Talk about anything Tolle-related here.
I would also add that it doesn't explain when people have had OBE's have seen people in other rooms and have described in detail who was there and what they were doing and saying. This has happened to me once, while I had a few OBE's all together. It also doesn't explain how one could have many dreams that have come to fruition. This also has happened to me.Webwanderer wrote:Manipulating the brain and its chemistry does have an effect on the perception of consciousness. That's rather obvious, but that says nothing about the origin of consciousness. I'm not sure why that's such an ah-ha moment unless your trying to claim that it somehow proves the brain is the origin. Why else would you post it? Such a conclusion seems to be quite a leap.ashley72 wrote:This article wasn't about Consciousness per se, it was demonstrating that out "sense of self" (where we perceive our body to be located) can be manipulated
The brain may influence perspective as is part of its purpose, but it does not create consciousness no more that a radio receiver creates the radio waves that form music. A skilled technician however, can certainly manipulate the sound that comes through that radio. But what does it actually prove?
It may challenge it in the minds of materialists who are religiously predisposed to explaining NDE's away rather than giving any honest consideration, but for those who think in larger contexts it simply means there is functional mechanism that can stimulate a sense of what is already familiar experience.NDE proponents use "out of body experiences during Near Death" as evidence that our sense of self is a non-physical property and not a product of the physical body. In a larger context, NDE proponents further speculate that one can further deduce from this that our Conscious self or "Consciousness" must be primary essence.
This experiment directly challenges the theory that "out of body experiences" are non-physical in nature. The fact that we can "physically" manipulate our perception to have an outer body experiences means its has a physical mechanism.
Again scientists that are blinded by a deeply held belief in materialism will only see what they want to see. Results of such experiments are routinely plugged into belief structures in a way that only supports those structures. This report is just one more example of such bias.
If all we are, are effects of the brain's synapses and chemical reactions through neuropathways, then it is a little difficult to explain how through attention and intention, one can physically change their brain. This has been proven over and over. So what is it giving the attention and intention to do so?
Or the question, what is it that gets angry when one feels offended from hearing hurtful words from another? Yes, looking at an fMRI one may see certain parts of the brain firing, but is that cause or effect? It shows that certain parts are firing, but does it really explain why? To me, there must be something before hand that causes certain parts of the brain to fire, as this would not just come out of a vaccuum. I was just asking myself this question just last week and really looking to what is it that gets angry and was amazed how just looking intensily this silent awareness arose that I don't think the materialist point of view can really explain.
This is not to dismiss the brain's part in all of this as it plays a huge part in the human experience. It is well known that damage to certain parts of the brain can disrupt and even alter a person's personality. Phineas Gage is probably one of the more well known cases in my psychology textbooks. This is why I like the line from A Course in Miracles that says, "The mind cannot be made physical, but it can be manifest through the physical." There is a recriprocal relationship IMO between mind and brain.