Topic: . (Read 5248 times)
Hypnosis is quackery, thread topic is mental masturbating horseshit.
Yep. A quick search of PsycINFO and PubMed show exactly zero peer-reviewed articles by Mr. Newton (not even any sleazy pay-for-publish journal articles). Mr. Newton's biography doesn't state where he earned his doctorate meaning at best it's probably from an unaccredited school; at worst, it's from a diploma mill. He's essentially peddling pseudo-science to people dumb enough to buy into it (e.g. libertarian teens). What a fucking pile of shit person.
Well, there's you as an ego, the worldly part of the soul, and there's you as consciousness, your spirit. You always have your spirit, but your ego is temporary, for this life. Your ego is limited to experiences it's dealt with, while our conscious is connected and contains the experiences of anyone and everyone that's ever lived.[citation needed]
Well, there's you as an ego, the worldly part of the soul, and there's you as consciousness, your spirit. You always have your spirit, but your ego is temporary, for this life. Your ego is limited to experiences it's dealt with, while our conscious is connected and contains the experiences of anyone and everyone that's ever lived.
Just sit quietly and try to imagine a different past for yourself, imagine you made some important decision in the past in a different way. Your experience of life and your memory of it to this point would be different, but you would still be *you* and you know that. It's empiric, it's part of observable Universe and any theory, simple or otherwise, would need to cope with that at some point.
Does it matter that any different past that I am able to imagine is still based ONLY on my collective experiences? I can imagine different paths that my life could have taken, but the results are still entirely limited by my imagination based on what I have seen and known. It is limited only to what I can describe using words from languages I speak, limited only to places I have seen (either in real life or in pictures/videos), and although I can choose to suspend logic, it's generally only following a sequence of possible events that I would expect it to follow based on my experience of how things follow one another.
In short, for me, there is no *you* that is any more than simply the sum of my life experiences. I also know that if I get a traumatic injury to the brain or a disease like Alzheimer's, I will be a completely different *you*, whereas your theory would suggest that the *you* will remain, because it transcends the physical body.
Can you explain why people with head injuries change personalities and become different *you* people? Or explain what the difference is between you, the brain physically wired to receive experiences and shape who you are, and the *you* that you are talking about? Because besides me having a brain with a differing collection of experiences, I don't get it, and don't see that difference as any more magical than, say, two different rivers that have different shapes and paths.
This guy has some interesting things to say about consciousness. He is interested in just what it is, and where in the body it happens.(or outside?). You were likely told that it is happens in your connected neurons. But consider an amoeba. It is only one cell, yet it hunts, avoids discomfort, thinks. But where? His research hints at a quantum effect underlying consciousness and perhaps even life itself.
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
Amoebas think? I figured they just reacted to chemical stimuli depending on whether that stimulation suggests food (compatible with absorption) or danger (can cause bad internal reactions), based only on how its genetic code tells it to interpret that stimulation. What happens if you stab an amoeba with a tiny needle, or show it a piece of art? Will it react?
But then I'm not a cellular biologist, so what do I know.
What I was getting at in my previous posts is that the real "you" exists outside of physical reality. It is very incoherent to assume that very uniform process of biological development would produce this singularity.
...
...
Let me ask you the exact same question, but with a slight difference.
You have a computer. It has a bunch of programs you installed, a bunch of files you created or downloaded, and all the settings are set up to be the way you want them to be. That is *your* computer, among the entire universe of *not your* computers.
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before you booted your computer for the very first time.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-your* computers and the Earth is populated completely by *not-your* computers. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *your* computer will be booted and running for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-your* computers as it always has done. Can you imagine the computer you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-your* computer with its own software and personalized settings?
^^^ That is how I read your question. And the answer is, it actually is the body, and my experiences through, it that make me *me*. Nothing more. Moreover, the *you* and *not you* property isn't all that drastic or binary. My arm is me. If it gets severed, it is no longer me. For disabled people, their wheelchairs and prosthetics are very much a part of *them*. If I have a cancerous growth, it's *me* but not really, because I don't want it to be me, and it's genetic code isn't exactly me. The only *you* that matters is the physical brain, just as the only *your computer* that matters is the physical location of 0s and 1s that store your files and settings and make your computer yours.
The stuff you're talking about is secondary. You can only call something *yours* (your computer, your arm, your body, your brain) when you have *you* in the first place.
You argue that a particular experience is what makes you *you*, but the truth is *you* is the one who receives the experience, who lives through it. The real *you* is a thing in itself, all the stuff that you are trying to attach to it is just that - an attachment. This includes your body, your memory, your experience, even your complete personality.
Just sit quietly and try to imagine a different past for yourself, imagine you made some important decision in the past in a different way. Your experience of life and your memory of it to this point would be different, but you would still be *you* and you know that. It's empiric, it's part of observable Universe and any theory, simple or otherwise, would need to cope with that at some point.
I've given away all the keys now, it's up to a curious and persisting mind to play with them and see which one opens the door.
My body is not necessarily "mine". I don't own it. I guess you could consider it a loaner to get a specific experience in this particular lifetime.
This is a dangerous supposition. If you do not own your body, who does? What of the actions your body takes? Do you own them? Or is the mysterious owner of your body ultimately responsible for them? Can you be "evicted"? Who has the power to do that? It's a slippery slope you tread upon when you renounce ownership of your corpus.
I'm sorry, I have friends which also believe this kind of stuff, and as friends I like them, but believing that your true purpose in life exist after some dimensional ascension, just makes you not responsible for others suffering or the world around you in general. Further how is it necessary to engage in meaningful relations with others if you only care about your own race to the singularity?
If you can call this kind of spirituality a religion, it's a selfish one in my opinion.
If you can call this kind of spirituality a religion, it's a selfish one in my opinion.
You spoke so wisely prior on value yet then you dismiss something based of its 'selfishness'? How can anything of extrinsic value, that is to say the only value in which we are capable of comprehending, be anything but a 'selfish' value?
Everything has a purpose.
I think that pretty much sums up my Ego Death experience. Everyone makes the right decisions at the time they made them.
It's fun to speculate that there's more to life than being meat that's the product of random genetic mutations.
It's far more "fun" to experience it.
Yeah, but I find everytime I begin to doubt what I've been experiencing, I get more confirmations that there's some weird shit going on. I like trolling my subconscious.
This has been confirmed in Dr. Newtons hypnotheraphy sessions. Apparently when we are spirits outside material dimensions, we can create and control life through a quantum effect.
I don't think this word means what they think it means. Using fancy scientific words that people generally don't understand is one of the big signs that it's bs. Used to be magnetic, or electric, or nuclear effects.
This guy has some interesting things to say about consciousness. He is interested in just what it is, and where in the body it happens.(or outside?). You were likely told that it is happens in your connected neurons. But consider an amoeba. It is only one cell, yet it hunts, avoids discomfort, thinks. But where? His research hints at a quantum effect underlying consciousness and perhaps even life itself.
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
This has been confirmed in Dr. Newtons hypnotheraphy sessions. Apparently when we are spirits outside material dimensions, we can create and control life through a quantum effect.
There is an energy that guides all life, if you will. Some subjects describe the science in detail.
This guy has some interesting things to say about consciousness. He is interested in just what it is, and where in the body it happens.(or outside?). You were likely told that it is happens in your connected neurons. But consider an amoeba. It is only one cell, yet it hunts, avoids discomfort, thinks. But where? His research hints at a quantum effect underlying consciousness and perhaps even life itself.
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
Amoebas think? I figured they just reacted to chemical stimuli depending on whether that stimulation suggests food (compatible with absorption) or danger (can cause bad internal reactions), based only on how its genetic code tells it to interpret that stimulation. What happens if you stab an amoeba with a tiny needle, or show it a piece of art? Will it react?
But then I'm not a cellular biologist, so what do I know.
This guy has some interesting things to say about consciousness. He is interested in just what it is, and where in the body it happens.(or outside?). You were likely told that it is happens in your connected neurons. But consider an amoeba. It is only one cell, yet it hunts, avoids discomfort, thinks. But where? His research hints at a quantum effect underlying consciousness and perhaps even life itself.
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/
What I was getting at in my previous posts is that the real "you" exists outside of physical reality. It is very incoherent to assume that very uniform process of biological development would produce this singularity.
I'll take one more shot at it from a bit different angle:
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before your birth.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-yous* and the Earth is populated completely by *not-yous*. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *you* will be produced for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-yous* as it always has done. Can you imagine the body you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-you* with its own consciousness and life path.
So it's not the body that makes you *you*, it's something completely different and it doesn't need to survive the death because it existed before you were born. Does this makes sense?
I'll take one more shot at it from a bit different angle:
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before your birth.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-yous* and the Earth is populated completely by *not-yous*. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *you* will be produced for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-yous* as it always has done. Can you imagine the body you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-you* with its own consciousness and life path.
So it's not the body that makes you *you*, it's something completely different and it doesn't need to survive the death because it existed before you were born. Does this makes sense?
Let me ask you the exact same question, but with a slight difference.
You have a computer. It has a bunch of programs you installed, a bunch of files you created or downloaded, and all the settings are set up to be the way you want them to be. That is *your* computer, among the entire universe of *not your* computers.
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before you booted your computer for the very first time.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-your* computers and the Earth is populated completely by *not-your* computers. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *your* computer will be booted and running for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-your* computers as it always has done. Can you imagine the computer you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-your* computer with its own software and personalized settings?
^^^ That is how I read your question. And the answer is, it actually is the body, and my experiences through, it that make me *me*. Nothing more. Moreover, the *you* and *not you* property isn't all that drastic or binary. My arm is me. If it gets severed, it is no longer me. For disabled people, their wheelchairs and prosthetics are very much a part of *them*. If I have a cancerous growth, it's *me* but not really, because I don't want it to be me, and it's genetic code isn't exactly me. The only *you* that matters is the physical brain, just as the only *your computer* that matters is the physical location of 0s and 1s that store your files and settings and make your computer yours.
Having never read the bible, I googled Jesus's stance on reincarnation and found this: http://reluctant-messenger.com/origen3.html
I haven't read all of it either but it is interesting.
Did Jesus ever say reincarnation doesn't exist? The above seems to imply that he acknowledges it in an indirect way.
I haven't read all of it either but it is interesting.
Did Jesus ever say reincarnation doesn't exist? The above seems to imply that he acknowledges it in an indirect way.
If you believe the case studies of various hypnotherapists, there is a continuity of consciousness. It's just there is amnesia when you are born and you only remember your entire timeline of consciousness after death. Supposedly there are lifeforms that can remember certain parts of their previous lives.
This seems comically self-contradictory to me. If there is amnesia, then there is no continuity of consciousness. Amnesia is, pretty much by definition, a break in the continuity of consciousness. And saying "you" remember something after your death would require first establishing what was this "you" that survived your death, which seems incoherent.Agreed. Hypnosis takes away conscious thought. Before I'd accept any scientific conclusion of hypnosis, it would have to be shown to me that the results of hypnosis are not influenced by external factors.
Arguably the most important spiritual figure in history, Jesus of Nazareth, did support reincarnation, but in the context of a) being born again in the spiritual realm which gives enhanced spiritual abilities and b) being given a new immortal body at the last day, which would exist in a 'new heaven' and a 'new earth'.
Reincarnation in the context of returning in physical form to the same physical plane was not supported by Jesus. Jesus did support the assertion that there is a great impassable gulf that separates the place of the living and the dead.
What I was getting at in my previous posts is that the real "you" exists outside of physical reality. It is very incoherent to assume that very uniform process of biological development would produce this singularity.
I'll take one more shot at it from a bit different angle:
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before your birth.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-yous* and the Earth is populated completely by *not-yous*. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *you* will be produced for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-yous* as it always has done. Can you imagine the body you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-you* with its own consciousness and life path.
So it's not the body that makes you *you*, it's something completely different and it doesn't need to survive the death because it existed before you were born. Does this makes sense?
I'll take one more shot at it from a bit different angle:
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before your birth.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-yous* and the Earth is populated completely by *not-yous*. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *you* will be produced for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-yous* as it always has done. Can you imagine the body you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-you* with its own consciousness and life path.
So it's not the body that makes you *you*, it's something completely different and it doesn't need to survive the death because it existed before you were born. Does this makes sense?
Yes, it's exactly my point but in more modern, concrete terms.
So it's not the body that makes you *you*, it's something completely different and it doesn't need to survive the death because it existed before you were born. Does this makes sense?
yup, this is also a strong point for the simulation argument. The player has to enter the simulation at some point, and you'd design it in a way that he can't explain how the hell he got there. ("Where do we come from, where do we go?")
What I was getting at in my previous posts is that the real "you" exists outside of physical reality. It is very incoherent to assume that very uniform process of biological development would produce this singularity.
I'll take one more shot at it from a bit different angle:
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before your birth.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-yous* and the Earth is populated completely by *not-yous*. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *you* will be produced for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-yous* as it always has done. Can you imagine the body you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-you* with its own consciousness and life path.
So it's not the body that makes you *you*, it's something completely different and it doesn't need to survive the death because it existed before you were born. Does this makes sense?
I'll take one more shot at it from a bit different angle:
Let's look at the moment in time 2 hours before your birth.
At this point the Universe has only been producing *not-yous* and the Earth is populated completely by *not-yous*. Now what is it in the physical/biological process that warrants that in 2 hours *you* will be produced for the first time? Why doesn't the Universe just continue producing *not-yous* as it always has done. Can you imagine the body you call yours will be born in 2 hours and it will be just another *not-you* with its own consciousness and life path.
So it's not the body that makes you *you*, it's something completely different and it doesn't need to survive the death because it existed before you were born. Does this makes sense?
If you believe the case studies of various hypnotherapists, there is a continuity of consciousness. It's just there is amnesia when you are born and you only remember your entire timeline of consciousness after death. Supposedly there are lifeforms that can remember certain parts of their previous lives.
This seems comically self-contradictory to me. If there is amnesia, then there is no continuity of consciousness. Amnesia is, pretty much by definition, a break in the continuity of consciousness. And saying "you" remember something after your death would require first establishing what was this "you" that survived your death, which seems incoherent.The theory is that there is a layer under your primal self that is pure subconscious thought. I believe this is quantified through hypnotherapy and analysis of human thought. (Parts of the brain light up according to certain activities).
Ergo, if your brain were to function without a supposed "soul", your human mind would function as a purely primal, emotional and survival-driven animal. Opposed to this is the spiritual, imaginative and other creative opponents that make the "soul".
Anyways, I know nothing in the end. I would commit suicide just to get an answer but that would be fruitless after I reincarnate with amnesia once again.
Okay, but so what? My molecules survive my death, and some of those molecules may wind up in later organisms just as some of my molecules were previously part of some earlier organisms. So maybe there is some kind of "layer" survives my death just as the molecules that compose me do. Since all the evidence suggests that it has no significant effects on anything whatsoever, who cares? I don't make a big deal about which molecules in my finger were one parts of Thomas Edison's nose. Since there's no continuity of conscious memory (or anything else significant), it's not more "me" than a rat that shared a few of my molecules.Ergo, if your brain were to function without a supposed "soul", your human mind would function as a purely primal, emotional and survival-driven animal. Opposed to this is the spiritual, imaginative and other creative opponents that make the "soul".
Anyways, I know nothing in the end. I would commit suicide just to get an answer but that would be fruitless after I reincarnate with amnesia once again.
If you believe the case studies of various hypnotherapists, there is a continuity of consciousness. It's just there is amnesia when you are born and you only remember your entire timeline of consciousness after death. Supposedly there are lifeforms that can remember certain parts of their previous lives.
The theory is that there is a layer under your primal self that is pure subconscious thought. I believe this is quantified through hypnotherapy and analysis of human thought. (Parts of the brain light up according to certain activities).
Ergo, if your brain were to function without a supposed "soul", your human mind would function as a purely primal, emotional and survival-driven animal. Opposed to this is the spiritual, imaginative and other creative opponents that make the "soul".
Anyways, I know nothing in the end. I would commit suicide just to get an answer but that would be fruitless after I reincarnate with amnesia once again.
Okay, but so what? My molecules survive my death, and some of those molecules may wind up in later organisms just as some of my molecules were previously part of some earlier organisms. So maybe there is some kind of "layer" survives my death just as the molecules that compose me do. Since all the evidence suggests that it has no significant effects on anything whatsoever, who cares? I don't make a big deal about which molecules in my finger were one parts of Thomas Edison's nose. Since there's no continuity of conscious memory (or anything else significant), it's not more "me" than a rat that shared a few of my molecules. Ergo, if your brain were to function without a supposed "soul", your human mind would function as a purely primal, emotional and survival-driven animal. Opposed to this is the spiritual, imaginative and other creative opponents that make the "soul".
Anyways, I know nothing in the end. I would commit suicide just to get an answer but that would be fruitless after I reincarnate with amnesia once again.
Anyways, what do you think of reincarnation? Is it just too good to be true?
I have never understood what it is that is being claimed. Frankly, it seems incoherent to me. What is that is supposedly being reincarnated? In what sense are these other beings supposed to be "me"?Most of the explanations speak of a "soul" or "spirit" that is reincarnated. To the extent I can understand what this means (which, frankly, is hardly at all), it seems clearly impossible since we know that the brain is the physical implementation of identity and the brain is destroyed during death. It's like arguing that you can burn a rug and somehow the pattern can continue in another rug. (The idea of a pattern without a rug seems incomprehensible. A thought without any brain to think it contradicts everything we know about how the brain works.)
Yes, there were certainly people and animals that lived before me and people and animals that will live after me. But if there is some sense in which some of them can "also be me", I don't even understand what sense that is.
The theory is that there is a layer under your primal self that is pure subconscious thought. I believe this is quantified through hypnotherapy and analysis of human thought. (Parts of the brain light up according to certain activities).
Ergo, if your brain were to function without a supposed "soul", your human mind would function as a purely primal, emotional and survival-driven animal. Opposed to this is the spiritual, imaginative and other creative opponents that make the "soul".
Anyways, I know nothing in the end. I would commit suicide just to get an answer but that would be fruitless after I reincarnate with amnesia once again.
Anyways, what do you think of reincarnation? Is it just too good to be true?
I have never understood what it is that is being claimed. Frankly, it seems incoherent to me. What is that is supposedly being reincarnated? In what sense are these other beings supposed to be "me"?Most of the explanations speak of a "soul" or "spirit" that is reincarnated. To the extent I can understand what this means (which, frankly, is hardly at all), it seems clearly impossible since we know that the brain is the physical implementation of identity and the brain is destroyed during death. It's like arguing that you can burn a rug and somehow the pattern can continue in another rug. (The idea of a pattern without a rug seems incomprehensible. A thought without any brain to think it contradicts everything we know about how the brain works.)
Yes, there were certainly people and animals that lived before me and people and animals that will live after me. But if there is some sense in which some of them can "also be me", I don't even understand what sense that is.
There might be some technical means to "copy" consciousness into a storage device and implement it in another physical container. So it's possible that before my death I could be "recorded" in some way and continue to exist through some other physical implementation. But if those people don't have my memories and don't extend my same consciousness, then they are not me.
In the spiritual path, you will find that the experience is the reason you are here. It's why you reincarnate. My body is not necessarily "mine". I don't own it. I guess you could consider it a loaner to get a specific experience in this particular lifetime.
The other goal of spirituality is to dissolve that dividing line that we use to say what is "me" and what is "not-me" or having a non-dual perception while being in duality.
Everything has a purpose.
The other goal of spirituality is to dissolve that dividing line that we use to say what is "me" and what is "not-me" or having a non-dual perception while being in duality.
Everything has a purpose.
Um, wtf???
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
...
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
...
Haha, in your simple explanation, if consciousness is just a product of electrical impulses in your brain,
then answer me this simple question - what makes a particular consciousness *your* consciousness?
...
There was no "appearance." It was a very slow development from nothing, through a very mentally undeveloped state as a toddler, to more and more developed state through childhood and adulthood, as my brain recorded various experiences and formed neural pathways that help me relate new information to my present day experiences. My particular life experiences, which were a direct PHYSICAL influences on the network structure of my brain's neural network, is what make my particular consciousness *my* particular consciousness. And "we" as in human species. We are no different from very complex network-based computers. And once our technology allows computers to think the way we do, and store our consciousness on machines, you guys will be going around causing all sorts of violence against intelligent machines and people who upload themselves to such machines, because you will think they don't have "souls" or "consciousness" any more, and thus won't consider destroying them as murder.
No, I'm not talking about the experience that you go through in your life as you develop.
I'm talking about binary singularity, that is real *you*. I'll explain...
All the biological forms on this planet have this binary property - it's either *you* or *not-you*.
Do you agree? Among all the life forms you call only one particular body *you* and all other bodies are *not-you*. Now, that's a drastic difference!
It would be very illogical to suggest that this drastic difference, this binary singularity, comes from seemingly uniform and slow biological development process, which allows bodies to develop from the same chemical elements with some minor differences here and there. See where I'm going...?
EDIT:
So, in other words, what is it in the chemical makeup that makes only one body (out of the billions similar ones) your body?
It's fun to speculate that there's more to life than being meat that's the product of random genetic mutations.
It's far more "fun" to experience it.
I suspect that we also are discussing this from a different cultural pretense.
I suspect you're right, the cultural differences probably are the main cause of our dispute. But I can tell you that in the US, eye contact and a smile make a huge difference in how you're perceived.
myrkul, exactly thats what I'm talking about, to step out of being a role. The conclusion to that, from my own point of view, is the ability to be the same person in a multitude of situations, hence the notion earlier in this thread of being as much yourself as you are at home with family.
I'm in Denmark / Scandinavia and there is not a lot of presence in a simple "thank you for doing business with you". In the UK, on the other hand, there is a lot more meaning and eye contact in the standard greetings, so I suspect that we also are discussing this from a different cultural pretense. When I think of Germans there is even more formality and less personality in professional relations.
To take this detour back to the OP, my original point was that this "spirituality world view" kind of secluded you from other people, only being concerned about your own ascension. I was then elaborating further that any interaction with other people defines how you view yourself and functions as a human being thus seeking deeper meaning in in every relation makes a lot of sense to me.
I'm in Denmark / Scandinavia and there is not a lot of presence in a simple "thank you for doing business with you". In the UK, on the other hand, there is a lot more meaning and eye contact in the standard greetings, so I suspect that we also are discussing this from a different cultural pretense. When I think of Germans there is even more formality and less personality in professional relations.
To take this detour back to the OP, my original point was that this "spirituality world view" kind of secluded you from other people, only being concerned about your own ascension. I was then elaborating further that any interaction with other people defines how you view yourself and functions as a human being thus seeking deeper meaning in in every relation makes a lot of sense to me.
A dream within a dream within a dream...
or, for tech-oriented left-brain people:
http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
Then the question is if your consciousness data will be reused and expanded in some way or not by the outside computer system or its operator. This operator may very well be your (higher) self, and you are the avatar.
or, for tech-oriented left-brain people:
http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
Then the question is if your consciousness data will be reused and expanded in some way or not by the outside computer system or its operator. This operator may very well be your (higher) self, and you are the avatar.
Myrkul, got your point, but I don't agree with you and I am somewhat puzzled that you can have such a view on the personal part of human interaction. The business call example is just an example - I'm talking about being there in conversations:
Yes, that's all well and good, But I think the difference here is that I do not, and never have, "zone out" when in a conversation. I am always engaged in the conversation, whether that is a tech support call or a transaction with a check-out clerk at wal-mart. I am always "there." I've worked in both outbound sales and inbound support environments, and I always did better in the support role for just that reason.
All I am saying is that a sincere 'Thank you, John, you've done a great job helping me today," is just as effective at breaking a call-center rep or a secretary or whomever out of their work-trance. And it does so in such a way that will not get them reprimanded for letting a call go too long.
In other situations, perhaps extending the conversation is not so detrimental, but it can still get you or them in (at least minor social) trouble. Take the supermarket check-out clerk, for example. Sit there and talk with them for a few minutes, and you'll sart getting dirty looks from the people behind you in line. Take a little longer, and maybe the manager comes over to see what the hold-up is. Keep pressing it, and soon you're no longer allowed in that store again, and the clerk thinks you're a creep.
But a simple smile and thank you could have avoided all this. Make eye contact, smile, and thank them, wishing them a good day, and they feel valued, you have reassured yourself that you're not an asshole, and best of all, you haven't wasted anyone's time.
You don't have to go out of your way to convince yourself you don't treat people like machines. Just treat them like people, and the rest will follow naturally.
Myrkul, got your point, but I don't agree with you and I am somewhat puzzled that you can have such a view on the personal part of human interaction. The business call example is just an example - I'm talking about being there in conversations:
When I was 20 I worked in a boiler room - a call centre, I didn't care at all if the Ad's I was selling was of any use to the customers. As I got better at it, I experienced that my mind often wandered, and in a pure mechanical way, while thinking about groceries and what to do after work, I was able to make the sale as if I was a robot. It was a pure stimuli / response interaction. The customers says that, then I say this, when conversation goes in circles, go for the kill.
Now I demand of myself always be present when I talk to people, and when people are acting as robots to me, I always try to trick them out of it and they always appreciate being discovered as human beings.
When I was 20 I worked in a boiler room - a call centre, I didn't care at all if the Ad's I was selling was of any use to the customers. As I got better at it, I experienced that my mind often wandered, and in a pure mechanical way, while thinking about groceries and what to do after work, I was able to make the sale as if I was a robot. It was a pure stimuli / response interaction. The customers says that, then I say this, when conversation goes in circles, go for the kill.
Now I demand of myself always be present when I talk to people, and when people are acting as robots to me, I always try to trick them out of it and they always appreciate being discovered as human beings.
Um, wtf???
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
...
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
...
Haha, in your simple explanation, if consciousness is just a product of electrical impulses in your brain,
then answer me this simple question - what makes a particular consciousness *your* consciousness?
When you say "[brain] ...having more information stored than we can possibly process", who is this mysterious *we* that processes it?
How *you* ended up in this biological shell with brain and stuff?
See, if you never existed before, then what triggered your appearance in this strange form at this time on this planet?
There was no "appearance." It was a very slow development from nothing, through a very mentally undeveloped state as a toddler, to more and more developed state through childhood and adulthood, as my brain recorded various experiences and formed neural pathways that help me relate new information to my present day experiences. My particular life experiences, which were a direct PHYSICAL influences on the network structure of my brain's neural network, is what make my particular consciousness *my* particular consciousness. And "we" as in human species. We are no different from very complex network-based computers. And once our technology allows computers to think the way we do, and store our consciousness on machines, you guys will be going around causing all sorts of violence against intelligent machines and people who upload themselves to such machines, because you will think they don't have "souls" or "consciousness" any more, and thus won't consider destroying them as murder.
Um, wtf???
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
...
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
...
Haha, in your simple explanation, if consciousness is just a product of electrical impulses in your brain,
then answer me this simple question - what makes a particular consciousness *your* consciousness?
When you say "[brain] ...having more information stored than we can possibly process", who is this mysterious *we* that processes it?
How *you* ended up in this biological shell with brain and stuff?
See, if you never existed before, then what triggered your appearance in this strange form at this time on this planet?
myrkul sorry: You are indeed not ironic, you sincerely believe people are a commodity and that their inner self is hired also! The one point you make, that is true is that doing good to others for the purpose of self gratification is somewhat selfish, but that is quite a stretch as you actually do something beneficial to others regardless of your personal motivation.
No, I do not believe people are a commodity. I do not believe their "inner self" is hired as well. I do believe you should not endanger someone's job by dragging out the call just to make yourself feel better.
You yourself stated that your motivation for doing this is to prove to yourself that you don't see them as faceless cogs in a machine made to serve you. That is a selfish motive, which in itself I do not disapprove of. Nothing wrong with acting to please yourself. What is wrong is to act to please yourself to the detriment of others. Which is exactly what you are doing when you drag out the call and tell them a joke when they are being paid to provide a service to people. People who do things other than their jobs while on their jobs don't typically get to keep that job.
If you truly wanted to make them feel valued, and cared about their welfare, you would take the advice of one of the people you are discussing about how to do that. No. All you care about is how you feel about how you consider them. It doesn't matter that you could be damaging the person's livelihood. You don't consider them part of a machine, and you've just wasted their time proving that to yourself. And let me tell you, again from the perspective of a person who has worked in a call center: That's exactly how we see it when the call drags on after we should have said "Thank you for calling
What's wrong with just saying "consciousness" is a fractal along one axis, "reincarnation" is a fractal along another, and having done with it? Bosh. Job complete...
Feel free to explain.
Well. I just quite like fractals really. But there's a certain poetry in nature replicating itself. The golden ratio repeats itself at all manner of levels. Consciousness is a "mirror" of reality, to possibly borrow from Shinto. Ergo, could consciousness be a fractal mirroring of the body which is, in turn a fractal mirroring of the environmental systems, which is in turn... etc. etc. etc.
Hence one axis = layers of reality which shift in tune with each other. As the global ecosystem alters, the human consciousnesseseses tied to it alter.
And if time is a dimension, wherein patterns repeat themselves with subtle variation (fractals are not *identical* at all levels, just reminiscent) - e.g. evolution and mutation, innovation cycles, plus ca change, etc., why couldn't reincarnation on a physical/mental/cultural/historical axis not also be a constant looping of fractal reflections? The golden ratio dispersed along event horizons.
But I'm still working on it. There may be holes in my argument.
Um, wtf???
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
Where did all the "consciousness" of the old 386 and 485 PCs go to? Reincarnated as android phones and cheap GPS systems?
I prefer the much simpler explanation of our brains being a network of electrical impulses, designed to help us survive and reproduce, but having more information stored than we can possibly process and make sense of, rather than this extra-body existence and reincarnation.
Where did all the "consciousness" of the old 386 and 485 PCs go to? Reincarnated as android phones and cheap GPS systems?
myrkul sorry: You are indeed not ironic, you sincerely believe people are a commodity and that their inner self is hired also! The one point you make, that is true is that doing good to others for the purpose of self gratification is somewhat selfish, but that is quite a stretch as you actually do something beneficial to others regardless of your personal motivation.
BTW this is the first time any one has replied with "FUCK YOU" to me ever in a forum.
BTW this is the first time any one has replied with "FUCK YOU" to me ever in a forum.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QDT58Q6Zxo
I've been searching and well...
I think Dr. Newton has pretty much figured it out through putting dozens of patients in hypnosis. According to him, we do reincarnate and we choose to live specific lives to learn certain lessons. Apparently there is life everywhere in every form and I find this funny in the context of libertarian philosophy: Life is inherently voluntary according to Dr. Newton. We can choose to stay on Earth after we die and watch our loved ones. We can choose to live multiple lives on Earth or live a life of a gaseous being on another planet. We can choose to live a life in the third-world or the first-world.
Now, I am still skeptical but if this is how the universe functions in the regards to sentient beings, I am truly content. I am truly happy. ...and apparently what he reports are universal visions across all his clients.
Anyways, what do you think of reincarnation? Is it just too good to be true?
P.S. Dr. Newton used to be a complete atheist.
I've been searching and well...
I think Dr. Newton has pretty much figured it out through putting dozens of patients in hypnosis. According to him, we do reincarnate and we choose to live specific lives to learn certain lessons. Apparently there is life everywhere in every form and I find this funny in the context of libertarian philosophy: Life is inherently voluntary according to Dr. Newton. We can choose to stay on Earth after we die and watch our loved ones. We can choose to live multiple lives on Earth or live a life of a gaseous being on another planet. We can choose to live a life in the third-world or the first-world.
Now, I am still skeptical but if this is how the universe functions in the regards to sentient beings, I am truly content. I am truly happy. ...and apparently what he reports are universal visions across all his clients.
Anyways, what do you think of reincarnation? Is it just too good to be true?
P.S. Dr. Newton used to be a complete atheist.
The OP is spot on.
Years of research and some sort of 'inner knowing' have led me to the same conclusions.
I would recommend the channelings of Bashar and Kryon on youtube to anybody interested in this topic.
EDIT:
Forgot to mention Dolores Cannon one of the pioneers in regression hypnosis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihH0L_bffAA
Cracking me up, can't LLO properly.
Perhaps the reason you must convince yourself that others do not exist solely to provide services to you is because you are the only person about whom you care in the slightest. If you truly cared about them, you would take my advice with thanks, instead of laughing at it. Fuck you.
Hypocrite.
Wonderful, adding fractals to this, so it sounds like theoretical physics.
Sorry guys, I have to say something nice to you now, Knowingly forcing you to read my post and robbing some ponzi schemer for your time where he could feel some sense of purpose in life offering you 11% interest/week.
I see the joke you're trying to make here, but it falls flat. It's not my job to read this forum, and if it is anyone's job to do so, I truly pity them. Nor am I providing a service to you or anyone else by reading this. I gave you specific advice from the perspective of one of those "human telephone exchanges" on how to make us feel valued without endangering our jobs, and you try to turn it into a joke. Son, I am disappoint.Sorry guys, I have to say something nice to you now, Knowingly forcing you to read my post and robbing some ponzi schemer for your time where he could feel some sense of purpose in life offering you 11% interest/week.
Here it goes: The contributions to this forum are diversified and original and really boost my English writing skills. I'm sure that this forum has a higher than average of good thinkers and the originality here always takes my preconceptions of everything in a new direction.
Thank you. Or perhaps you're welcome would be more appropriate?
Wonderful, adding fractals to this, so it sounds like theoretical physics.
Sorry guys, I have to say something nice to you now, Knowingly forcing you to read my post and robbing some ponzi schemer for your time where he could feel some sense of purpose in life offering you 11% interest/week.
Here it goes: The contributions to this forum are diversified and original and really boost my English writing skills. I'm sure that this forum has a higher than average of good thinkers and the originality here always takes my preconceptions of everything in a new direction.
Cheres
Sorry guys, I have to say something nice to you now, Knowingly forcing you to read my post and robbing some ponzi schemer for your time where he could feel some sense of purpose in life offering you 11% interest/week.
Here it goes: The contributions to this forum are diversified and original and really boost my English writing skills. I'm sure that this forum has a higher than average of good thinkers and the originality here always takes my preconceptions of everything in a new direction.
Cheres
What's wrong with just saying "consciousness" is a fractal along one axis, "reincarnation" is a fractal along another, and having done with it? Bosh. Job complete...
Feel free to explain.
On another note, I thought about dying and nobody being there for me. Apparently that happens. lol
Quote
My own conceptions of what it must be like to be alone at the spiritual gateway and
beyond is not shared by those souls who utilize the option of going solo. Actually,
people in this category are experienced travelers. As older, mature souls, they seem
to require no initial support system. They know right where they are going after
death. I suspect the process is accelerated for them as well, because they manage to
more rapidly wind up where they belong than those who stop to meet others.
beyond is not shared by those souls who utilize the option of going solo. Actually,
people in this category are experienced travelers. As older, mature souls, they seem
to require no initial support system. They know right where they are going after
death. I suspect the process is accelerated for them as well, because they manage to
more rapidly wind up where they belong than those who stop to meet others.
When I call up a business I usually prolong the conversation with the receptionist, and come with some kind encouraging joke.
I know what you're doing here, and I approve. But you're doing it wrong. In prolonging the conversation and telling a joke, you're denying other people the service that that person is being paid to deliver. As a phone tech support person, I can honestly say that calls such as the ones you suggest usually brightened my day. But they also negatively affected my metrics... call times, etc. Consider, then, the next time you drag out a call, that you may be costing that nice person on the other end of the line their job.
Instead, show your respect for them by being understanding that the other person did not cause the problem you're having, and indeed only wants to help you fix it, and, at the end of the call, honestly and sincerely thank them. If they did an exceptional job, be sure to contact their superiors and let them know. A letter makes a nice frameable cubicle decoration.
Seriously, if you want to make the person you're taking to feel valued and appreciated, a simple sincere "thank you" is all you need. Remembering and using their name in that thanks will really drive it home.
Sorry I was not finished: It is as simple as making people feel good about them self makes you feel good about yourself.
The wrong way of doing it, is to try to outsmart or trick others to boost your own confidence in yourself, and ease your own pain, but only achieving a kind of reenactment of your own pain of past deceits.
The wrong way of doing it, is to try to outsmart or trick others to boost your own confidence in yourself, and ease your own pain, but only achieving a kind of reenactment of your own pain of past deceits.
Every porcupine have a fluffy belly, and I have had my share of deceit too, as most people have. But the alternative is to live in fear and suspicion, and that makes you kind of gray on the inside. I believe that I have to risk a measured amount of naivety or card blanc trust in strangers, else it would be a world not worth living in! luckily lots of people have come to the same conclusion. Mutual passions in business or other types of relations are meaningful as you are sharing a common sub goal of your life. Sharing a passion is real human interaction. The business relation I consider wasteful is the view of the other person as a service provider to me. When I call up a business I usually prolong the conversation with the receptionist, and come with some kind encouraging joke. That is not a trick to make her remember me the next time I call. I have to prove to myself that the other person is not just a a human telephone exchange to me.
Good question. you kind of figured me out. I'm like this; when I interact with other people at work, family whatever, I define myself and feel more contact with the social me. I wan't to meet strangers with the same respect and openness as I give to my family. I always seek this kind of mental connection with others as It gives me a strong sense of meaning in my life. I have a harder time with people that doesn't care to share that with me, as they make me feel uneasy in the long run. I think that pure business like relationships, from a personal viewpoint, are a waste of time and kind of wasteful to me, as well as to the other guy.
I usually say to myself before I ask for a bus fare; " The driver is also a person"
I've posted some in the various religion treads, and I believe that most religions have some idea of the brotherhood of mankind. This notion is also valuable to society in general. So a less social oriented ideologies religions or politics always makes me a little sad.
I usually say to myself before I ask for a bus fare; " The driver is also a person"
I've posted some in the various religion treads, and I believe that most religions have some idea of the brotherhood of mankind. This notion is also valuable to society in general. So a less social oriented ideologies religions or politics always makes me a little sad.
I empathize with you and what you want out of life.
In my experience of trying to be close to others, I've been shut out a lot for unclear reasons and it can be traumatizing. I imagine a lot of people are not as social out of past experience.
It seems humans are like porcupines, if you catch my drift.
I get what you mean in regards to business relationships but mutual passions can be fulfilling, can they not?
Good question. you kind of figured me out. I'm like this; when I interact with other people at work, family whatever, I define myself and feel more contact with the social me. I wan't to meet strangers with the same respect and openness as I give to my family. I always seek this kind of mental connection with others as It gives me a strong sense of meaning in my life. I have a harder time with people that doesn't care to share that with me, as they make me feel uneasy in the long run. I think that pure business like relationships, from a personal viewpoint, are a waste of time and kind of wasteful to me, as well as to the other guy.
I usually say to myself before I ask for a bus fare; " The driver is also a person"
I've posted some in the various religion treads, and I believe that most religions have some idea of the brotherhood of mankind. This notion is also valuable to society in general. So a less social oriented ideologies religions or politics always makes me a little sad.
I usually say to myself before I ask for a bus fare; " The driver is also a person"
I've posted some in the various religion treads, and I believe that most religions have some idea of the brotherhood of mankind. This notion is also valuable to society in general. So a less social oriented ideologies religions or politics always makes me a little sad.
I'm sorry, I have friends which also believe this kind of stuff, and as friends I like them, but believing that your true purpose in life exist after some dimensional ascension, just makes you not responsible for others suffering or the world around you in general. Further how is it necessary to engage in meaningful relations with others if you only care about your own race to the singularity?
If you can call this kind of spirituality a religion, it's a selfish one in my opinion.
If you can call this kind of spirituality a religion, it's a selfish one in my opinion.
Interesting written excerpt by this man.
Quote
The Levels of Soul Groupings
The Beginner Soul
There are two types of beginner souls: souls who are truly young in terms of exposure to an existence out of the spirit world, and souls who have been reincarnating on Earth for a long period of relative time, but still remain immature.
I believe almost three-quarters of all souls who inhabit human bodies on Earth today are still in the early stages of development. Souls end their incarnation on Earth when they reach full maturity.
The beginner soul may live a number of lives in a state of confusion and ineffectiveness, influenced by an Earth curriculum which is different from the coherence and supportive harmony of the spirit world. Less developed souls are inclined to surrender their will to the controlling aspects of human society, with a socio-economic structure which causes a large proportion of people to be subordinate to others. The inexperienced soul tends to be stifled by a lack of independent thinking. They also lean towards being self-centered and don't easily accept others for who they are. Every soul was once a beginner.
The Intermediate Soul
Once our souls advance into the intermediate ranges of development, group cluster activity is considerably reduced. This does not mean we return to the kind of isolation that occurs with novice souls. Souls evolving into the middle development level have less association with primary groups because they have acquired the maturity and experience for operating more independently. These souls are also reducing the number of their incarnations.
These souls are at last ready for more serious responsibilities. The relationship we have with our guides now changes from teacher-student to one of colleagues working together. Since our old guides have acquired new student groups, it is now our turn to develop teaching skills which will eventually qualify us for the responsibilities of being a guide to someone else.
This is a significant stage for souls in their development because now they are given increased responsibilities for younger souls. The status of a guide is not given to us all at once, however.
As with many other aspects of soul life, we are carefully tested. The intermediate levels are trial periods for potential teachers. Our mentors assign us a soul to look after, and then evaluate our leadership performance both in and out of physical incarnations.
Only if this preliminary training is successful are we allowed to function even at the level of a junior guide. Not everyone is suited for teaching, but this does not keep us from becoming an advanced soul. Guides, like everyone else, have different abilities and talents, as well as shortcomings. By the time we reach the advanced level, our soul aptitudes are well known in the spirit world. We are given occupational duties commensurate with our abilities. Different avenues of approach to learning eventually bring all of us to the same end in acquiring spiritual wholeness.
The Advanced Soul
I believe that people on Earth who possess souls which are both old and highly advanced are scarce. A person whose maturity is this high doesn't seek out a regression therapist to resolve life-plan conflicts. In most cases, they are here as incarnated guides. Having mastered the fundamental issues most of us wrestle with daily, the advanced soul is more interested in making small refinements toward specific tasks.
We may recognize them when they appear as public figures, such as Mother Teresa; however, it is more usual for the advanced soul to go about their good works in a quiet, unassuming manner. Without displaying self-indulgence, their fulfillment comes from improving the lives of other people. They focus less on institutional matters and more on enhancing individual human values.
The mark of an advanced spirit is one who has patience with society and shows extraordinary coping skills. Most prominent is their exceptional insight. This is not to say life has no karmic pitfalls for them, otherwise they probably wouldn't be here at all. They may be found in all walks of life, but are frequently in the helping professions or combating social injustice in some fashion. The advanced soul radiates composure, kindness, and understanding toward others. Not being motivated by self-interest, they may disregard their own physical needs and live in reduced circumstances.
The Beginner Soul
There are two types of beginner souls: souls who are truly young in terms of exposure to an existence out of the spirit world, and souls who have been reincarnating on Earth for a long period of relative time, but still remain immature.
I believe almost three-quarters of all souls who inhabit human bodies on Earth today are still in the early stages of development. Souls end their incarnation on Earth when they reach full maturity.
The beginner soul may live a number of lives in a state of confusion and ineffectiveness, influenced by an Earth curriculum which is different from the coherence and supportive harmony of the spirit world. Less developed souls are inclined to surrender their will to the controlling aspects of human society, with a socio-economic structure which causes a large proportion of people to be subordinate to others. The inexperienced soul tends to be stifled by a lack of independent thinking. They also lean towards being self-centered and don't easily accept others for who they are. Every soul was once a beginner.
The Intermediate Soul
Once our souls advance into the intermediate ranges of development, group cluster activity is considerably reduced. This does not mean we return to the kind of isolation that occurs with novice souls. Souls evolving into the middle development level have less association with primary groups because they have acquired the maturity and experience for operating more independently. These souls are also reducing the number of their incarnations.
These souls are at last ready for more serious responsibilities. The relationship we have with our guides now changes from teacher-student to one of colleagues working together. Since our old guides have acquired new student groups, it is now our turn to develop teaching skills which will eventually qualify us for the responsibilities of being a guide to someone else.
This is a significant stage for souls in their development because now they are given increased responsibilities for younger souls. The status of a guide is not given to us all at once, however.
As with many other aspects of soul life, we are carefully tested. The intermediate levels are trial periods for potential teachers. Our mentors assign us a soul to look after, and then evaluate our leadership performance both in and out of physical incarnations.
Only if this preliminary training is successful are we allowed to function even at the level of a junior guide. Not everyone is suited for teaching, but this does not keep us from becoming an advanced soul. Guides, like everyone else, have different abilities and talents, as well as shortcomings. By the time we reach the advanced level, our soul aptitudes are well known in the spirit world. We are given occupational duties commensurate with our abilities. Different avenues of approach to learning eventually bring all of us to the same end in acquiring spiritual wholeness.
The Advanced Soul
I believe that people on Earth who possess souls which are both old and highly advanced are scarce. A person whose maturity is this high doesn't seek out a regression therapist to resolve life-plan conflicts. In most cases, they are here as incarnated guides. Having mastered the fundamental issues most of us wrestle with daily, the advanced soul is more interested in making small refinements toward specific tasks.
We may recognize them when they appear as public figures, such as Mother Teresa; however, it is more usual for the advanced soul to go about their good works in a quiet, unassuming manner. Without displaying self-indulgence, their fulfillment comes from improving the lives of other people. They focus less on institutional matters and more on enhancing individual human values.
The mark of an advanced spirit is one who has patience with society and shows extraordinary coping skills. Most prominent is their exceptional insight. This is not to say life has no karmic pitfalls for them, otherwise they probably wouldn't be here at all. They may be found in all walks of life, but are frequently in the helping professions or combating social injustice in some fashion. The advanced soul radiates composure, kindness, and understanding toward others. Not being motivated by self-interest, they may disregard their own physical needs and live in reduced circumstances.
Without your own death as a certainness, how can anything have purpose without getting esoteric?
Can your astral projection remember a brain wallet?
Can your astral projection remember a brain wallet?
The current theory is that we all are building a higher level of consciousness through the lives we go through. Eventually we will rejoin as a stronger singularity in regards to whatever origin this whole phenomenon came from.
As for brain wallets, I don't think money will have much relevance when you come back to your spiritual self. It may if you find it novel enough. I am led to believe such things can be remembered through other life, while with human beings it's an exception. We have spiritual amnesia when we are born.
You know how some children have imaginary friends? They are likely real and are on another dimensional plane the child can still communicate with.
Jump to: