Total posts: 112
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
The entire world and vast body of spiritual facts and knowledge....Observations which come through applying spiritual principles and practices as well as my own personal spiritual experiences. You should consider that all spiritual type experiences are testimonial....meaning ones own experience/encounters. This is due to the nature of spirituality, being that which is outside the physical experience alone which involves the inner man/soul. So when I say observations, that means my own experiences and my own time I've spent studying spirituality and applying it. And I've been doing that since I was a young boy on my own accord.
What experiences? How do you determine that any look beyond the physical gleans accurate results, rather than just imaginings produced by the brain? The ability to be able to determine such a difference is the crux of this entire discussion. It's why I ask how things would be different if the brain produced consciousness. If we can verify that the states would produce different results and then determine which result actually is, then we'd have reason to believe one over the other. So far you've presented nothing that does that.
Created:
Posted in:
Not because we just make it up, consciousness is outside the mind otherwise you wouldn't be able to observe what takes place within the mind. If you WERE the mind itself rather than the witness of the mind your thoughts (which are generated by the mind) would be literally be your original point of observation but we know that is untrue because you were first aware before you thought, your awareness processes (observes) thought, which is generated through the mind (not your awareness). Likewise you were first a conscious soul before you were confined to a brain and a little body. BTW it's not "what we observe in the mind that has an external source", it's you that has an external source outside the individualized mind.Your conscious awareness comes right through the mind, so in practice and demonstration your observation point begins with first.....awareness....which projects through the mind, where the mind stores information (thought), memory and it labels things according the user through the emotional layer which then categorizes experiences. All these events come first from the observer not the brain or the mind, the mind is simply a tool and the brain a restrictor.
Supposition, why do you assert the mind wouldn't be able to observe itself?
This is an odd question perhaps you could rephrase it for me, because if I thought or believed that consciousness was the product of the brain I would obviously believe the opposite, and believe that activity within the brain is what creates ones awareness. I would not pursue Theistic or spiritual knowledge nor would I consider any practice of it. I wouldn't consider spiritual sources as a means to correlate my own observations and inclinations/intuition. But, I've gathered all the information about this from all sides including my own experiences and it is blatantly obvious to me that not only is there sufficient testimonial based evidences for the soul and experiences outside the physical body, the science behind the nature of consciousness in the spiritual arena is far superior and can take you much deeper in knowing what you really are. Especially in eastern thought (Hinduism ect), as well as western philosophy. In my opinion, "soul over matter" is a superior theory/fact.....Creator to creation.....consciousness first, which projects the mind (which is confined to a brain), which labels through emotions and which feels both through the physical nervous system as well as the subtle emotional layer. You actually have five sheaths or layers that cover your soul which individualizes you as a human, confines your experience here to a little man in a big world lol. Ohhh, if people only knew what they were and where they originated.
The question is simple. I am asking you to consider the alternative position (the key to open-mindedness I think), if the brain produced the consciousness how would what we observe be different? When you answer include how you can know this answer is correct. If you cannot know that there would be a difference, then assuming either position is true seems pointless and counter-productive to learning truth.
If we can have a decent discussion/debate I believe we could make some headway, perhaps you would consider another possibility. I understand full well what perceptions the materialists have and those that examine the functions and activity of the human body, and to me it's an azz backwards way to examine our nature, when spirituality has given the answers to consciousness for thousands of years. I think we should be examining the physical reality and I'm not trying to knock a naturalistic understanding I just think it's a misconception. It's all there though, all knowledge that transcends the physical experience is fragmented between many religions and pathways to spirituality. My own experiences dictate that I must not accept an inferior theory as I would have to lie to myself. In that though, I have reasonings and explanations for what I believe.
Yet how does it show its answers are correct? What are the means of verification? Again how would things be different if the consciousness were the product of the brain? Also, what can you observe that transcends the physical? How do you observe it? Honestly, you seem to be either avoiding or unable to answer my questions. I've asked what your observations are, how you verify that your observations are accurate and why they would require your worldview to be true to occur, so far you haven't answered any of these questions.
The whole of spirituality, testimonials, spiritual sources including many religions. My own observations......I then begin to cross reference my own experiences as I observe them, and the correlations and experiences in a very vast body of knowledge suggests a very convincing reality. I'm more of an Omnist towards religion, so I examine spirituality as a whole because what religion really is, is the observation and experience of a diverse, dynamic yet singular reality. Singular as in the same purpose for each soul. While not all religions are created equal they each have truth and misconceptions. You put the pieces together through your own participation and experiences. If you consider spirituality and spiritual experiences as a whole, one would have to be stubborn not to even examine the possibility. And then experience it.
A rather vague answer. Could you give specific observations, how they can be observed and why they verify the consciousness isn't/can't be the product of the brain?
Created:
Posted in:
That's because it's true, and even though it's a Theistic proposition (which seems absurd to atheist/materialists at first glance) it should resonate with your intuition and natural instincts just like a baby animal recognizes its own nature without being taught specifics or details, it just gravitates naturally to it, knows intuitively how it functions and this is true for the soul and for the occupant of the material body. The brain does not create consciousness, the mind, the emotions and physical senses do not create your awareness. You are the observer of the mind, body and emotions and the brain itself (along with the nervous system) confines/locks your experience to this physical form, without that confinement your soul would be free from this world and its limitations but that fleshy blob inside your skull is only a conductor and just like the electricity flows through a circuit board, your consciousness has to be restricted and confined to your body and so all of your perceptions from the time you were born are formed through that, which allows you to have a new experience and live your dreams and desires on this planet.But the "soul" itself, which is the inner you....the one observing the mind and body, come from the very eternal consciousness of the Creator, that is both the nature of God as well as the nature of the soul, they are one and the same. The Creator forms the physical and spiritual universes and we inhabit bodies as souls to experience life through. Ask me anything you want about that there is a lot to it even though it is simplistic.
No. I find it interesting because in my experience people who make this claim generally reason that things they observe in the mind must have an external source. I put it to you, if the consciousness were the product of the brain how would that alter what you percieved and use as evidence and why? I find the possibility of someone being able to answer that (and show their answer is accurate) is very interesting. Frankly trying to tell me why I'm interested in something is condescending and smacks of hubris.
No, this is from observation and correlating sources. Cross referencing combined with personal experience
Such as?
Are you willing to look outside the veil of the physical world and consider sources and practices that correlate with such knowledge and observation?
I'm willing to consider most things (I can't think of anything I have refused to consider for that matter), however I make no promise to accept anything.
So yes, when cross referencing observation with spiritual sources the means by which it can be verified is vastly available to all, not just me
What observations, observed under what circumstances, if you don't mind my asking?
But again, you have to willing to examine things outside of what you currently understand or assume is true about this existence. And all that really means is to consider knowledge outside your paradigms or ideologies/worldview.
Consider sure, to do otherwise would be close minded, accept? That depends on where reason leads me.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Here is what the Merriam-webster unabridged dictionary tells us about the ultimate reality....Definition of ultimate reality: something that is the supreme, final, and fundamental power in all reality ultimate reality in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is GodTHE TRUTH
And how do you determine what that truth is? You can twist English so that the word God =truth however that is all you can do. Can you show there is a supreme and final power in all reality? Let us again address your lack of properties expressed in your definition of God. If accept your definition (I don't, I use the Oxford English dictionary, seems a better source for English considering it's in England) then I'm left quite comfortably with the idea that there is an ultimate reality and that this is god. This reality could be a mindless creatorless universe. In short your argument does nothing to show any particular entity is true, it simply argues for truth. Pure semantics with no substance at all.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
What traits does this supposed ultimate reality possess? Or do you claim that is it? Or must it somply be 1: The last in a progression of realities, 2: the best or most extreme of realities ... Or well, there are other uses of ultimate. If so then I see no reason to assume the reality we observe isn't the ultimate reality it's the only reality I know of. That would lead to pantheism if I accepted your definition of god wouldn't it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Also ultimte can mean last in a series. In which 'God' becomes the last reality rather than the 'realiest'. This is one reason the definition seems meaningless, the other is that we've no way of knowing there are multiple degrees of reality, which means ultimate reality is pretty meaningless as a definition. It presents no traits or concepts beyond the idea that it is real (it isn't even that clear on if it's the most real or simply last in a series of real things), at least the definition:
1(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
Gives clear traits.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
So you don't attribute any traits to this 'ultimate reality'? It could simply be the universe we observe around us every day? If not then what traits does this 'ultimate reality' of yours possess?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Scientists can monitor the brains activity because there's activity going on in a conscious brain lol, that's irrelevant. The brain is nothing more than a conductor and restrictor to the flow of consciousness, it does not create it.
This is an interesting claim. Do you simply suppose this or do you have means by which you can verify it?
Created:
Posted in:
There are a great many things that lie squarely outside the scope of scientific observation, free will, ghosts, and god(s) are among the most obvious.
I can agree with that. Do you have any reason we should believe in free will, ghosts, or gods?
Created:
Posted in:
So anything that can be considered an 'ultimate ' reality is by your definition god? Can show evidence this 'ultimste reality' exists? What traits does it possess? How can you know them? The definiton seems less than informative. Is it intelligent? Did it create the universe (or is it the last in the series, the final reality if you will)?
In short why should we assume there is an ultimate reality? And if we do, why should we assume we know anything of it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I'm curious as to where you're getting that definition. I can't find it anywhere. What properties do you propose your God possesses?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Personally, I have only ever taken the position that I have no way of verifying gos is anything more than a concept. I suppose the same can be said for free will and infinity. I would say everyone I know assumes they percieve the same reality as others. It is an assumption, one that may be necessary, but an assumption none the less.
Created: