It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 34
<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by UFOOWNER

But absolutism is a fine road to stagnation and I don't want that.


posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 01:38 PM
In this ocean of verbiage, here's three excerpts from the Upanishads:

He by whom It is not thought out, has the thought of It; he by whom It is thought out, knows It not. It is unknown to the discernment of those who discern of It, by those who seek not to discern of It, It is discerned.

- Kena Upanishad.

An inferior man cannot tell you of Him; for thus told thou canst not truly know Him, since He is thought of in many aspects. Yet unless told of Him by another thou canst not find thy way there to Him; for He is subtler than subtlety and that which logic cannot reach.

- Katha Upanishad.

He that is not easy even to be heard of by many, and even of those that have heard they are many who have not known Him, — a miracle is the man that can speak of Him wisely or is skilful to win Him, and when one is found, a miracle is the listener who can know God even when taught of Him by the knower.

- Katha Upanishad.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 04:53 PM
reply to post by Itisnowagain

"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."

That you ask for evidence of the existence of self shows that you are confused about what the self means. You need to learn to distinguish between the the nature of consciousness and the nature of self. There are as many selves as there are perspectives of consciousness. Just because they are all perspectives of consciousness does not mean that there is only one self, and only one consciousness: consciousness is in actuality individuated. Additionally, before you search for evidence of the existence of self, you should consider the various definitions of self, and identify which of these definitions of self you reject. A basic definition of self: an individual natural person. How to identify a self? By the biological embodiment of one's conscious perspective. Only we can feel the sensations that happen to our body. Others don't observe what we sense, only what they themselves sense. If there would only be one self, that is one perspective of consciousness, we would all be optimally telepathic, and there would be no cognitive separation, but that is clearly not the case. The existence of self is thus easily proven.

In ancient times the concept of self existed with a different word: soul. Soul was considered the life principle of the body, and that which allows the body to be conscious, and self-conscious. The emergence of psychology led to a secularized concept of 'soul,' that is, the introduction of 'self' or 'psyche' to study the inner cognition and overt behaviour of the body.

Taking into consideration both the ancient and contemporary definitions of self, I recognize self is the conscious, individual life force of each body.

In regards to your video link, just because someone can no longer access a conscious perspective of their body when their brain is impaired or altered does not mean that no conscious individual perspective of that body is possible or that self cannot exist. Thus, when you question the existence of self, and even ask someone to prove it exists what you are doing by logical implication is demanding proof for something that is already self-evident to most sane, living individuals. They know that their self exists because they individually experience its existence.

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 08:06 PM
Thank-you for this thread, thank-you for your reply to my post, I will help you with some definitions to allow those that are stateing you are wrong to think a little more critically of their own statements. These words are,
PERSPECTIVE and PERCEPTION. Depending upon our individual state of perspective upon that which we collectively percieve we will derive at a completely different truth.

We are all one and inseperable. I am, you are, we are as one. We are a manifestion of our planet. Without our planet we are as yet unable to exist. Yet at the same time the greatest threat to our continued existence is our own planet and the manifestations it creates. Our planet is a manifestation of our solar system which is a manifestation of our galaxy which is a manifestation of our percieveable Universe. From this PERSPECTIVE we are the Universe and are inseperable from it. It is us and we are it. I am you and you are me, we are as one.

Yet our reality is a CONTRADICTION. It is in the contradictions that we have derived purpose and meaning. When you state the obvious from your PERSPECTIVE you frighten people who are just coming to terms with accepting themselves as individuals, seperate from the collective that justifiably tries in vain to control them.

Remember PERSPECTIVE can get you killed in a culture that is still reliant upon short term control to attain it's COMFORT, CERTAINTY, SECURITY, and STABILITY.

When you expand your PERSPECTIVE you can realize that what we see IS NOT ALWAYS what it is.

The simplest of all is the sun moving across the sky above an earth that does not appear to move. Change your perspective and you realize the earth is moving and it is the one moving around a sun that appears to be stationary, change your perspective again and you realize the sun and it's system is moving around a galaxy which is moving around a Universe which is....... Thank-you for that which I am yet to know.

It is the absence of knowledge that can provide you with purpose and meaning in life just as much as knowing it can. To all who read this try and be patient with people who have a different PERSPECTIVE. Try not to be so quick to judge them as wrong. For your claims that you are right may be so, as long as you stay within the PERSPECTIVE you have become reliant upon for your perception of comfort, certainty,security and stability.

For me I am thankful for the contradictions of reality so that I may have purpose and meaning in my life, I am thankful that I exist in a reality that is bound by limitations so a single explosion does not continually expand until it engulfs the entire universe. I am thankful most of all that I am part of a species that evolved a part of it's mind which has the capacity to define itself as a seperate individual yet at the same time know that it is one with the entire universe it exists within.

NOW for a reality check, it is easy to stand before a blank wall and confess you are one with the universe, you have an entirely different PERSPECTIVE when, you stand before an animal THAT WANTS TO EAT YOU.

It is difficult to chant I AM ONE WITH THE LION when it is eating you alive. When Humanity eventually evolved the statagies to kill the lion before it was eaten it defined itself justifiably superior to the lion. It changed our collective PERSPECTIVE in a rather contradictory way. The greatest threat to humanity after the actions of our our planet, is now ourselves. This has been screwing with our subconscious minds for hundreds of thousands of years. Finally we have nothing to fear except the most dangerous predator of them all, our selves.

Remember our physical reality is a transferred reflection or projection of our internal thoughts. To change our external reality our internal PERSPECTIVE needs to try and change so that we can change our perception of ourselves and each other.

How can you change your PERSPECTIVE and PERCEPTION when you state that you no longer need to, as you are one with all. What you are stateing to people without meaning to is "I dont have to change", This is percieved as control and control is intolerable as it is intolerant of change and the very reason people come onto this sight is that they want and need change even though most of them will never accept the loss that this change demands from them. So the next best thing is to find someone to blame for thier frustrations.

It requires an exceptionally accepting individual to stand up to a justified rejective collective.

Why else would your ancestors evolve your capacity to seperate yourself from the destructive actions of the tribe in its pursuit of short term comfort, certainty, security and stability.

Use your pespective to help others try and expand thier own....................


posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:20 AM
reply to post by Lucidia

I don't want you to identify yourself, i asked if you can 'find' yourself.

Socrates' guiding rule was, "Know Thyself." These words are of eternal significance. No better advice has ever been give to man or woman. When one begins to explore this dictate it leads to profound understandings about all of creation. It makes unhappiness, fear, sadness, doubt, and all the negative emotions meaningless.

Know thyself is the only one order given by every master, prophet and avatar in this world. Knowing thyself is the objective of our life .

I didn't write the last two paragraphs, i copied them.
All great sages from all traditions ask you to find yourself, find out what you are. Humans assume too much and 'think' they know what they are but not many actually look to find out what they are directly, intimately. The ones who do find something quite astounding.

edit on 7-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 04:28 AM
reply to post by Lucidia

self is ur body existence out of u as existing conscious one constant perspective of, so ones must realize themselves, ur body genetical reasons or objective life is out of absolute facts or else free powerful wills and means so it is never urself, urself is a true objective reality one so relative one fact bc constant conscious reality with still become free by being objective through

it is like we must reach individually to b object constant rights from what object constancy made u be free

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 04:29 AM
made us b free, i meant to type

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 06:44 AM
As you had 666 posts I felt it was my civic duty to become the 667th.

Otherwise I feel absolutely (the 666th poster) would unleash fire and brimstone across this thread like nobody has ever seen or heard before.

Unfortunately I completely missed this one and it looks like another really cool topic. But I can't possibly hope to read 33 pages of this stuff......

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:32 PM
reply to post by Itisnowagain

If you don't believe that yourself exists (and you question its existence), you are far away from having the capacity to know yourself. You don't even believe in the existence of self - what self do you expect to get to know?! Before you try to become the 'self' of the universe, you would be wiser to develop a good human sense of self so that you may better know what you are aiming to get to know.

What I am seeing in this thread is god-envy at its worst, and some spiritualists that would prefer to become 'god' by identifying with 'universal' self before they have even learned to be enlightened at being human beings.

It is wiser to try to take things a small step at a time in your pursuit of enlightenment. But these spiritualists are trying to leap to god status before even knowing what it means to be a human being.

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 07:40 PM
reply to post by Lucidia

The Primal mind in order to react effectively is compelled to diminish the conscious mind of reason. There are many reasons not to drink the coolaide, the primal or subconscious mind or reactive mind, whatever one defines it to be must lock out those reasons to instigate reactive behaviours of control. There are reasons not to rape women, reasons not to abuse children, reasons to love yet there never has been or ever will be a reason for an unreasonable behaviour. To absolve the self is a primal want of control be it the control of others or the control of your own self.

This is why religons do what they do. The cause is simple to realize the effects are overwhelmingly complex. It is easy to get focused on the effects rather than know, realize and accept there cause.

posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:09 AM

Originally posted by subtopia
yet there never has been or ever will be a reason for an unreasonable behaviour.

it is a tempting perche, unreasonnable behavior is mostly free then true

what reflects on nothing is all absolute fact, all is evil that is why a lot move for nothing in enjoying doing worse

u can witness how brains deficiencies is never a reason for crime

on the contrary the more intelligent is the conscious the more it kills and torture without remorse as long as it can hide behind a justification that could remain constant and free

posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 03:20 AM
reply to post by Lucidia

Sorry, i think you have misunderstood, i have not said that i do not exist.
There is only one thing i know for sure and that i am experiencing.
edit on 8-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 07:43 AM
reply to post by Lucidia

When you don't 'identify' yourself life is great.
edit on 8-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 01:01 PM
reply to post by Itisnowagain

bc u enjoy what is fake, while only what is true is the reason of joy
u hate conscious life wgile it is the exclusive one where it is u really the free living

posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 06:33 PM

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
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?
edit on 6-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

Through various posts in this thread and in other threads, you deny the existence of separate self ---- logically that is the same as denying the existence of individual self, which means your are showing what I call 'self-nihilism' (denial of the reality of distinct selves and, consequentially, dismissal of the validity of personal psychology, a dismissal that rejects the view that the mind can psychologicallly individuate its selfhood). What you pose is better known as solipsism which includes primarily the belief that there is only one self.

You claim the only way to know oneself is to view oneself as being one with--yet greater than--the universal mind, that is, the "god mind" which includes the total phenomenal field of views (the conscious, as you say, tv-like "screens" of all experiencers). You suggest all mental experience belongs to god, and say god has the mind, but it is more than mind itself. You view yourself as one with god, not an individual (separate) self logically distinct from god. You wrote: "I don't believe i am separate from God." Plus, you insist "I" is also one with that which exists outside of universal mind. This indicates that you have a solipsist view of self that holds that we all are the 'god consciousness,' only one consciousness, not individual consciousness. Problematically, you do not recognize the conscious experience of each individual as belonging to each distinctly or separately; in your view, the cosmic consciousness is the only mental property holder, and thus there are no distinct minds, or distinct mental property holders, or separate knowers of self-knowledge.

While, as you said, you don't deny the existence of 'I," the only 'I' you believe in, which you call "true self" and a "perfect expression of oneness" is that of the "god" or cosmic consciousness. Essentially, you are denying the existence of individual self, and preaching that those that aim to be self-knowers should not identify or define "I" because it is not good for us to have a sense of distinct (separate) self-identity in our effort to 'find' our "true" self, which is oneness, omni-presence, god.

You are trying to say there is a self to get to know but not an idividual self. You consider your view as non-dualistic, because it is logically contradictory from a dualistic perspective (ex. in this thread, you wrote "you are are everything"..."absence of self is presence"); instead of choosing one or the other duality or opposite, you are trying to choose both. That is a logically impossible task. It is the diverse nature of self that gives its meaning distinction. Otherwise, there is no need for the word 'self:' with the existence of only one "self," the word 'self' would be a redundant and logically unnecessary identifyer; it would be meaningless.

So, what you mean by self-knowledge is not self-knowledge at all. It is self-ignorance. In that extreme state of self-ignorance, that you mistakenly view as non-dualistic self, and some spiritualists call no-self, one chooses to not exclusively choose the dualities that apply to their self-definition, yet talk permissively and loosely as if all the dualities apply to oneself, and that is actually the most extremely dualistic self-identity possible, which claims that one's "true" self is in a state of self-contradiction, and thus that logic cannot be used to get to know it. What you need to consider is that dualistic self-definition is a necessary part of the process of getting to know oneself.
edit on 8-12-2011 by Lucidia because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 02:24 AM
reply to post by Lucidia

If you believe there is a separate self then i am not arguing with you, for you the individual self is real.
I have seen through this and know for sure there is oneness. Oneness does not have to be believed in to be, one has to see it to know it.
I can see you are passionate about this subject on an intellectual level, you know all the words. Oneness is not something that can be understood using words, it is experiential. So until you experience it you will continue to deny it.
However, you are a perfect expression of oneness whether you know it or not.

PS. This forum is for expression and those who accuse preaching are doing what? And for what reason?
edit on 9-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:31 AM
reply to post by Itisnowagain

what is absurd is the assumption that others dont see oness, which clearly prove how u mean to use others in order to pretend to urself being superior
everyone know oness especially animals, but if everything must be justified in some ways being related it must b then end in positive terms, which is not so there is obvious problem of that oness u r happy through to justify while its only justification is for objective right facts

second, preaching about oness is first proving that it is not all, any out of it is to be right by itself more for objective right facts, if oness is handling the rest inn
while u didnt say anything about ur justification in being right by worshipping that oness thing out of, do u do that all ur seconds of that part out? and mean that all should do the same with their conscious out ? what is ur value doing or giving then even in meaning it?

third, you are totally wrong, the sense is for freedom responsabilities, now and before when truth ended being free, so the positive fields is not the issue of any since it is done alone mathematically ending always as a field positively, since when existence was a fact objective free

then truth sense is freedom objective realisations of each positive free existing ones as the reason out of all different kind realities life sources, it is up to u to b real there is no oness meant to provide reality for u

when it is known how objective is alone, then it is known more how that what matter the most to save and protect, this is primary sense of existence objective that truth obvioulsy mean to realize out of evil oness abuses in endless failing ways that surely cost a lot to truth freedom ways

when truth is then any is not true but then it is nothing, while the open door to fallacies powers is wide

what is not free is impossible to b
what is free must b true first then it must struggle to be free one right through being itself free reality then it can b living, out of positive free relations between free rights and free objective truth in the base of sameness

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:55 AM
Enough said. This is Alan Watts:
edit on 9-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 05:40 AM

Originally posted by smithjustinb

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
reply to post by smithjustinb

If you, me, everyone doesn't exist then you wont mind if I take your wife and or legal age daughters out for a romantic trip around the world. This will last about a month and I assure you there will be plenty of sex involved.

Whatever you ignorant fool. You completely missed the point. Re-read the original post, and the read some of the comments in the following 30 pages. Then come back and post something intelligent that shows me you at least understand what I was saying.

Oh yeah I read your mumbo jumbo alright. Your existensionalism is a thin veneer of psudophilosophy. That's why I sought to bring you back to the ground where ideas have merit in reality. But I guess you missed that point.

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 09:24 AM
reply to post by absolutely

I never pretend superior. It is you who keeps telling me i am wrong, have i ever told you or anyone else that they are wrong?
Everyone is allowed their veiw but some come here just to tell others they are wrong, judgmental.
Judgment is thinking you know more and better, that is thinking you are superior.
If you do not like what i say that is ok, you do not have to save the world from me!!!.

edit on 9-12-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in