What is "Mind?"

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 12235 - 12254 of total 22307 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

Wayno

Big Wall climber

Seattle, WA

Feb 13, 2017 - 12:24pm PT

I'm afraid that what Paul has proposed or rather expressed, as it has been proposed before, will never even be considered here due to the limiting nature of the static world view of the participants. There are some here that conclude it is not even necessary to consider something as nebulous as being beyond physical reality as they perceive it.

We have those pesky things we call the five senses that somehow limit the boundaries of this discussion. This fact need not be judged to have value, but it is. I think this is mostly a modern cultural manifestation that hopefully someday will pass. Science, Philosophy, Religion, and metaphysics among others have all contributed and will continue to contribute to the inexorable progress we make collectively to understand our position in what we see as the universe. Sure we have made great strides, but i think it will pale in comparison to what we still have yet do discover and invent.

Then there is the individual and where they stand in this spectrum of comprehension. Not everyone is going to have or even be interested in the same concepts or methods for understanding. This should be understood as being completely natural, yet we chastise one another for possibly having another viewpoint. This slows things down considerably for the whole but provides a safe haven for the individual who is challenged by the momentary fear of the unknown. But individuals make up the whole and these temporary sanctuaries give the respite needed to move forward into uncertainty. I just wish it wouldn't be so snarky. ;0

Then there is the fact that for most of the people on this planet they are so involved in the their struggles of living a life here that none of this stuff even matters.

eeyonkee

Trad climber

Golden, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 12:28pm PT

Science, Philosophy, Religion, and metaphysics among others have all contributed and will continue to contribute to the inexorable progress we make collectively to understand our position in what we see as the universe. Sure we have made great strides, but i think it will pale in comparison to what we still have yet do discover and invent.

Except for philosophy, religion, and metaphysics...

Wayno

Big Wall climber

Seattle, WA

Feb 13, 2017 - 12:45pm PT

Thanks eeyonkee, that is great example of my point. You get an "A".

eeyonkee

Trad climber

Golden, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 12:53pm PT

Shucks Wayno, I'm speechless!

paul roehl

Boulder climber

california

Feb 13, 2017 - 02:10pm PT

Sympathetic Structure = Intelligent Design ?

Explain the difference.

Intelligent design usually refers to a deity of some interactive sort as constructor of what is.

By sympathetic order I simply meant the obvious, which is a rule laced universe allowing for some results and disallowing others and among those allowed results is consciousness.

Why is there something? Because there can be. Why is there awareness, consciousness, knowing? Because there can be. Why can these things be? You don't necessarily have to invoke the notion of deity to realize the sublime nature of that mystery and the importance it lends to us as human beings.

The act of knowing may be one of the most remarkable aspects of the universe, seems a shame to think less of it.

healyje

Trad climber

Portland, Oregon

Feb 13, 2017 - 02:39pm PT

sublime nature of that mystery and the importance it lends to us as human beings

Or it could all just be entirely random chance and there is no more importance to us as human beings than as to a speck of interstellar dust. You seem in general to push the notion humans are somehow special and important.

Wayno

Big Wall climber

Seattle, WA

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:29pm PT

a deity of some interactive sort

Interesting choice of words. Do you mean interactive in the traditional sense?

If there is no need to invoke the notion of deity then why distinguish sorts of deity?

paul roehl

Boulder climber

california

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:20pm PT

You seem in general to push the notion humans are somehow special and important.

Absolutely. And it's one of the great flaws in contemporary thought not to recognize the fact that the extraordinary nature of human capability requires extraordinary responsibility. And this is of course counter to the prevalent notion of our insignificance: we are a bit of nothing on a speck of dust. What that idea ignores is our ability to know and experience and be aware in a manner no other thing we have yet to discover can.

Simply with the knowledge of our own inevitable mortality we step into a kind of opportunity for nobility.

Largo

Sport climber

The Big Wide Open Face

Topic Author's Reply - Feb 13, 2017 - 04:24pm PT

Sez Ed: In particular, I believe that Largo has posited that there is a causal relationship which schematically goes like this:

Nothing → Something

My sense here is that Ed has a different take on casual than I do in this regards, based on an indirect or 3rd person take on observable external objects, then tried to graft those onto the mind discussion. This works wonderfully on the mechanical aspects of brain function, but runs aground on the objectless shores of awareness.

But let's return to the issue of pure awareness - especially in regards to Healyje's philosophical position that awareness is a mind state that is inexorably tied to content. I refer here to a paraphrased article on the subject by Jan Sinclair.

One of many ways to encounter "pure" awareness (by anyone bothering to try) is to witness the nature of your consciousness in the "gap" between two thoughts. In that "gap" -- after one thought has vanished but the next thought has not emerged -- what remains? Is that "gap" a mere nothingness? Do you cease to exist? If not, then what continues in the absence of any conceptual cognition taking place? What is it that continues? In other words, what is consciousness like when there are absolutely no thoughts taking place within it?

Let's be even more precise: What is consciousness like at the time when there are neither thoughts nor external sense perceptions arising -- for example in a state of total sensory deprivation? The mind doesn't simply cease, does it? Even if one has no thoughts or perceptions there is still a naked awareness. But if we observe that naked awareness just as it is, what do we find? What is it like?

If you examine this in your own experience you may find that it is basically emptiness without any characteristics, yet it is also "awake" or imbued with a quality of epistemic being. There is nothing there at all with any characteristics that can be identified, reduced, defined, measured, or isolated in any way. You cannot be "wrong" about this because there is no thing, perception, or quality to be wrong about. Yet at the same time it is not a mere nothingness -- there is a quality there that is self-aware of itself, of its own emptiness (no content).

This is not something that can be understood from simply reading these words; you have to empirically stop calculating, stop evaluating, let your mind settle until you experience it yourself and are certain that this is actually what awareness really is like. Again, I am not referring to any sort of subjective perception or subjective "state" because it is totally non-conceptual, pre-subjective and pre-state.

State, by definition, is "any of various conditions characterized by definite quantities." Pure awareness is the total absence of qualities, definite or otherwise.

The sticking point for most people is that pure awareness is non- conceptual, and so you have Healyje scrambling to paint it this color or that and functionally attribute "it" to something observable or at any rate, conceptual. An evolved something. But in doing so, he has already arrived at the game too late, once qualities have already arisen IN awareness.

jgill

Boulder climber

The high prairie of southern Colorado

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:34pm PT

Intelligent design usually refers to a deity of some interactive sort

True. But what of the notion of the mathematical universe where no such entity is proposed - merely the underlying mathematical structure of reality? Can only conscious beings be considered intelligent rather than some ground of existence that displays a bewildering organization? Are we intelligent because we can decipher the rules of physical reality, rather than create them?

. . . there is a quality there that is self-aware of itself, of its own emptiness (no content)

Careful. To be aware of itself is to have an object of awareness.

In general, I agree with some of what you say. But I remain unconvinced that a "study" of raw awareness will lead anywhere productive.

MH2

Boulder climber

Andy Cairns

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:37pm PT

What is consciousness like at the time when there are neither thoughts nor external sense perceptions arising -- for example in a state of total sensory deprivation? The mind doesn't simply cease, does it?

Not unless the brain ceases to exist.

MH2

Boulder climber

Andy Cairns

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:45pm PT

You don't necessarily have to invoke the notion of deity to realize the sublime nature of that mystery and the importance it lends to us as human beings.

That is a lovely image, Narcissus.

However, you should look around at the other things which were inherent in the primordial plasma, like Rodney Dangerfield, the broken shoelace, and the 380,000 or so species of beetle.

If you don't look away from your own image, there will be trouble.

jgill

Boulder climber

The high prairie of southern Colorado

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:50pm PT

Sullly = Sycorax

MH2

Boulder climber

Andy Cairns

Feb 13, 2017 - 05:05pm PT

We have those pesky things we call the five senses that somehow limit the boundaries of this discussion.

Wayno,

Are these the five senses you refer to:

taste, sight, touch, smell, and hearing

I know of others.

eeyonkee

Trad climber

Golden, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 05:44pm PT

The sticking point for most people is that pure awareness is non- conceptual, and so you have Healyje scrambling to paint it this color or that and functionally attribute "it" to something observable or at any rate, conceptual. An evolved something. But in doing so, he has already arrived at the game too late, once qualities have already arisen IN awareness.

The sticking point for you is you don't see that awareness is on a continuum with what my cat does. You make a problem where there is none. Awareness is absolutely not a "problem" for me. It is an emergent property that is the result of evolution on this planet. What's the big deal?

Wayno

Big Wall climber

Seattle, WA

Feb 13, 2017 - 05:52pm PT

Are these the five senses you refer to:

taste, sight, touch, smell, and hearing

I know of others.

Me too. Which ones were you thinking of?

Some on this thread have mentioned what their education and background and careers entail. As if it mattered. I don't think it does as far as general discussion like this is concerned. Maybe if we were talking more specifically about a purely academic endeavor. I bring this up because we mentioned the five senses and more. I am a cook. Not a chef, although people call me that all the time. I do not have a college or university degree but I have taken more than a few classes at the college level. The one unique experience that I have from my work, and it just occurred to me recently is that I use all of the "five senses" continually to get my job done and have good results. That makes me really effing special. Not. Just an interesting observation, that pays rather poorly.

paul roehl

Boulder climber

california

Feb 13, 2017 - 05:53pm PT

If you don't look away from your own image, there will be trouble.

"The unexamined life is not worth living."

Beetles, life on this planet it's all fascinating and remarkable, but human consciousness and what it produces, its ability to comprehend, to know and to make/produce is like nothing else on this planet. The human mind has extended its senses to different planets, something beetles with all their fascinating qualities have yet to do. I don't think it's narcissistic to realize what you are, on the contrary with it comes a realization of your responsibilities.

eeyonkee

Trad climber

Golden, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 05:58pm PT

Responsibilities? Please go on...

paul roehl

Boulder climber

california

Feb 13, 2017 - 06:15pm PT

True. But what of the notion of the mathematical universe where no such entity is proposed - merely the underlying mathematical structure of reality? Can only conscious beings be considered intelligent rather than some ground of existence that displays a bewildering organization? Are we intelligent because we can decipher the rules of physical reality, rather than create them?

I brought this idea up ages ago and typically it was trashed: the divinity of number, referring to the eternal nature of mathematical relationships that seem to be a reflection of an intelligence within the universe itself. "Ground of existence that displays a bewildering organization," yes, strange and mysterious.