FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-20-2002, 06:23 AM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Midlands, UK
Posts: 195
Post

heheheh, Warrior Ken certainly isn't worried about looking silly. Good for him. Although his ideas lack elegance, there are some redeeming features.

I could wish, though, that he spent less time deconstructing what he says isn't really there to begin with, and more time on a cogent synthesis of what actually is. But that's the postmodernist way.

Thinking of myself as a "holon" gives me nothing I didn't already have from the Western mystery traditions, except a new vocabulary word.

If we are one, then I want to know:

a) One what? and
b) What should we do differently because of it?
victorialis is offline  
Old 05-20-2002, 01:48 PM   #12
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 15,796
Post

Corwin writes:

Quote:
Let's propose something else for the modern world with a bit less unfounded mysticism...

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Then I will tell you a great secret, Captain. Perhaps the greatest of all time. The molecules of your body are the same molecules that make up this station and the nebula outside, that burn inside the stars themselves. We are starstuff, we are the universe made manifest, trying to figure itself out. As we have both learned, sometimes the universe requires a change of perspective."
-- Delenn to Sheridan in Babylon 5:"A Distant Star"
We're supposed to believe this instead of "unfounded" mysticism? Who has been to star to know what "star stuff" really is? We assume that we have uncovered fundamental principles and we assume that those principles can tell us about stars, nebulae, etc. But we don't KNOW these things.

Mysticism is based on self-knowledge. How much more "founded" does the subject have to get?
boneyard bill is offline  
Old 05-20-2002, 01:54 PM   #13
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 15,796
Post

Adam Who writes:

Quote:
I have felt "oneness" at times long before I ever heard of eastern religions so I believe that it is just a brain state, a question for chemistry. Drugs might give you the feeling of "oneness" but that is just your pattern forming abilities operating under the influence
But how many preconceptions have to be accepted without proof in order to sustain this claim? Quite a few, including a scientific world-view that wouldn't be defended by a great many scientists.
boneyard bill is offline  
Old 05-20-2002, 02:05 PM   #14
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 15,796
Post

D.H. Cross writes:

Quote:
If anybody can point me toward some more recent scholarship, please do.
Chalmers first book on this subject was The Conscious Mind.

He has a web site that is just loaded with links to all kinds of on-line papers on consciousness.

<a href="http://www.u.arizona.edu/~chalmers/" target="_blank">http://www.u.arizona.edu/~chalmers/</a>
boneyard bill is offline  
Old 05-20-2002, 03:18 PM   #15
Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 13,389
Post

Quote:
I have felt "oneness" at times long before I ever heard of eastern religions so I believe that it is just a brain state, a question for chemistry. Drugs might give you the feeling of "oneness" but that is just your pattern forming abilities operating under the influence

But how many preconceptions have to be accepted without proof in order to sustain this claim? Quite a few, including a scientific world-view that wouldn't be defended by a great many scientists.
I didn't start my journey with preconceptions, I tried to start it like Descartes, by denying every thing (I know that it is a ridiculous exercise), and I have never found any reason for believing my feelings (such as "a feeling of oneness") is anything more than very complex chemical reactions, granted it is mysterious but not mystical or magical.
If you would like to defend the claim that "The feeling of oneness is more than just complex chemical reactions" then I would like to hear you explanation.

[ May 20, 2002: Message edited by: AdamWho ]</p>
AdamWho is offline  
Old 05-20-2002, 03:35 PM   #16
JL
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Mawkish Virtue, NC
Posts: 151
Post

Maybe Carl Jung would interest you demon-sword. Are you familiar with his theories on archetypes and the collective unconscious? It sounds somewhat similar to what you're describing.
JL is offline  
Old 05-20-2002, 04:00 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: the 10th planet
Posts: 5,065
Post

"Second and more pertinent involves human consciousness or awareness which can be described as highly profound and penetrating but still limited. You could assume for the sake of discussion that our consciousness is non-material or spiritual. Are all 6 billion individual awarenesses also one like originating from a universal consciousness."

I’ve been plagued with this notion for years, that the universe and consciousness are the same. Every living thing gets a small piece, billions of ‘peepholes’, eyes of the universe, that the big bang created everything that will ever exist or happen in an instant, past present and future all at once, time, motion all some kind of illusion
“I am he as you are me and we are all together… koo koo ka joob
“I’m waiting for a sign that the universal mind has written me into the passion play, skating away on the thin ice of a new day”
“Oh we all shine on, like the moon and the stars and the sun”

Marduk is offline  
Old 05-21-2002, 11:23 AM   #18
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Midlands, UK
Posts: 195
Post

marduck, that's cool.

Does this plaguing notion ever develop itself further? Like, does it lend itself to any kind of if/then constructs?

Similar ideas I've heard, have also resonated for me. Like, "each of us is a pearl in Indra's net, each seeing all the others and each reflecting all the others."

While it gives me the sensation denoted by the smilie with the shades on, no further ideation has emerged from it.



Now, I guess, is not the time.
victorialis is offline  
Old 05-21-2002, 03:31 PM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: the 10th planet
Posts: 5,065
Cool

"Does this plaguing notion ever develop itself further? Like, does it lend itself to any kind of if/then constructs?"

No, that's where I usually get stuck!
Marduk is offline  
Old 05-22-2002, 11:27 AM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manila
Posts: 5,516
Post

from Marduck:
I’m waiting for a sign that the universal mind has written me into the passion play, skating away on the thin ice of a new day”
-------------

I'll confess to being silly in the past. For a couple of months, I tried meditating trying to find that universal consciousness that I presumed should exist. A book said I should see a flickering blue light; a practitioner said one could encounter your "master". There were only two things that happened to me. First, I learned to induce that state of peace and blankness that I can do it even when standing but I think this is natural to humans, acquired by practice. Second, I repeatedly dreamed over a period of two years or so that I could float in the air at higher than rooftops bobbing up and down. It's exhilarating but nothing else. My practitioner friend said I was doing astral travel.

The only problem with asking people who claim to have mystical experiences is they refuse to describe and explain their experience to me to avoid getting pinned down, I suspect. I'm still skeptical.
Ruy Lopez is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:08 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.