Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: dblaney]
    #5443616 - 03/26/06 09:38 AM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Well I'm a big fan of the Christian Neoplatonist Dionysus the Areopagite, and the Via Negativa is the only thing one can do to 'suggest' the ineffable Mystery.

Skorpivo and I are on two different sides, and they are decidely NOT the same thing using different semantics. To Skorpivo, and those of his persuasion, it is "absurd" to posit God (which is what the philosophical term Ontos/Being is really about). God is Real, defined as Ultimate Reality, but God does not 'exist!' That is to say, God does not partake of existence, meaning, any space-time creation. This means not only matter, but much more subtle existence - space-time devoid of matter. Space-time partakes of extension, hence form. God (Pure Consciousness) is non-substantial and does not 'exist' in spacio-temporal dimensionality or form.

Whereas our neural tissues, connected and fed of course from all the other interactive bodily systems my conduct electrical impulses in ways more complex than silicon-based computer intelligence, our consciousness is a microcosm of the Macrocosmic Consciousness from which all of creation derives from a Neoplatonic (and a spiritual) point of view. Humans are said to be 'made in the image and likeness of God' and this is what that Biblical saying refers to. It is a cosmic and a mystical apprehension of how it all is. Reality is multilayered, but Ultimate Reality transcends the phenomenal world. That is to say, God in Unknowable as God Knows God, but again I am unknowable to others as I know myself. I am not saying that God is a super person either, but the Reality is greater than human comprehension of personality, not lesser. We creatures may well have developed from amino acids and lightning, but the Idea behind the electrons in lightning, as well as the Ideas behind every nuance of creation from quarks to quasars, are Ideas derived from God/Consciousness/Essence.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5443625 - 03/26/06 09:43 AM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

SkorpivoMusterion said:
Every one of your premises are contrary to the spiritual/metaphysical position.

Depending on however you like to define such terms, of course.


I have already amply expressed examples pertaining to the spiritual and you refuse or are unable to regress to the same point of origin but establish yourself in conditions of 'stable' existence long after origination has occured, and without any comment on the Mystery which precedes creation.

Regress to the same point of what you think is the "Origin". In regards to that matter, I hold that there is no "origin".

An excerpt from http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/branden.htm
Quote:

The man who asks, "Where did existence come from?" or "What caused it?" is the man who has never grasped that existence exists. This is the mentality of a savage or a mystic who regards existence as some sort of incomprehensible miracle - and seeks to "explain" it by reference to non-existence.

Existence is all that exists, the nonexistent does not exist; there is nothing for existence to have come out of - and nothing means nothing. If you are tempted to ask, "What's outside the universe?" - recognize that you are asking, "What's outside of existence?" and that the idea of "something outside of existence" is a contradiction in terms; nothing is outside of existence, and "nothing" is not just another kind of "something" - it is nothing. Existence exists: you cannot go outside it; you cannot get under it, on top of it, or behind it. Existence exists - and only existence exists: There is nowhere else to go.





You are like Newton, explaining how things work in a macro sense but completely ignorant of how things operate on a micro or quantum level. Completely different conditions, completely different governing principles, completely different implications for the ultimate nature of material reality.

Not a fair assessment at all. Unlike what you are professing to be the truth, quantum physics has actual evidence supporting it - not mere anecdotes of vague mysticism. There is no objective, scientific or logical basis for claiming that our consciousness does anything other than what we observe it doing or anything other than what it is: The faculty of percieving that which exists, which is an emergent phenomena of our brain.


You are defining the neurologically based models of brain consciousness and fail to grok that Consciousness (AKA Spirit) is posited by the spiritual/metaphysical position as GOD.

You are defining the mysticism-based models of brain consciousness and fail to grok that consciousness is the faculty of percieving existence, and is posited by the Law of Identity.


So, if you wish to insist that there is no such eternal Ground of Being (no attributes or lack thereof being debated here), no 'infrastructure' of Ultimate Reality, then we cannot proceed with this interaction. We have a stalemate.

It's moreso that you are professing our consciousness to be such an "infrastructure". Again, this is comitting the fallacy of context-dropping; you are dropping the context of what consciousness actually is and does. Like most mystics, you take whatever remains in the unknown darkness of reality, and in the absence of factual knowledge, proceed to establish fantasies in thin-air. I see this occurring all the time in regards to Quantum Mechanics, in regards to evolutionary theory, in regards to many, many historical instances involving situations whereby folks didn't have sufficient knowledge of a phenomena - and as a result, fell to mysticism. On the bright side, we've come a long way from the age of witchdoctors and spell-chanting savages.


There is no such thing as a "mysticism of meat."

To the contrary - just as there are those who've tried to escape from the bodily and/or physical reality and construct elaborate castles of 'other-worldly' fantasies in thin-air, there are those who've tried to deny the efficacy of consciousness altogether and/or profess the non-existence of non-material entities, read: the mind.




Simply stated: you simply have not Experienced "Cosmic Consciousness" yourself, or you would Know the position that I advocate. Your philosophy is of one who has not yet had the Experience, but your world view will be shattered if you are granted it.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #5443865 - 03/26/06 12:01 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

We creatures may well have developed from amino acids and lightning, but the Idea behind the electrons in lightning, as well as the Ideas behind every nuance of creation from quarks to quasars, are Ideas derived from God/Consciousness/Essence.

You remind me of someone who observes that our skyscrapers and automobiles were volitionally created, and didn't necessarily have to exist as such, for they were creations of man's own choices - and then over-extends that conclusion to Mother Nature. He concludes therefore, that the planets in orbit around the sun did not have to be, because nor did man's creations.
He fails to realize that the metaphysically given is not governed by will, choice, or consciousness - but by the Law of Identity. The metaphysically given is necessitated, i.e., absolute.

Nature, i.e., the universe as a whole, cannot be created or annihilated; it cannot come into or go out of existence. All the countless forms, motions, combinations and dissolutions of elements within the universe - from a floating speck of dust to the formation of a galaxy to the emergence of life - are caused and determined by the identities of the elements involved. Nature is the metaphysically given - i.e., the nature of nature is outside the power of any volition.

"Creation" does not [and metaphysically cannot] mean the power to bring something into existence and out of nothing. "Creation" means the power to bring into existence an arrangement [or combination or integration] of natural elements that had not existed before.
The best and briefest identification of volitionary power in regard to nature is "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed." -- Francis Bacon. Again, one may ask, "But.. where did existence come from?" Again, I must refer to Branden's adroit refutation of such "creationism":
http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/branden.htm

One who thinks that consciousness "itself" creates existence, fails to realize or accept the fact that to be conscious is to be conscious of something. Consciousness must always have an object. So, to be conscious of one's consciousness is to be conscious of one's consciousness of...an object. There has to be something that one is conscious of in order for consciousness to exist. Then and only then can one be conscious of one's process of being conscious. And nor is consciousness a "thing" in the sense of an entity, any more or less than vision or hearing is; but a faculty or process - just as is vision, hearing, digestion and so forth.

This exposes the fallacy inherent in creationism, which says that God, a pure spirit or consciousness, created everything else that exists. But if, prior to creation, nothing else existed except God, then God himself could not exist, because he would then be a consciousness with nothing to be conscious of, which is a contradiction in terms.

Once again, as I've said before, it is perfectly logical and reasonable to extend the observation that we as volitional, sentient beings have consciousness as a product of this Earth's existence, to the entire Universe itself. There is no reasonable or logical basis for claiming that consciousness can do anything other than what we CAN and DO observe it doing.
Consciousness can not exist without reality. Reality can exist without consciousness.
Reality precedes "truth", much as the premise precedes the proof. There can be no "truths" in relation to a consciousness with no reality by which to refer, just as there can be no proofs in relation to a consciousness with no premise by which to refer.

Ergo, existence exists, and is primary.


Simply stated: you simply have not Experienced "Cosmic Consciousness" yourself, or you would Know the position that I advocate. Your philosophy is of one who has not yet had the Experience, but your world view will be shattered if you are granted it.


Simply stated: you simply assume too much. You do not know what experiences I've had - you may certainly assume that I haven't interpreted my experiences in a way that you chose.




--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Edited by SkorpivoMusterion (03/26/06 01:35 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5444129 - 03/26/06 02:08 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

As I stated, there are things, that don't exist but are processed by consciousness.
Secondly, there is something prior to existence, prior to creation, if you talk of the universe. It's called singularity and virtually brings something into existence out of 'nothing'. (Bacon did not know about singularity)


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #5444312 - 03/26/06 03:19 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

As I stated, there are things, that don't exist but are processed by consciousness.

No comprende. If something doesn't exist, then how can one be conscious of it?


Secondly, there is something prior to existence

To be something is to exist. Therefore something cannot be "prior to" existence.


It's called singularity and virtually brings something into existence out of 'nothing'.

[Playing along for a moment]: Nothing that you know of - would be the truly accurate statement. All you're doing is pointing to your own nescience, and mistaking that to be a metaphysical entity, resulting from a failure to distinguish between metaphysics and epistemology. Your position is akin to those who think that the "Big Bang" literally came out of "nothing" per se. In actuality, we just don't know precisely what gave birth to the Big Bang. But a rational, logical individual can confidently conclude that if something gave birth to the Big Bang, then something exists.




--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5444972 - 03/26/06 07:15 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

SkorpivoMusterion said:
As I stated, there are things, that don't exist but are processed by consciousness.

No comprende. If something doesn't exist, then how can one be conscious of it?



I simply made the example of the perception of the future, which, by default, does not exist yet, and has not to become true according to the perceived one. But everyone does this.


Quote:

Secondly, there is something prior to existence

To be something is to exist. Therefore something cannot be "prior to" existence.


It's called singularity and virtually brings something into existence out of 'nothing'.

[Playing along for a moment]: Nothing that you know of - would be the truly accurate statement. All you're doing is pointing to your own nescience, and mistaking that to be a metaphysical entity, resulting from a failure to distinguish between metaphysics and epistemology. Your position is akin to those who think that the "Big Bang" literally came out of "nothing" per se. In actuality, we just don't know precisely what gave birth to the Big Bang. But a rational, logical individual can confidently conclude that if something gave birth to the Big Bang, then something exists.



I can stay happy if one says "existence, depending to the creation of our universe, stems from some unknown cause, which pre-existed outside of the realm of our perceivable reality and got real through singularity." :laugh:
I think (you know me), even with two existing things in reality, there can and is more then simple addition, if one adds these things for creational purposes. I think I have read that you defy the rule of 'the sum is MORE then its parts'. I think this rule is true.
And I hope to bring some (even) rational knowledge to the principles 'behind' that.


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #5445102 - 03/26/06 08:02 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

I simply made the example of the perception of the future, which, by default, does not exist yet, and has not to become true according to the perceived one. But everyone does this.

Our conceptive-imaginative-extrapolative projections of the future are precisely that: conceptual constructs. First you state the perception of something, then you clarify the non-existence of that something. If that something is non-existent, then it was actually something else that was being percieved in the first place. See: First sentence of this paragraph. We're getting increasingly sidetracked from the point: That consciousness is not some "Thing" as in an entity, but rather, a biological process or faculty - like vision, hearing or digestion. To claim that it does anything other than what we observe it doing [facilitating perception through our senses] is arbitrary and without merit.


I can stay happy if one says "existence, depending to the creation of our universe, stems from some unknown cause, which pre-existed outside of the realm of our perceivable reality and got real through singularity."

If I understand you, you're still insisting that existence has a cause. Once again: Existence cannot have a cause, for a cause, by definition, exists.
All this "singularity" and "creation" tripe that you keep bringing up has little to no substantial support, no factual reasoning behind it. So it looks like you're going to be unhappy, because I will continue to stand firmly by my metaphysical, objective convictions.


I think I have read that you defy the rule of 'the sum is MORE then its parts'. I think this rule is true.
And I hope to bring some (even) rational knowledge to the principles 'behind' that.


What do you mean by a "rule"? At any rate, I've maintained that metaphysically speaking, an entity is only the sum of it's parts - nothing more, nothing less. Epistemologically, one can say otherwise. That is to say, conceptually speaking. MushmantheManic had a good example of such recently, pertaining to biological terms.



--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5445331 - 03/26/06 09:27 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Your statements about God as being impossible are wrong, but what you say does lead into interesting arguments for the necessity of creation through which God can come to know God. Freke and Gandy bring out this notion in their three publications about Gnosticism that I have posted about (enthusiastically) lately.

I do not assume too much about Cosmic Consciousness. It is Consciousness of Cosmic proportion - R.M. Bucke's famous term from the 19th century publication of the same name, and is so compelling an inlfuence that its implications just are not ignored. One does not experience Cosmic Consciousness and remain wedded to a position of simple empiricism applied to "Ultimate Concerns" (P. Tillich).

Moreover, you stated in an earlier post that you do not believe in an origin to the universe. You must therefore maintain a static theory of the universe (one that seems untenable from a scientific cosmological view) and one that seems untenable from a mythological cosmology, i.e., most of the world's creation myths since time immemorial (an Intuitive apprehension of Reality). Even here you insist that the universe as a whole, cannot be created or annihilated." Please. If you concede to empirical evidence about the Big Bang it undermines your piss-poor pantheism which makes the phenomenal universe eternal. You live in a universe with no 'Transcendenz' and thus, as I stated earlier, you could NOT have had any experience with Cosmic Consciousness which is the microcosmic realization of the Transcendental Reality, which is 'God.' So which is it? It can't be both.

Regardless, I stand with the philosophers East and West, Plato and Buddha and all that have followed, despite their formulational differences. This dialogue is repetative and tiresome. I was once where you are and can never regress. You will not be able to grok my perspective until you have received a cosmic encounter. The trip is directional toward this understanding. Good evening to you.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5446243 - 03/27/06 03:24 AM (17 years, 10 months ago)

You don't say that the perception of the future is abitrary or without merit. That would be false.
And you admit, that there are unknown things beyond singularity. Other would be false.

Like Jiggy once said, why see reality with one eye, if we have two ?
I follow this example, respecting your extreme position in the realm of scientific valuable datas, to make sense of, but I stay at my position (firmly, too) that there is much more, that we don't know, but can perceive intentionally, to add to our abstract models, making some sense of (even counter-check) them, not to be trapped in some egocentrical solipsism (I know, you don't like it either), which overevaluates human intellect :wink:


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Edited by BlueCoyote (03/27/06 03:36 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #5449714 - 03/28/06 12:22 AM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Even here you insist that the universe as a whole, cannot be created or annihilated." Please.

Matter, substance or energy cannot be destroyed or annihilated, although they can change various forms. Moreover, if they cannot be annihilated, they could not have been "created". The indestructible is uncreatable. And when I say "the universe as a whole", I mean: Existence; the totality of all existence. Existence cannot be created or annihilated.

We cannot conceive of the creation of force, or of its destruction. Force may be changed from one form to another - from motion to heat - but it cannot be destroyed or annihilated.

If force cannot be destroyed it could not have been created. It is eternal; static.

Moreover, matter, substance or energy cannot exist apart from force. Force cannot exist apart from matter. This has been shown by several scientists, but most clearly by Buchner.


If you concede to empirical evidence about the Big Bang it undermines your piss-poor pantheism which makes the phenomenal universe eternal.

I've touched upon this more than once. I don't disagree that there was some incidental "big bang", of course. My sole contention in this matter is: that which gave birth to the big bang, exists, and existence is eternal. Once more, by "Universe", I mean existence; the totality thereof.


Regardless, I stand with the philosophers East and West, Plato and Buddha and all that have followed, despite their formulational differences.

-=Browses personal library and picks out a Taoist book, flips to page 211=-

"Those who follow Tao declare that there is no evidence that a god created our world. They have not found any empirical proof, and they cannot accept the idea philosophically."

Well, some smart folks these surfers of the Tao are. I guess that makes us both, Markos. I, too, stand with both West philosophy and East philosophy - at least, in specific, certain principles.





--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBasilides
Servent ofWisdom
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 7,059
Loc: Crown and Heart
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5449831 - 03/28/06 01:50 AM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Was existence always was, then?

I think at a certain point this boils down simple formula.

It is said the universe is expanding. If it is, that means at certain point in "manifested", or sparked.

I like to look beyond that point - beyond manifestation. Lets say the universe isn't expanding. It has to be a certain size then. It has to have "borders" whether expanding or not.


It's... I dunno. I think large chunk of humanity sees the metaphysical phenomena, while others do not.

I just keep thinking about the borders of the universe - impossible to touch, impossible to break through. Breaking through would enter God Herself. The only way through is to become what is on the otherside.

I don't understand how some cannot see the borders of materiality, and to just for a second, ponder the other side. I have had extensive debates about this with a friend of mind, and no matter how many times I explained it, no matter how many metaphors I used, he saw nothing but an empty void beyond the borders of the bubble of physics. Like total blankness, where nothing is possible as opposed to a deepened mystery - where anything is possible.

Penetrate the borders with your heart and you will see the hidden secret :heart:


--------------------


"Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."


Edited by St_Valentinus (03/28/06 02:16 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5449866 - 03/28/06 02:25 AM (17 years, 10 months ago)

If I may propose that our (perceivable) universe is only a part of some (parallel and serial) multiverse, then there can exist things, which are beyond our perception-horizonts and even materialists could get a grip on how things can be 'created' into the existence 'we know' from there.

So, I absolutely have no problem to see, that there exists something prior to our known existence, whatever it may be.
Even if it is only a possibility, which could be cut away by Occam, I won't dismiss it until proven wrong. But all realism and rationalism points otherways.


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5450036 - 03/28/06 06:02 AM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Taoist cosmology is simply wrong. They imply a 'steady state' universe. What they say regarding the current state of human-cosmic interaction is extremely insightful, but pick up after the notion of Origination.

Your metaphysics pertaining to Ontology and Existentialism are also erroneous.
God does not "exist" but God is the Reality from which existence derives. There is a truly profound difference which you do not grok.

Phenomenological-Existential Psychology as a discipline is essentially about what we are discussing. What you posits makes no sense to a position which is cognizant of the Transcendental ever-receding horizon of the Mystery. There is nothing Transcendental in your view, no possibility of radical origination. Plus it eternalizes phenomenon, which is preposterous. The Laws of Thermodynamics (one of which you keep paraphrasing) only applies to physics after physics came into being. The early universe was of a superheated nature in which the physics were completely different from the physics to which the now known laws pertain. Possibly, like many people, even philosophically interested people like yourself, the notion of Creation is terrifying as it implies a 'Creator' which is too mind-blowing a concept. But...it's time to blow your mind. That might result in a Transcendental Experience - Cosmic Consciousness.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #5452184 - 03/28/06 05:34 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Taoist cosmology is simply wrong. They imply a 'steady state' universe. What they say regarding the current state of human-cosmic interaction is extremely insightful, but pick up after the notion of Origination.

In content, existents may not be "steady" in the sense of always transforming and changing, but the context: Existence, is static; eternally steady.


God does not "exist" but God is the Reality from which existence derives. There is a truly profound difference which you do not grok.

Any "reality" from which "Existence" derives will naturally have to exist ["non-existence" is merely a relational concept], be it in some form of meta-energy or whatever. I know that you keep implying "consciousness" by the word God - and as I've said before, it isn't so much that we're/you're espousing there to be some sort of "infrastructure" to the "cosmos", rather it's the what. You hold it to be consciousness, I hold it to be existence. Note that I do not state what form of existence, but rather underscore that it exists. This is because, unlike many mystics, I do not claim to be omniscient. I am well aware, that in reality, no one can actually know - have actual, objective knowledge about the things we are discussing, insofar as the "what" goes. However, there are no things that are truly unknowable [not to be confused with the unknown], for every existent must interact with reality and -in principle- we can become aware of any and every existent [knowing that it is, not what it is] through inference.

So in addition to the fact that we're not omniscient, what then, is the basis for rejecting the notion that what exists insofar as this reality we're talking about, is consciousness? Because of the fact that there is no sensory or rational evidence to ever suggest that consciousness can be divorced [or totally independent] from existence, or that consciousness does anything other than what it actually does and what we actually see it doing: facilitating the process of perception through our bodily senses.
There is all the evidence to the contrary, and all the more reason to establish that whatever this "ground of reality", is: existence.

On what grounds is it denied that existence precedes consciousness? There is none. There is no rational or sensory evidence to suggest otherwise at all.

Of course, mystics with their under-differentiated and over-integrated metaphysics and epistemology, often can't help but "feel" that it [an existent or existence] must be..."consciousness!", neglecting that they are only pointing to their own consciousness, resulting from a failure to differentiate and integrate. This is a common mentality amongst savages, children and of course, mystics. It is an immature and ultimately, dangerous state of mind with often far-reaching consequences if one does not grow out of it [as all healthy folks do]. Making stuff up, and then professing the made-up stuff to be actual truth is, as history shows, a dangerous, dangerous habit. Not to mention it is very anti-spiritual. Living in full acceptance of facts, is very spiritual.


Plus it eternalizes phenomenon, which is preposterous. The Laws of Thermodynamics (one of which you keep paraphrasing) only applies to physics after physics came into being. The early universe was of a superheated nature in which the physics were completely different from the physics to which the now known laws pertain.

As long as existence exists, so will phenomena. Physics - whose subject matter is "matter & energy" - never really 'came into' existence [I noticed you used the word being - an off-shoot of the primacy of consciousness theory?]. It has always been true of reality. The familiar and common 'laws of physics' - those that hold true in the knowable universe - are contextual laws, in a kind of counter-intuitive manner. In other words, physics [or metaphysics] was always existing; the laws were how humans discovered a certain order to how things work.


Possibly, like many people, even philosophically interested people like yourself, the notion of Creation is terrifying as it implies a 'Creator' which is too mind-blowing a concept. But...it's time to blow your mind. That might result in a Transcendental Experience - Cosmic Consciousness.

Possibly, like many people, even philosophically interested people like yourself, the notion of no "godly creator" is terrifying as it implies a lack of divinity which is too scary a concept. But...it's time to wake up. That might result in a Transcendental Experience - Cosmic Honesty.



--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineTemptress
Butterfly
Female

Registered: 01/31/06
Posts: 143
Loc: Texas - where else?
Last seen: 17 years, 9 months
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5452236 - 03/28/06 05:44 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

even philosophically interested people like yourself, the notion of Creation is terrifying




i am quite new to to the disucsion of suc things but isnt this sort of projection abuot anothers emotions a basic no no in philsophy? is this not a form of ab hominim ? and a detracktion from the conversation?


--------------------
i have less ego than you do!


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5452388 - 03/28/06 06:23 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

But...it's time to wake up. That might result in a Transcendental Experience - Cosmic Honesty.

:winner:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5452566 - 03/28/06 07:03 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Not a very creative finish, but an obvious stalemate. We're done here.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: MushmanTheManic]
    #5452610 - 03/28/06 07:09 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

If you think so, you must be an Existentialist too. It's a grim vision, and not one that I would want to try and live with. Fortunately, I AM awakened.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBasilides
Servent ofWisdom
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 7,059
Loc: Crown and Heart
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #5452612 - 03/28/06 07:10 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Of course, mystics with their under-differentiated and over-integrated metaphysics and epistemology, often can't help but "feel" that it [an existent or existence] must be..."consciousness!", neglecting that they are only pointing to their own consciousness, resulting from a failure to differentiate and integrate. This is a common mentality amongst savages, children and of course, mystics. It is an immature and ultimately, dangerous state of mind with often far-reaching consequences if one does not grow out of it [as all healthy folks do]. Making stuff up, and then professing the made-up stuff to be actual truth is, as history shows, a dangerous, dangerous habit. Not to mention it is very anti-spiritual. Living in full acceptance of facts, is very spiritual.




Why don't you respond to my responses? I want a piece of this discussion too..  :crazy:

Mystics don't "feel" the cosmic infrastructure. They see it. They become it. They completely discorporate into it. Physics doesn't disappear. It simply becomes quiet. Whatever manifested structure physical phenomena has, it simply becomes unnoticed, or subtle - Mystery automatically illuminates when physics have been simmered, and this is gnosis.

The mystic as immature? Isn't this just an ad hominem attack? How many self-identified mystics do you know? For one thing, not that many people are esoterically minded. You must certainly have quite the intuition when it comes to generalizing a group of people that are quite quiet, unknown for the most part and spread through out the earth.

It was the mystic Rumi who wrote "Love is a furnace and ego its fuel.". It's totally ironic that you're calling mystics immature, as traditionally in history they were the ones persecuted by childish orthodoxies that were nothing more than institutionalized spiritual brown nosing.

You don't have the slightest clue what spiritual immaturity is. If you want to see a perfect example of stunted spiritual growth, look at the Mullahs of Afghanistan who are calling for the death of Abdul Rahman whilst proclaiming he must die for "Insulting God,". The God of these Mullahs must be a cry baby, so it's not surprising they act like one too. It's poor conceptualizations like these that ultimately define spiritual immaturity.

The mystic - who lives and breaths the Love of God, is a human being who has finished growing within. They have finished growing because by nature they are terminally curious. To me, maturity is defined by a permanent state of curiousity. The fact that you refuse to fathom what is beyond the borders of existence is in itself stunted spiritual growth.


--------------------


"Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: Consciousness - the hen or the egg? [Re: Basilides]
    #5452667 - 03/28/06 07:23 PM (17 years, 10 months ago)

The fact that you refuse to fathom what is beyond the borders of existence is in itself stunted spiritual growth.

Wrong. I don't refuse to fathom - believe it or not, I look out at the night sky, gaze at the milky way and wonder.

What I actually refuse, is to mine mystery for ores of intellectual onanism out of some personal dissatisfaction with reality, or escape from reality or simple epistemological negligence.

That would be quite emblematic of stunted spiritual growth.



--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Edited by SkorpivoMusterion (03/28/06 07:35 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Help...i'm on a downward Nihilistic spiral Great Scott 2,841 18 02/13/04 12:12 PM
by PHARMAKOS
* Proof that faith is a crock?
( 1 2 3 all )
GoBlue! 3,981 57 01/11/03 06:47 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* don't knock faith CosmicJokeM 1,808 14 04/29/03 07:34 AM
by gnrm23
* Consciousness due to Awareness: AI content.
( 1 2 all )
IgnatiusJReilly 2,610 20 09/12/05 05:02 AM
by redgreenvines
* The reality and consciousness link... MystikMushroom 1,098 11 08/13/06 09:23 PM
by AlteredAgain
* The mind of matter -- does agglomerated matter (and the universe itself) have consciousness?
( 1 2 all )
Asante 2,131 24 02/02/10 10:01 AM
by Icelander
* Faith is for the ignorant and the frightened
( 1 2 all )
Ulysees 4,154 21 07/18/02 11:52 PM
by Ulysees
* The difference between Faith and Blind Faith.
( 1 2 all )
JacquesCousteau 5,218 38 03/20/05 05:24 PM
by gettinjiggywithit

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
7,602 topic views. 0 members, 11 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 15 queries.