What Am I - What Are You?

A place for anything that doesn't fit into the existing forums

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby rideforever » Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:59 pm

I wander why you WW persist with NDE evidence ?

Isn't the only thing that really matters that a person looks ... and that a person finds.

NDEs evidence is external. And if you are trying to use it not for you but to convince others ... well the reason people don't look is not a question of evidence. Very few people can think objectively ... it's all just primal drives and rationalisations.

What I mean is ... even if you present a mountain of evidence - they still won't look. Because when it comes down to it they don't care about evidence. They are just acting primally. Fear mostly. And all that evidence-talk was just rationalising it.

I feel that for most, to convince most people to care enough about themselves to look inside, it is not a great strategy to add more content to the merry-go-round in the head.
I was proud, and I demanded the finest teacher
.. .. and when he appeared
.. .. .. .. I was so small
User avatar
rideforever
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: Hove

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby downeyjr » Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:05 pm

Really? Nothing you have written so far suggests an extensive knowledge of the NDE evidence - from other than the materialist choir explaining how NDE's are simply illusions. Don't be afraid, explore.


Really, nothing you have written so far too suggests and extensive knowledge of NDE evidence from other than claiming it exists. Don't be afraid, explore.
It's funny mr. WW, how everything you try to hammer me with is valid for yourself and don't even seem to realize it? I'm not going to spend my time trying to convince you why all the NDE etc, cannot be considered real in any court, this is another topic. You can give me links to videos, to websites etc. I can give you counter links with criticism, I can write my own thoughts, it just doesn't matter, you will believe what you want to no matter what the information in front of you is and what's most likely true, for you it simply doesn't matter, what matters for you is to believe that there is non-physical reality, everything supporting that is truth.


Your position is simply expressive of the strength of your belief. When it comes right down to it there is no physical evidence for a physical origin of consciousness. It's all conjecture born of a strong materialist bias. An informed and able lawyer would have an easy time exposing the error in the theory.


Well, yes, I didn't say you can prove that the consciousness has a physical origin and that this can be proved in court either, please stop putting words in my mouth. It can't. But, it's the most likely option, and that's what you are aiming for, right? The most likely option.


Yes it's difficult to convince someone who has actually experienced non-physical consciousness that they just imagined it.


Yes, I would say it's quite difficult to convince someone who (may I use your own expression mr. WW), is close-minded and doesn't perceive information that is not convenient for him. You are funny. You like to tell stories, right, illustrate things so people can get the idea, let me try using this method. Imagine a child saw a person with a ghost costume in the living room. For the child this is the ultimate truth. Did the child experience the ghost, yes , of course, he/she did! Was it a ghost? And even though the parents try explaining it was only a costume, it was fake, it was a set up, the child still believes what he/she saw. It's the ghost.... So mr. WW, yes, it's quite difficult. That's why I consider the case closed :)

So I guess, case is closed.

Not likely. The only thing that can be closed on this issue is one's mind.


May I suggest some time in front of a mirror while you say this. It could be time well spent.
downeyjr
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:44 pm

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby Webwanderer » Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:54 pm

rideforever wrote:I wander why you WW persist with NDE evidence ?

Isn't the only thing that really matters that a person looks ... and that a person finds.

NDEs evidence is external. And if you are trying to use it not for you but to convince others ... well the reason people don't look is not a question of evidence. Very few people can think objectively ... it's all just primal drives and rationalisations.

What I mean is ... even if you present a mountain of evidence - they still won't look. Because when it comes down to it they don't care about evidence. They are just acting primally. Fear mostly. And all that evidence-talk was just rationalising it.

I feel that for most, to convince most people to care enough about themselves to look inside, it is not a great strategy to add more content to the merry-go-round in the head.

No doubt you make good points. It's just that sometimes I feel compelled to correct the record just in case some may be prone to fall into the same materialist trap. I'm sure my concerns are unwarranted for most who read here.

And then there's the matter of when confronted with a perspective (dare I say clarity?) that some cannot yet comprehend, their certainty turns to a shrillness that exposes their fears. You know they're struggling when they start with the screaming text and abusive use of emoticons. It's interesting to watch, especially in those who only come to this forum to save us from our imagined ignorance.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6307
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby Webwanderer » Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:37 am

downeyjr wrote:Really, nothing you have written so far too suggests and extensive knowledge of NDE evidence from other than claiming it exists. Don't be afraid, explore.

Have you actually read what I've written? Didn't think so. You have, at present nine posts here. I have thousands. You would find, had you looked, that I have written a good deal on NDE's. Your opinions on the reality of NDEs will be welcomed and encouraged once you've put a couple of years of intensive study on the subject. Another option is giving a report should you ever experience one. Usually that is a real paradigm shifter. Just ask neuro-scientist Dr. Eben Alexander. Here's a link to a good interview if you are interested in a good start on real information.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOSb3G53HsA

Well, yes, I didn't say you can prove that the consciousness has a physical origin and that this can be proved in court either... It can't.

Thanks for that admission. As hard as materialist scientists have tried they admit to having no knowledge of where consciousness originates - yet here we all are with countless reports of non-physical experiences, many by intelligent scientists, educators, writers, officials - the list goes on.

The court will now issue a summary judgment in favor of a non-physical reality.

Case closed.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6307
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby downeyjr » Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:16 am

Well, yes, I didn't say you can prove that the consciousness has a physical origin and that this can be proved in court either... It can't.


Thanks for that admission. As hard as materialist scientists have tried they admit to having no knowledge of where consciousness originates - yet here we all are with countless reports of non-physical experiences, many by intelligent scientists, educators, writers, officials - the list goes on.


All of these experiences have no value since they have physical origin, non of them, not a single one of all the people(including your favorite Eben Alexander) can absolutely prove that their brain was completely dead during that experience and that the experience wasn't produced by the brain. And brain is quite physical. And for defense of the physical origin, well...it's simple, everything around you is physical, your body, brain, cells, everything is physical, so why make an exception for the consciousness?

And please, I can sense your huge irritation towards opinions that are different than yours from miles, it just doesn't fit you. Oh, and If you really want to protect all your forum children from different opinions or as you said ,, fall into the same materialist trap,, then why waste time and energy for refuting materialist's posts, just ban everyone that has a different opinion straight away, this would guarantee protection of your fellows.
downeyjr
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:44 pm

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby arel » Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:23 am

downeyjr wrote:
All of these experiences have no value since they have physical origin, non of them, not a single one of all the people(including your favorite Eben Alexander) can absolutely prove that their brain was completely dead during that experience and that the experience wasn't produced by the brain. And brain is quite physical. And for defense of the physical origin, well...it's simple, everything around you is physical, your body, brain, cells, everything is physical, so why make an exception for the consciousness?



Downeyjr, you might be missing the point and value in all of the accounts of NDE. I fully agree with you in the belief that those experiences are made up of human perception, or the brain. But the insight that they can induce can be life changing and reveal to the human being the real identify of the self. Magic Mushrooms can as well for example, or extremely strenuous physical activity can, or contemplation of "Who am I?". Hope you see my point.

And sure, from a certain perspective, you can say consciousness is physical, since it's known, conceptualized and talked about in the experience of being human being. But you cannot refute the fact that all the concepts, "everything physical" happens in something, something irreducible, the background that is the present moment. Can you deny that? Can you say that it's physical? The subject that is you and I, subject to every physical object cannot be escaped in any way, logically or experientially, it's infinitely present. Can you deny that?
What I say is only my viewpoint.
arel
 
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:11 pm

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby ashley72 » Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:21 am

Image

Eckhart Tolle's primary teaching is about negating the symbolic-self. The symbolic-self is based on a symbolic mapping of physical space & physical behaviours. Our symbolic self is analogous to the way we make a drawn map of a territory and then we pinpoint our physical location within that symbolic map of the territory to help us navigate the physical space based on our physical movements.

I recently visited a city overseas, where I had to rely on symbolic mapping in order to navigate the town without getting lost. Symbolic thought is a very important skill to have at our disposal.

These active symbols we use to create symbolic maps of a territory in the brain...inevitably lead to the same kind of self-reference which Gödel proved was inherent in any complex logical or arithmetical system in his Incompleteness Theorem. Gödel showed that mathematics and logic contain Strange Loops: propositions that not only refer to mathematical and logical truths, but also to the symbol systems expressing those truths.

The symbolic-self arises out of a similar kind of paradox. We are not born with an ‘I’ – the ego emerges only gradually as experience shapes our dense web of active symbols into a tapestry rich and complex enough to begin twisting back upon itself.

According to this view the symbolic-self is a narrative fiction, something created only from intake of symbolic data and its own ability to create stories about itself from that data. The consequence is that a perspective (a mind) is a culmination of a unique pattern of symbolic activity in our nervous systems, which suggests that the pattern of symbolic activity that makes identity, that constitutes subjectivity, can be replicated within the brains of others, and perhaps even in artificial brains.

Tolle believes that we can negate our symbolic-self, by withdrawing attention from physical objects and start paying attention to the physical empty space itself . He says this simultaneously withdraws attention from symbolic thought and emotions that arise as a result of symbolic thought such as symbolic fear, guilt, regret, etc (i.e symbolic suffering).

Tolle says the symbolic-self only becomes problematic, causing symbolic suffering, when we forget to withdraw attention from its active symbols when not needed. Obviously when I needed to navigate the foreign town I needed to rely on those active symbols, but otherwise I should attend to the physical space & physical behaviours without the use of symbolic time (past & future) and an active symbolic self.

Therefore we all must have a non-symbolic self, which is free of active symbols. We find this non-symbolic self by diverting our attention to the "space" of the inner physical body - the source domain that creates the target domain (active symbols) . This withdraws attention from the active symbols being formed in the brain. This is what Tolle refers to being in the HERE & NOW, which is free of all symbolic thought.... and that troublesome 'fictitious' symbolic-self. :wink:

Image

Active Symbolic 'attention' is needed for cognitive tasks. Non-symbolic 'attention' is needed for motor tasks. Almost all learning and curricula (e.g, reading, mathematics, social studies, science) require humans to manipulate, acquire, retain, transform, and recall and attend to active symbols. In contrast, non-symbolic 'attention' requires them to learn physical or motor tasks, such as picking up a pencil, shooting a basketball, or running and jumping.
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby Robert » Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:47 am

downeyjr wrote:...this has nothing to do with the fact that your current believes are not based not proven facts but rather on false assumptions.

My beliefs, in as far as i have them, are based on my personal experience, and of those friends around me whom I have known for years and whom I trust. To a lesser extent they are also based upon all other available information. They are also not rock solid, but open to adaptation as the circumstance requires. So your judgement of my beliefs being unproven (and how can an experience said to be false?), is a rather hasty one, based on 2 or 3 of my posts in this thread. For which I don't blame you, misinterpretation happens, this is only language we use to describe stuff, which is nice but very limited.

...since the ,,thinking mind,, is something bad for you, it's kind of a trap...

It is not bad, it just has it's limitations, and it is good to be aware of them.
Robert
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 9:20 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby Webwanderer » Sun Dec 16, 2012 7:02 pm

downeyjr wrote:All of these experiences have no value since they have physical origin, non of them, not a single one of all the people(including your favorite Eben Alexander)...

Of course you don't actually know this. This is the kind of belief and faith that you criticize.

...can absolutely prove that their brain was completely dead during that experience and that the experience wasn't produced by the brain. And brain is quite physical. And for defense of the physical origin, well...it's simple, everything around you is physical, your body, brain, cells, everything is physical, so why make an exception for the consciousness?


The death of the brain isn't the only criteria for evidence of non-physical consciousness. It's just the set of rules set by materialists to protect the beliefs that they are so emotionally invested in from considering genuine possibilities that would conflict with their ideology. It's a little like religious fundamentalists defending their scriptures, or even their unique interpretation of them, as being the inviolate word of God. Both try to enforce a specified limitation of what is considerable that they alone control. They, the fundamentalists of religion and materialism, share a good deal of human foibles.

And please, I can sense your huge irritation towards opinions that are different than yours from miles, it just doesn't fit you. Oh, and If you really want to protect all your forum children from different opinions or as you said ,, fall into the same materialist trap,, then why waste time and energy for refuting materialist's posts, just ban everyone that has a different opinion straight away, this would guarantee protection of your fellows.

I suspect the irritation you sense is your own, but I'll consider it just to keep an open mind. This is however, a conversation I've had many times with bible worshipers and materialists alike. There really isn't that much difference when it comes to the religious attachment to a chosen ideology.

Understand, all are welcome to whatever they wish to believe and hold sacrosanct. But if such a one chooses to come into a forum such as this and point to another perspective of which they have declared in error, then they invite an exploration of both what they criticize, and what they claim is the 'real' truth. There must be dozens of such threads in this forum.

And yes, moderators do hold the keys to the ban button. But it's generally only used in rules violation - such as abusiveness to others. While you may think it acceptable to ban outright those who hold a different view as you suggest, I find it often stimulating in gaining greater clarity into the nature of human life perspectives - that includes others as well as my own. You see, we are not enemies in my vision. We are fellow travelers in a unique life experience. Our essence, our source of being, is ultimately the same. In this environment we have simply adopted perspectives that appear to conflict.

In the larger reality our differences will matter very little indeed. The beauty of the NDE accounts is that they testify from experience to a perspective of unity and love that makes logical and reasoned sense - not so much from a material appearance, but from a conscious perspective most easily recognized from a reality beyond the physical appearance. In the larger reality there is no separation, only uniqueness of expression.

No one can choose for another. At best we can point to what we have found valuable and invite a personal exploration. This forum may well be described as a forum of invitation to look here and there to what some have found helpful in their own right, as well as an opportunity for others to come and seek answers to matters of importance to them as it relates to gaining clarity on their life experience.

Hopefully every member will either find, or offer, something of value. Each of us will necessarily decide for ourselves.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6307
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby downeyjr » Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:08 pm

downeyjr wrote:All of these experiences have no value since they have physical origin, non of them, not a single one of all the people(including your favorite Eben Alexander)...

Of course you don't actually know this. This is the kind of belief and faith that you criticize.


Well, that's the most likely option, so I express myself as if it's certain, this is the same what you are doing, for you non-physical is the most likely, so you are writing as if it's 100% truth, you don't say every time, the most likely option etc. Please :)

...can absolutely prove that their brain was completely dead during that experience and that the experience wasn't produced by the brain. And brain is quite physical. And for defense of the physical origin, well...it's simple, everything around you is physical, your body, brain, cells, everything is physical, so why make an exception for the consciousness?


The death of the brain isn't the only criteria for evidence of non-physical consciousness. It's just the set of rules set by materialists to protect the beliefs that they are so emotionally invested in from considering genuine possibilities that would conflict with their ideology.


Well, hehe, the same you are saying here is valid for you, I'm tired of copy pasting your words, before saying them , think if they are valid for you. For me, it's just the set of rules set by ,, choose a nickname,, to protect the beliefs that they are so emotionally attached to considering genuine possibilities that would conflict with their ideology. The difference between us is in the little details, how we assess facts, what we consider as facts and how do they influence your perspective of the given situation. For me, my arguments make sense, yours are false, false in a way , that you so much want something to be true that you start believing in obviously false facts, false ideas and you don't even realize why it's false.

In regards to the topic and what really matters, you said extremely little ,,The death of the brain isn't the only criteria for evidence of non-physical consciousness.,, Well, what you are simply saying here is that the brain can be active and we can still have a non-physical experience in the form of NDE etc ? That's the things I'm talking about, this is what you don't realize it's false, this is where you push your imagination, this is where you desire for this to be truth comes in and blinds you. This is where you are going to build a little fairy tale how we can have an NDE when the brain is active and the NDE still be a non-physical experience, but this my friend, is you imagination, an would be a huge assumption, otherwise if I want to believe in that, I can also tell you at least 10 options of how this can happen. This is what doesn't differ you from a person that believes in the classical God from the bible. You simply believe in something based on nothing, or yes, it's based on your assumptions, but they are based on nothing as well, they are based on your desire for this to be true. And since the physical origin is the most likely option, that's what I believe in. Non-physical origin considering the facts we have is simply a fairy tale. And if you intend to say, no it's not, at least tell me why and let it be sensible.

p.s.
Generally Einstein was right as you like to quote him, ,,Imagination is more important than knowledge,, but this is a different situation, and this is not valid here.
downeyjr
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:44 pm

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby smiileyjen101 » Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:01 pm

downey junior said: The difference between us is in the little details, how we assess facts, what we consider as facts and how do they influence your perspective of the given situation.


downey junior said: that's the most likely option, so I express myself as if it's certain, this is the same what you are doing


Sorry, what difference is there?

Perspective through experience is all subjective, not objective.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com
User avatar
smiileyjen101
 
Posts: 3688
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby samarpana » Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:33 am

Another way that I understand this question is : Where do I end and you begin.
Where do I end and the stars begin.
I read awhile ago a quote about the light from stars. i thought the quote was from Buckminster Fuller. I so wish I could find the quote again, though i never for got the concept.
The quote stated that all stars are light that are reached into our eyes at the speed of light. That there is no seperation between our eyes and the stars (light),which is what a star is; as we observe them.
I never see stars as seperated from me since i read this quote.

I also remember in my awakening to Bliss,sometime ago, \i must say, being it waned like a 6 month candle wick;
\as \i walked under a tree, the tree branches felt like they were extended in my very head/mind, grabbing onto the old cobwebs, and dusting them away.

So at that time, where did \i end and the tree begin.......question didn\'tmatter, as cobwebs disintegrated and star trees were born.
Sue

I am enchanted by this forum!
samarpana
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:19 am

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby Sighclone » Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:03 pm

WW - Hey - great tout re Eben Alexander. I saw him on the Oprah Super Soul Sunday recently, and read his book "Proof of Heaven," fine book and very easy, kind of dramatic. read.

downeyjr - Do not be worried about the ban button. So long as you remain civil in discourse, you can argue with any member that black is white so long as the forum exists. The rules are far more about respect for members than about any opinions. It is entirely possible that all the other mods disagree with WW regarding NDEs. It is entirely possible that all past, present and future forum members disagree with him about this. What is important regarding this subject, and any other, is that respect is shown:

Member A: Black is white.

Member B (respectful): In my opinion, Member A, it is utterly ridiculous to assert that black is white. There is not one single piece of evidence in recorded history to suggest that such an extreme view has any possiblity of being true.

Member C (disrespectful):

Black is white.

You must be insane. What a stupid position.

Member C would probably get one warning, then be banned if he/she made a similar kind of comment. But maybe not...moderators are imperfect...sometimes we just ban rude people immediately.

Nine years is a long time for a forum to survive. Part of the reason we remain is the care given by moderators to the tone of speech here...not the opinions.

Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce
User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6183
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby heidi » Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:20 pm

Hey Andy - You'd better watch it! :wink: Rule #12. Public Discussion of the Moderators' Actions is Not Allowed. :mrgreen:

Now, back to the topic - What am I; What are you?

Lately, through inquiry, I've been finding myself unfindable! :lol:
Heidi
http://www.heidimayo.com
wonderment on the third wave
User avatar
heidi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2703
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 12:37 am
Location: 42nd parallel, Massachusetts, USA

Re: What Am I - What Are You?

Postby Sighclone » Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:33 pm

Aw Jeepers, heidi...I thought that was about not discussing a specific moderator action, not the general topic of how / why we enforce rules, and gave a general theoretical example to help draw the line....

Unfindable Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce
User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6183
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests