What you resist persists - why?

Manifesting your reality or the Law of Attraction

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Phil2 » Mon Apr 28, 2014 9:35 pm

Enlightened2B wrote:Has material science 100 percent found the 'truth' to Consciousness?


Do you need science to tell you of the existence of awareness ? ... which is a quite obvious fact ? evident per se ...

??

ps: I don't know if you use the word 'consciousness' as a synonym of 'awareness', personally I don't like to use the word 'consciousness' as it seems to have different meanings for different persons ...
"What irritates us about others is an opportunity to learn on ourselves"
(Carl Jung)
Phil2
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby dijmart » Mon Apr 28, 2014 10:21 pm

Phil2 wrote:
Enlightened2B wrote:Has material science 100 percent found the 'truth' to Consciousness?


Do you need science to tell you of the existence of awareness ? ... which is a quite obvious fact ? evident per se ...

??[/i]


Um, he said "truth to...", which is different then saying "the existence of...".
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2085
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Enlightened2B » Mon Apr 28, 2014 10:35 pm

Phil2 wrote:
Do you need science to tell you of the existence of awareness ? ... which is a quite obvious fact ? evident per se ...

??

ps: I don't know if you use the word 'consciousness' as a synonym of 'awareness', personally I don't like to use the word 'consciousness' as it seems to have different meanings for different persons ...


Ha, of course not. Awareness is self evident. It's the reason I'm able to communicate with you right here and now. I'm just talking about where it stems from as a truth. I use Consciousness and Awareness interchangeably. I have no idea if there is a scientific term for each nor do I really care. They essentially mean the same thing if you ask me.

I think that even if science DOES come up with a place in the brain where consciousness is associated with, I STILL don't think that they can prove that it actually stems FROM the brain.

I've been on both sides of the fence now at different points of my life and can honestly say that material science has provided no 'proof' that consciousness comes from a material source. Their counter argument is that 'there is no evidence that it comes from an immaterial source'. They are exactly right. The reason being is that....consciousness is not something that is measurable or testable in a laboratory. This is why they will never be able to determine its source.

Deep Sleep might hold some of the deepest answers. Ever wake up and 'know' that you slept only a certain amount of hours as opposed to other times where you awaken and you 'know' that you have slept for MANY hours? How could it be known? It's one of the strangest thing I've experienced.

This is where I think forms of self inquiry can be helpful to an extent, minus any belief factor.

But, I'm very open to both sides of the fence. I do question....if Consciousness is indeed universal, then what happened before living creatures existed on the planet? How could there even be a planet unless the universe itself is self-aware in a bizarre way.

The physicists I've mentioned in the other posts have come to the conclusion that the universe is a form of a computer which means that SOMETHING comes prior to the computer. Max Planck said it among others that perhaps....the answers can never be found because 'we' are a major part of the equation.

Very strange, but I think it's worth exploring.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Phil2 » Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:11 pm

Enlightened2B wrote:
Phil2 wrote:
Do you need science to tell you of the existence of awareness ? ... which is a quite obvious fact ? evident per se ...

??

ps: I don't know if you use the word 'consciousness' as a synonym of 'awareness', personally I don't like to use the word 'consciousness' as it seems to have different meanings for different persons ...


...

... if Consciousness is indeed universal, then what happened before living creatures existed on the planet? How could there even be a planet unless the universe itself is self-aware in a bizarre way.

...

Very strange, but I think it's worth exploring.


I would answer 'à la' Ramana Maharshi, which introduces another dimension in our discussion : where do the persons and objects you meet in your dream come from ? Has the house you see in your dream been built brick by brick ?

??
"What irritates us about others is an opportunity to learn on ourselves"
(Carl Jung)
Phil2
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby ashley72 » Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:02 am

There are a number of theories on Consciousness.

But for some system or object or agent to be conscious or self aware it must be aware of its environment or itself. It must be conscious of other objects or conscious of some inner process. Now a rock seems to have very little objective evidence of consciousness. If another object touches a rock it doesn't response or react in anyway. And we know the composition of rocks... They don't have neurons or nervous system.

As soon as you move to any agent or object that comprises a neuron or nervous system you have reactivity.

In 1976 Richard Dawkins wrote, "The evolution of the capacity to simulate seems to have culminated in subjective consciousness. Why this should have happened is, to me, the most profound mystery facing modern biology". In 2004, eight neuroscientists felt it was still too soon for a definition. They wrote an apology in "Human Brain Function"

"We have no idea how consciousness emerges from the physical activity of the brain and we do not know whether consciousness can emerge from non-biological systems, such as computers... At this point the reader will expect to find a careful and precise definition of consciousness. You will be disappointed. Consciousness has not yet become a scientific term that can be defined in this way. Currently we all use the term consciousness in many different and often ambiguous ways. Precise definitions of different aspects of consciousness will emerge ... but to make precise definitions at this stage is premature."

The current problem consciousness researchers face involves explaining how and why consciousness arises from neural computation.

In 2012 this declaration by Cambridge neuroscientist....

The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.

With the advent of synaptic transistors and quantum computers, coupled with the field of machine learning. I personally think machine simulation will offer the best hope for unravelling the mystery of consciousness. The fact that classical & quantum computers can simulate neural architecture based on biological systems gives scientists a great opportunity to unravel the mystery of conscious states. We may even discover different characteristics of conscious states with non-biological neural synaptic architecture refer to as (Artificial consciousness (AC), also known as machine consciousness (MC) or synthetic consciousness).

Neuroscience hypothesizes that consciousness is generated by the interoperation of various parts of the brain, called the neural correlates of consciousness or NCC. Proponents of AC believe it is possible to construct machines (e.g., computer systems) that can emulate this NCC interoperation.

Domenico Parisi, researcher at the Institute of Cognitive Science and Technologies, writes in his article "Mental Robotics" that in order for robots to possess artificial consciousness, they must also have what he calls "mental life". According to Parisi, mental life is "To have internal representations of sensory input in the absence of the input."
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Enlightened2B » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:17 am

ashley72 wrote:Neuroscience hypothesizes that consciousness is generated by the interoperation of various parts of the brain, called the neural correlates of consciousness or NCC. Proponents of AC believe it is possible to construct machines (e.g., computer systems) that can emulate this NCC interoperation.


It could be an interesting hypothesis. Then again, Tom Campbell and John Hagelin's theory/hypothesis is also interesting and I think more compelling in light of the absence of any true evidence of material consciousness to this point. But, once again, even if they are able to create robots with some sort of 'consciousness', we would have to define what we mean by 'consciousness'.

But I feel that the reason no headway is being made by mainstream science into real, hard theories on this subject matter is the 'hard problem of Consciousness' which just cannot be overlooked. The materialist perspective says something along the lines of this : "Just because there has not been a place in the brain where they can pinpoint where Consciousness comes from, does not automatically equate to the idea that consciousness comes from beyond the brain". I would agree with this quote based on the premise alone that the absence of one thing does not translate to the existence of another necessarily.

However, I think what fails to be appreciated is that the reason, no true headway is being made into the 'why' of subjective experience, COULD very well be because we are looking in the wrong place (matter). I think if science really wants to be true to its craft, then it needs to include both perspectives. The conventional perspective of non-matter arising from matter and the perspective of matter arising from non-matter. Unfortunately, the second perspective is dis-regarded in mainstream science and people like Dennis Dennett continue to claim that 'we'll find the answer', but we've been waiting for that for quite some time now and outside of a hypothesis or two, there is no ground really being broken into how something like matter could produce this 'subjective experience' that, not just humans, but all animals experience (to some degree).

This is exactly why many mainstream physicists including Campbell, Hagelin, Peter Russell, even Max Planck among countless others started to look in a different direction.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Phil2 » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:05 am

Enlightened2B wrote:
ashley72 wrote:Neuroscience hypothesizes that consciousness is generated by the interoperation of various parts of the brain, called the neural correlates of consciousness or NCC. Proponents of AC believe it is possible to construct machines (e.g., computer systems) that can emulate this NCC interoperation.


It could be an interesting hypothesis. Then again, Tom Campbell and John Hagelin's theory/hypothesis is also interesting and I think more compelling in light of the absence of any true evidence of material consciousness to this point. But, once again, even if they are able to create robots with some sort of 'consciousness', we would have to define what we mean by 'consciousness'.

But I feel that the reason no headway is being made by mainstream science into real, hard theories on this subject matter is the 'hard problem of Consciousness' which just cannot be overlooked. The materialist perspective says something along the lines of this : "Just because there has not been a place in the brain where they can pinpoint where Consciousness comes from, does not automatically equate to the idea that consciousness comes from beyond the brain". I would agree with this quote based on the premise alone that the absence of one thing does not translate to the existence of another necessarily.

However, I think what fails to be appreciated is that the reason, no true headway is being made into the 'why' of subjective experience, COULD very well be because we are looking in the wrong place (matter). I think if science really wants to be true to its craft, then it needs to include both perspectives. The conventional perspective of non-matter arising from matter and the perspective of matter arising from non-matter. Unfortunately, the second perspective is dis-regarded in mainstream science and people like Dennis Dennett continue to claim that 'we'll find the answer', but we've been waiting for that for quite some time now and outside of a hypothesis or two, there is no ground really being broken into how something like matter could produce this 'subjective experience' that, not just humans, but all animals experience (to some degree).

This is exactly why many mainstream physicists including Campbell, Hagelin, Peter Russell, even Max Planck among countless others started to look in a different direction.


The biggest mistake scientists make is to believe that awareness arises out of matter ... there is no evidence for this and never will be simply because this is false.

The other mistake is to believe that there are many awarenesses, that each body has/possesses his own independant awareness, and here also there can be no evidence for this. This mistake is due to the perspective of identification with forms, as thought identifies awareness with the body, thought thinks that each body 'contains' its own awareness, which is a wrong assumption.

The fact is that there is only ONE awareness. And it is really a 'fact' because you can never experience another awareness than 'yours' (which in fact is not 'yours' at all), this is simply impossible, because if you would experience another awareness, it would still be 'you' experiencing this awareness ...
"What irritates us about others is an opportunity to learn on ourselves"
(Carl Jung)
Phil2
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Phil2 » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:11 am

ashley72 wrote:There are a number of theories on Consciousness.

...

In 1976 Richard Dawkins wrote, "The evolution of the capacity to simulate seems to have culminated in subjective consciousness. Why this should have happened is, to me, the most profound mystery facing modern biology". In 2004, eight neuroscientists felt it was still too soon for a definition. They wrote an apology in "Human Brain Function"

"We have no idea how consciousness emerges from the physical activity of the brain and we do not know whether consciousness can emerge from non-biological systems, such as computers... At this point the reader will expect to find a careful and precise definition of consciousness. You will be disappointed. Consciousness has not yet become a scientific term that can be defined in this way. Currently we all use the term consciousness in many different and often ambiguous ways. Precise definitions of different aspects of consciousness will emerge ... but to make precise definitions at this stage is premature."

...


Scientists will never be able to demonstrate how consciousness emerges out of matter, simply because this assumption is false ... a non-fact ...

As simple as that ...
"What irritates us about others is an opportunity to learn on ourselves"
(Carl Jung)
Phil2
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Rob X » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:31 pm

Phil2 wrote:The other mistake is to believe that there are many awarenesses, that each body has/possesses his own independant awareness, and here also there can be no evidence for this.

What the ultimate nature of Consciousness/Awareness is, nobody knows. But it is plainly the case that conscious perception (i.e. this knowing that allows the reading of this comment) arises VIA each body-mind. That's not to say there are multiple consciousness's but that there are multiple conscious perspectives. I'm sure that you're not denying that Phil?

Phil2 wrote:Scientists will never be able to demonstrate how consciousness emerges out of matter, simply because this assumption is false ... a non-fact ...

As simple as that ...

I can't see how scientists will be able to demonstrate that consciousness emerges out of matter either. But if they did it would have to entail that we understood both consciousness AND matter in a completely different way to how we do now. And remember that our understanding of both consciousness and matter are the feeble constructs of the cousin of a chimp (no offence to chimps.) I'm certain that human cognition is only just scratching the surface of what Reality could REALLY be made up of - and what it all means.

The thing is, none of this is a threat to spirituality…. it doesn't matter how we formulate this - the fact remains that Reality is ultimately and spectacularily mysterious. When we awaken to the sense that this 'me' identification is false - that we are products of an ineffable creative dance… then that's enough! No need to attempt to formulate it or figure it out… Because whatever you say IT is…. it's not.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Rob X » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:18 pm

KathleenBrugger wrote:My husband says the only thing he knows is "Uh." And by that he means "something's happening." He likes saying "uh" because it has less words to be tripped up by, to make you think you know something. You could also say, "something's happening I know not what."


:D Love it.

You should encourage your husband to contribute here Kathleen. We need more of this calibre of philosophy. :D
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby KathleenBrugger » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:53 pm

Rob X wrote:
KathleenBrugger wrote:My husband says the only thing he knows is "Uh." And by that he means "something's happening." He likes saying "uh" because it has less words to be tripped up by, to make you think you know something. You could also say, "something's happening I know not what."

:D Love it.

You should encourage your husband to contribute here Kathleen. We need more of this calibre of philosophy. :D

:lol: I'll see what I can do!

Your previous post made this same point very nicely. I'll paste some here because it relates to some more of Arthur's philosophy:

I can't see how scientists will be able to demonstrate that consciousness emerges out of matter either. But if they did it would have to entail that we understood both consciousness AND matter in a completely different way to how we do now. And remember that our understanding of both consciousness and matter are the feeble constructs of the cousin of a chimp (no offence to chimps.) I'm certain that human cognition is only just scratching the surface of what Reality could REALLY be made up of - and what it all means.

Arthur calls us "farting apes." We think we're so advanced, when we've really just begun to understand the universe with our scientific tools. How long have we been doing science? Three hundred years or so? That's an eyeblink! Just because we've got some amazing tools and toys produced by science doesn't mean we are anywhere near understanding the basic principles of the universe. Typical human hubris.

Plus a lot of science is reductionist. It's all about tearing things apart and studying the pieces and explaining how the parts work. That approach has its uses, but it's limited in its ability to explain the whole. Spirituality is about explaining the Whole. For example, speaking of chimps...scientists study caged animals' behavior and make all sorts of pronouncements about what that behavior means about humans--but they don't seem to recognize that they are studying a CAGED animal. Doesn't that impact the animal's behavior? Think of the experiments where an animal can press a lever to get some kind of reward. If I was spending my life in a cage, i think I'd probably press the lever to keep the pleasurable stimulation coming. Why not? But does that say anything about how the animal would behave in its ordinary environment? I don't think so. But to research this in a more holistic way, to see how the animal would respond in its natural environment, is way beyond science's capabilities today.
We are ALL Innocent by Reason of Insanity
http://kathleenbrugger.blogspot.com/
User avatar
KathleenBrugger
 
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:18 pm

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby SandyJoy » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:56 pm

It just seems so simple to me, as it does to a few others here; you cannot have matter 'create' the Awareness of 'matter"--- You must have Awareness first in order to be aware of 'a brain' or 'things'. This is almost silly, but it seems some cannot grasp this notion at all.

If you will notice, Awareness is not subject to time and matter is. If you will notice, Awareness is not some "thing" we can own or control or get our hands on "matter" we can hold and mold, This means Awareness reigns supreme and free from 'slavery' , or harm, or damage---

We can blow the world to smithereens with nuclear bombs, and you know what? Awareness would not be blown up, altered, changed, or die. Awareness would go right on being Aware of a 'blow up' and Aware of whatever else would follow such a disaster--- Awareness would remain unharmed and unchanged. Awareness and Now are the same --- Now would not be changed --- Now would still exist, Awareness and Now are Supreme, come First, are Real and Changeless -- Not dependent on the 'brain' --- How can the brain be creating 'any thing' it is a 'thing'--- End the brain and Life does not end!! End the brain and Now is not gone!


The brain can be altered, and ruined--- Awareness cannot, Now cannot. Awareness is Inviolate, Now, Isness, Awareness is unchanging, unalterable Reality. If we do not get this point straight we can get nothing at all right in our lives-

Over and above the natural order of being, beyond the mundane, exists Existence, Isness, the Godhead. Advancing technology, spiraling human power and ability, are unable to touch the fount of Being. Rather, Isness is the warp and woof of technology—if technology is anything at all.

When we get this right, we are free from 'things' we see they are powerless and have no real value-- this is when we really find freedom

The value and importance is not in 'things' it is in This Awareness itself, all other things are included as images within Awareness.

Awareness is being the 'brain' and "we" or "who we are" is not a container-- we are the Freedom and Joy of Being This Unbound Awareness -- Not slave to any "piece of meat matter"--- Not slave--- Free!! and Fearless and In Love
You are not finished, until you play in that meadow and live there. You can, you know. But only you can take yourself there.
User avatar
SandyJoy
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:42 am

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Enlightened2B » Tue Apr 29, 2014 6:44 pm

Rob X wrote:I can't see how scientists will be able to demonstrate that consciousness emerges out of matter either. But if they did it would have to entail that we understood both consciousness AND matter in a completely different way to how we do now. And remember that our understanding of both consciousness and matter are the feeble constructs of the cousin of a chimp (no offence to chimps.) I'm certain that human cognition is only just scratching the surface of what Reality could REALLY be made up of - and what it all means.


It's a problem with the current paradigm of science. You're exactly right. It ultimately WOULD entail looking at matter and consciousness in a completely different light. Yet, many scientists are already starting to do this and have been for quite some time. It's just usually dismissed by the mainstream.

I think one day in the future, they WILL be able to map some sort of direct relation of where Consciousness is related to the brain. However, the key word there is 'related'. The Brain and Consciousness are obviously related, but that doesn't mean that the brain actually PRODUCES Consciousness. Yet, they STILL will not be able to give ANY indication as to how and where this Consciousness actually develops because the ultimate assumption is that Subjective experience arises from a piece of meat. This is the 'hard problem of Consciousness'.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Enlightened2B » Tue Apr 29, 2014 6:48 pm

Phil2 wrote:The biggest mistake scientists make is to believe that awareness arises out of matter ... there is no evidence for this and never will be simply because this is false.


I don't know if I would label it as a 'mistake' as much as I would label it as merely an 'assumption'. You're right that there IS no evidence for this. It's just an assumption.

The other mistake is to believe that there are many awarenesses, that each body has/possesses his own independant awareness, and here also there can be no evidence for this. This mistake is due to the perspective of identification with forms, as thought identifies awareness with the body, thought thinks that each body 'contains' its own awareness, which is a wrong assumption.

The fact is that there is only ONE awareness. And it is really a 'fact' because you can never experience another awareness than 'yours' (which in fact is not 'yours' at all), this is simply impossible, because if you would experience another awareness, it would still be 'you' experiencing this awareness ...


I wouldn't say it is a 'fact' that there is One Awareness. It might seem more likely, but 'facts' are hard to come by. As Rob indicated, I'd say there is one Awareness that appears via multiple perspectives which explains why each of us has a unique subjective experience.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1897
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: What you resist persists - why?

Postby Phil2 » Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:55 pm

Enlightened2B wrote:
Phil2 wrote:The biggest mistake scientists make is to believe that awareness arises out of matter ... there is no evidence for this and never will be simply because this is false.


I don't know if I would label it as a 'mistake' as much as I would label it as merely an 'assumption'. You're right that there IS no evidence for this. It's just an assumption.



An assumption that many scientists do not even question ...

Enlightened2B wrote:
Phil2 wrote:
The fact is that there is only ONE awareness. And it is really a 'fact' because you can never experience another awareness than 'yours' (which in fact is not 'yours' at all), this is simply impossible, because if you would experience another awareness, it would still be 'you' experiencing this awareness ...


I wouldn't say it is a 'fact' that there is One Awareness. It might seem more likely, but 'facts' are hard to come by. As Rob indicated, I'd say there is one Awareness that appears via multiple perspectives which explains why each of us has a unique subjective experience.


Yes, an awareness that appears via multiple perspectives ... the very SAME reality seen from different points of view ... through different forms ... still ONE reality ... which is awareness ...
"What irritates us about others is an opportunity to learn on ourselves"
(Carl Jung)
Phil2
 
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:24 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Law of Attraction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest