Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 08:29pm PT
|
John is good at firing off from the adventurist trenches, criticizing objectivity and it's adherents.
JL is surely combative. My subjective take is that he is fencing. Examples:
Feint: An attack with the purpose of provoking a reaction from the opposing fencer.
Counter Attack: A basic fencing technique of attacking your opponent while generally moving back out of the way of the opponent's attack.
To his credit he uses rubber weapons.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 08:41pm PT
|
My subjective take is that he is fencing
Rapier wit . . . ?
;>)
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 08:48pm PT
|
What do you imagine the words mean, "sentience is not a thing."
a zen koan
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 09:04pm PT
|
PSP: [Nonduality glimpsed through meditation] is very subtle though and can easily be misinterpreted as a self improvement technique mostly because if you haven't experienced letting go of the self then everything is about the self.
Well said.
Cintune:
There are many states of consciousness. Even for you. :-) (Take a look.) And indeed, you can go farther. Even when you close your eyes, your universe disappears. You have no evidence for it otherwise. What you “think” is there are only thoughts you have in the now. It’s similar to memories: you don’t "remember," you experience memories in the now (always), and they are constructions of what you think happened.
It’s a vicious illusion. Before you know it, you think YOU exist as you believe. Look closely and I think you’ll have a problem finding what you think is your self or “I” of any substance.
Jgill: . . . . you throw these vague conceptual entities into the meditative miasma: BFZZ.
This reminds me of Ed’s call for definitive terms. Hey, . . . they are out there, but can you read sanskrit, tibetan, hindi, Tamil, Japanese, Chinese? And I’m not talking about just one term, but a whole slew of them that go on for pages and pages. Most of them are untranslatable and hardly conceptual. Most all of them relate to what could be called pristine experience, awareness, and consciousness.
Again, Jgill: Startling epiphanies enforced by the guidance of Zen masters (themselves proselytized by previous generations) and reinforced by considerable time sitting create a powerful tendency to "believe" and to convince others of the enormous implications of those beliefs. Viz, "form is emptiness and emptiness is form" and "objects are not really solid" and "without an observer, objects do not exist", etc.
Would that be like subatomic particles, gravity, or electricity? Form? Solid? Tangible pin-it-down existence? Our planet going 66,000 miles an hour, spinning at 1,000 miles an hour, yet apparently floating in the middle of an infinite expanse of space? That’s your idea of “normal?” It is your belief that you are aware of this . . . how?
;->
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 09:07pm PT
|
This reminds me of Ed’s call for definitive terms. Hey, . . . they are out there, but can you read sanskrit, tibetan, hindi, Tamil, Japanese, Chinese? And I’m not talking about just one term, but a whole slew of them that go on for pages and pages. Most of them are untranslatable and hardly conceptual. Most all of them relate to what could be called pristine experience, awareness, and consciousness.
oh, I thought this stuff was beyond description... "experience, awareness, and consciousness," but I guess that is only true if you don't use the right description...
my bad.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 09:12pm PT
|
if you haven't experienced letting go of the self then everything is about the self
You can't let go of the self.
It's never ever been done nor ever will be done.
The Mayavadi philosophy thinks its so.
The mayavadi philosophy is the most dangerous philosophy period.
It was Shankaracharya's work and he even called all his followers in the end fools for the nonsense he had to preach.
The individual self is eternal and has personality.
The atheists are not dangerous but the Mayavadi fools are the most .....
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 09:30pm PT
|
Sentience starts where objective functioning leaves off.
Objective functioning starts where Sentience leaves off.
There, think I fixed that for ya ; )
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 09:50pm PT
|
Jan said,
I see meditation as a method of making us happier, more creative, and more functional human beings, a way to reprogram the mind/brain. Perhaps if it is reprogrammed enough, it becomes empty as Zen describes, but I haven't experienced that state on any sustained basis.
So your use of meditation sounds much different from the others here. If i may say, it almost sounds like you use meditation to Congeal with your inner I? Pardon me, but all this talk on meditation seems a bit egotistical, or maybe free-willish! I mean, come'in from Ed's point of view, who are you to silence what the universe has wrought?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
Aug 18, 2015 - 10:16pm PT
|
Mh2 always sez,
A simple way to answer the question is to say that consciousness is what goes away when you go under general anesthesia. As with most simple statements there are exceptions, but often enough under general anesthesia, heartbeat, breathing, digestion, kidney filtration, and a host of other biological activities continue more or less as usual while consciousness is notably absent.
I see a mild misconception between understandings of Consciousness.
Yours, being awake and able to make thought provoked decisions.
Others, even when on drugs, or asleep. The body, heart, lungs, liver, etc. continue to live, and make decisions.
Would you say when we're asleep we're on the same level of 'consciousness' of a plant?
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 07:15am PT
|
Would you say when we're asleep we're on the same level of 'consciousness' of a plant?
Hard to say, but a plant has never told me that my snoring woke it up.
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 07:59am PT
|
I think you are on to something there JGill "Big Fat Zen Zero " sounds like a musical broadway hit! and that last mouthful you posted has screenplay potential. With bushman and norwegian to write the lyrics. You are going need some people or willing to shave their heads.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 08:12am PT
|
(This morning I read that maya is derived from the root “ma,” to measure out. Funny connection, that.)
Ed: oh, I thought this stuff was beyond description…My bad.
(I think you’re being facetious.)
It’s my understanding (poor as it must be—yet as I transcribed from the commentary from Ksemarali above) that an internal or external non-object (that which cannot be properly conceptualized, that which the mind makes up—is beyond terms, labels, and empirical experience.
I can understand how all this seems confusing. It IS confusing. There is reasoning, but the reasoning resists conceptualization.
I’ll offer the following as an example using upon technical terms and language.
————
In Saiva philosophy, Ultimate Reality is said to be not simply “prakasa” (literally, light; the principle of Self-Revelation; consciousness; the principle by which everything else is known); it is also “vimarsa” (literally, experience; technically—the Self-consciousness of the supreme, full of “jnana” {roughly, knowledge} and “kriya” {roughly, action} which brings about the world process).
———-
In other words, Ultimate Reality is the light that lights itself.
Does that clarify things for you now, Ed?
If it doesn’t, it doesn’t for good reason. Such “things” cannot be defined accurately or completely. At best, at any time, people are just pointing in every field of study, using close approximations that are often useful and predictive, but still essentially rough metaphors.
There are very good reasons why we can’t pin anything down as we think we can.
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 08:19am PT
|
Big Fat Zen Zero ... as Broadway hit...
I may have something to add here, the refrain:
...zeeny-bop flap-doodle woo woo...
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 10:10am PT
|
There are very good reasons why we can’t pin anything down as we think we can.
Well, there we agree...
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 11:50am PT
|
OK. Lets agree on something, I see this over and over: Is sentience a thing?
First, how do you define thing? Does it have to be something (it is hard to get away from the word "thing") that you can hold in your hand? Is it the result of physical processes that can be detected and measured? Is it something that can be shown to be a function of something that you can hold in your hand?
How do you define thing?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 11:58am PT
|
According to wikipedia it's:
Sentience is the ability to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively.
I believe Largo's Chalmers basically considers the difference as 'objective' is looking at information from the outside; 'subjective' is looking at it from the inside. From what I gather, though, when pressed, he has a bit of a hard time putting his paw on exactly what 'looking at information from the inside' really means.
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 01:57pm PT
|
Like it, Cintune!
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 03:06pm PT
|
Well, if an idea is a THING, then H.Sapiens is not alone in that respect, although I acknowledge, provisionally, that we are the king bees of the animal kingdom when it comes to abstract thought.
Where does an idea come from? I say, with a lot of confidence, that it is the brain and its hormones, such as the adrenal glands.
I know that 2/3 of this thread won't admit that the brain is our thinking organ, so I can only ask them for an alternative. From evidence, thinking, including abstract thought, takes place in the brain.
Our brains might seem to be a formidable advantage in the animal kingdom. It was risky, though. That big brain takes a lot of calories to operate.
You guys can go on and on, but it is pretty plain. Abstract thought is a thing. Sentience is a result of abstract thought. I know that you work hard to not think, but you do. You certainly do when posting here.
Now I know that Largo or MikeL is going to be all over this. You know, you have to experience it. You can't get there from here, that jive. So what? You can study, be coached, and think all that you want, but it won't help you very much if you want to be an NFL Quarterback. The world is filled with such analogies.
I hear that with Zen you have to do the work to understand it. I have no problem with that statement. You couldn't pick a log very well without a few years of experience. Most things are like that.
I will say that sentient thought is a thing. It can be observed, certainly by the thinker. Again, it depends on how you define thing, but thought can be observed. You guys do it in groups, so you can communicate about the topic. It is a little different in that Zen apparently strives for no-thought, but there seems to be a method involved. Otherwise you would be doing it on your own.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Aug 19, 2015 - 03:22pm PT
|
Clearly Werner believes consciousness exists independent of the meat; not sure about everyone else. For me, personally, the experiences from briefly working in the mental health field and with newborns suffering from a range of congenital conditions completely disabused me of any such notions. From those experiences and from reading about brain damage studies, I think whatever consciousness is, it's tightly bound to the meat at all levels of from micro to macro and in a highly distributed manner.
[ The macro binding is also problematic to Chalmers' micro-phenomenal binding ideas which basically discount the notion of macro-level structure binding. ]
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|