Watching World News ?

OBE's, NDE's, lucid dreams, and the like...

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby Phil2 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 10:35 am

Phil2 wrote:
Phil2 wrote:
But it would be like trying to explain the images and sounds you see and hear on the screen and loudspeakers of a tv set by exploring the content of the tv receiver ... nowhere in the tv set you can find those images and sounds, simply because those images come from outside the tv device, in the electro-magnetic waves surrounding all around ...

So the body and its brain is used by consciousness more like a 'receptor' than as a 'creator' of reality ... and it is a very hi-tech device too ... yet merely a device in consciousness ...


Coming back to the original topic of this thread, this is exactly what modern science (so-called 'neuro-science') is currently trying to do: to find consciousness by examining the content and the functioning of the brain ... they postulate that consciousness arises out of the brain, which is of course the fundamental mistake ... this is why neuro-science is doomed to fail in this endeavour ... consciousness is not more in the brain than the images displayed on the TV screen would be found in the TV set ...



... and let us not forget that the TV set itself (ie. the body/brain) is part of the 'movie' displayed on the screen of consciousness ... so that finally the only reality is the surrounding 'EM field' called 'consciousness' and that this consciousness is formless, hence cannot be attributed any measurable properties or attributes ... it can only be attributed absence of attributes like when saying: timeless, nameless or formless ... iow. consciousness is unmanifested ... yet is the one and unique source of all manifestations ... the source of the 'movie' ...
"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: Watching World News ?

Postby snowheight » Tue Sep 02, 2014 12:12 pm

Phil2 wrote:
snowheight wrote:Science is the art of objectification btw. No objectification, no science. Science and nondual are two different words that refer to two different topics.


Yes, this is correct, there can be no science without creating 'concepts' ie. 'objects' ... this means that duality is created: the 'object' and the 'observer' of this object ... and science postulates that the object is independent of the observer, ie. this 'object' is given an 'autonomy' and repetitive patterns of behaviour called 'scientific laws' ... this process of 'objectification' is called 'reification' (which literally means "to make things") ... and this is how thought (and 'knowledge') operates, by creating objects and repetition (hence time) ...

When David Chalmers declares his intention to create a "Science of Consciousness", one could wonder if this is not self-contradictory ... can there be a science of consciousness ? Can consciousness ever be 'independent' of the 'observer' ? ... and subjected to time and repetition ?

??


The business of science is that of replacing an existing belief with a new one. Current understandings are subjected to skeptical inquiry based on experiment and observation and revised or discarded based on the results that form the basis for a new set of ideas.

Business is the game of supply and demand, and as long as there is the demand for a theory that explains reality, business will stay brisk.

But doesn't the outline of this process remind you of a different line and sort of inquiry? What is it that the scientists are inquiring about?

As far as your specific question goes, my answer is, that it's just business as usual.
Stop talking. Hear every sound as background. Look straight ahead and focus. Take one deep breath. This is you. This is Now.
snowheight
 
Posts: 1941
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby Phil2 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:59 pm

snowheight wrote:Business is the game of supply and demand, and as long as there is the demand for a theory that explains reality, business will stay brisk.

But doesn't the outline of this process remind you of a different line and sort of inquiry? What is it that the scientists are inquiring about?

As far as your specific question goes, my answer is, that it's just business as usual.


How does science operate ?

The scientist observes the 'movie' (ie. the 'outside' world) and then tries to recognize 'objects' with repetitive patterns, and those patterns become scientific laws ... hence the scientist gets a grip on the 'movie' and says I can predict the behaviour, I can control what will happen ... so science is about control ... the scientist postulates that the there is an 'outer' world independent of the observer and that he can control it ...

The fundamental mistake is that the behaviour itself is not independent from the observer because there is no 'outside', no autonomous world, no fixed repetitive patterns ... everything takes place in consciousness, and consciousness is the source of all things ...
"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: Watching World News ?

Postby Enlightened2B » Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:38 pm

Thanks for the reminder Jen. Beautifully said. Quite easy to forget sometimes. And I agree with your post above too.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby snowheight » Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:44 pm

Phil2 wrote:
snowheight wrote:Business is the game of supply and demand, and as long as there is the demand for a theory that explains reality, business will stay brisk.

But doesn't the outline of this process remind you of a different line and sort of inquiry? What is it that the scientists are inquiring about?

As far as your specific question goes, my answer is, that it's just business as usual.


How does science operate ?

The scientist observes the 'movie' (ie. the 'outside' world) and then tries to recognize 'objects' with repetitive patterns, and those patterns become scientific laws ... hence the scientist gets a grip on the 'movie' and says I can predict the behaviour, I can control what will happen ... so science is about control ... the scientist postulates that the there is an 'outer' world independent of the observer and that he can control it ...

The fundamental mistake is that the behaviour itself is not independent from the observer because there is no 'outside', no autonomous world, no fixed repetitive patterns ... everything takes place in consciousness, and consciousness is the source of all things ...


Yes, the scientist looks outward and science is a collective endeavor that builds on itself over time in that one scientist can answer a question for another that can become the basis for further work. A spiritual seeker engaged in self-inquiry, on the other hand, has to answer his questions for himself. The scientist assumes an objective reality outside of and separate from themselves, but what does the seeker assume? Aren't the two assumptions intimately related?

I agree with this idea that the observer isn't independent from his observations, but how would it be possible to get someone who is attached to a world view that has material realism at it's root to consider this? ... and from corresponding with people over the past four+ years, it's my opinion that material realism can take many different forms that run quite far afield from what the term suggests. A model of an objective world outside of oneself can be rooted in any one of a number of different ideas.

Also, in your opinion, does the fallacy of objective reality imply some sort of subjective reality that can be modeled, described and codified?
Stop talking. Hear every sound as background. Look straight ahead and focus. Take one deep breath. This is you. This is Now.
snowheight
 
Posts: 1941
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby Phil2 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:07 pm

snowheight wrote:
Also, in your opinion, does the fallacy of objective reality imply some sort of subjective reality that can be modeled, described and codified?


Of course not, consciousness being without attributes or properties (timeless and formless) can never be modelled, if it could be modelled there would be no freedom ... this is why any "science of consciousness" is doomed to fail ... consciousness is beyond knowledge ... it is primary to knowledge and thought ... and without consciousness there would be no knowledge and no thought ... in fact nothing at all ... this is why consciousness is the one and only ultimate reality ...
"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: Watching World News ?

Postby Phil2 » Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:16 pm

snowheight wrote:
I agree with this idea that the observer isn't independent from his observations, but how would it be possible to get someone who is attached to a world view that has material realism at it's root to consider this?


Well, Eckhart often said that suffering leads us to this understanding ... when we see that our 'materialistic' strategies do not work and do not bring us happiness, but only suffering ... when we are tired to suffer, then we might consider an alternate understanding of the world and life ... this is also the core idea of Buddhism, everything in the Buddha's spiritual quest started from the fact of suffering and the will to understand its root ... and this root is ego, ie. precisely the sense of separation between the observer and the world that we were speaking of ...
"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: Watching World News ?

Postby dijmart » Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:44 pm

Phil2 wrote:
dijmart wrote:This is not what I meant. I meant, if one knows that duality is ultimately an illusion, then even if thought appears dual, for communication or other purposes it doesn't necessarily mean it IS dual or creating duality, within the mind of the thinker, because the illusion of separation is not operating.


Di,

With WHOM do you want to "communicate" when there is no duality ?

??


Other aspects of myself...of the one, "appearing" as others. So, thought doesn't create duality, unless you let it. My foot is very different then my hair, but it's still.. ONE. You are different then me, but we are still one. I know what you mean, by thought creates duality, but all you have to do is open your eyes with no thought to see "others", but if you "know" that really it's all "one", then none of that matters.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2078
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby dijmart » Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:59 pm

smiileyjen101 wrote:Btw folks - Snowy started his post with ... "It's funny how....." and yet it was all taken so finitely cognitively / intellectually seriously without 'feeling' :P (Snowy, I went by feel and your beginning gave me the (music) score to flow with.)



I honestly could not figure out what half the post meant, should I have acted as though I did? As, soon as he tranlated, then I posted my reply. Also, I couldn't have taken something I didn't understand seriously, I just thought it amusing that try as I did, I didn't get it. Phil saying it was "clear as mud" was funny and I rolled with it. Snowy, if your feelings were hurt, I apologize. Me and phil willingly put our dunce caps on and had a laugh...no harm done, as far as I'm concerned.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2078
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby Enlightened2B » Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:23 pm

dijmart wrote:
smiileyjen101 wrote:Btw folks - Snowy started his post with ... "It's funny how....." and yet it was all taken so finitely cognitively / intellectually seriously without 'feeling' :P (Snowy, I went by feel and your beginning gave me the (music) score to flow with.)



I honestly could not figure out what half the post meant, should I have acted as though I did? As, soon as he tranlated, then I posted my reply. Also, I couldn't have taken something I didn't understand seriously, I just thought it amusing that try as I did, I didn't get it. Phil saying it was "clear as mud" was funny and I rolled with it. Snowy, if your feelings were hurt, I apologize. Me and phil willingly put our dunce caps on and had a laugh...no harm done, as far as I'm concerned.


I think Jen was more referencing my post to Snowy as I kind of took his post out of context a bit into what I thought he might have been saying. It's hard over an internet forum sometimes, especially when interpreting another's perspective, especially when it's hidden in very complex prose. You do your best. It's all good. I don't think anyone in this thread is truly hurt.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby snowheight » Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:48 pm

Phil2 wrote:
snowheight wrote:
Also, in your opinion, does the fallacy of objective reality imply some sort of subjective reality that can be modeled, described and codified?


Of course not, consciousness being without attributes or properties (timeless and formless) can never be modelled, if it could be modelled there would be no freedom ... this is why any "science of consciousness" is doomed to fail ... consciousness is beyond knowledge ... it is primary to knowledge and thought ... and without consciousness there would be no knowledge and no thought ... in fact nothing at all ... this is why consciousness is the one and only ultimate reality ...


Well, strictly speaking, that does state a model.
Stop talking. Hear every sound as background. Look straight ahead and focus. Take one deep breath. This is you. This is Now.
snowheight
 
Posts: 1941
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby snowheight » Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:51 pm

Phil2 wrote:
snowheight wrote:
I agree with this idea that the observer isn't independent from his observations, but how would it be possible to get someone who is attached to a world view that has material realism at it's root to consider this?


Well, Eckhart often said that suffering leads us to this understanding ... when we see that our 'materialistic' strategies do not work and do not bring us happiness, but only suffering ... when we are tired to suffer, then we might consider an alternate understanding of the world and life ... this is also the core idea of Buddhism, everything in the Buddha's spiritual quest started from the fact of suffering and the will to understand its root ... and this root is ego, ie. precisely the sense of separation between the observer and the world that we were speaking of ...


Suffering isn't the only way to that understanding.
Stop talking. Hear every sound as background. Look straight ahead and focus. Take one deep breath. This is you. This is Now.
snowheight
 
Posts: 1941
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby dijmart » Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:01 pm

Enlightened2B wrote:I think Jen was more referencing my post to Snowy as I kind of took his post out of context a bit into what I thought he might have been saying. It's hard over an internet forum sometimes, especially when interpreting another's perspective, especially when it's hidden in very complex prose. You do your best. It's all good. I don't think anyone in this thread is truly hurt.


After 5 pgs ya kinda forget who said what to whom, however I wouldn't be so quick to think she was talking about you, because in her post she also said-

smiileyjen101 wrote: I liked what Rach said
Relax ... stay with it ... and wait for the mud to settle. :-)

Swimming in mud can be fun too!
......


Which seems to be referring to Phil and myself, when he said, "It's clear as mud" and I agreed, but it doesn't really matter, since, as you said, I don't think anyone was truly hurt.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2078
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby snowheight » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:03 am

dijmart wrote:
Enlightened2B wrote:I think Jen was more referencing my post to Snowy as I kind of took his post out of context a bit into what I thought he might have been saying. It's hard over an internet forum sometimes, especially when interpreting another's perspective, especially when it's hidden in very complex prose. You do your best. It's all good. I don't think anyone in this thread is truly hurt.


After 5 pgs ya kinda forget who said what to whom, however I wouldn't be so quick to think she was talking about you, because in her post she also said-

smiileyjen101 wrote: I liked what Rach said
Relax ... stay with it ... and wait for the mud to settle. :-)

Swimming in mud can be fun too!
......


Which seems to be referring to Phil and myself, when he said, "It's clear as mud" and I agreed, but it doesn't really matter, since, as you said, I don't think anyone was truly hurt.


Can't speak for anyone else, but these days I value honesty at least enough to prefer being informed I wasn't understood over than a veneer of politesse. :D

Also there's a distinct lack of concern over here right now at not being comprehended unless there's a clear vector on the part of the one who didn't understand to want to understand.
Stop talking. Hear every sound as background. Look straight ahead and focus. Take one deep breath. This is you. This is Now.
snowheight
 
Posts: 1941
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: Watching World News ?

Postby dijmart » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:52 am

snowheight wrote:
Can't speak for anyone else, but these days I value honesty at least enough to prefer being informed I wasn't understood over than a veneer of politesse. :D

Also there's a distinct lack of concern over here right now at not being comprehended unless there's a clear vector on the part of the one who didn't understand to want to understand.


Good to know, I wanted to understand, if not, I wouldn't have read it three times, then actually went back after you translated and tried to see why I didn't get it to begin with.
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2078
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Beyond the Physical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest