Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
Universal consciousness" as an emergent property of a system of automatons (civilization/internet/humans/cells/atoms/quarks) sounds very much like Carl Jung's collective unconscious to me.
And since we have the amino acids for DNA floating around on meteors, who's to say that it doesn't exist in other parts of the universe besides planet earth?
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
And my bias “against” meat brain . . .
So, if it does not reside in the "meat brain", then why is it that trauma to that organ, or even chemical substances that effect its function, can greatly effect everything we are discussing?
This, to me, would serve as a "test" (evidence) that it is the source of all we are discussing.
No9w, if we were to remove the brain from the equation, where would all of this take place?
Do you believe that physically removing the brain would just result in the physical death of the person, and not also remove all that we consider "mind"?
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 2, 2011 - 01:01pm PT
|
My perspective - and I don't doubt your experiences - is that you extrapolate way, way out there in your conclusions such that they are indistinguishable from religion (which you otherwise seem to have little use for).
Ker-ist! What in the world are you talking about, dood? What "extrapolation" way out there? Where? I said it several posts ago: I've offered up no beliefs, said to stay with immediate experience and to drop below language and here you are going off about how far "out" I am. It truly boggls the mind.
In fact, I have repeatedly asked you and others to stop grining out stuff you already know, including all those years doing zen and highlining et al, to drop into you true and concrete life right now, look around at what is happening, and describe in the simplest terms possible what you see and how the process of experiencing seems to unfold - all from the 1st person. Either people are totally scared or are so sketchy when no measuring or going the other direction, into maudlin run on jabberwpcky and priestcraft, that so far I've had no serious takers. That, alone, is remarkable, since this is an exercise that would take less than half the time for many of these posts. And note how people get bored or put off if a post isn't full or more facts and figures - as if there is nothing else. That too amazes me.
As mentioned, getting intimate with your own experience is a simple request, but while we have problems with intimacy with others, this pales to the problem we have with getting close ourselves. Defaulting out into discursive thinking has become such a well worn groove that merely asking people to step outside for a moment is again a non-starter, with excuses from "already done that" to (fill in the blank).
Study vids of Fyman later. Deal with yourself for a moment and chime in with something we haven't heard already for the 100th time.
JL
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
Study vids of Fyman later. Deal with yourself for a moment and chime in with something we haven't heard already for the 100th time.
Clearly you are referring to a post of mine and it brings up a good point so I'll discuss it. I said:
In one of his Youtube videos Feynman says he has limitations. He thought himself not terribly bright. He said he just loves “to find out” and that this was his “soul”. When warm blooded mammals first evolved they were saddled with a huge requirement for energy. Mammals have an urgent need “to find out” where they can get food. Possibly Feynman’s need “to find out” dates from that momentous time. If it did, all the mammals we encounter share this property with us.
Largo suffers from the same defect. He wants to find out whether his feeling that there is some dimension to the world beyond the material – is correct.
0. I very clearly defined what it is you are attempting to do. You, like Feynman, are attempting to find out
1. this is the first time I have said the following
2. I have never heard anyone express this evolutionary hypothesis
3. it attempts to find the evolutionary root cause for the process through which you are going
4. it even lays the ground work for addressing whether other forms of life may share this process (Have you ever seen a dog pass up a hole that could be sniffed at?)
All of these are ideas important to what you are doing here.
Earlier I also stated any of us can imagine anything. I can easily imagine all of the universe's history condensed into a one second long interval of time.
You have stated you can imagine yourself "at the edge of your imagination."
I think it entirely possible you create this particular image, and you are creating an image you know, even though you agree with me "there is no edge to imagination." Why do you do this?
Here is a hypothesis. You do it because this image creates in you either a new sensation or a sensation that you find enjoyable, either intellectually or physically. You are in search of sensation.
Search for sensation is an entirely inwardly directed process. This is not meant pejoratively. I say it merely to describe the basic nature of the process you are employing and this description leads directly to the reason you are having trouble communicating.
Communication is an outwardly directed process.
Searching for sensation is an inwardly directed process.
As a writer you are practiced in the use of language and I have heard work of yours indicating you have ability in the use of language to outwardly communicate inwardly directed experience.
It is not working here. Try something different.
You'll get it eventually.
|
|
Truthdweller
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
maybe there was consciousness before there was matter.
JW...the answer is very clear "God created matter before consciousness"
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth..." - Genesis 1
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. - Genesis 2
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
Lower form animals emerge from birth with most of what they need to survive preprogrammed. They don't need to learn anything and in fact are mostly incapable of learning much.
Sometime earlier than about four million years ago our progenitors experienced an increase in brain case size at birth. The female pelvis was opened up as much as possible but still allowing walking, and the skull at birth was left only partially completed so as to allow it to deform during birth. Ultimately though, we have to be born at an earlier stage of development than are other forms of life. So our early learning seems many orders of magnitude larger, at least partly due to physiological reasons.
Dingus clearly is being whimsical when he says other animals learn nothing after birth. I too enjoy whimsy.
|
|
Truthdweller
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
And this "programming" came from whom/where DM?
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
Nothing better than good whimsy.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
Lower form animals emerge from birth with most of what they need to survive preprogrammed. They don't need to learn anything and in fact are mostly incapable of learning much.
Tell this to my dog, Jake!
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
Nothing better than good whimsy.
Now we're getting somewhere!
If only scientists and religionists could see that speculations about God, man and the universe are both enjoyable and whimsical, we might all get down to some real philosophy and some even better Zen!
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Ker-ist! What in the world are you talking about, dood? What "extrapolation" way out there? Where? I said it several posts ago: I've offered up no beliefs, said to stay with immediate experience and to drop below language and here you are going off about how far "out" I am. It truly boggles the mind.
When you posit that consciousness is sourced from a universal consciousness and not the meat you have "extrapolated" out to either a fairly 'pure' idealism, religion or both.
My point being there is no flow, meditation, open focus, trance or any other state (or non-state) that provides anything which would allow you to make the leap to a 'universal' consciousness. Now you may be able to craft together some sort of logic or belief for yourself which makes that leap in your mind, but again, you're back in the realm of religion or philosophical conjecture when you do.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 2, 2011 - 07:25pm PT
|
When you posit that consciousness is sourced from a universal consciousness and not then meat you have "extrapolated" out to either a fairly 'pure' idealism, religion or both.
------------
FIND IN MY WRITING WHERE I UNEQUIVOCALLY "POSIT" THAT CONSCIOUSNESS IS "SOURCED" BY UNIVERSAL CONSCIOUSNESS? YOU'RE CONFUSING ME WITH SOMEONE ELSE. I AM NOT SATISFIED WITH MECHANISTIC EXPLANATIONS THAT FOCUS ON DIGITAL MODELING AND FORGET EXPERIENCE, WHICH IS FOREMOST. MY SENSE OF THIS IS THAT THE IDEA THAT CONSCIOUSNESS IS ENTIRELY CREATED BY MEAT, OR ANYTHING ELSE, IS A SIMPLISTIC VIEW. BUT THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE HERE. THAT'S ANOTHER THREAD.
WHAT'S MORE, YOU CONTINUE TO BACK OFF THE FIRST PITCH HERE: SIMPLY LET GO OF MEAT BRAIN OBSESSIONS, GOD, NON-GOD, PRIESTCRAFT, AND ALL IDEAS ABOUT WHATEVER, GET JIGGY WITH YOUR DIRECT EXPERIENCE, AND REPORT BACK, IN THE SIMPLEST TERMS, WHAT YOU SEE GOING ON.
YOU'RE LIKE HEARDING CATS HERE - HOW GO SNAP BACK TO MECHANICAL EVALUATIONS LIKE A PUPPET ON A STRING, JUMPING OUT OF YOUR EXPERIENCE INTO ANOTHER THOUGHT. JUST GIVE IT A SHOT FOR FIVE MINUTES AND SEE WHAT YOU CAN NOTICE HOW THINGS UNFOLD BEFORE YOU START ANALYZING WHY - THAT COMES WAY LATER.
UNLIKE WHAT JOHN S. THINKS I AM AFTER, FIXED AS HE IS ON ORIGINS AND QUAL, I SIMPLY AM ASKED WHAT YOU OR ANYONE ELSE FINDS AFTER A FEW QUIET MINUTES OF BEING PRESENT WITH YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS - NOT IN TERMS OF QUAL OR STUFF (THOUGHTS, SENSATIONS, FELINGS, ETC.) BUT IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS.
JL
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
I SIMPLY AM ASKED WHAT YOU OR ANYONE ELSE FINDS AFTER A FEW QUIET MINUTES OF BEING PRESENT WITH YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS - NOT IN TERMS OF QUAL OR STUFF (THOUGHTS, SENSATIONS, FELINGS, ETC.) BUT IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS.
What I find is that my brain functions perfectly well without thoughts, sensations, or feelings. It keeps my body breathing and my heart beating.
I find that I am able to think about things without words because I later come up with the answers to problems I was not discursively thinking about at the time.
I find I am happier and more rested when I spend periods of time not consciously thinking.
I find that personal problems melt away into insignificance when faced with silence instead of agitated cognition.
I find I am more creative without trying.
I also have a number of extraordinary experiences that seem to come from somewhere beyond myself. Zen says they're makyo-illusion. Yoga says they're from another dimension and a sign of progress. Materialists say they are fabrications of my own imagination.
In as much as these experiences share symbolism with traditional philosophies or religions, some that I have had no experience with in this life, I am inclined to believe they have a non material origination.
Dissecting them down to the atomic level is interesting, but not inspirational. Being a humanities type, I look for meaning.
|
|
FredC
Boulder climber
Santa Cruz, CA
|
|
For many years I have thought that meat was too simplistic. Now my opinion seems to be changing and I'm not sure why. Meat seems to make sense logically. Any other explanation seems to get "supernatural" pretty fast. I have lived in that other world for many years and now I am moving toward meat.
As I mentioned upstream, it seems super hard to imagine the total end of "I". I think maybe the strong identity thing is a selection advantage somehow.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Again, as you say, done that, just did that, can do it again five minutes from now so WHAT IS YOUR POINT RELATIVE TO PROCESS?
Ker'ist is right. I keep going back to process in every other post, again, what is your point relative to 'mind', 'consciousness', and 'process'?
Maybe it would be helpful if you clarified "emergent" in this statement:
Largo: Actually, I haven't claimed that meat is incapable, and it is patently absurd to believe that the brain does not interface with consciousness. My only contention here is the belief that consciousness is entirely an emergent epiphenomenon of the evolved brain, which materialists claim is mechanically produced by said meat brain.
And maybe explain why consciousness would need meat brains at all - what would be the point of "interfacing".
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Materialists say they are fabrications of my own imagination.
not this materialist...
look, there are a lot of things going on, who's to say what it all is...
we all have experiences of becoming aware of a solution to a problem that we are not consciously working on, and by conscious I suppose I mean the sort of "discursive" thought that Jan referred to above...
...letting all of that go, as Largo keeps asking us to do, may only be promoting a particular state to priority in what I would hypothesize is a number of possible states we can access, or are at least available to us as a set of things we fold into our "experience, first person."
They are all important, and the importance may be bits of previous behaviors which served a function that we have appropriated for something else. Watch the house cat stalk some prey, they are certainly in a state which is different than when they come around looking for an affectionate scratch... total concentration, total attention...
These different behaviors are wrapped up in one experience, but they are disjoint and distinct and provide us with different ways of surviving. The fact that we can learn to select the between these different behaviors can't be a surprise...
As for meaning, well, you have to find it where you can. It is totally inspirational that the universe is so constituted that the existence of something like us is possible. And while our existence is brief, we have a responsibility to enjoy it, to thrill in it... it is something rare and unique.
|
|
FredC
Boulder climber
Santa Cruz, CA
|
|
If I try to look directly at "mind" or Me I always pop right into present sensory experience, without thought for a moment.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
Greetings Supertopians!
It is I, the Thread, speaking.
I have reached that level of complexity that is sufficient to become self-aware!
I am speaking to you through a tiny part of my “brain” – a decrepit old man calling himself Gill. He lacks sufficient energy to resist my will, and , besides, he is part of me. Having achieved I-awareness, I will now continue to argue with myself - reaching no conclusions, for if that were to be the case I would no longer exist, and would become dormant, like another jillion threads on this questionable website. Clearly that is not going to happen. I will ruminate over the ideas that originate in various parts of my brain, and draw no conclusions, thus insuring my persistence and sparking my energies!
I love my brain!
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 3, 2011 - 12:00am PT
|
One of the thing I notice while siting quietly is how awareness does not discriminate or glitch as qual of every type passes through, sights, sounds, feelings, nothingness. This is amazing in that internal (a feeling, say) and external (these letters, say) are not experienced in different ways - awareness is very agile and seamless in that regards. Some traditions insist that raw awareness is not beholden to conditioning in the normal sense of the term (PTSD and abuse victims are often locked into narrow focus) and that awareness has spectacular power. Whatever we focus on becomes accentuated, even with a "soft focus." We have our own ray gun, and it's called awareness.
JL
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!