios, the ability we have to imagine in great detail far beyond the short term has us projecting more complete and intricate higher-level perceptions/worldviews onto reality. A reality which has repeatedly shown to be callously unconcerned with shattering our perceptions of how we think reality is/should be.

Or I could just be butchering psychology at this point.


[edit on 20-1-2010 by Lasheic]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Algebra
 


I agree with you in general terms, but I gotta nitpick a bit on the coma part. It really depends on brain activity, on what kind of a coma you're in. fMRI scanning of coma patients has revealed that their brains often are as functional and robust as anybody else's.. and they are perceptually aware. They just cannot interact or respond to outside stimulus in most cases. Though therapies involving Brain-Computer Interfaces will allow them to eventually speak and converse with doctors and family.

Vegetative patients like Terry Shiavo however.... yeah... anything that once resembled the person they were is long dead, and their body movement is more reflex and spasms.


In regards to "Energy" being what some people like to call the soul... you're right on IMO. I don't think most people who suggest it really mean "Energy" in the form they're trying to reconcile it with. If I were to kick Bernie Maydoff in the groin, I would be transferring as much kinetic energy from the tip of my shoe to his scrotum as I could... but what (if anything) that has to do with my soul or some flow of consciousness, I have yet to decipher.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


Interesting point that the brain has not changed in over 150,000 years. While I do not deny that evolution could be taking place and the changes may not be detectable, and that 150,000 years in evolutionary theory is hardly nothing at all, it does make it quite clear that the brain is not going anywhere in our lifetime. Therefore, if you place all of the importance on the brain, especially when it comes to intelligence, you are operating on a rather slow mainframe.

Instead, you can use the duality that the brain transfers to us of subject and object and instead find the correlation between the two through meditation. That "ground" between the two is the Self.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


Sorry i should have clarifyed that it was someone in a vegetative state i was refering to.

As regards to people refering to the spirit as energy. Its either energy or not. The kenetic energy you speak of would have to be the same as that of the soul. Just in a different state. You cant compare the soul to energy because if its not energy then its either something physical or a singularity.

However it could well be energy, just a different form to that we are used to. Like a kind of radiation or electro field

I think what im driving at is. Is the soul just energy that has been converted in to the spirit by the act of measurement. If we believe we have a soul then we create one. Then by creating one, it becomes whatever we want it to be.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
But it makes alot more sense that it is all a causational domino effect. That there is no freewill and every thought is an orchestra of chemicals and electrical signals. In fact we have evidence of this... yet what you say has no evidence and not only that you are delusional and desire these fantasy because you are desparate.

Stop making up things that dont exist to comfort you because reality is scary or uncomfortable. There is no after-life and no soul.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by Wertdagf]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ancient_wisdom
 




Therefore, if you place all of the importance on the brain, especially when it comes to intelligence, you are operating on a rather slow mainframe.


I don't think we've really begun to fully dissect the intricacies of memory, let alone it's optimization which is rather hard to experiment on without serious ethical consideration. Studies (what few there are) of feral children show permenant intellectual & emotional handicaps if raised outside of (or in minimal contact with) human social group during the developmental years. While there are evolutionary limitations on intelligence and cognition, this doesn't mean human intelligence is set in stone. Whereas some see a division between evolutionary psychology and behavioral psychology (nature vs. nurture) - I tend to think the two compliment each other fairly well. Our brains are amazingly plastic, and it's ability to re-wire itself so as to engage in learning or compensate for injury is phenomenal. Be that as it may, however, we are still talking about BILLIONS of neurons with TRILLIONS of synapse. Rewiring beyond a certain point just isn't going to happen. Again, this stresses a proper developmental environment so that when the child is young, with far far fewer brain cells, it is much easier to learn skills such as language and rules of social interaction.

Insofar as exceeding our biological limit, I would suggest that we have already done so long ago. However, we've implemented social/technological mechanisms by which to augment human memory and cognition. At the basic level this is represented by written language, books and culture. The formation of universities, logic, debate, the scientific method. Photographs, sheet music, compact disks. Computers are vastly popular for being able to store incredibly accurate copies of information and sent them around the globe in the blink of an eye, as well as collate data and track changes in trends we normally wouldn't notice.

In today's world, you would be hard pressed to find someone with the memorization skills of a bard in ancient Greece who had to memorize epic works such as the Iliad & Odyssey. Yet, you'd also be hard pressed to find an ancient Grecian who could memorize and access every book in the Library of Congress, and recall it - search it - and cross reference it with the ease and proficiency we can today. I see no reason for this trend to stop at the dermal layer, and I fully expect to see integrated computer enhancements to human brain function in my lifetime.



Instead, you can use the duality that the brain transfers to us


Point being, there is no duality so far as anyone can tell. While mind can indeed be exerted over matter, that does not dampen the realization that mind IS matter. Or more accurately, a meaningful configuration of matter from which "YOU" emerge as a product of complex interaction. Tweak that pattern, and you loose or modify the emergent trend. This is why those who suffer from traumatic brain injury often report a "loss of self" and why those close to them often report drastic changes in personality and disposition. So much so at times that it seems the original person is dead, and someone else took their place. And that's not too far off.




For example, visual or auditory hallucinations are associated with increased activity in the visual and auditory regions of the brain, respectively, and can be induced by electrical stimulation, during, for example, presurgical evaluation of epileptic patients.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 


if there is no free will, yet everything is an orchestra of chemicals and electrical signals, who's orchestrating?



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


The lower self is complex

the higher Self is singular.

It's a technical issue that needs to be underscored if you want to study metaphysics and Buddhism.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 

What a totally sad existence you must have.

Too much speak of the Brain as if it was the centre of Us, the thing that is Us. It is no such thing. The brain is only the neck-top computer that operates the functions of the body. The soul is what empowers that.

Yes you can cause all sorts of apparently supernatural phenomena when tickling the brain with electrodes, but, when these things happen via choice, at will, who then is tickling the brain with electrodes?

The soul is the energetic awareness that gives motive power to the physical body via the brain, without it there is no Life on Earth.

I have been having out of body and "supernatural" experiences all my life, from age 5 and now I am 50. At first they were unasked for by me, but once I met a teacher (small t) I learned how to operate with what was naturally there so that I could exit the body into the Real Time Zone astral layer and move about observing and reporting back the next day for proofs.

Doing so opened me even further so that Insight came unasked for all the time, and, more interestingly it was and has been spot on each and every time. When we can easily "visit" another person in a different country and report back to them where their house is, how their room was laid out and what they were wearing at the time, and find that these things were correct, then I cannot for the life of me find any reason to believe such things to be fakery or mind-created.

What I learned from direct experience, not based on any Belief-System, is that all things we can think of already exist, we are tiny portions of this aware universe, we are far more than what we are Indoctrinated into believing we are, we are powerful in our own right and that the only blockage to developing any higher awareness of the larger reality is exactly what you personally believe about it al and yourself.

Hence, those who are very much materially motivated, see Science as the whole truth and nothing but, cannot ever have direct experience of their higher-self without first dropping the pre-conceived notions being attached to.

When I dreamt of the September 11 events two weeks in advance, and told my friends about it, I could not accept that it would not occur. And so it did occur, exactly two weeks after seeing it in a lucid dream.

When I was chairing a research group meeting one night I had the by then known Feeling of something wanting connection with me... this is a feeling as if the centre of my fore. is being sucked inwards and the strength of it tells me how "important" the need for connection is. So I opened up at will to see what was making the request, only to be shown a woman dressed in black cammo clothing start shooting children hostages inside a building. .... it wasn't until the next morning that I heard on the Radio News that a school in Russia had been overrun by Terrorists and one of them.. a women in black cammo.. was the one who began shooting the kids.

Can you tell me how, under your understanding of the functioning of our human brain, that such things can occur and be so very correct in outcomes? Who was tickling my brain with electrodes?



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Tayesin
 


It seems like your avvoiding the obvious anwser. Your desparation for a higher power to protect you, or a superpower to bring justice to teh world, caused you to become deluded and invent evidence that never existed.

It is you that live in the sad world. Ignorance may be bliss... but some day soon the curtains gonna fall, and you will be naked.

Im sorry for what ever horrible things happened in your life to become crazy enough to imagine things like seeing 911 before it happend... or thinking your astral traveling. The day we see what these delusions really are youll be able to move forward in understanding.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by Tayesin
 


It seems like your avvoiding the obvious anwser. Your desparation for a higher power to protect you, or a superpower to bring justice to teh world, caused you to become deluded and invent evidence that never existed.

It is you that live in the sad world. Ignorance may be bliss... but some day soon the curtains gonna fall, and you will be naked.

Im sorry for what ever horrible things happened in your life to become crazy enough to imagine things like seeing 911 before it happend... or thinking your astral traveling. The day we see what these delusions really are youll be able to move forward in understanding.

Hello again W,

Just a couple of things to add here.

There is no higher power W, we are it already. So I have never sought a higher power to Protect me from anything. I do not need protection for I have no fear. This is so because I know there is nothing to fear anywhere, even when it appears there might be.

Naked, cool. As in with no crutches, no preconceived notions, no beliefs? Been there done that and sold off the T-shirt my friend, man it is invigorating, you truly know you're living in the moment then.

How does one invent evidence in advance of an event W?

I am not here to argue over who is right or wrong W.

I make no claims on your sanity, I do not heap disrespect on you, instead I do choose to share 100% openly, honestly and as simply as I can word it for the masses. Even though I know people with closed and decided minds will heap piles of dung on what I share.. that is okay too, it is just the way of things for now.

Enjoy W.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ancient_wisdom
 




if there is no free will, yet everything is an orchestra of chemicals and electrical signals, who's orchestrating?


Causality. Even if you suppose a god or gods that created the universe, this only means such a being would need to set up the initial (and relatively very simple to describe) conditions at the beginning of the universe and let causality handle the rest. So it wouldn't really be orchestrating, but more like letting dominoes fall as they may.

"Orchestrating" implies active intervention to guide results. While I personally believe in a creator god, I have yet to see evidence of the fundamental laws of physics being anything but constant. I don't suspect such a being intervenes - nor do I think such a being could intervene without completely borking physics as we know it. It would necessitate a violation of fine tuning arguments.

(Note: I don't actually endorse the fine tuning argument, though it does tend to come with the territory of pre-said belief. I just find it irrelevant.)

In any case, even if we can acknowledge that free will probably doesn't exist - we still perceive that it does. We didn't evolve in an environment which favored absolute causal knowledge of the universe. Such an ambition is impossible anyhow, since there's not enough energy in the universe to catalog and model the interactions of everything in the universe. We evolved brains that are useful at understanding just enough of our reality to survive until reproduction. The efficient and useful way to do this, was by inferring through heuristics based on experience, memory, associations, instinct, etc.

"Common Sense" is heuristic, while Science is Logic based. In computers, you're probably most familiar with heuristics via your virus scanner. This actually makes a decent conceptual analogy. While known threats are defined and immunized when discovered by AV programmers, there is no way for those programmers to immunize against threats which exist - but which they haven't discovered yet. Sort of like us in our environment, they can only take a reactive approach. Implementing heuristics into virus scanners allows users a basic layer of protection against those viruses the AV company hasn't encountered. The program uses basic "rules of thumb" and pattern recognition to identify potential threats which match certain criteria of known threats.

However, Heuristics has a terrible problem of being wrong quite a bit, since it's basically "looks like a duck" guesswork. In your AV software, errors might manifest in terms of flagging auto-update software and memory guards (for online games) as trojans and prematurely quarantine them. In perception, it leads to cognitive biases - which I'll mention a bit later.



It's a technical issue that needs to be underscored if you want to study metaphysics and Buddhism.


Truncate it. I don't need a functional understanding of it, just a conceptual understanding will do. Just like you don't need a functional understanding of atomic fission, to conceptually "get" how an atom bomb works.

reply to post by Tayesin
 




What a totally sad existence you must have.


I could say the same of you. There is a richness of beauty and texture to this Universe far grander than most people realize. It's not always comforting and pleasant though. I wouldn't expect it to be, either. Claims that are too good to be true, typically are. And while I may not always find comfort and bliss by accepting the evidence for what it suggests, I find dignity and solace. To paraphrase Thunderf00t;

"I strongly urge you to accept your mortality. Do not let your fear of your inevitable death make you waste your only mortal life pursuing phantasms and delusions. Look at yourself in the mirror, for billions of years those particles which are staring back at you circulated in the universe, but for a brief moment they have coalesced in you. Rejoice in that impressive instant until they dissipate whence they came. Delight that you're a spark of life in the universe. Life is so much more vibrant and vivid without the empty and undesirable promise that sparks can burn forever. Our time is finite. This gives our lives meaning, this gives our lives purpose, this gives our lives urgency. Live life today, Savor it."



The brain is only the neck-top computer that operates the functions of the body. The soul is what empowers that.


Then how do you account for the severing of the Corpus Callosum resulting in two distinct consciousnesses in isolation, while the patient is only perceptually aware of one? How are there two distinct wills acting independently and agnostic of each other - yet a seemingly single conscious observer who is unaware of either of them being separate?

By what mechanism does the soul interface with the brain? By the pattern of synaptic firing? No, that's well understood and mathematically defined. What exactly is the molecule or compound in the brain which interacts with the soul, so that it may empower the flesh? Can we then extract or sequester this agent outside of the brain so as to create "soul/reality" interfaces with technology? Why bother creating AI when a "Soul Co-Processor" can be installed in your PC?

Do you see the problem I'm trying to get at?





Yes you can cause all sorts of apparently supernatural phenomena when tickling the brain with electrodes, but, when these things happen via choice, at will, who then is tickling the brain with electrodes?


The perception of supernatural phenomena, at any rate. And it is your brain's operation which creates them. Your brain isn't a singular organ... it's a culture of billions of cells interacting with each other, divided up into specialized tasks that weave the tapestry of perception. When you look at cube, the stimuli your visual cortex processes doesn't just impress some innate "cubeness" upon your consciousness. There's a lot more going on under the hood. For instance, you can describe the properties of the cube in remarkable detail... but if you suffer from apperceptive agnosias, you wouldn't be able to recognize it as a cube. If all six sides are colored differently, you might be able to count the different colors and recall the fact that Cube = Six Sides... but you wouldn't be able to draw one. You couldn't tell a hexagon from a cube. If you suffered from prosopagnosia, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between your wife's face and your own reflection. Though you may still be able to identify which is which by other cues. For instance, if she is wearing earrings and your ears aren't pierced - you could distinguish between the two that way. But it wouldn't click in your mind... you still wouldn't recognize her face... or your own face.

And yes, you can prime your brain to invoke expected hallucination - especially if outside reinforcing techniques are used. Ambiance, music, ritual, social participation, etc.



The soul is the energetic awareness that gives motive power to the physical body via the brain, without it there is no Life on Earth.


The vast majority of life on Earth has no brain or nervous system. Do you suggest that microbes are not alive? Or are you suggesting some archaic version of vitalism?



I learned how to operate with what was naturally there so that I could exit the body into the Real Time Zone astral layer and move about observing and reporting back the next day for proofs.


Yet, I take it you didn't suffer from either form of agnosia I described above. I wonder, did you experience sensory perception while on your OBE? What colors did you see? Why did you see color with biological adaptations, rather than just perceiving variation in the wavelength of EM radiation? Could you see Microwaves and Radio Broadcasts?



When we can easily "visit" another person in a different country and report back to them where their house is, how their room was laid out and what they were wearing at the time, and find that these things were correct, then I cannot for the life of me find any reason to believe such things to be fakery or mind-created.


Come visit me then, and describe my den. Or better yet, preform such feats in a controlled environment under observation. You're not the first to make such claims, and if you substantiate them - then James Randi has an easy 1,000,000 for you to make.



that the only blockage to developing any higher awareness of the larger reality is exactly what you personally believe about it al and yourself.


It's not a matter of belief... it's a matter of evidence. If what you suggest is true, then I would love to discover more about it. Why would I hold prejudice towards the Neutron or Tectonic Plates, but not transcending the spiritual planes? But I'm not just going to take your word on it and stumble into a known cognitive bias.



Hence, those who are very much materially motivated, see Science as the whole truth and nothing but


This is incorrect. Science isn't limited to the material. It's limited to the real. Science studies abstract concepts such music, culture, and art. If magic were real, Science would study magic. Indeed, most of what IS science today, was the magic of yesterday - though poorly understood, if at all.

(Continued.)



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   


When I dreamt of the September 11 events two weeks in advance, and told my friends about it, I could not accept that it would not occur. And so it did occur, exactly two weeks after seeing it in a lucid dream.


I would assume that you had a dream journal then by which to record your dreams that you could use as evidence? I actually have tinkered around with Lucid Dreaming myself, and it has been well observed in controlled studies. However, I almost never dream. Or rather, I should say that I don't often remember my dreams. So one of the key steps in my process was to record a dream journal. Whenever I had a dream that I remembered, the first thing I did upon waking was writing down every detail. This helped to establish the ability to remember what my dreams were after waking, and helped me to identify certain "triggers" which only occur in my dreams.

For instance, I can't drive a car in my dreams. The car swerves all over the road, and it's difficult to maintain control. Noticing that trend, and others, it becomes easier to recognize when I am in a dream. Though I've found more success in mental focus on a concept or sound when transitioning between sleep and wakeful states. The only problem being that "falling" sensation when entering the dream state can be jarring enough to wake you.

So I do have a bit of experience on this particular topic of Lucid Dreaming, and I've also noticed that my perceptions of events in my dreams when recalling them several weeks to months later often differs from what I wrote in my dream journals. Associations get jumbled, memories get hemmed together at the corners, "jists" are mistaken as detail. Often what I recall as being one dream, was really a series of disconnected dreams. A lot of our memory is like that, sadly.

This segways back into my above mention of cognitive biases.

From Wiki-p



A cognitive bias is a person's tendency to make errors in judgment based on cognitive factors, and is a phenomenon studied in cognitive science and social psychology. Forms of cognitive bias include errors in statistical judgment, social attribution, and memory that are common to all human beings. Such biases drastically skew the reliability of anecdotal and legal evidence. These are thought to be based upon heuristics, or rules of thumb, which people employ out of habit or evolutionary necessity.


They also have quite an extensive list of cognitive biases.





Can you tell me how, under your understanding of the functioning of our human brain, that such things can occur and be so very correct in outcomes?


Were they correct? How many differences, perhaps vitally important, are there between your perception and the event you thought you had foresight of? Quiet a few suggestions pop up to my mind, but without evidence or independent access to observe the conditions of those claims - how am I to know if you're merely lying for attention, crazy, or genuinely honest thinking you are experiencing such phenomena. Now, if you want to make a detailed prediction of a future event, perhaps we can work something out to test your claims vs. my current understanding of neurology and psychology.

QuilaSoup has another excellent video on just this subject.



Who was tickling my brain with electrodes?


You were.




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join