“You are not your body”—and other contradictions.

reply to post by WhiteHat


You make some fairly strong points. But rationally I cannot see anything that shows us that we are not our bodies. I wish we could agree on something.

I don't think I am following your concept of awareness. I'm going to conform to the typical definition and assume we are not talking about the same concept. I don't think there is an actual concrete entity that we can call awareness. But I understand the concept of mind.

The only thing that can be said of the mind is that the body thinks. There is no actual mental construct that one is able to show me or to draw a circle around. The mind is just a body thinking; just like breath is just the body breathing; just like sight is just the body seeing; and feelings are just the body feeling. If there was a mind, it would manifest, it would show itself, because it would have to be physical enough to have any bearing on the physical world. The mind is only a concept. A concept of what?

mind |mīnd|
noun
1 the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought: as the thoughts ran through his mind, he came to a conclusion | people have the price they are prepared to pay settled in their minds.
• a person's mental processes contrasted with physical action: I wrote a letter in my mind.
2 a person's intellect: his keen mind.
• a person's memory: the company's name slips my mind .
• a person identified with their intellectual faculties: he was one of the greatest minds of his time.
3 a person's attention: I expect my employees to keep their minds on the job.
• the will or determination to achieve something: anyone can lose weight if they set their mind to it.

What is the element that allows them to be aware of the world and their experiences? To think? To feel? and the capacity of consciousness and thought? Every time it is the functioning body—every single time. Brain injuries hinder thought, speech, cognition and awareness. With dementia one is without the ability to remember. With schizophrenia, the lines between dreams and reality are blurred. Whether it's genetics, injury, disease, malfunction, drugs, or environmental factors—awareness is always distorted by reason of biology.

If this non-material substance called "mind" or "awareness" is non-physical, it would be no where in the physical world, it wouldn't be trapped in a physical thing, it couldn't have any bearing what-so-ever with anything at all. It wouldn't be able to see, to hear, to feel, simply because it has nothing to see, hear and feel with. All concepts of sight, hearing and feeling are concepts derived from bodily experience and no where else.

Because we call the body "mine" doesn't mean there is a non-physical entity in possession of a physical body. I think that is a stretch of the imagination. But I do agree that language leads us to some strange conclusions—even to the conclusion that we are not our body.

CONCLUSIONS

I thank you everyone for the insight you have each shared.

Rationally and experientially, I cannot agree with the precept "We are not our bodies". There is no thing, object or substance that is within the body that we can reduce ourselves to. Nothing of the sort is ever found, observed, or circumscribed in both practice and thought.

A non-physical object or substance has no way of interacting with physical substances and objects. How is something immaterial trapped within something material? The idea evades comprehension. It cannot be explained how a non-physcal soul is trapped within a physical body.

The only thing I can conclude is that the idea that the body is a house or vehicle for a spirit or soul or mind or consciousness is highly prevalent, which is a little disconcerting to say the least. If there is nothing that shows there is a soul or kernel of ourselves within our bodies, why can we not reconcile the idea of body and soul into one complete entity?

To protect this dualism, people say I am akin to flat earthers, that I do not experience what I experience, that I live a sad life because without a soul there is no purpose. Even though the concept of the soul is just as old as the flat earth idea, I am maligned for adhering to biological explanations over supernatural ones. Why this is I have no clue.

Instead, everyone calls their bodies prisons—calls themselves prisons—in which they will willingly trap themselves, and that is the most tragic thing about the whole idea. No one can call themselves a free spirit when they claim their spirit is imprisoned.

NinjaBackFlip,

I highly, highly recommend you get

Pim Van Lommel "Consciousness Beyond Life"

www.pimvanlommel.nl...

This is a very good and SCIENTIFIC book.

I *especially* recommend that you note chapters 9 & 12 , which deals with how our brain actually functions and the relationship of your brain and your consciousness.

I was startled yesterday reading this because those chapters and the scientific approach/observations would answer so many of YOUR questions. Again, this is not some "new age blahblah" book.

I try to give a very quick recap for you:

There is NO PROOF whatsoever that consciousness is "produced" by the brain. There is NO RELATIONSHIP between measured brain patterns or brain regions with thoughts, consciousness, ideas.

Scientists up to this very date have NOT found or proven that consciousness, "the ego" is "produced" by the brain...with increasingly more neusoscientists actually rejecting the idea.

I really, really recommend this book.

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed

There is NO PROOF whatsoever that consciousness is "produced" by the brain. There is NO RELATIONSHIP between measured brain patterns or brain regions with thoughts, consciousness, ideas.

Scientists up to this very date have NOT found or proven that consciousness, "the ego" is "produced" by the brain...with increasingly more neusoscientists actually rejecting the idea.

Consciousness—The having of perceptions, thoughts, and feelings; awareness. The term is impossible to define except in terms that are unintelligible without a grasp of what consciousness means. Many fall into the trap of equating consciousness with self-consciousness—to be conscious it is only necessary to be aware of the external world. Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon: it is impossible to specify what it is, what it does, or why it has evolved. Nothing worth reading has been written on it.

Macmillan Dictionary of Psychology

Any philosophical musings regarding consciousness are just that, philosophical musings. There is no concrete definition of consciousness, what it is, might be, or what it does. The how, why and what of consciousness is no where to be found.

Check out this article: Consciousness

Rapha
reply to post by NiNjABackflip

 

Every signal of information going from the body to the brain is electrical.

So what is stopping the film 'The Matrix' from actually being true ?

i just feel sorry for the atheists who believe in nothing. Because when their body dies their spirit enters darkness; no light, no colour, no sound or smell; just emptyness. Its a pity really.

My first post on the new design ATS lol...

Anyways.. don't you think instead.. They'd reincarnate back here? This world, even for evidentialist, would be all they know to believe is real.

NiNjABackflip
CONCLUSIONS

I thank you everyone for the insight you have each shared.

Rationally and experientially, I cannot agree with the precept "We are not our bodies". There is no thing, object or substance that is within the body that we can reduce ourselves to. Nothing of the sort is ever found, observed, or circumscribed in both practice and thought.

A non-physical object or substance has no way of interacting with physical substances and objects. How is something immaterial trapped within something material? The idea evades comprehension. It cannot be explained how a non-physcal soul is trapped within a physical body.

The only thing I can conclude is that the idea that the body is a house or vehicle for a spirit or soul or mind or consciousness is highly prevalent, which is a little disconcerting to say the least. If there is nothing that shows there is a soul or kernel of ourselves within our bodies, why can we not reconcile the idea of body and soul into one complete entity?

To protect this dualism, people say I am akin to flat earthers, that I do not experience what I experience, that I live a sad life because without a soul there is no purpose. Even though the concept of the soul is just as old as the flat earth idea, I am maligned for adhering to biological explanations over supernatural ones. Why this is I have no clue.

Instead, everyone calls their bodies prisons—calls themselves prisons—in which they will willingly trap themselves, and that is the most tragic thing about the whole idea. No one can call themselves a free spirit when they claim their spirit is imprisoned.

These are all beliefs you have because you've never experienced otherwise. People who've had OBE's aren't talking about something they believe and they're not communicating ideas.

Using an analogy, if you've been in a cave your whole life, and I came back from seeing the Sun, and told you about the experience, all you can do, is believe or not believe. Even if you were to believe it, you couldn't possibly imagine it....because you've never seen it.

reply to post by Visitor2012

These are all beliefs you have because you've never experienced otherwise. No rational and intelligent person should ever believe in something that is beyond their personal experience. And if it becomes a personal experience, there would be no need to believe in it.

I agree, no rational and intelligent person should ever believe in something that is beyond their personal experience. Then I am curious as to why you still believe I haven't had an OBE, even though my experiences are beyond yours. I don't recall you being there when my experience occurred.

I don't doubt people's experiences. I'm only doubting their interpretation of them.

People who've had OBE's aren't talking about something they believe and they're not communicating ideas. They are talking about something they've witnessed first hand.

The problem with these "witnesses" is that they witness with their mind and imagination. If they have left their body, then surely they have left their witnessing senses behind with it.

The fact that I can imagine flying elephants doesn't mean I actually witness them. People see mirages, have delusions, hallucinate and at some times cannot differentiate between dreams and reality. These are known symptoms of bodies in distress, malfunction, injury and under the effects of narcotics—the exact same instances in which many OBEs occur.

I don't think we'll come to any agreement in this regard. Though you make some excellent arguments, I don't think they lead us to any conclusions, only more unanswerable questions and assumptions.

reply to post by NiNjABackflip

The problem with these "witnesses" is that they witness with their mind and imagination. If they have left their body, then surely they have left their witnessing senses behind with it.

Look, you say you had an OBE and you say it was no different than a hallucination. Do you see the silliness in that statement? In other words, It shows you do not know the difference between the two. Even if your experience was a fraction of what you say it was, you would know what I'm talking about. Oddly, you don't. There are aspects about an OBE you don't seem to be aware of.

The basis of your arguments are rooted in the concepts and ideas you have about OBE's not from experience itself. Anyone who's had an OBE can see this in every statement you make. To illustrate my point, I include a quote from a movie called 'Money Pit' about a man (Jack Butler) claiming to know about house remodeling and electrical work..

--------------
Jack Butler: ... Come on over here Ron. Let me show you what I'm doing, taking advantage of some of the time off. To, uh, add a whole new wing on here. Gonna rip these walls out and, uh, of course re-wire it.
Ron Richardson: Yeah, you gonna make it all 220?
Jack Butler: Yeah, 220, 221. Whatever it takes.
---------------

If you experienced an OBE, you would know that dreams and hallucinations share VERY little in common with it. Similar to the comparison of an image on a tv screen to real life.

The fact that I can imagine flying elephants doesn't mean I actually witness them. People see mirages, have delusions, hallucinate and at some times cannot differentiate between dreams and reality.

Exactly right. That's why they are called delusions, hallucinations and dreams. And you're right, some people can't differentiate between the two. You seem to believe that the term 'Out of Body' came from someone who just had an amazingly vivid hallucination. You couldn't be further from the truth.

These are known symptoms of bodies in distress, malfunction, injury and under the effects of narcotics—the exact same instances in which many OBEs occur.

The methods I use, and millions of others use, require COMPLETE sobriety. No narcotics, no mind altering drugs. So I think you're research is ignoring a big piece of the pie.

I don't think we'll come to any agreement in this regard. Though you make some excellent arguments, I don't think they lead us to any conclusions, only more unanswerable questions and assumptions.

I already told you this would be an impossible discussion to have. All of your concepts about OBE's seem to be imaginative versions of hallucinations. Not recognizing the fact that all forms of hallucinations are STILL called hallucinations by definition! No form of hallucination can be mistaken for an OBE.

If you say you had one, show us that you know the difference between an OBE and a hallucination or a dream. And I'm not just talking about the 3rd person visual perspective. If you're claiming to have had an OBE , you tell us. What's the difference between a hallucination of a 3rd person perspective and an OBE? If you can't answer that, then you were probably hallucinating or dreaming.

reply to post by NiNjABackflip


where is it? I see all these post, I see "you" online but I can't find a body anywhere!!!

reply to post by NiNjABackflip

Any philosophical musings regarding consciousness are just that, philosophical musings. There is no concrete definition of consciousness, what it is, might be, or what it does. The how, why and what of consciousness is no where to be found.

That's because it's you. Like a flash light that is trying to shine the beam of light back onto itself. Consciousness, can't be the object of its own observation. Thus the reason why you can never find it or see it. You ARE it.

reply to post by NiNjABackflip

If there is nothing that shows there is a soul or kernel of ourselves within our bodies, why can we not reconcile the idea of body and soul into one complete entity?

This indeed, body and mind are one and cannot be separated.
The soul is our psyche, not some loose part that can enter or leave the body.
Hence reincarnation and so on are nothing but a belief, maybe because people can't live with the notion that one day this will al be over.
And of course the dreamstate in which one enters the astral world, during sleep or meditation.
One can see and speak to loved ones that have passed away long ago as if they were still very much alive.
Maybe that is how "you are not your body" became a subjective truth

A quantum physicist might say that electrons, like all other subatomic particles, are described by a "probability density state." At this level it is strikingly evident that there may be no objective physical reality at all. What the scientific community once thought was there in the sub-atomic realm and what the educated world was taught to perceive as real simply does not exist.

The new physics tells us that matter may actually be nothing more than a series of patterns out of focus and that subatomic "particles" aren't really made of energy, but simply are energy

One needs a conscious observer to see matter as it really doesnt exist anywhere else than the mind of the observer, electrons wont exist until observation happens.
As you brain is made up of atoms , electrons etc.
Wouldnt it be fair to say that your brain is in your mind, as your brain really isnt made up of material stuff
but energy.

So one could argue that the mind is not inside the brain or produced by the brain but rather the brain is in the mind .

To know more about reality, you must know alot about insanity.

until we can prove that OBE and NDE can verify events outside of the brain this discussion is pointless dont you think ?

JiggyPotamus
You are partly right and partly wrong in my opinion. People who say this can mean that there is more to a person than the physical, which is absolutely true; whether you believe it or not does not affect the truth. And the body may be essential for everyday tasks, but the body is by no means what makes a person work. The brain is the most important organ in the body as far "creating" animation in a person, and the brain is not the body.

So what if someone said, I am not my brain? What would you think about that? Plus, there is no way anyone can disprove the idea of life after death, or of the soul. The idea of a soul has been around for millennia, and I believe that such a thing exists. So did many of the most brilliant people to have ever walked the Earth. So if the life one experiences in their body is simply a small part of a much broader life that exists in some other time or dimension, then it is true that a person is not their body.

And if you want to get philosophical, one must ask what exactly is the essence of a person. You are focusing on nothing but the physical, and that is why I said you are only partly correct and partly incorrect.

How could you say that the Brain is not the body? Of course it's the body! To suggest that you are a particular component of your body and not the rest, would be laughably absurd. The term "You are not your body" means your actual self, is not the body. The body, which includes the brain obviously, is a manifestation or result of the actual you.

So if you were to use the analogy of a potter. Right now, you believe yourself to be the vase on the wheel. But in reality, you are the potter experiencing your life through the vessel (vase).

So you are not your body, your body is a vessel through which you experience your life. The actual you is THAT from which your vessel is made.