Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2015 - 06:39pm PT
|
Another thing that is rather disappointing is that Moose actually believes that someone who has looked at mind for 45 years is making an elemental mistake that he understands having never looked at mind from the inside. This rather amazes me.
What is surprising about it?
In the long history of meditation many people have "looked at the mind from inside" without any way of knowing about neurons and how they communicate with each other and how their activity underlies our perceptions. For millenia people looked at the sun without knowing how it makes heat and light. Looking at something is different than trying to find out how it works.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2015 - 06:46pm PT
|
Did the mistress feed the cat?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2015 - 09:04pm PT
|
Those that can, conceive
Those that Kant, perceive
If I shoot you in the head, your perception of the stuff will change. Does that mean the stuff is only a perception, sourced by brain? (JL)
It's this kind of weird "logic" that too much meditation encourages. Note the appeal to violence, the hostility . . . Seek moderation, John (Buddha).
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2015 - 09:05pm PT
|
MH2: Looking at something is different than trying to find out how it works.
Look at THAT.
Looking is experiencing.
“How things work” is stipulated through representations, models, theories, . . . due to the creation of things and objects cognitively.
If my kid draws a picture of mom, the representation might bring my wife to my mind, but the representation is not my wife, nor is it NOT my wife to me and my child. But it works.
You can extend the use of representations (maps) to “how it works” through the use (and creation) of variables and relationships among those variables. This also works.
But to say that it is “how things work” is mis-leading.
We don’t know how things work. It’s even questionable that there is anything at all, or that anything is really changing to begin with. (You can question, you know.)
Compare that to “looking.” Looking (without subject or object) is a direct experience.
If you say that you “know” “how things work” it would seem that you must start with experience. Of course, that may not even be true. You could simply have a vivid imagination. It’s what every liberated master has said to us.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 07:40am PT
|
Moose for the cigar again.
Not to crash a rhetorical circle jerk, but...
Reality is what is everywhere, where ever that is, whether you're there or not.
Perception is your chimp-wielding-an-Etch a Sketch-on-the-back-of-a-bumpy-short-bus's model of same.
Given that reality includes all, including gross misunderstanding (the perceptual norm, apparently), perception can then be described as a tiny subset of the reality.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 07:45am PT
|
“How things work” is stipulated through representations, models, theories, . . . due to the creation of things and objects cognitively.
What do you mean by "creation," Mike?
How could we be aware of anything other than "cognitively?"
Do representations, models, and theories have no appeal to you?
We don’t know how things work. It’s even questionable that there is anything at all, or that anything is really changing to begin with.
If there is nothing, would it make any difference to how you spend your days?
You can ask questions, but one of those questions should be, "Where do my questions lead?" An explanation of how one thing works can lead to an understanding of how many things work. This interconnectedness is a fertile, powerful, and robust feature of our world. To doubt the entirety of it, one is pushed to extremes like your, "It's even questionable that there is anything at all..."
Sure, it's questionable. Do you have an answer?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 07:55am PT
|
but I prefer scientific methods
The scientific method includes observation, hypothesis and then demonstration (experiment).
Saying meditation is unscientific is scientism hypocrisy.
This thread reeks with scientism, bias and hypocrisy.
Your complete argument is a puffed up self righteous bluff cloaked in the cloth of your own self made so called dogmatic science. (like so many others here also)
That is not Science ......
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 07:57am PT
|
Where do thoughts (neural impulses) come from? Just two sources: 1) Pre-existing neural impulses or your senses (in the most complete sense, given that you've got neural transducers in every nook and cranny in your body that monitor everything from smells to your blood sugar level).
That much we DO know already.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 07:58am PT
|
Werner, is your anti-static lab coat a hoody?
If so, please wear it backwards.
|
|
TWP
Trad climber
Mancos, CO & Bend, OR
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 08:03am PT
|
I've practiced meditation (a lot) and studied molecular biology.
The mysteries only get deeper looking down both barrels.
Like this one:
How does an aggregation of molecules generate something as subtle, transient and evanescent as a thought, a mood, an emotion or a hallucination?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 08:09am PT
|
Just see
TWP represents the intelligent class .....
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 08:15am PT
|
Anyone here who isn't an aggregation of molecules; please self identify and let us know what you are instead.
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 08:35am PT
|
As sophisticated talented intellectuals at the pinnacle of evolution and the leading edge of what can be achieved by such superior biological organism such as ourselves, we must not forget our role as the chief predators and the unpredictably dangerous animals that we also are.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 08:41am PT
|
dangerous animals that we are
Those who bluff in the name of scientific method that are too much addicted to the gross plane of scientific mode of thinking are unable to transcend the stage of direct perception.
Thus they remain as none other then polished animals.
The intelligent class are the real human beings .....
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 08:57am PT
|
As sophisticated talented intellectuals at the pinnacle of evolution and the leading edge of what can be achieved by such superior biological organism such as ourselves, we must not forget our role as the chief predators and the unpredictably dangerous animals that we also are.
we are the Crown of Creation? (cue Jefferson Airplane)
I think you might have misinterpreted "evolution" and taken a rather species-centric view. If viewed strictly by biomass, we are in the rather distinct minority, single cell organisms have it way over us, and in fact are a major "challenge" to our putative superiority, even terms like "chief predator" seem a quaint boast.
Ever have an infection? damn those sneaky bastards, why don't they stand up and fight like a man!
If "talented intellectualism" was such a strong evolutionary advantage, why don't we see it occurring in more species? An alternative explanation is that "talented intellectualism" is really just a sexual selection, it is our species' "peacock feathers," or perhaps more aptly, our "turkey feathers" (we do tend to stand in front of mirrors displaying a lot...).
Even among the multi-celluar our claim of superiority is rather vapid. The ants, taken as a whole, equal humans in biomass, and they've been around for many more millions of years than humans have. They also have an elaborate social system, though very different than the human version, seemingly equally effective. I suspect they survive into the future... humans may have a rather limited play of a few million years in the long running story of life on planet Earth.
But do go on and enjoy your time in the sun. Every living thing has that unique moment.
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 08:59am PT
|
but in end, the brain/mind is a mysteries product of evolution.
Maybe if you spent more time meditating you will have the answers.
You see now how silly your arguments are/become ......
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 09:10am PT
|
Comedy gold, that.
If one is completely unconscious under anesthetics then you will be dead.
Consciousness is the symptom of life.
Thus a so called unconscious person still exhibits consciousness of the living entities life force being active.
The only comedy is your poor fund of knowledge, Randisi .....
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 09:44am PT
|
Comedy Central we are not.
Eccentric Ghandi and or Einstein never has been-wannabees, maybe?
Still, can't attempt a joke on this site without a bee hive hitting me in the head!
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 09:52am PT
|
We (humans) can measure the 'success' of a species in a number of ways. One is sheer population size - we're doing quite well there. We've proven to be adaptable to just about every (surface) environment on earth.
Now, if we add 'sustainable' to 'population size', the jury is still very much out on that one.
If we then add 'utility to the rest of the biological environment' as a criterion, we score a bit lower. Perhaps at or near the bottom of all species today.
Ants, on the other hand, are incredibly useful - they recycle dead things so that they're available to build new living things, from bacteria to trees. They've become absolutely necessary for the health of most of the world's eco systems.
If we add 'time in the saddle (long term survivability)' as a criterion, we score no where near the top. Archaea would rule that roost, along with some larger organisms like ginkos, sharks, and, of course, insects.
Anyway, as any Californian well knows, ants come and go as they please with impunity.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2015 - 10:00am PT
|
Randisi -- Unconscious things are not conscious.
But they still exhibit consciousness.
You're making the mistake between conscious and consciousness itself.
As long as the heartbeat is still going a person still exhibits consciousness.
Consciousness IS the exact symptom of life itself.
Life comes from life ......
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!