Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post

Melchior · 10-22-2009, 03:58 PM

@ Manomanman: Interesting blog; visited and scanned.

Go ahead and blog some more then. It would be a nice change from things that haven't really make sense based on personal experience.

Speaking of personal experience...

@ Anagogy: These things you speak of about consciousness (i.e. ascendant nature, permeation of all of space/matter, evolving entity in a world of paths, creation of the Source, and probably other stuff as well), I personally have not experienced any of it directly. Not been told any of that by any'thing' that I deemed a trustworthy source of information. Nor have I reached those conclusions intuitionally, perhaps even of something similar, but of an altogether different quality. Moreover, the findings of the report in question here also doesn't have anything in particular to support those views of consciousness, except perhaps the comparison of consciousness to software. but as I pointed out earlier in a favorite quote of mine: "It's all hardware", software at a fundamental level is really just hardware and without hardware, the software could not exist, similar to the ideas in nondualist philosophy. Granted, I don't think those ideas of consciousness are necessarily 'false', but at the same time, I also don't think that they are verifiable while we are in the physical world of those ideas in the case they are true, and that, unfortunately, is not very useful. (In any case, I'd like to get to the bottom of this whole consciousness thing as well, and bits and pieces like these don't help too much in getting any answers...

).

In response to the evolutionary chain thing about human bodies and consciousness, I'm looking forward to the day which I can make my current self obsolete. (for those who've read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, it is similar to the situation of 'Deep Thought' and the 'Earth'

). Unfortunately, in this case, it is my guess that for it to be successful, what would be required is a sense of detachment of my current self with itself... a dissolution of the self (or if you enjoy puns, perhaps it will be a disillusion

).

@ Curtis2011: I'm not sure if you would classify me as one of those people beyond hope of comprehending a higher power. Does the fact that I 'can' but at the same time 'will not accept it due to 'valid' reasons' mean that I'm one of them? Why is it obvious that consciousness comes from something 'higher'? What does it mean to be 'higher' in the first place? If there was nothing 'lower' would the 'higher' still exist? Or is speaking someone like me, somewhat of a nondualist (at least I hope that's an accurate enough term, not completely solidified yet here... >.>) trying to explain some abstract concept as the teachings of the bible to some other existence such as a pet cat?

@ Rockchick26: As with many of the other people here, this test, by itself, does not prove anything about consciousness really except that these people got these results, etc. I would agree that it is definitely strong support for this thing we call consciousness being related to the brain however. The 'mirror stage' as it has been called is also somewhat supportive of that idea that consciousness is not 'inherent' but rather 'developed'. Maybe at such a complex level as what's found in the networks of the brain, there emerges consciousness, but I'm guessing that it also depends on the type of networking involved, something that's, at least in part, determined by DNA.

Also, I also seem to have a bit of difficulty finding 'more conscious' people in my life outside of the internet. Perhaps things like this aren't so important to them and the law of attraction keeps it from invading their otherwise happy lives. Or, probably, they just don't want to be bothered with such pursuits, choosing to ignore it perhaps out of a mental defense mechanism whenever it is brought up.

@ rei: 'what if' questions, while good for thought experiments and providing interesting consequences at times, really don't hold as much ground as empirical evidence and critical analysis of information gathered from such data. If consciousness really does come from another source, whatever that source is, it's hiding itself quite well. Then again, theories are constantly being updated.

10-22-2009, 03:58 PM	#17 (permalink)
Melchior Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Here Posts: 787	@ Manomanman: Interesting blog; visited and scanned. Go ahead and blog some more then. It would be a nice change from things that haven't really make sense based on personal experience. Speaking of personal experience... @ Anagogy: These things you speak of about consciousness (i.e. ascendant nature, permeation of all of space/matter, evolving entity in a world of paths, creation of the Source, and probably other stuff as well), I personally have not experienced any of it directly. Not been told any of that by any'thing' that I deemed a trustworthy source of information. Nor have I reached those conclusions intuitionally, perhaps even of something similar, but of an altogether different quality. Moreover, the findings of the report in question here also doesn't have anything in particular to support those views of consciousness, except perhaps the comparison of consciousness to software. but as I pointed out earlier in a favorite quote of mine: "It's all hardware", software at a fundamental level is really just hardware and without hardware, the software could not exist, similar to the ideas in nondualist philosophy. Granted, I don't think those ideas of consciousness are necessarily 'false', but at the same time, I also don't think that they are verifiable while we are in the physical world of those ideas in the case they are true, and that, unfortunately, is not very useful. (In any case, I'd like to get to the bottom of this whole consciousness thing as well, and bits and pieces like these don't help too much in getting any answers... ). In response to the evolutionary chain thing about human bodies and consciousness, I'm looking forward to the day which I can make my current self obsolete. (for those who've read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, it is similar to the situation of 'Deep Thought' and the 'Earth' ). Unfortunately, in this case, it is my guess that for it to be successful, what would be required is a sense of detachment of my current self with itself... a dissolution of the self (or if you enjoy puns, perhaps it will be a disillusion ). @ Curtis2011: I'm not sure if you would classify me as one of those people beyond hope of comprehending a higher power. Does the fact that I 'can' but at the same time 'will not accept it due to 'valid' reasons' mean that I'm one of them? Why is it obvious that consciousness comes from something 'higher'? What does it mean to be 'higher' in the first place? If there was nothing 'lower' would the 'higher' still exist? Or is speaking someone like me, somewhat of a nondualist (at least I hope that's an accurate enough term, not completely solidified yet here... >.>) trying to explain some abstract concept as the teachings of the bible to some other existence such as a pet cat? @ Rockchick26: As with many of the other people here, this test, by itself, does not prove anything about consciousness really except that these people got these results, etc. I would agree that it is definitely strong support for this thing we call consciousness being related to the brain however. The 'mirror stage' as it has been called is also somewhat supportive of that idea that consciousness is not 'inherent' but rather 'developed'. Maybe at such a complex level as what's found in the networks of the brain, there emerges consciousness, but I'm guessing that it also depends on the type of networking involved, something that's, at least in part, determined by DNA. Also, I also seem to have a bit of difficulty finding 'more conscious' people in my life outside of the internet. Perhaps things like this aren't so important to them and the law of attraction keeps it from invading their otherwise happy lives. Or, probably, they just don't want to be bothered with such pursuits, choosing to ignore it perhaps out of a mental defense mechanism whenever it is brought up. @ rei: 'what if' questions, while good for thought experiments and providing interesting consequences at times, really don't hold as much ground as empirical evidence and critical analysis of information gathered from such data. If consciousness really does come from another source, whatever that source is, it's hiding itself quite well. Then again, theories are constantly being updated.