I suspect reality is as follows, and I want liberation from it

page: 20
175
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mindpeace
Perhaps the “brain” is a seemingly physical branch on the tree of the mind and, after all is said and done, maybe the physical brain is nothing more than the interface the mind uses to interact with the reality it perceives.


This topic is interesting philosophically but I think that it has already be proven scientifically.

The brain is nothing but a series of chemicals reactions to synthesize the information received from the body.

However, nothing about our understanding of the brain suggests it is able to "feel" it's own message.

The very nature of consciousness itself proves that a nonphysical piece (soul/mind/energy) is required for emotion,thought, and feelings to even exist.




posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Reality is objective, we can all agree that the earth is an oblate spheroid, that's science, that's FACT. There's no getting around that fact, If someone says well it's my subjective opinion of reality that it's flat, you would tell them to check some satalite imagery.


Well an objective reality might exist, but to start off you should realize that scientifically it is impossible to even prove another person has consciousness let alone the idea that they experience reality as you do.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Nice post and I have had the same thoughts before. One of the ultimate questions in life is, Is it worth it? The real kicker in all of this is that we have created this world and decided to come here. If our consciousness is part of this Source that created the world, then we have chosen this existence. A lot of the evil in the world is a result of human activity. So if you don't like it then guess who has the power to change it: You do. My philosophy is just be a force for good in the world and after death you can argue with the Source about weather or not the universe as we know it should continue. Great work!



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by Mindpeace
Perhaps the “brain” is a seemingly physical branch on the tree of the mind and, after all is said and done, maybe the physical brain is nothing more than the interface the mind uses to interact with the reality it perceives.


This topic is interesting philosophically but I think that it has already be proven scientifically.

The brain is nothing but a series of chemicals reactions to synthesize the information received from the body.

However, nothing about our understanding of the brain suggests it is able to "feel" it's own message.

The very nature of consciousness itself proves that a nonphysical piece (soul/mind/energy) is required for emotion,thought, and feelings to even exist.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Another Hello Jezus.

As always, interesting thoughts and they are greatly appreciated. Much food for thought.

…p r o o f…

For me, the probable source of understanding/misunderstanding are words, terms and their personally accepted “value”. Since these concepts (words, terms) are most probably mere conveyors of information and NOT the information itself (a premise I personally accept as probably “true”), then it seems to me that all sorts of “additives” are consciously/unconsciously included in the shipment when interacting with others.

So someone please attach a personal meaning to the concept identified as “proof”. A few of the possibilities:

Is “proof” definitive Individual acceptance of a given concept’s validity as it relates to…whatever?

What role do the emotions play in determining “proof”?

What role does intellect play in determining “proof”?

What role does personal philosophy play in determining "proof"?

Is “proof” representative of discovery or contrivance?

Does an Individual’s chosen approach to life determine the method of formulating [acceptable] proof (religion, science, philosophy, none of these, etc.)?

Are “proof” and “truth” synonymous and interchangeable?

Although we can define and categorize our Individual and shared “reality” ad infinitum, where does the significance of “proof” ultimately rest?

and, finally

Is all of this merely bull_sh*t and we, after all is said and done, are simply moving it around with our ethereal shovels...rendering life and existence absolutely meaningless?

As I mentioned above, “Much food for thought”; though I’m running a bit short on Prilosec at the moment.

Thanks for listening.

Mindpeace
edit on 1-12-2010 by Mindpeace because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


I'd suspect the majority of us do considering that we have the same physical make-up, we are the same species, This reality has given birth to all of us, we can all prove we're concious by the very fact we are typing on a chat room or talking to our friends.

The very fact that scientists can come to an agreement in terms of practical science, of observation, the very fact we can work together shows we are concious beings and that reality is objective. E.g you see a lake, i see a lake, you see stars, so do i (providing i have no genetic defects)

I apologise but i feel like that subjective reality is a cop out, it's an falsifiable hypothesis. It's not subjective i because your body adheres to the same physical laws of nature, things appear the same as they do to anyone else, we are on a planet, it orbits the son, we have evidence now, it's not subjective.

Most people describe animals the same, maybe with different language, but we observe reality just the same as each other, we can draw pictures and use video footage to show reality is objective.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Jezus
 


I'd suspect the majority of us do considering that we have the same physical make-up, we are the same species, This reality has given birth to all of us, we can all prove we're concious by the very fact we are typing on a chat room or talking to our friends.

The very fact that scientists can come to an agreement in terms of practical science, of observation, the very fact we can work together shows we are concious beings and that reality is objective. E.g you see a lake, i see a lake, you see stars, so do i (providing i have no genetic defects)

I apologise but i feel like that subjective reality is a cop out, it's an falsifiable hypothesis. It's not subjective i because your body adheres to the same physical laws of nature, things appear the same as they do to anyone else, we are on a planet, it orbits the son, we have evidence now, it's not subjective.

Most people describe animals the same, maybe with different language, but we observe reality just the same as each other, we can draw pictures and use video footage to show reality is objective.


I understand that logically it might seem obvious that other people are conscious.

But scientifically you can not prove that consciousness exists.

You can observe correlations between brain activity and perceived mental states.

However, there is no way to see the difference between something complex that responds to stimuli and something that actually feels and is conscious.

This may seem ridiculous but it is an important part of understand that abstract nature of consciousness.



posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


You can't prove scientifically that "love" exists either.



posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Jezus
 


You can't prove scientifically that "love" exists either.


Exactly.

Thoughts, emotions, and feelings are the substance of consciousness.

Think about when someone says "I am in love" or "I am happy"

It is fundamentally abstract.



posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


But i still know those emotions exist as a manifestation of the human mind, just as are numbers. You don't find these by simply looking under rocks in nature. Ideas are "bulletproof" but nature is still objective,reality is objective, we are a contruct of reality in the same way that a rock or a solar system is.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Jezus
 


But i still know those emotions exist as a manifestation of the human mind, just as are numbers. You don't find these by simply looking under rocks in nature. Ideas are "bulletproof" but nature is still objective,reality is objective, we are a contruct of reality in the same way that a rock or a solar system is.


"emotions exist as a manifestation of the human mind"

The human mind does not create emotions, the human mind/consciousness is literally made up of abstract concepts like emotions, thoughts, and feelings.

Reality COULD be objective on some level but we would never know because of the subjective dominance of our conscious experience.

Reality is a construct of consciousness; not the other way around.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


"The human mind does not create emotions, the human mind/consciousness is literally made up of abstract concepts like emotions, thoughts, and feelings."

You're mind, brain and cells provide the ability to experience emotions LIKE I SAID.

There's no subjectivity, i see an animal, you see one, if i torture it, you see that, you don't see what your mind WANTS you to see. it is objective.
edit on 4/12/10 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Jezus
 


"The human mind does not create emotions, the human mind/consciousness is literally made up of abstract concepts like emotions, thoughts, and feelings."

You're mind, brain and cells provide the ability to experience emotions LIKE I SAID.


Mind = Emotion

Mind is not created by the brain it interacts with the brain.

You are confusing correlation with causation.

The brain does not create emotion.

The brain sends a message to the mind and responds to the mind's activity upon receiving the message .


The external world has information.

The physical vehicle collects this information.

The brain synthesizes this information.

The mind receives this message.

EMOTION = THE MIND CHANGING

The brain respond to the mind's changes.


The mind is the reflection point.



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


If you didn't have a brain, you woudn't sense anything.

Chemical reactions have been recorded in the brain in "CORRELATION" with our emotions.

If you take the brain away, or cease the brain there would be no activity to manifest, hence no emotions.

There is no afterlife, this is reality, when we die, we cease to be. I am a human consisting of biological and physical matter, therefore i am.

When i die, i will return to the earth, but i will not be alive in the conscious sense.

That's all i am saying.
edit on 18/12/10 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)
edit on 18/12/10 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


The fundamentally nonphysical, abstract nature of consciousness is a distinct issue.

You simplify far too much and squash something complex into your notions of religion and souls.

You need to view consciousness from the physiological psychology point of you.



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


I literally have no idea what your talking about. I'm sorry i think (perhaps) you're misunderstanding me. I never profess any knowledge of the soul, or preach any religion. The soul is an abstract concept to me. A human word created to try to define the underpinning of our own experience or consciousness of this reality. Its means nothing to me to be honest, in the same way that "Spirituality" means nothing to me, just an abstract word like a "demon" or a "sin"

Again i state, you take away the biological concept that is a human, you destroy its cells and functions, you cease its activity. This includes the mental acitivity of the brain, and thus the mind.

What's your theory? Please explain? Sorry if i'm being ignorant.
edit on 18/12/10 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Furthermore, i present to you "Information-theoretic death"

Enjoy.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


Hello awake_and_aware.

Firstly, please forgive this intrusion.

You know, I've been following your conversation with Jezus, and perhaps what follows here MAY convey to you a belief position concerning the state of being referred to as physical existence and, maybe more importantly, how your consciousness may actually be creating what you perceive and sense as being REAL as your Individuality interacts with that "reality" through application of an "appropriate" interface (your brain, physical senses, etc.).

++++++++++

In extremely cold weather, you can feel the bite of the air on your skin. You can see the ice crystals form on your window and YOU KNOW WITHOUT A SHADOW OF DOUBT that without those walls of your home to protect you from the frigid bitterness, you would most certainly die.

In reality, however, there ARE no walls and there IS no cold; and your own physical body's "realness" is in all actuality a portion of the entire [physical] panorama. Put another way, although you fervently BELIEVE these things to be real, you accept this as being "true" ONLY on a level of consciousness mired in this [perceptible] physical existence through application of that "appropriate physical interface" previously mentioned, and that on other levels of awareness you quite easily "contextualize" this [physical] experience into a level of consciousness that INCLUDES your physical experience, but a level of consciousness that is NOT LIMITED TO physical experience.

++++++++++

Simply offered here as food for thought, and nothing more.

Thanks for listening and Happy Holidays.

Mindpeace








edit on 21-12-2010 by Mindpeace because: addition of a partial thought.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Jezus
 

I literally have no idea what your talking about. I'm sorry i think (perhaps) you're misunderstanding me.


I understand you perfectly.

You are allowing your view of religion distort your comprehension of consciousness.


Originally posted by awake_and_aware
The soul is an abstract concept to me.


A soul is just a word to describe raw consciousness.

However, fundamentally consciousness IS abstract.


Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Again i state, you take away the biological concept that is a human, you destroy its cells and functions, you cease its activity. This includes the mental acitivity of the brain, and thus the mind.


If you can understand the abstract nature of consciousness then you will understand the distinction between the mind and the brain.

The brain does not feel or think. It communicates with that which does. It synthesizes information from the outside world and reacts to the Mind's response to this information.

Soul - Mind - Consciousness

These are all different ways to describe the same thing.

That which feels and decides.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 



You are allowing your view of religion distort your comprehension of consciousness.


No, my scepticism is getting in the way. My view of religion is that it is false, presumptuous and immature.

I am skeptic as there is no evidence.

If someone tells me "I can talk to Ghosts/Dead People"," Heal people with their hands", "There is an afterlife" - i want evidence to confirm these claims.

What EVIDENCE do you have that consciousness carries on long after the physical body has ceased?

Forgive me if i'm being ignorant, but what evidence do you have? Present me with it.

If you say my consciousness carries on after death, then did it exist before i was born?
edit on 22/12/10 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


Last night I had the strangest dream, as the song goes, not about putting an end to war unfortunately, but about a very cute, very small monkey that I let in my _ I kept asking the little monkey to sit on my shoulder, but it wouldn't, it would just tilt it's head and look at me quizically. I put it on my shoulder, and it jumped straight off like it'd been shocked, and then hid from me. I couldn't coax it back out again. That, in the dream, made me sad. Wanting to know how to look after it, I looked up what type of monkey it was, or saw a nameplate, or something like that, I can just remember it being black text on a white background. I woke up, just before 5, straight out of the dream, switched on the light and wrote down the name. Mainly because it was an unusual name but also I was sure that I had seen it before somewhere. Cutting to the quick, it was a Schuyler Monkey, which of course does not exist. So now I am wondering why I am dreaming about you and why you are a little monkey. Any ideas?

Perhaps, it's to do with boobs...I should maybe try that thread instead...could I have been wanting you to sit on my shoulder so that you would look at my cleavage because you need to feel better? Or perhaps to make me feel better? Am I feeling inadequate because I can't make men healthy because I lack the necessary cleavage?

Interesting...and not even remotely off-topic, if you think about it.





new topics
top topics
 
175
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join