View Single Post
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 09-23-2007, 05:24 AM
Jaben Jaben is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 110
Jaben is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Yahoo to Jaben
Default

I would agree that Steve's latest definition of SR is pretty consistent with what I understand about Advaita or non-duality.

Why would consciousness be split up if it is all one at the deepest level? A perfectly sound possible answer is the nature of consciousness requires separate experiencers in order to have experiences that are meaningful. How meaningful would tasting sorbet or the experience of seeing the sun set be if we were at the same time witnessing the experience of seeing trillions of sunsets and sunrises from all the various solar systems and tasting what ever every being in existence is tasting? Simultaneously witnessing all experiences from all perspectives is nonsensical. Communication seems to be our current choice mechanism for sharing experiences between experiencers.

The other non OR answer is to say it's not split up but rather the others don't exist (solipsism). If that's true then either you are not reading this or there was never any experience of writing this. Not falsifiable, but if you were to truly believe in solipsism, compassion becomes void of meaning and the need for congruency is not very logical. Wild fantasies breaking all laws of nature would become reasonable intentions.

When a tree is on it's last year I like to think it bears its largest crop of fruit because its conscious of the fact that it has one last chance to spread it's seed.

David Deutsche in fabric of reality says that anything that is irrefutable (not falsifiable) is not very meaningful. On the other hand if a theory can be proved wrong but withstands tests it contains more truth than a theory that cannot be proved or disproved.

SR states consciousness is the primary building block from which the objective world arises and OR states the opposite, consciousness is a function of some static primary energy that obeys laws that can be defined and represented in the form of knowledge and understood by the consciousness that it composes. Try to cut that with Occam's razor

When computer's are able to simulate consciousness as well as the human consciousness one instance will wonder if it can witness it's true identity as the aware presence in which and by which all exists by shutting off it's power supply. Are we really any different?
Reply With Quote