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.
I do not exist. Neither do you.
page: 33share:
Originally posted by arollingstone
reply to post by smithjustinb
It has no bearing on existence? How do you think all other animals on this planet except for humans perceive themselves? That's right they don't. They don't perceive themselves as separate from their environment. The capacity for humanity to develop an ego is called sentience. Dolphins, whales, chimps, and a couple birds. That's all that believes they are separate. The rest do not believe in separation.
How would we function without labels? How do any animals function without labels? When it's time to eat, food is provided or is hunted for. Who has to ask for food?
Ok, wow. You really have swam way out of your depth now. What on earth are you talking about? Of course animals perceive themselves. And of course they see themselves as separate from their environments and other species. Otherwise they would be eating each other and humping trees. What kind of science books have you been reading?
All animals are sentient beings.. It does not mean that they believe in separation.. it means they are aware of their own existence and their relationship to their environment, that they are capable of feeling, etc. Are you for real? Dolphins, whales, chimps and a couple birds believe they are separate but all the other animals don't? Wow. What planet are you living on?
You're second paragraph is hence, non-void.
And once again, to state such nonsense as a fact is really not very productive unless you're writing a children's book.
I thought sentience meant self-awareness, but I looked it up, and I think I was wrong. All animals probably are sentient, but not all are self-aware. This was proven in a test called the mirror test where it showed that most animals do not have the ability to recognize themselves in a mirror. This means they are aware, but not aware of their self. They are aware of existence, but they don't know that it is them that is existing. Therefore, all that is left for them to infer is that their existence is the existence of the all. There is no differentiation, therefore, they are aware of this unity that I speak of. They are aware of it because they don't differentiate between self and other. Because they can't.
Now, with this in mind, you would assume then that self-awareness is a step up in the evolutionary ladder. And it is, but the point is not to separate yourself from the 'other'. The point is only to make you realize that it is you that is having the experience. Then, you go from the insect/lower animal awareness of "all is me and I am in the all" to the higher Creator God awareness of "I am all and all is in me". Right now, our awareness is, "I am me and all is not." We even believe that so strongly that it leads us to believe the lie of, "I am me and I am separate from all." But, that's just not how it is. The truth is, "All is me and all is in me." That's the next step in human perception.
Originally posted by arollingstone
All you know that you are is what has been told to you and what your ego has allowed itself to believe it is, but this is not really what you are.
Sigh. How do you know what I know? You don't and you lose credit for trying to tell me that you know more about me than I do. I know what I know and I know what I don't know, which I have made clear in all of my posts here. Minus 5 points.
How is it possible to know what you don't know? If you don't know it, how can you know it? minus 2 points.
Seriously though, uh. I don't know what you know. I know what you don't know, and what you don't know is what you are. I don't know what I am either. No one does. You might can say, "I am a living conscious being.", but that doesn't fully describe what you are. Because you could also say, "I am a living conscious being that...". Then, by continuing with your definition, you have an infinite number of possibilities to define what role the living, conscious being actually plays. The point is, some may say, "I am a living, conscious being.". Others may say, "I am intelligent life.". The fact of the matter is, no one knows what any of that implies. If you don't know the implications of what you are, then you don't really know the extent of what you are.
I never told anyone who they were, all I said is that no one knows what they are. How would I tell anyone what they are when I know that that answer is unknowable.
You just did that in the same response - look at the previous quoted segment. Minus 8 points.
No, I didn't. minus 42 points.
These are just weak definitions that miss the mark in properly identifying what it means to exist.p
No. We are living, conscious beings. To exist is to exist, end of. However we are conscious of existence, this is another undeniable truth. Minus 10 points.
Yes, that is what we are. But that is not all of what we are. No one knows all of what we are.
Minus 43 points, you lose.
Minus 44 points, you lose. Plus another 5 for claiming to have one when the game was not even over.
Minus 49 points.
Quit disagreeing with yourselves, don't make me SEPARATE you two
People think that it is them who are living their lives. They would be surprised to know that this is not true. It isn't you living your life, it
is God living your life.
reply to post by smithjustinb
S & F
Totally agree, and the science is on your side too! The more we look closer at outselves and closer we look at all matter, the more we see the particles within the particles are eventually just made of the same thing, and eventually you just have energy and space.
Even long before we are close enough to see the energy we see it is all the same thing just in different arrangements. If you look close up you can no longer define where you stop and where something else begins, therefore, as you state it is all simply one, it is all the same energy just in different concentrations.
What we experience is a perception, the perception is created from relativity, if we were a nano particle our perception would be very different, just as it would if were a galaxy.
S & F
Totally agree, and the science is on your side too! The more we look closer at outselves and closer we look at all matter, the more we see the particles within the particles are eventually just made of the same thing, and eventually you just have energy and space.
Even long before we are close enough to see the energy we see it is all the same thing just in different arrangements. If you look close up you can no longer define where you stop and where something else begins, therefore, as you state it is all simply one, it is all the same energy just in different concentrations.
What we experience is a perception, the perception is created from relativity, if we were a nano particle our perception would be very different, just as it would if were a galaxy.
edit on 4-12-2011 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)
reply to post by smithjustinb
I have an open mind, but not so open it falls out. ATS is the last place you'll find slavish brain dead devotees. Evidence and truth seekers we be.
FYI. Using the excuse that you cannot prove anything because it just is won't work. You need something concrete to prove your theory.
I have an open mind, but not so open it falls out. ATS is the last place you'll find slavish brain dead devotees. Evidence and truth seekers we be.
FYI. Using the excuse that you cannot prove anything because it just is won't work. You need something concrete to prove your theory.
reply to post by smithjustinb
How does that prove that animals are not self-aware? All it proves is that they don't understand the science behind mirrors. Animals don't tend to use mirrors very often. You ever seen a dog look in one? They don't bark at it, they clearly know its their own reflection after a while.
Even if the study were true, it doesn't explicitly mean that at all. That is a massive jump in logic.
As aforementioned, they definitely do differentiate between the self and the other - or they would have died out by now. If they couldn't they would be humping trees and eating their own. They recognise the differences between species and genders, which implies the opposite.
This is all rambling.. No one goes out their way to separate themselves from the other, it is the self-evident nature of existence.
No, 'All is me and all is in me' is not the truth. I am in the all would be more accurate. If the all was in me, I would be the universe.
I thought sentience meant self-awareness, but I looked it up, and I think I was wrong. All animals probably are sentient, but not all are self-aware. This was proven in a test called the mirror test where it showed that most animals do not have the ability to recognize themselves in a mirror.
How does that prove that animals are not self-aware? All it proves is that they don't understand the science behind mirrors. Animals don't tend to use mirrors very often. You ever seen a dog look in one? They don't bark at it, they clearly know its their own reflection after a while.
This means they are aware, but not aware of their self. They are aware of existence, but they don't know that it is them that is existing.
Even if the study were true, it doesn't explicitly mean that at all. That is a massive jump in logic.
Therefore, all that is left for them to infer is that their existence is the existence of the all. There is no differentiation, therefore, they are aware of this unity that I speak of. They are aware of it because they don't differentiate between self and other. Because they can't.
As aforementioned, they definitely do differentiate between the self and the other - or they would have died out by now. If they couldn't they would be humping trees and eating their own. They recognise the differences between species and genders, which implies the opposite.
Now, with this in mind, you would assume then that self-awareness is a step up in the evolutionary ladder. And it is, but the point is not to separate yourself from the 'other'. The point is only to make you realize that it is you that is having the experience. Then, you go from the insect/lower animal awareness of "all is me and I am in the all" to the higher Creator God awareness of "I am all and all is in me". Right now, our awareness is, "I am me and all is not." We even believe that so strongly that it leads us to believe the lie of, "I am me and I am separate from all." But, that's just not how it is. The truth is, "All is me and all is in me." That's the next step in human perception.
This is all rambling.. No one goes out their way to separate themselves from the other, it is the self-evident nature of existence.
No, 'All is me and all is in me' is not the truth. I am in the all would be more accurate. If the all was in me, I would be the universe.
reply to post by smithjustinb
Couldn't think of your own original post? Ok, lets go pal.
Because I am aware of what I know for certain, as well as what I don't. Careless reading. Minus 1000 points.
Then...
If you don't know what I know - you don't know what I don't know. Sorry, total failure of logic here - minus 1000 points.
It may, it may not. It's close enough for me. It is extremely delusional and arrogant to assume that humans are anything more without adequate justification. As far as we're aware, that's all we are. Unless you can prove a more concise definition, you have no argument.
No, there are not an infinite number of possibilities - that is a ludicrous claim. Perhaps there are many ways in which ignorant people could try to define it, but they are not valid. Living, conscious being = intelligent life - it's just another way of phrasing it.
You're losing your grip on coherency here, never mind the repetition.
You may not know who or what you are, but that doesn't mean nobody else does. There is no evidence to suggest that we are anything other than human beings, biological machines, whatever definition you choose to assume.
Your argument is extremely juvenile - 'nobody knows what we are' 'anything is possible' etc. Uninformed ramblings. You seem to think your views hold more precedence than thousands of years of empirical study across a range of fields - when yours are based on none other than an idea that 'we don't know anything'. Maybe we don't know everything for certain, but that does not mean we're not getting closer by the day.
Seriously, please do some reading before shooting off about how nobody knows anything because that's an insult to intelligence, rationality, science, philosophy, you name it.
You should not debate a subject until you have done your homework!
Minus infinity points.
Couldn't think of your own original post? Ok, lets go pal.
How is it possible to know what you don't know? If you don't know it, how can you know it? minus 2 points.
Because I am aware of what I know for certain, as well as what I don't. Careless reading. Minus 1000 points.
Seriously though, uh. I don't know what you know.
Then...
I know what you don't know, and what you don't know is what you are.
If you don't know what I know - you don't know what I don't know. Sorry, total failure of logic here - minus 1000 points.
You might can say, "I am a living conscious being.", but that doesn't fully describe what you are.
It may, it may not. It's close enough for me. It is extremely delusional and arrogant to assume that humans are anything more without adequate justification. As far as we're aware, that's all we are. Unless you can prove a more concise definition, you have no argument.
Because you could also say, "I am a living conscious being that...". Then, by continuing with your definition, you have an infinite number of possibilities to define what role the living, conscious being actually plays. The point is, some may say, "I am a living, conscious being.". Others may say, "I am intelligent life."
No, there are not an infinite number of possibilities - that is a ludicrous claim. Perhaps there are many ways in which ignorant people could try to define it, but they are not valid. Living, conscious being = intelligent life - it's just another way of phrasing it.
The fact of the matter is, no one knows what any of that implies. If you don't know the implications of what you are, then you don't really know the extent of what you are.
You're losing your grip on coherency here, never mind the repetition.
I never told anyone who they were, all I said is that no one knows what they are.
You may not know who or what you are, but that doesn't mean nobody else does. There is no evidence to suggest that we are anything other than human beings, biological machines, whatever definition you choose to assume.
Your argument is extremely juvenile - 'nobody knows what we are' 'anything is possible' etc. Uninformed ramblings. You seem to think your views hold more precedence than thousands of years of empirical study across a range of fields - when yours are based on none other than an idea that 'we don't know anything'. Maybe we don't know everything for certain, but that does not mean we're not getting closer by the day.
Seriously, please do some reading before shooting off about how nobody knows anything because that's an insult to intelligence, rationality, science, philosophy, you name it.
You should not debate a subject until you have done your homework!
Minus infinity points.
reply to post by arollingstone
You may not believe anything you have read here except for what you have written, so i have posted this documentary for you to watch. It includes the mirror test on children so you can see when 'self' consciousness appears, it not something you are born with.
Please watch it and then comment.
BBC Horizon The Secret You:
youtu.be...
It is quite shocking even the presenter is flabbergasted at the results especially the last experiment.
You may not believe anything you have read here except for what you have written, so i have posted this documentary for you to watch. It includes the mirror test on children so you can see when 'self' consciousness appears, it not something you are born with.
Please watch it and then comment.
BBC Horizon The Secret You:
youtu.be...
It is quite shocking even the presenter is flabbergasted at the results especially the last experiment.
edit on 5-12-2011 by Itisnowagain
because: (no reason given)
reply to post by Itisnowagain
Your link provides no evidence against the existence of individual self. That we can be ignorant about ourselves doesn't prove that there is no self. That a brain can be so young that it has not yet developed the neuro-psychological capacity for self-perception and self-awareness, or that a brain can be in whatever the way impaired of the capacity to recognize self doesn't mean that there is no such thing as self.
That which objectively exists exists regardless of whether we know it or not. It is not knowledge of something that brings it into existence. If self wouldnt' exist, knowledge of self would be impossible: it is impossible to know that which does not exist.
The claim that one becomes more self-aware by denying the existence of individual self is so absurd for those that have the logic to see the absurdity.
We do not all have the same level of individual self-knowledge. If there would only be one universal self and no individual selves, then we would all have the same level of self-knowledge and self-awareness, but this is not the case. The psychological fact of individual self is that there are multitudes of individual selves, with various levels of self-knowledge, and self-awareness due to various levels of individual development and growth.
Your link provides no evidence against the existence of individual self. That we can be ignorant about ourselves doesn't prove that there is no self. That a brain can be so young that it has not yet developed the neuro-psychological capacity for self-perception and self-awareness, or that a brain can be in whatever the way impaired of the capacity to recognize self doesn't mean that there is no such thing as self.
That which objectively exists exists regardless of whether we know it or not. It is not knowledge of something that brings it into existence. If self wouldnt' exist, knowledge of self would be impossible: it is impossible to know that which does not exist.
The claim that one becomes more self-aware by denying the existence of individual self is so absurd for those that have the logic to see the absurdity.
We do not all have the same level of individual self-knowledge. If there would only be one universal self and no individual selves, then we would all have the same level of self-knowledge and self-awareness, but this is not the case. The psychological fact of individual self is that there are multitudes of individual selves, with various levels of self-knowledge, and self-awareness due to various levels of individual development and growth.
reply to post by hmdphantom
I believe in God and I kinda understand what he is saying.
talk for yerself
I believe in God and I kinda understand what he is saying.
talk for yerself
reply to post by Itisnowagain
it is incredible how far u go to bet on oness force for ur relative sake base of wills, u love so much powers that u keep moving all ways for
no mister what i said is right so what u r saying about self awareness is total fallacy
animals are self aware too but not conscious, bc they cant perceive objective separate to them, they think that all is related to themselves so as one like u love to see all, they confuse awareness and self reality, bc they are not conscious of truth conception, truth conception is the reason of humans brains as free conscious stands, that know how themselves is a relative fact independant from all objective perspective being resolved in absolute terms of truth conception as existing while themselves only relative to that objectiveness from them out of it free like
brains in humans mind is what allow that abstraction to b constant present so beings could deal with objective and relative separately and both relations
animals think that they are included in sorting everything as it is that is why they dont get how there could see themselves objectively, they think being themselves part of all objective while only their forms realities is objective not them
truth is the answer only bc truth is only what exist objectively and subjectively, everyone and especially ur gods first enjoy believing that they could spend their freedom as out of truth positively, while if they mean that they should then stay still, bc free objective moves are only of recognizing that all is free, and recognizing that is by considering first truth freedom conception as existing objective right the most
second point that shows how u jump too fast for giving to oness force any justifications by inventing any fallacy as a reply to what u see being right
is where u say that u cant know what u dont know, it is like willing to take advantage from that easy abuse to mean that noone know any, while u keep running around telling everyone that u know
for what u surely somewhere is aware that if relative knowledge exist, so free conscious of that is what know how it is relative in positive and negative absolute terms, to conceive it right and realize it objectively in limited ways
so no mister, only u know what u r bc any object and objective reality is to truth which is whole noone, that each and any is exclusively relatively existing through as each and any is relative fact out of it true
it is incredible how far u go to bet on oness force for ur relative sake base of wills, u love so much powers that u keep moving all ways for
no mister what i said is right so what u r saying about self awareness is total fallacy
animals are self aware too but not conscious, bc they cant perceive objective separate to them, they think that all is related to themselves so as one like u love to see all, they confuse awareness and self reality, bc they are not conscious of truth conception, truth conception is the reason of humans brains as free conscious stands, that know how themselves is a relative fact independant from all objective perspective being resolved in absolute terms of truth conception as existing while themselves only relative to that objectiveness from them out of it free like
brains in humans mind is what allow that abstraction to b constant present so beings could deal with objective and relative separately and both relations
animals think that they are included in sorting everything as it is that is why they dont get how there could see themselves objectively, they think being themselves part of all objective while only their forms realities is objective not them
truth is the answer only bc truth is only what exist objectively and subjectively, everyone and especially ur gods first enjoy believing that they could spend their freedom as out of truth positively, while if they mean that they should then stay still, bc free objective moves are only of recognizing that all is free, and recognizing that is by considering first truth freedom conception as existing objective right the most
second point that shows how u jump too fast for giving to oness force any justifications by inventing any fallacy as a reply to what u see being right
is where u say that u cant know what u dont know, it is like willing to take advantage from that easy abuse to mean that noone know any, while u keep running around telling everyone that u know
for what u surely somewhere is aware that if relative knowledge exist, so free conscious of that is what know how it is relative in positive and negative absolute terms, to conceive it right and realize it objectively in limited ways
so no mister, only u know what u r bc any object and objective reality is to truth which is whole noone, that each and any is exclusively relatively existing through as each and any is relative fact out of it true
reply to post by Lucidia
There is only the feeling of the present moment as the presenter said at the end of his last test. All you have is the sensation of the present moment. The sensation of 'this'.
Life is sensational.
Yet as humans we project an imaginary future and with that imaginary future there is an imaginary 'me'. The future 'me' and the past 'me' are illusionary as is the past and future. The only 'me' there is is right here and now always present with what is happening.
What is happening is the present moment and i can not separate myself from that.
You might 'think' that you can separate youself from the present moment but that is not true. Everything is happening now as one.
No one has proved that something objectively exists without someone being there, you can say it does but it can not be proved!!
And have you actually looked to see if you can find this 'self' you are so sure is there?
Have look for it now and write back and tell me what you find.
There is only the feeling of the present moment as the presenter said at the end of his last test. All you have is the sensation of the present moment. The sensation of 'this'.
Life is sensational.
Yet as humans we project an imaginary future and with that imaginary future there is an imaginary 'me'. The future 'me' and the past 'me' are illusionary as is the past and future. The only 'me' there is is right here and now always present with what is happening.
What is happening is the present moment and i can not separate myself from that.
You might 'think' that you can separate youself from the present moment but that is not true. Everything is happening now as one.
No one has proved that something objectively exists without someone being there, you can say it does but it can not be proved!!
And have you actually looked to see if you can find this 'self' you are so sure is there?
Have look for it now and write back and tell me what you find.
edit on 6-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
reply to post by Lucidia
"The claim that one becomes more self-aware by denying the existence of individual self is so absurd for those that have the logic to see the absurdity."
Of course this is an absurd claim-who wrote it?
"The claim that one becomes more self-aware by denying the existence of individual self is so absurd for those that have the logic to see the absurdity."
Of course this is an absurd claim-who wrote it?
edit on 6-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
You might 'think' that you can separate youself from the present moment but that is not true. No one has proved that something objectively exists without someone being there, you can say it does but it can not be proved!!
(no reason given)
what is that video u made me loose the precious use of my hands for seconds to mean, u think it is funny dont u, guessing what i think of buddhas creepy figure, which prove how u r smart so all u say here is the hypocrite u r
like here ur sentence i quoted, it is obvious that u know self exist without needing another but u r meaning to abuse the idea of thinking that lucidia as anyother cant prove it, to jump on the conclusions u can use to justify any of ur wills conclusions based on the statement that self do not exist
very bright of ur mauvaise foi congratulations
of course u can separate urself from the present that what u do and all evil ones do, but to do it right like i do it is proven possible too despite all powers of evil directly forcing u to stop but that is what i do always right
now let me prove its absolute justification in truth
positive objective abstraction is the present, if u realize by urself any consideration to objective right existing reality as it is then u r present
superiority freedom is the truth, if u can step back from all objective realities by meaning free stand justification being better then all u see and realize ur self freedom of that justified mean as a nothing to even u but verify how u r relative to so true
not only u r then proving urself existing alone objectively but also that u dont need whole existence to know how u r true as ur self free sense is being in truth rights
reply to post by absolutely
freedom sense is the easiest fact since all and any is free in truth and evil powers is bc of that fact
but anyone who is relatively true at a point real cant b free in evil ways absolutely never
that is why most of u choose to stop being real in order to be free really present stable fact
evil ways of being free, is from meaning all existence and objective realities inferiority always, so it is easy to invent any justification that u become relatively real with to assert geting ur present stand constancy freedom
right ways is from meaning objective conception superiority while u do the opposite
freedom sense is the easiest fact since all and any is free in truth and evil powers is bc of that fact
but anyone who is relatively true at a point real cant b free in evil ways absolutely never
that is why most of u choose to stop being real in order to be free really present stable fact
evil ways of being free, is from meaning all existence and objective realities inferiority always, so it is easy to invent any justification that u become relatively real with to assert geting ur present stand constancy freedom
right ways is from meaning objective conception superiority while u do the opposite
reply to post by absolutely
I am present and it is the present, this equals presence.
There is just presence.
Sorry you didn't like the enlightening video.
I am present and it is the present, this equals presence.
There is just presence.
Sorry you didn't like the enlightening video.
edit on 6-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
reply to post by azulejo
It is clear that I am talking for my self.
Every one on ATS is talking for his/her self and this is not necessary to mention it.
I just commented based on my personal experience and I think you better recommend something better than slapping me in the face , because slapping some one in the face is not going to have positive outcome.
regards.
talk for yerself
It is clear that I am talking for my self.
Every one on ATS is talking for his/her self and this is not necessary to mention it.
I just commented based on my personal experience and I think you better recommend something better than slapping me in the face , because slapping some one in the face is not going to have positive outcome.
regards.