reply to post by Wandering Scribe
Reality….. So what is reality
I came here thinking someone could finally fill me in but all I’m getting is a cold hard dose of opinion
of how they believe the world is as
perceived through their senses (which themselves are merely tools with limitations) mixed up with more opinion of today’s primitive science to give
it some legitimacy.
What is reality then? Is it this world of clunky physical objects, some of which we classify as ‘alive’ (which essentially means nothing if all we
merely are is simple meat computers driven by inbuilt instincts and urges resting upon a framework of organic chemistry) existing in a world governed
by traditional Newtonian physics? Or is it actually the world of quantum physics where particles appear and disappear and zip backwards and forwards
in time and information can pass between one particle and another instantaneously no matter what the distance between them.
It seems you haven’t done your homework on neurobiology too well either for we know almost nothing about what consciousness is, let alone if there
are separate ones or just one all encompassing consciousness and we are simply separate awarenesses/minds each perceiving their little part of the
puzzle (which logically makes more sense to me).
The Double Slit Experiment shows that the human mind can affect particles beyond the confines of the human body In fact these are the very particles
which make up all of ‘Creation’. Particles which are not restrained by time, space or any other natural laws which appear
to govern the
macroscopic behavior of the universe. This experiment is the icing on the cake of a long line of other scientific experiments which prove we know next
to nothing about anything. If consciousness can affect matter outside of the brain, it shows that consciousness is not confined by
Imho the next logical opinion is that consciousness does not need
Maybe the brain is merely a symptom of an incorporeal identity existing in a material world. Possibly the brain is a signal processor to the fleshy
automation which makes up the body. What are thoughts? Simply brain activity. What causes thoughts? Simple brain activity…..? So does that mean
thoughts cause thoughts? I guess in a way they do, but can something be both the cause and the result at the same time or is their more to the
You see a brain scan then tell someone to remember something and a certain region lights up. Then you tell them to work out a puzzle and some other
area lights up. You then think ‘a ha, this bit is in charge of these neurological functions, and these other bits take care of this’. You then go
and study people with brain injuries and see that this area is injured and now they can’t do this. But just because the processor is broken, does
that automatically mean that there is no signal, or that the signal itself is faulty somehow. To an outside observer, especially one who is firm in
their belief that the signal itself and the signal processor are one and the same, then superficially this may appear to be proof
consciousness is indeed localized. But if we are only just beginning to understand the signal processor, and have no idea at all where the signal
itself comes from then this is faulty reasoning at its best.
As per Bandit’s link and Openlock’s statement we have really no idea what consciousness is. All we can do is take the available evidence and draw
conclusions from. You’ve done, I’ve done it, scientists are doing it and hippies are there as well. But the evidence is merely behavioral symptoms
of possessing a consciousness within a material world, and imply no causation nor any defining limits either. And the conclusions drawn from this
observed behavior are also nothing but opinion. As long as each party has all facts then each conclusion drawn is equally valid.
Scribe, you have an interest in the esoteric and you are obviously a spiritual person. To tell you the truth I’m not sure where you stand as for the
few posts of yours I’ve read you seem to waver between a hard atheist and an armchair occultist. But whatever beliefs, they are simply your
beliefs. All you have done is taken the available evidence and formed conclusions from it which fits your
reality. Then you’ve presented them
in a thread written with the kind of tone I’d expect my grandma to display right after dealing with ‘those pesky kids from down the street’. The
fact that you have written it assuming you are correct without really threshing out all the possibilities puts you in the same league as any other
wannabe guru here on ATS, a fact I find a little disappointing.
I consider the ‘All are One’ mentality to be beautiful on not only a practical and scientific level, also on a spiritual level. I do not believe
in a firm divide between the spiritual and material worlds, and if spirituality mirrors ‘reality’, which is probably fairly likely, then I believe
the collective consciousness theory has a lot of merit.
As for forgiveness…
If (as your thread implies) we are merely meat computers with moving parts, then you have to consider the perpetrator of even the most heinous,
depraved deed is merely acting off a mindset formed through hardwired instincts tempered with previous experience and the circumstances he found
himself in at the time. And you or I would do exactly the same thing if we were in exactly the same situation. Could you forgive someone for
committing an act which they were destined to commit since the dawning of time?
For there is no freewill in the world of the meat computer.
Nor does forgiveness matter anyway for it is simply a ‘thought’ in the localized consciousness of a biological automation which really has no
bearing on anything whatsoever. It may enable the automation to operate out of ‘meaningless anger and hate’ mode though which tends to cause less
wear and tear as well as a much smoother ride overall.
edit on 4/9/2012 by 1littlewolf because: (no reason given)