An alternative theory of consciousness, if you will.

Here I will propose a simple and short postulate on consciousness. This is only for the purposes of discussion and I'm not necessarily endorsing this as a definite.

So it goes like this:

Let us first operate from a standpoint of there being no pre-existent individual soul form; that we are born into the flesh through solely biological means. What we think of as the individual soul does not, or rather, did not exist before birth.

As we grow we gain experience which leads to personal identity. Scientifically, we are able to do this through the apparatus of our brains. Using our brains we are able to organize our sense-experience into ideas and impressions. Our brains' capacity for memory gives us the capability to reflect on our experiences and make seemingly self-willed choices.

As these ideas and impressions accumulate they crystallize as thought-forms. These become like our navigators as we move through the physical, informing us in our every action and reaction. We start to filter our sense-experience through the 'crystal' of these thought-forms. For example we have the thought-form of the warrior, that of the philosopher, that of the skeptic, that of the magician, and so on.

Bringing me to this:

Perhaps it is the cumulative activity and orientation of our mind in the physical plane that gives rise to the consciousness. The input we gather and organize in our brains over time takes on a life of its own, its own energy signature, its own etheric body. Not that we were born with it intrinsically, but that it came to be due to the activity of the interactions and feedback between our brain and our sense-experience.

Consciousness crystallizes its unique character over the course of individual life, developing its own etheric body/signature that is then transferred to the astral plane upon physical death. The data we've focused on and poured into this consciousness over the course of our lives determine the nature of our experience in the hereafter. It is our own creation solely.

Now this does not necessarily completely rule out the pre-existence of a consciousness in some form before we born, but that our coming into the flesh represents an opportunity to start fresh; to create our own unique consciousness. Perhaps it is the serendipitous union of our unique physical sense-experience with our reflective mind that allows us the opportunity to forge our own direction in the quantum path of a neutral consciousness as it transitions through forms.

When we die, our unique crystal of consciousness that we have formed aligns by signature or frequency with the complementary astral state and resides there indefinitely, but the neutral consciousness branches off yet again, like in a fractal pattern, and moves on to a new physical form uninformed of its previous incarnation on a conscious level but sill quantumly entangled with it, and thus influenced subtly by it on the unconscious level but in indirect ways that are difficult to perceive without accessing the universal genetic memory, or akashic layer. This could explain why people rarely remember past lives.

Consciousnesses fractal out and crystallize in astral bodies, enjoy their time there as long as they choose and then merge with source then re-emerge as a blank slate(if so desired), while other fragments continue on in microscopically shifted planes/dimensions and repeat the same phase transitions but in a unique way, resulting in infinite divisions of unique signatures/characters. There is no limit to the variance of characters that can dance across this great stage of manifestation.

In this theory we essentially have a blank canvas upon which to render our Atman, making the opportunity we have here all the more important.

reply to post by Qi Maker

So you are going with the WHOLE being GREATER than the SUM OF THE PARTS theory. Could be.
Split Infinity

yeah i have also thought about this as in you the vessel creates the soul as it gathers experiences, i think it is a valid theory and would explain why some people feel so emotionless or soulless, maybe because they never developed a soul/consciousness, it would also explain where all the souls come from but it does take away a lot of the mysticism and makes it simple so many people wont want it like that.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Qi Maker

 

So you are going with the WHOLE being GREATER than the SUM OF THE PARTS theory. Could be.
Split Infinity

Not necessarily greater, but rather having its own sanctuary in the body of the whole, while its parts fractal out through free choices and subsequently build their own sanctuaries. Infinity would allow for this, as there would be no exhaustion of differentiation.

reply to post by CesarO


I think it empowers the creative force of the individual to build their own destiny, create their own ultimate reality, unencumbered by the trudge of a pre-destined linear projection.

So in this way it could be more mystical.

reply to post by Qi Maker

Well...if one looks at Choice and Cause and Effect as well as Probability governing the Creation of Alternate Divergent Universal States....as this is an example of Quantum Particles Build up toward Maximum Number within Protons and Neutrons in a version of YOU or I within a Universal Reality that is about to split into Multiple Divergent States...say...You are driving to work...a kid kicks a ball that rolls in the road...a truck overturns in it's attempt to avoid hitting the kid...the road is closed...you take an alternate route...you stop on your way to work at a Coffee Shot you never drive by...you meet a person who will eventually become your spouse...you have two kids...one of these kids has the genetic disposition to be curious and develops a Formula for Energy Production that allows for the production of a Flying Car.

There are so many Divergent Universal Realities that the one event...A BAD KICK....or even the kids Mom allowing the Kid to go outside to play......so the events compile in either direction. The point is that we live in a MUTIVERSE and our Universes Reality is but one among an INFINITE NUMBER of which is just one INFINITE STATE OF DIVERGENT UNIVERSAL REALITIES that We EXIST IN OR OUR PHYSICAL LAWS APPLY OR HAVE THE SAME NUMBERS OF DIMENSIONAL STATES.

This is why the MACRO-UNIVERSE is not consistent with the QUANTUM MULTIVERSAL SYSTEM. Quantum Particles such as a Quark can BLINK IN AND OUT OF OUR UNIVERSAL REALITY....where do they go? Quarks can exist in number inside a Proton or Neutron at a Minimum Number and at a Maximum Number as well as any number in between those Minimums and Maximums....but NEVER MORE OR LESS!

As Probability Dictates...the VERSION OF YOU that is driving to work on the road you always take and in this Universal Reality...the Kids Mom say's NO! You can' go out! You drive to work as always and never meet that person who will be your spouse. The Probability of Non-Action dictates that Quarks will be at or close to Minimum in Number per Proton and Neutron in all effected objects or parties.

If the Kids Mom say's YES...but he has been practicing kicking a ball...Probability of a Bad Kick Dictates Quantum Particles at a Lower to Mid-Range Number. If the Kid can't kick for beans...and the truck turns over...Quantum Particles Blink out of existence in other Objects or Versions of YOU as well as all parties not effected in the OTHER DIVERGENT UNIVERSAL STATES OF REALITY WHERE NO ACTION WILL OCCUR and will BLINK INTO EXISTENCE AT OR CLOSE TO MAXIMUM in the versions of YOU as well as all objects and other parties effected in the Alternate Divergent Universal State of reality...where YOU WILL MEET YOUR SPOUSE. Split Infinity

reply to post by Qi Maker


I bet you don't get more than flags for this thread and your ideas. That's a shame, as most here seem to fight over the scraps of enlightenment or oneness, garnering many flags, stars and exposure, even though they're just retelling the same story in different words.

You're ideas here are refreshing, interesting and creative. And although it's highly speculative, it sounds more reasonable than anything I've seen or read on here in a while. So a huge star and flag for you sir/madam.

Now that I'm done with the flattering, what sort of implications may this idea bring with it if it held to be true?

Originally posted by Qi MakerIn this theory we essentially have a blank canvas upon which to render our Atman, making the opportunity we have here all the more important.

I believe in a blank canvas, after reading Locke's tabula rasa theory. But I believe it is Atman that is rendering it's image on this blank canvas, until it achieves self awareness and seperates from Atman, becoming another Atman. Even though when that happens we are just little Atman's and it might take a few thousands of billions of years (give or take) before any of those become like the Atman was when it rendered us.

Originally posted by Qi Maker
Here I will propose a simple and short postulate on consciousness. This is only for the purposes of discussion and I'm not necessarily endorsing this as a definite.

So it goes like this:

Let us first operate from a standpoint of there being no pre-existent individual soul form; that we are born into the flesh through solely biological means. What we think of as the individual soul does not, or rather, did not exist before birth.

As we grow we gain experience which leads to personal identity. Scientifically, we are able to do this through the apparatus of our brains. Using our brains we are able to organize our sense-experience into ideas and impressions. Our brains' capacity for memory gives us the capability to reflect on our experiences and make seemingly self-willed choices.

As these ideas and impressions accumulate they crystallize as thought-forms. These become like our navigators as we move through the physical, informing us in our every action and reaction. We start to filter our sense-experience through the 'crystal' of these thought-forms. For example we have the thought-form of the warrior, that of the philosopher, that of the skeptic, that of the magician, and so on.

Bringing me to this:

Perhaps it is the cumulative activity and orientation of our mind in the physical plane that gives rise to the consciousness. The input we gather and organize in our brains over time takes on a life of its own, its own energy signature, its own etheric body. Not that we were born with it intrinsically, but that it came to be due to the activity of the interactions and feedback between our brain and our sense-experience.

Consciousness crystallizes its unique character over the course of individual life, developing its own etheric body/signature that is then transferred to the astral plane upon physical death. The data we've focused on and poured into this consciousness over the course of our lives determine the nature of our experience in the hereafter. It is our own creation solely.

I am totally with you right up to this point. My terminology is a little different, and I have the gathering "human being" actively involved in managing the ongoing data entry criteria for the "memory cloud" that the brain uses to further manage its corporeal survival and to develop the emerging human personality, but essentially, we agree on how this happens. That said, I have to stay with my own view that the internal (historical) contextual composition of each completed human being (the "etheric body" if you will) prevents it from being able to employ a new brain for additional input, since authorship is a primordial qualifier when dealing with existential Identity (which is essential to the existence of whatever it is that exists).

The idea that the human mind can simply begin anew with its own existential emergence after completing a full gestational cycle (as suggested by reincarnation) violates the basis of contextual identity and how identity is created and maintained. Humans are pretty special, but nothing can violate the primordial substructure that allows it its very existence. The whole reincarnation notion can be explained without the actual existence of reincarnation. The anecdotal and empirical evidence for reincarnation - as compelling as it is - can be fully explained by other very plausible narratives that don't violate such fundamental structural requirements.

Good stuff, though.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Qi Maker

 

I bet you don't get more than flags for this thread and your ideas. That's a shame, as most here seem to fight over the scraps of enlightenment or oneness, garnering many flags, stars and exposure, even though they're just retelling the same story in different words.

You're ideas here are refreshing, interesting and creative. And although it's highly speculative, it sounds more reasonable than anything I've seen or read on here in a while. So a huge star and flag for you sir/madam.

Now that I'm done with the flattering, what sort of implications may this idea bring with it if it held to be true

From one philosopher to the another I thank you for your kind words.

Well I suppose that is what us philosophers are best at after all...lofty nebulous speculations

As for your question, well I suppose it entails that we each are unique, if ever nuanced, and posses a definite free will to shape our destinies as we see fit

That reincarnation is non-linear and new selves are created by the marriage of thought with form; being an iteration of the movements of all previous selves, linked in a quantum matrix but able to establish a new trajectory through will, thus able to construct its own astral temple of sorts--its unique Atmic domain...

Basically, at some point in the past or future, we'll all be/become interstellar wizards that preside over our own planetary playground

Originally posted by Dragonfly79

Originally posted by Qi MakerIn this theory we essentially have a blank canvas upon which to render our Atman, making the opportunity we have here all the more important.

I believe in a blank canvas, after reading Locke's tabula rasa theory. But I believe it is Atman that is rendering it's image on this blank canvas, until it achieves self awareness and seperates from Atman, becoming another Atman. Even though when that happens we are just little Atman's and it might take a few thousands of billions of years (give or take) before any of those become like the Atman was when it rendered us.

edit on 21/6/2012 by Dragonfly79 because: (no reason given)

Great addition here Dragonfly...and we're essentially saying the same thing.

Atmans who branched off close to Source cast a much a wider net of perception than that of newer iterations, but these newer iterations offer refreshing character and weave new detail into the tapestry of the Brahmanic whole, providing that endless variation that keeps the dance exciting and fresh.

Yes these new Atmans scope is initially much narrower, but the nexus of the Atmic spark with the novel material form offers the opportunity to "change the game" if you will.

Originally posted by NorEaster
I am totally with you right up to this point. My terminology is a little different, and I have the gathering "human being" actively involved in managing the ongoing data entry criteria for the "memory cloud" that the brain uses to further manage its corporeal survival and to develop the emerging human personality, but essentially, we agree on how this happens. That said, I have to stay with my own view that the internal (historical) contextual composition of each completed human being (the "etheric body" if you will) prevents it from being able to employ a new brain for additional input, since authorship is a primordial qualifier when dealing with existential Identity (which is essential to the existence of whatever it is that exists).

I interpret this as not really differing all that much from the theory I've given, unless I misunderstand you or you me. It is that this 'etheric consciousness form' we develop crystallizes in a separate trajectory and transfers as a unique identity to the astral plane to assume its own domain, not to a new physical vessel, all the while a spark of that initial consciousness carries on through the phase state of transitions, inhabiting a new form to continue the process of fractal specialization ad infinitum until all is reabsorbed into the womb of the Father-Mother whole, or into the state known as Pralaya (en.wikipedia.org...).

Originally posted by NorEaster
The whole reincarnation notion can be explained without the actual existence of reincarnation. The anecdotal and empirical evidence for reincarnation - as compelling as it is - can be fully explained by other very plausible narratives that don't violate such fundamental structural requirements.

This exactly. This applies to basically all new age pseudo-buddhism.

reply to post by Qi Maker

Time is Non-Linear in a One Dimensional State. Since our Universe currently is said to have 10 or 11 Dimensional States...I think more...each one of these Geometric States must be partially Governed by Another. Thus...you cannot have Time without Distance. And you cannot have distance unless you have the existence of Matter and you cannot have matter exist in a One Dimensional State...nor a Two Dimensional State.

Some people might say you would need at least three Dimensional States to have Matter but than is not true either as Matter...consists of Particles of Mass and Particles of Energy. An Atom of Helium has Protons, Neutrons, Electrons...plus the Quantum Particles that Make up Protons and Neutrons such as Quarks, Leptons, Gluon, W Boson...etc.

These Quantum Particles also exist to make up Matter and exist in a Dimensional State that go beyond our Universal 10 or 11 Dimensional States and are Connected to a Much Larger System known as the Multiverse so there is alot more going on besides a concept of Non-linear Time. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


bull# ur time is based as qimaker suggesting it on one dimension only, u wish to conquer a second but u dont knw what is gonna happen

matters life that u know is all what u gonna get till its end that dimension based on killing all objectives knowledge through opposites way or subjective free wills one, which is u as a matter pride of one

that is how all life is of death u know, fittest u love to call it pervert hypocrit

u gonna get what u did at its true ends

reply to post by absolutely

I can honestly say...I have no idea how to translate your abbreviated wording on you last posts first sentence. QIMAKER?....what the Hell does that mean?

Also...what is your meaning of...suggesting on one dimensional only...referencing or even describing. I feel like I have to Break out the Rosetta Stone! LOL!

Nonsensical Dribble. Split Infinity

I find it a SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS when a Topic sinks into a Verbal personal attack when it would be so much more constructive to offer a persons ideas and opinions and DEBATE whether or not they are of any merit or use that could either Help Others or at the very least...allow people to get ideas that might be a catalyst that could generate thought processes that have merit or allow alternative thought to expand Human Knowledge.

I have enjoyed posting with people who also understand this and it does not matter if we agree....it only matters that we can all take something constructive away from these types of debates.

I have tried to extend this opportunity to you at every post but you seem more interested in either posting Gibberish or spend your time intent on informing me how sick or disgusting I am...Which unto itself does not effect me other than wasting time that could be used better.

You have NO IDEA who I am. You on't know me even well enough to Dislike Me. So the Question Remains....What are you trying to get out of these posts that Make You look as if you REALLY DO HAVE BRAIN DAMAGE? What is even more disturbing is your SELF DESTRUCTIVE TONE that increases in effect every time I put forth a Challenge to you and I have been OVERLY SELF RESTRAINED do to the possibility that very well MIGHT HAVE SERIOUS ISSUES that you are struggling with.

Because of that real possibility I have Restrained myself from using your own words against your stated Concepts as It would be too easy to make you look any more Ridiculous than you already have shown yourself to be. So I will once again offer my Reasoning Abilities to Help You. If you do not want my Help than I have no problem with you saying so. If you throw this back in my Face....You will become to at the very least...me...as a person who thinks they know everything. Despite my EGO and despite my Long Running period of training....I am always first to admit that I do not know everything...and I am ALWAYS eager to learn. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


nonsensical more then dribble for me while one sense to u certainly, the end is what matter as being the exclusive constant fact, while the end cant b but the truth, even if all ur illusions worked out fine for ur head u wont end but the worse u r
the least is the reference for each thing to end it in truth, when in truth any is like all only absolutely smthg

keep ur dirty means safe in u while its pervert projections by using outfit are obvious, ur most dirty references to get smthg from outside is where u gonna end constant out

u love playing with stuff so play with this one,

the worse u is u forever from the start, like hotelcalifornia song there is no way out for u

Originally posted by absolutely
u love playing with stuff so play with this one,

the worse u is u forever from the start, like hotelcalifornia song there is no way out for u

No way out of where or what...what I do? I choose to do what I do. Three specific jobs...one in Entertainment...one helping my Family run their Companies and a Third Job that I do now and then that I am PROUD OF....and I do it as a PATRIOT and as well as I am qualified to be the right person to do it.

Why would I want out? Split Infinity