[Melchior]

Originally Posted by spacedout

These are two of Don Price's and Jim Barrell's earlier works. Barrell's book The Experiential Method: Exploring the Human Experience must be out of print. I went to Amazon.com and found one copy for sale for over $100. I have a copy if anybody would like to borrow it. Price and Barrell new book coming out in 2010 by MIT Press is entitled Science and Consciousness.

Heh, too much money for me. I'll keep a lookout for the newer book though, thanks.

Originally Posted by bluedragon

I believe Consciousness itself is above knowledge and therefore one cannot understand it using reason. I don't know if anything created it, and if it did, this kind of creation would be way beyond our ability to comprehend. I believe everything in the world is a manifestation of Consciousness, and therefore, included in it, so it would be impossible to understand it unless your mind is liberated and it remembers it is Source.

That reminds me of something said once about how the solution to a problem must be at a level of at least one greater than that of the problem, otherwise, the only way to know for sure is to test and see what happens. If I recall correctly, this was something that I heard from a talk that Wolfram gave about his book: A New Kind of Science. (also talks about cellular atomata, i.e. the Game of Life is a variation)

What I believe to be the most accurate (even if challenging) perspective that of the Advaita Vedanta philosophy.

Challenging does not matter, as long as it's correct (and there's nothing less challenging that explains the same thing while also being accurate and correct ).

The idea (in short) is that there is consciousness (the Soul, Brahman) which is eternal. The universe does not simply possess consciousness, it is consciousness, and this consciousness is Brahman. This consciousness manifests itself as the life we see - out of playfulness. Life is a play, a miracle, but humans mistakenly identify themselves with their psiho-mental processes (the ego...) and confuse their ego with the Self, which is none other than Source. Through meditation, and with the help of a master, one is able to understand, like a scientist, which his own authority, who he is (the answer to the supreme question, who am I? ), and become one with Source. Once the mind is liberated by that realization, life is no longer Samsara (a nuissance, a win and loose game), but becomes a play. Source wants to know itself through us, and there is no reason for it. You know why once you are liberated, because you are Source, but you cannot understand it if by "you" you mean your human body and mind - the intellect cannot comprehend that - it can only be known.

There's no need to become one with the Source if you are already one with the Source, as you've mentioned. The only thing left being getting rid of the barriers that are keeping you oblivious to your true nature. This almost sounds like self-awareness or actualization if you ask me, the universe coming full circle so that a part of itself realizes what itself is. But that is also the end for consciousness as it knows itself because it realizes that it came from unconsciousness and that they are actually the same. I don't know if you'll believe me when I say this, but this fundamental connection with what you term as the Source is something that I came across a couple months ago, if I remember correctly, leading me to come to an understanding of what, as an umbrella term, is called nondualism, which looking at the wiki page on Advaita Vedanta, it's quite similar, and even has non-duality in its description. However, either my 'ego' decided to save itself from dying completely by some means of a mental defense mechanism or if this pattern here, called myself, simply had the correct conditions to continue moving and 'living' after realizing what I have thought must be the fundamental and true nature of reality in a meaningful way according to myself, choosing to continue on as though I had a choice in the matter at all, continuing with 'duality', but understanding 'nonduality'. But anyway, this is for another thread, the theory that is, the application of it would be useful for creating consciousness. Although, it would seem that my use of the term consciousness is misplaced given your beliefs. The proper question would probably be: how to replicate patterns of consciousness such as ourselves at or above the complexity of ourselves (I'm sure we're not at the upper limit ).

I'm writing a paper on Yoga for a University course, so if you like, I can write about that view as well.

Sure thing, but if you could, could you also point out how you think it's related and would help answer the question (modified above in your case due to definitional discrepancies)?