Total Posts:94|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

If consciousness can survive death

Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 5:02:08 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

Cool... no replies yet, and i a glad. I went back to proof read, but.... the a's look like b's =)

Although i fool around due to my current intoxication, these are serious premises in my belief... that... i am comfortable to generalize in....

The beliefs of the future. WE are all gods, WE are all amazing. And, if it takes to the death of me... i will prove why your are so awesome.
JimDavis
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 5:16:52 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness can survive death, wouldn't it have to be in the form of some kind of "data" or "information"? But can pure information exist without a medium? Hard to imagine, since this is outside our experience. Or could it be a massless medium like some sort of energy field?

For consciousness to survive death, would there have to be another dimension akin to a spiritual realm? I'd have a hard time imagining it's some kind of ghost or soul that is immaterial but somehow contains the data of our mind.

For me this topic raises more questions than it answers, but it's interesting nonetheless.
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 5:31:49 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
Before space, before matter, before energy.

Energy is eternal my friend, it can neither be created or destroyed. Although it can be converted to matter, even that must return to the energy form which it originated.

The greater majority of non-believers, seem to acept that this present universe of once mindless matter has produced beings with intrinsic ends, self- replication capabilities, and "coded chemistry" in the short 14 billion years since the Big Bang that produced this cycle of universal activity.

Our ancient ancestors expressed the belief that our scientists of today are just beginning to come to terms with, and that is, that following each "Big Bang" there comes the "Big Crunch," when this universe is condensed once again, into the infinitely dense, infinitely hot, infinitesimally small singularity from which it originated.

There is no way whatsoever that the world as it has evolved to today, did so in the short 14 billion years since the last BIG BANG.

Only when we come to the realisation that this generation of the universe, has evolved from a series of parental universal bodies that have preceded this one, will science begin to realise the time scale involved in the evolution of man from mindless matter.
Another universe may have preceded ours, study finds. May 14th, 2006. Courtesy Penn State University and World Science staff.

Three physicists say they have done calculations suggesting that before the birth of our universe, which is expanding, there was an earlier universe that was shrinking. The results stem from a +theory that claims the fabric of space and time is made up of minuscule, indivisible bits, much as matter is. Scientists believe our cosmos began in a sort of explosion called the Big Bang, when everything that exists---which had previously been packed into one infinitely dense point---burst outward. The universe is still expanding according to this view, because it was born expanding.

According to some proposals, the Big Bang is a repeating cycle. Universes might expand, then shrink back to a point, then expand again. Thus the "Bang" would be really more like a bounce. The idea is appealing in some ways, but scientists have found it far from easy to test. Einstein"s Theory of Relativity, a key basis for the Big Bang theory, is silent on what happened before that event.

"General relativity can be used to describe the universe back to a point at which matter becomes so dense that it"s equations don"t hold up," said Abhay Ashtekar, director of the Gravitational Physics and Geometry at Penn State University in University Park, Penn.

To go further, physicists must use tools Einstein didn"t have, he added. Ashtekar and two post-doctoral researchers developed such tools through a combination of Quantum physics- the science of subatomic particles"and general relativity, which describes the large-scale structure of space and time. They found that before the Big Bang, there was a contracting universe. Other than the fact it was shrinking, they added, it was similar to ours in terms of the geometry of its space and time, or spacetime, as cosmologists call it since Einstein found the two are interwoven.

"In place of a classical Big Bang there is in fact a quantum bounce," said Ashtekar. "We were so surprised by the finding," he added, that the team repeated the calculations for months to include different possible values of some numbers representing the current universe. But the results kept pointing to a bounce. The findings appear in the current issue of the research journal Physical Review Letters.

While the general idea of another, pre-Big Bang universe isn"t new, Ashtekar said, this is the first mathematical study that systematically establishes its existence and deduces properties of its spacetime geometry. The notion that spacetime has a geometry involves the idea that it can be curved or flat. A "flat" spacetime is one in which geometry works as we normally expect; for example, parallel lines never meet. But Einstein found that material objects deform this flatness, introducing curvature.

To arrive at their pre-existing universe finding, Ashtekar"s group used loop quantum gravity, a theory that seeks to reconcile General relativity with quantum physics. These two seemingly fundamental theories are otherwise contradictory in some ways. Loop quantum gravity, which was pioneered at Ashtekar"s institute, proposes that spacetime has a discrete "atomic" structure, as opposed to being a continuous sheet, as Einstein, along with most us, assumed. In loop quantum gravity, space is thought of as woven from one-dimensional "threads." The continuum picture remains mostly valid as an approximation. But near the Big Bang, this fabric is violently torn so that it"s discrete, or quantum, nature becomes important. One outcome of this is that gravity becomes repulsive instead of attractive, Ashetkar argued; the result is the Big Bounce.

Just as the Big Bang theory has been evolving over the years and is continuing to evolve as new data becomes available, these big Crunch theories that are just beginning to emerge are still in their infancy. I would rather a theory which states that there are many galactic clusters out there within the boundless cosmos, each cluster in its own position in Space-time, consisting of billions of Galaxies falling inward toward a Great Abyss, Black Hole, or Bottomless Pit, where it is torn to pieces molecule by molecule, atom by atom, sub-atomic particle by sub-atomic particle, and reconverted into the electromagnetic energy from which they were created and accelerated along the dark worm hole to speeds far, far in excess of the speed of light, where that liquid like Magnetic energy is spewed out in the trillions of degrees, somewhere far beyond the visible horizon of the eternal and boundless cosmos, where, from the cooling quantum of that electromagnetic energy a new universe is created, or rather, the old universe is resurrected, to which the light from its old position in space-time, would take billions upon billions of years to reach it.

According to the ancient cultures, we live in an eternal oscillating universe that expands outward and contracts back to its beginning in space time, which is the BEGINNING of this three dimensional universe, taking with it all the information gathered in each cycle of physical manifestation, a living universal being who is all that exists, and in who, all that is, exists. A living universal being who exists in the two states of visible matter and invisible energy.

To be continued.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 5:39:53 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
Continued from Post #4.

An eternal being who began as energy which cannot be created or destroyed, but can and is converted into matter only to be reconverted into energy.

"Universe after universe is like an interminable succession of wheels forever coming into view, forever rolling onwards, disappearing and reappearing; forever passing from being to non being, and again from non being to being. In short, the constant revolving of the wheel of life in one eternal cycle, according to fixed and immutable laws, is perhaps after all the sum and substance of the philosophy of Buddhism. And this eternal wheel has so to speak, six spokes representing six forms of existence." ---- Mon. Williams, Buddhism, pp. 229, 122.

The days and nights of Brahma are called Manvantara, or the cycle of manifestation, "The Great Day," which is a period of universal activity, that is preceded, and also followed by "Pralaya," a dark period, which to our finite minds seems as an eternity. "Manvantara," is a creative day as seen in the six days of creation in Genesis, "Pralaya," is the evening that proceeds the next creative day. The six periods of Creation and the seventh day of rest in which we now exist are referred to in the book of Genesis as the "GENERATIONS OF THE UNIVERSE."

The English word "Generation," is translated from the Hebrew "toledoth" which is used in the Old Testament in every instance as "births," or "descendants," such as "These are the generations of Adam," or "these are the generations of Abraham, and Genesis 2: 4; These are the generations of the Universe or the heavens and earth, etc. And the "Great Day" in which the seven generations of the universe are eternally repeated, is the eternal cosmic period, or the eighth eternal day in which those who attain to perfection are allowed to enter, where they shall be surrounded by great light and they shall experience eternal peace, while those who do not attain to perfection are cast back into the refining fires of the seven physical cycles that perpetually revolve within the eighth eternal cosmic cycle.

A series of worlds following one upon the other,-- each world rising a step higher than the previous world, so that every later world brings to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in the former, and itself then prepares the seed for the universe that will follow it.

This is the true resurrection in which all from the previous cycle of universal activity, who still have the judgmental war raging within them, are born again into the cycles of physical manifestation.

Those scientists who are beginning to come to terms with the Big Crunch theory, believe that this universe has another 300 billion years to go before the next Big Crunch, If that is correct, then this universal being is only an infant and has not yet brought to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in it from the previous universal body, in which light beings evolved from mankind and which universe still exists out there in space-time.

There are those who hold the unrealistic view that this present universe of once mindless matter has produced beings with intrinsic ends, self- replication capabilities, and "coded chemistry" in the short period of some 14 billion years, while we believe that God who is all that exists and in all that exists, who began as energy, which is converted to a material universal body, which is then reconverted to the eternal energy, taking with it all the information that is gathered in each cycle of physical activity.

And we believe that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, within the Logos, is "THE LIGHT OF MAN" that which is born of mankind, all the knowledge, wisdom and insight gained from the body of mankind, which body took countless periods of universal activity to evolve.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
JimDavis
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 5:43:25 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:

There is no way whatsoever that the world as it has evolved to today, did so in the short 14 billion years since the last BIG BANG.

I like the idea of the eternally oscillating universe, but as you said, we still lack the ability to adequately test this model. Perhaps we will never know for sure.

But you made a very confident and bold assertion, which I quoted above. How do you know this?
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 6:04:46 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 5:16:52 AM, JimDavis wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness can survive death, wouldn't it have to be in the form of some kind of "data" or "information"? But can pure information exist without a medium? Hard to imagine, since this is outside our experience. Or could it be a massless medium like some sort of energy field?

For consciousness to survive death, would there have to be another dimension akin to a spiritual realm? I'd have a hard time imagining it's some kind of ghost or soul that is immaterial but somehow contains the data of our mind.

For me this topic raises more questions than it answers, but it's interesting nonetheless.

John 1: 1; The "LOGOS" is said to mean "WORD," but is in fact, the gathered information of every universal body throughout all eternity. The Logos, should be seen as the essential divine reality of the universe the eternal spirit-gathered information, from which all being originates, and to which all must return.

You are body, soul and spirit. Your body is made up from the universal elements, and it is activated by the universal soul, which is the animating principle that pervades the entire universal body, activating everything within the universe, from the wave particles to the subatomic particles that make up the atoms which are the building blocks of the molecules from which the universal body is created. It is to the universal soul=LIFE-FORCE that all information = SPIRIT is gathered.

"YOU" the mind, are spirit. The body in which you, [The mind] are developing as the supreme head and controller of that body, which is made up of the universal elements, which is activated by the soul [Animating life force] to which all the spirit [gathered information] of all your ancestors, human and prehuman, has been gathered in the evolution of whatever was in the beginning to become who you are, and that parental spirit dwells behind the veil of the flesh, to the inner most sanctuary of its earthly tabernacle=tent, which is your body.

If that body in which your parental spirit dwells, were born without the sense of sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, etc, then no information whatsoever could be taken into the brain, and "YOU" who are spirit [Gathered information] could never have begun to develop and the living body, in which the parental spirit dwells, would soon die, never having developed a personality = "CONTROLLING GODHEAD" to that body.

Then of the Thee in Me who works behind
The veil, I lifted up my hands to find
A lamp amid the Darkness; and I heard,
As from Without__ "The Me within Thee is blind.".... By Omar Khayyam.

When the body in which you [the mind] are being formed, dies, [This is the first death] and your body: "skin, flesh, muscle, blood, bone, brain matter etc, etc," has returned to the universal elements from which it was created, all that remains, is a shadow or rather, a facsimile of YOU = the mind=spirit, that has been imprinted into the universal life force=soul, from which it will be resurrected in the next cycle of universal activity.

Unless of course, the information=spirit that is "YOU" is divided from the universal life-force, which is the second death. For the spirit=information that is you, can be divided from the universal soul----------"For the word of God is alive and active, sharper than any two edged sword. It cuts all the way through to the division of the soul and spirit."
'
The term, "THE WORD OF GOD," pertains to the sense that is identical to the term "LOGOS". In Sanskrit the similar meaning is given in the use of the word 'vach.' Vach means word. But in Sanskrit teachings of the Sanatana Dharma, vach has many levels. Including where the word is first considered as being in the mind as a thought, not as the spoken word or speech. but as a thought.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
JimDavis
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 6:26:54 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 6:04:46 AM, Gentorev wrote:
At 2/5/2016 5:16:52 AM, JimDavis wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness can survive death, wouldn't it have to be in the form of some kind of "data" or "information"? But can pure information exist without a medium? Hard to imagine, since this is outside our experience. Or could it be a massless medium like some sort of energy field?

For consciousness to survive death, would there have to be another dimension akin to a spiritual realm? I'd have a hard time imagining it's some kind of ghost or soul that is immaterial but somehow contains the data of our mind.

For me this topic raises more questions than it answers, but it's interesting nonetheless.

John 1: 1; The "LOGOS" is said to mean "WORD," but is in fact, the gathered information of every universal body throughout all eternity. The Logos, should be seen as the essential divine reality of the universe the eternal spirit-gathered information, from which all being originates, and to which all must return.

You are body, soul and spirit. Your body is made up from the universal elements, and it is activated by the universal soul, which is the animating principle that pervades the entire universal body, activating everything within the universe, from the wave particles to the subatomic particles that make up the atoms which are the building blocks of the molecules from which the universal body is created. It is to the universal soul=LIFE-FORCE that all information = SPIRIT is gathered.

"YOU" the mind, are spirit. The body in which you, [The mind] are developing as the supreme head and controller of that body, which is made up of the universal elements, which is activated by the soul [Animating life force] to which all the spirit [gathered information] of all your ancestors, human and prehuman, has been gathered in the evolution of whatever was in the beginning to become who you are, and that parental spirit dwells behind the veil of the flesh, to the inner most sanctuary of its earthly tabernacle=tent, which is your body.

If that body in which your parental spirit dwells, were born without the sense of sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, etc, then no information whatsoever could be taken into the brain, and "YOU" who are spirit [Gathered information] could never have begun to develop and the living body, in which the parental spirit dwells, would soon die, never having developed a personality = "CONTROLLING GODHEAD" to that body.

Then of the Thee in Me who works behind
The veil, I lifted up my hands to find
A lamp amid the Darkness; and I heard,
As from Without__ "The Me within Thee is blind.".... By Omar Khayyam.

When the body in which you [the mind] are being formed, dies, [This is the first death] and your body: "skin, flesh, muscle, blood, bone, brain matter etc, etc," has returned to the universal elements from which it was created, all that remains, is a shadow or rather, a facsimile of YOU = the mind=spirit, that has been imprinted into the universal life force=soul, from which it will be resurrected in the next cycle of universal activity.

Unless of course, the information=spirit that is "YOU" is divided from the universal life-force, which is the second death. For the spirit=information that is you, can be divided from the universal soul----------"For the word of God is alive and active, sharper than any two edged sword. It cuts all the way through to the division of the soul and spirit."
'
The term, "THE WORD OF GOD," pertains to the sense that is identical to the term "LOGOS". In Sanskrit the similar meaning is given in the use of the word 'vach.' Vach means word. But in Sanskrit teachings of the Sanatana Dharma, vach has many levels. Including where the word is first considered as being in the mind as a thought, not as the spoken word or speech. but as a thought.

Hmmm... although it's interesting to hear WHAT you believe, it would be more interesting to hear WHY you believe it.
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 7:48:07 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
From the scriptures and my God given logical mind.

Romans 1: 18; For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,7 in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. They say they are wise, but they are fools! Instead of worshipping the immortal God they worship images made to look like mortal man, etc.

The invisible God is made manifest in the universal body. to Know God, then open your eyes.

Who are "YOU," who are continuing to grow/evolve within that human body? And when did "YOU" begin to develop within that body?

You were created in the likeness of God and as You the mind continues to evolve, so does the Supreme personality of Godhead , the MIND of God who Is the "LIGHT OF MAN," the Most High in the creation.

God is the same today as he always has been, God is the only true constant, in that he is constantly evolving. Show to me a mind that has ceased to evolve, and I will show to you a mind that has ceased to exist.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 3:50:02 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness is defined as the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings, the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world, then it would appear consciousness is a characteristic of the brain, hence consciousness will no longer exist if the brain dies.

It would therefore stand to reason that consciousness could not possibly be a "first source in existence", which would be a direct contradiction based on the definition.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 10:41:53 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 3:50:02 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness is defined as the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings, the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world, then it would appear consciousness is a characteristic of the brain, hence consciousness will no longer exist if the brain dies.

It would therefore stand to reason that consciousness could not possibly be a "first source in existence", which would be a direct contradiction based on the definition.

It could if a fourth dimensional being evolves from Mankind, who is able to travel, not only through Soace, but also time, and He the Omega, descended to the very beginning to be the Alpha.

As to the question of the survival of consciousness after the body in which the mind had evolved had returned to the universal elements from which it was created, we read in 1st Peter 4: 6; That is why the Good News was preached also to the dead, to those who had been judged in their physical existence as everyone is judged: it was preached to them so that in their spiritual existence they may live as God lives.

And that is, within the body of mankind, gathering to themselves all the spirits of their descendants who had fallen asleep in righteousness after paying the blood price for their inherited sin and any mistakes that they may have made while in the flesh, over those spirit, the second death has no power.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
keithprosser
Posts: 1,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 10:57:33 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Consciousness does not survive the tiny changes in brain chemistry caused by an anaesthetic (or even alcohol!), nor even the mild trauma of a physical blow to the skull. To suppose it can survive the complete destruction of the brain seems no more than wishful thinking.

Consciousness is produced by a brain as electicity is produced by a dynamo and a broken dynamo does not produce electricity.

But if consciousness does survive death, I would not look forward to my burial or cremation.
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 12:54:51 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 10:57:33 PM, keithprosser wrote:
Consciousness does not survive the tiny changes in brain chemistry caused by an anaesthetic (or even alcohol!), nor even the mild trauma of a physical blow to the skull. To suppose it can survive the complete destruction of the brain seems no more than wishful thinking.

Consciousness is produced by a brain as electicity is produced by a dynamo and a broken dynamo does not produce electricity.

But if consciousness does survive death, I would not look forward to my burial or cremation.

What is the reward that the mind receives,
Surely it is, what that mind believes
So the mind that rejects eternity
When freed from its body, where will it be?

What is that body that gave to you birth?
Is it nothing but elements taken from earth?
Or was it created from the spirits and souls
Of your ancestors who, are from times that are old?

Believe as you will, but remember this verse,
When your coffin is placed in the back of the hearse;
The reward that the mind must surely receive
Is that which the mind (Not in the hearse) believes....... Gentorev
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 2:43:16 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 10:57:33 PM, keithprosser wrote:
Consciousness does not survive the tiny changes in brain chemistry caused by an anaesthetic (or even alcohol!), nor even the mild trauma of a physical blow to the skull. To suppose it can survive the complete destruction of the brain seems no more than wishful thinking.

Consciousness is produced by a brain as electicity is produced by a dynamo and a broken dynamo does not produce electricity.

But if consciousness does survive death, I would not look forward to my burial or cremation.

You are defining consciousness physically, so of course you are right. I am saying that your consciousness was created by a massless you. It was created to have an experience. Think about it: If you are massless intelligence; wouldn't you want a experience? a reality? just something other than floating around in infinite darkness? Maybe you will go with the darkness...but, i can confidently say you will eventually want something, a change. And, wouldn't mortality be a perfect vessel to use in experiencing the change... experiencing different worlds? It's a logical assumption. Immortality is just preparing your next mortal experience. Whatever experience you are in has its own rules... like a brain. The brain serves many functions... you can die, you can imagine, you can alter it, and most importantly, it contains the you.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 2:43:23 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 5:39:53 AM, Gentorev wrote:
Continued from Post #4.

An eternal being who began as energy which cannot be created or destroyed, but can and is converted into matter only to be reconverted into energy.

"Universe after universe is like an interminable succession of wheels forever coming into view, forever rolling onwards, disappearing and reappearing; forever passing from being to non being, and again from non being to being. In short, the constant revolving of the wheel of life in one eternal cycle, according to fixed and immutable laws, is perhaps after all the sum and substance of the philosophy of Buddhism. And this eternal wheel has so to speak, six spokes representing six forms of existence." ---- Mon. Williams, Buddhism, pp. 229, 122.

The days and nights of Brahma are called Manvantara, or the cycle of manifestation, "The Great Day," which is a period of universal activity, that is preceded, and also followed by "Pralaya," a dark period, which to our finite minds seems as an eternity. "Manvantara," is a creative day as seen in the six days of creation in Genesis, "Pralaya," is the evening that proceeds the next creative day. The six periods of Creation and the seventh day of rest in which we now exist are referred to in the book of Genesis as the "GENERATIONS OF THE UNIVERSE."

The English word "Generation," is translated from the Hebrew "toledoth" which is used in the Old Testament in every instance as "births," or "descendants," such as "These are the generations of Adam," or "these are the generations of Abraham, and Genesis 2: 4; These are the generations of the Universe or the heavens and earth, etc. And the "Great Day" in which the seven generations of the universe are eternally repeated, is the eternal cosmic period, or the eighth eternal day in which those who attain to perfection are allowed to enter, where they shall be surrounded by great light and they shall experience eternal peace, while those who do not attain to perfection are cast back into the refining fires of the seven physical cycles that perpetually revolve within the eighth eternal cosmic cycle.

A series of worlds following one upon the other,-- each world rising a step higher than the previous world, so that every later world brings to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in the former, and itself then prepares the seed for the universe that will follow it.

This is the true resurrection in which all from the previous cycle of universal activity, who still have the judgmental war raging within them, are born again into the cycles of physical manifestation.

Those scientists who are beginning to come to terms with the Big Crunch theory, believe that this universe has another 300 billion years to go before the next Big Crunch, If that is correct, then this universal being is only an infant and has not yet brought to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in it from the previous universal body, in which light beings evolved from mankind and which universe still exists out there in space-time.

There are those who hold the unrealistic view that this present universe of once mindless matter has produced beings with intrinsic ends, self- replication capabilities, and "coded chemistry" in the short period of some 14 billion years, while we believe that God who is all that exists and in all that exists, who began as energy, which is converted to a material universal body, which is then reconverted to the eternal energy, taking with it all the information that is gathered in each cycle of physical activity.

And we believe that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, within the Logos, is "THE LIGHT OF MAN" that which is born of mankind, all the knowledge, wisdom and insight gained from the body of mankind, which body took countless periods of universal activity to evolve.

That was an interesting read, thank you. I relate with many of the points. I however, think everything is possible, and we make it possible. I believe in multiple dimensions - actually countless dimensions. Why? Bc that is what would happen if sentience was massless... if it is massless; essentially everything it thinks is created. And "it" isn't just one; at this point, it's an unimaginable number. However, i do believe it started with one... one that slowly became, evolved into sentience, and we are all pieces off it... not of it. I believe free will is in our source state. Characters within characters.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 2:43:33 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 3:50:02 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness is defined as the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings, the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world, then it would appear consciousness is a characteristic of the brain, hence consciousness will no longer exist if the brain dies.

It would therefore stand to reason that consciousness could not possibly be a "first source in existence", which would be a direct contradiction based on the definition.

What i am saying is beyond reason, and i admit that. I am not looking at consciousness the way you are, but i do define it similar: State of being awake and aware of oneself - sentience, imagination, intelligence, so on. Then i take a leap and say who you are is a vessel to your true self... your massless self. Why? how else would you live an experience? If there is a source self... then, it would be logical to think it would want to have experiences. I am correlating this massless self exactly to humans; just backwards. Why do we have a brain? Again that would be a logical creation from a massless intelligence to one: Have a vessel to live "said" experience; and two: to have contingencies in place for many reasons: To die, to not remember, to be able to alter, etc. If there is an intelligence that first evolved massless - our intelligence would be unimaginably behind. A caveat however, i am presenting these ideas with my bias and subjective... i think characters (humans if you will) is infinite (but finite)... Not everyone agrees with me... that is why they are their own world. I think we all come from our own worlds to play out our character here... then, to the next. See... i think that is exactly what a immortal intelligence would do.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 2:43:38 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 5:16:52 AM, JimDavis wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:

If consciousness can survive death, wouldn't it have to be in the form of some kind of "data" or "information"? But can pure information exist without a medium? Hard to imagine, since this is outside our experience. Or could it be a massless medium like some sort of energy field?

It would be beyond matter, bc it created matter, noticed space... felt energy. But remember, it is massless, so whatever it feels, notices, thinks of... is being created. I can't speculate exactly what it is, but how and why can be examined. How? Well, i think consciousness evolved and is evolving massless. I would go with "sort of energy field" as a close conjecture to what it is... bc, you are right, it is beyond our experience. My own source (by source i mean massless self) is an entirely different being. Just like i am a different me, comparing to my teenager self. But, i won't get anywhere close to what my source is even if i live long. This source "energy" is what i am speculating on. What it is made of... i don't think we know or will... It is something invisible, with sentience. It doesn't have to follow rules; it creates rules.

For consciousness to survive death, would there have to be another dimension akin to a spiritual realm? I'd have a hard time imagining it's some kind of ghost or soul that is immaterial but somehow contains the data of our mind.

i have a dualistic approach. I think you have your self that is mortal... and your self that is immortal. The immortal self is the complete "you." This form chooses to be your mortal self... The mortal self is a vessel. Your source self can either live within its own mind, or pick a reality to experience. To me, if immortality is real in regards to sentience, then mortality makes sense. Mortality would be the means of living realities that you can experience, and die... death will bring you back to your source - so on.

For me this topic raises more questions than it answers, but it's interesting nonetheless.

I like that you have an open mind. I hope we have good dialogue in the subsequent responses.
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 5:58:29 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 2:43:38 AM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/5/2016 5:16:52 AM, JimDavis wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:

If consciousness can survive death, wouldn't it have to be in the form of some kind of "data" or "information"? But can pure information exist without a medium? Hard to imagine, since this is outside our experience. Or could it be a massless medium like some sort of energy field?

It would be beyond matter, bc it created matter, noticed space... felt energy. But remember, it is massless, so whatever it feels, notices, thinks of... is being created. I can't speculate exactly what it is, but how and why can be examined. How? Well, i think consciousness evolved and is evolving massless. I would go with "sort of energy field" as a close conjecture to what it is... bc, you are right, it is beyond our experience. My own source (by source i mean massless self) is an entirely different being. Just like i am a different me, comparing to my teenager self. But, i won't get anywhere close to what my source is even if i live long. This source "energy" is what i am speculating on. What it is made of... i don't think we know or will... It is something invisible, with sentience. It doesn't have to follow rules; it creates rules.

For consciousness to survive death, would there have to be another dimension akin to a spiritual realm? I'd have a hard time imagining it's some kind of ghost or soul that is immaterial but somehow contains the data of our mind.

i have a dualistic approach. I think you have your self that is mortal... and your self that is immortal. The immortal self is the complete "you." This form chooses to be your mortal self... The mortal self is a vessel. Your source self can either live within its own mind, or pick a reality to experience. To me, if immortality is real in regards to sentience, then mortality makes sense. Mortality would be the means of living realities that you can experience, and die... death will bring you back to your source - so on.

For me this topic raises more questions than it answers, but it's interesting nonetheless.

I like that you have an open mind. I hope we have good dialogue in the subsequent responses.

No human beings are immortal, all must die the physical death, apart from those who are to be translated in the twinkling of an eye, from bodies of corruptible matter, into glorious bodies of brilliant and blinding energy, but even those physical bodies are destroyed in the translation.

As to the spirits who developed within the physical bodies of man, all will survive the first death, which is that of the physical bodies, but not all will continue to live on after their judgement, for there are those who will suffer the second death, when those spirits=conscious minds are divided from the universal soul, which is the divine animating principle that pervades the entire universal body.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
keithprosser
Posts: 1,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 10:54:28 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
Then i take a leap and say who you are is a vessel to your true self... your massless self.

I think 'massless self' is what most people call 'soul'. I don't think there is any need to be euphemistic! I'd agree that we are vessels of our selves, but I think we disagree as to the nature of that cibsciousness/self/soul.

I believe consciousness to something the brain produces by virtue of its operation.

Unconsciousness is not due to anything leaving the body; its due to the brain ceasing to produce a self, and regaining consciousness is due to the brain restarting normal activity. The parallel with a dynamo producing electricity is I think a very useful one, but its meant as an illustration, not a precise analogy.

As I see it, the idea that the self is dynamically produced by a working brain works for what we can verify and oberve about 'selves'. If it was proven, for example, that it was possible to communicate with the dead in the way spiritualists claim then the idea that the self is the product of the brain would have to be abandoned, but I don't consider such things as 'verified' or 'observed'.

The survival of the soul after death is of course an article of faith for many Christians, but articles of faith are - by definition - neither verifiable or observable. As a non-beliver I have no reason to consider that objection to the theory as disproving it.

But the theory does suggest that my consciousness may be produced in other ways that by my brain. An object that had precisely the same operation as my brain would produce my self just as my brain did. Constructing such an object is beyond human ingenuity today (thankfully), and possibly it will be forever but I do think it is theoretically possible for my consciousness to exist by being produced by a machine emulating my brain. I'm not sure I'd want it to be.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 3:32:59 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 2:43:33 AM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/5/2016 3:50:02 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness is defined as the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings, the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world, then it would appear consciousness is a characteristic of the brain, hence consciousness will no longer exist if the brain dies.

It would therefore stand to reason that consciousness could not possibly be a "first source in existence", which would be a direct contradiction based on the definition.

What i am saying is beyond reason, and i admit that. I am not looking at consciousness the way you are, but i do define it similar: State of being awake and aware of oneself - sentience, imagination, intelligence, so on. Then i take a leap and say who you are is a vessel to your true self... your massless self. Why? how else would you live an experience? If there is a source self... then, it would be logical to think it would want to have experiences. I am correlating this massless self exactly to humans; just backwards. Why do we have a brain? Again that would be a logical creation from a massless intelligence to one: Have a vessel to live "said" experience; and two: to have contingencies in place for many reasons: To die, to not remember, to be able to alter, etc. If there is an intelligence that first evolved massless - our intelligence would be unimaginably behind. A caveat however, i am presenting these ideas with my bias and subjective... i think characters (humans if you will) is infinite (but finite)... Not everyone agrees with me... that is why they are their own world. I think we all come from our own worlds to play out our character here... then, to the next. See... i think that is exactly what a immortal intelligence would do.

I must say you have some very interesting ideas, but one thing about you is that you should be highly respected as you are one of the few here who offer a caveat, who will admit that what you're claiming is not a hard fact about reality, that you know well enough your claims are bias and subjective, and that deserves a lot of respect. Kudos to you, sir, for being honest.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 5:23:15 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
If consciousness survives death, how would it sense and interact with the world or anything else bereft of the sensory system of the body?
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:40:38 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/6/2016 5:58:29 AM, Gentorev wrote:
At 2/6/2016 2:43:38 AM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/5/2016 5:16:52 AM, JimDavis wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:

If consciousness can survive death, wouldn't it have to be in the form of some kind of "data" or "information"? But can pure information exist without a medium? Hard to imagine, since this is outside our experience. Or could it be a massless medium like some sort of energy field?

It would be beyond matter, bc it created matter, noticed space... felt energy. But remember, it is massless, so whatever it feels, notices, thinks of... is being created. I can't speculate exactly what it is, but how and why can be examined. How? Well, i think consciousness evolved and is evolving massless. I would go with "sort of energy field" as a close conjecture to what it is... bc, you are right, it is beyond our experience. My own source (by source i mean massless self) is an entirely different being. Just like i am a different me, comparing to my teenager self. But, i won't get anywhere close to what my source is even if i live long. This source "energy" is what i am speculating on. What it is made of... i don't think we know or will... It is something invisible, with sentience. It doesn't have to follow rules; it creates rules.

For consciousness to survive death, would there have to be another dimension akin to a spiritual realm? I'd have a hard time imagining it's some kind of ghost or soul that is immaterial but somehow contains the data of our mind.

i have a dualistic approach. I think you have your self that is mortal... and your self that is immortal. The immortal self is the complete "you." This form chooses to be your mortal self... The mortal self is a vessel. Your source self can either live within its own mind, or pick a reality to experience. To me, if immortality is real in regards to sentience, then mortality makes sense. Mortality would be the means of living realities that you can experience, and die... death will bring you back to your source - so on.

For me this topic raises more questions than it answers, but it's interesting nonetheless.

I like that you have an open mind. I hope we have good dialogue in the subsequent responses.

No human beings are immortal, all must die the physical death, apart from those who are to be translated in the twinkling of an eye, from bodies of corruptible matter, into glorious bodies of brilliant and blinding energy, but even those physical bodies are destroyed in the translation.

I agree with glorious body, yet color mine a red wine or red velvet with the emotion of a black pearl... an ode to vampire glory would be most deserved - that eternal nerd heart thing... Mixed with a pharmacy of emotions. How else would you live? Who else would you be? Let my essence be forever bc that is all i know i can be.

As to the spirits who developed within the physical bodies of man, all will survive the first death, which is that of the physical bodies, but not all will continue to live on after their judgement, for there are those who will suffer the second death, when those spirits=conscious minds are divided from the universal soul, which is the divine animating principle that pervades the entire universal body.

Well, whoever i am fighting... let me know. Reference my last paragraph; vampires aren't even close to the horror i would bring down on a wicked soul. My second death will happen, but i control the switch to its eternal source. I pick were i go. Period. However, i am not trying to sound rude. I would say the same luxury is offered to you as well. It just depends how you look at it... interpret it. I can't tell you if your aspirations will be real, because my bias answer would be yes... i, too, want an afterlife.

See. this is how i look at it ... You will be whatever you think you are in whatever "world" you want. While, i will take my role in a paradise that accepts my definition of a blinding light.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:40:45 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/6/2016 10:54:28 AM, keithprosser wrote:
Then i take a leap and say who you are is a vessel to your true self... your massless self.

I think 'massless self' is what most people call 'soul'. I don't think there is any need to be euphemistic! I'd agree that we are vessels of our selves, but I think we disagree as to the nature of that cibsciousness/self/soul.

Yes, i do mean soul. I just don't want the semantics to play back to religion, bc that's not what i am trying to promote here. Saying "soul" has religious connotations, so i try to avoid it when i can.

I believe consciousness to something the brain produces by virtue of its operation.

I agree 99%. I'll leave room for error since it's wise to - any absolute can change on us in regards to consciousness. But... i think our scientists are on correct paths, and i have no disagreements.

Unconsciousness is not due to anything leaving the body; its due to the brain ceasing to produce a self, and regaining consciousness is due to the brain restarting normal activity. The parallel with a dynamo producing electricity is I think a very useful one, but its meant as an illustration, not a precise analogy.

I also agree. However, i think it is too soon to be so confident in the correlation between our conscious and unconscious... but, i do progress with science in definitions.

As I see it, the idea that the self is dynamically produced by a working brain works for what we can verify and oberve about 'selves'. If it was proven, for example, that it was possible to communicate with the dead in the way spiritualists claim then the idea that the self is the product of the brain would have to be abandoned, but I don't consider such things as 'verified' or 'observed'.

They definitely are not. I happen to be a person that has had experiences that defy logical understanding. However, i am not convinced one way or the other from them.

The survival of the soul after death is of course an article of faith for many Christians, but articles of faith are - by definition - neither verifiable or observable. As a non-beliver I have no reason to consider that objection to the theory as disproving it.

I agree with you here too. However, due to the way i spiritually see things, i would say articles of faith such as Christianity are spiritual tools. Could be a tool for both good and evil, i have no objection that it can be used for both. To me, the people that wrote or understand spirituality in a way others don't see it is interesting. You can call it "spiritual intelligence" i guess. Same as a prodigy of music, i think there are prodigies within the spiritual genre. How this is so can be explained by a well trained neurologist, but... i am more interested in why. Why is it, ever since i remember having the capacity to form a belief, i intuitively believed i am in some fashion an immortal? Why is it that i, and surly others that aren't deluding themselves, have the capacity to ask themselves these questions. I can keep going down the "define" route, so i will stop here and wait to see if you have any questions.

But the theory does suggest that my consciousness may be produced in other ways that by my brain. An object that had precisely the same operation as my brain would produce my self just as my brain did. Constructing such an object is beyond human ingenuity today (thankfully), and possibly it will be forever but I do think it is theoretically possible for my consciousness to exist by being produced by a machine emulating my brain. I'm not sure I'd want it to be.

I have gone down this line of reasoning. Both spirituality and physically. If, physically, we can one day transfer our "self" into a machine (body) that continues to emulate my consciousness, what would that mean? That would mean that our consciousness is separate, in some way, to our brain. We have no idea why neurons fire the way they do, or basically, why the energy within us move the way they do to give us subjective experience. I am not the type of person under the "believer" section to say this is any sort of proof. However, i will speculate that has something to do with our "soul." Can we one day figure out how to preserve our soul? Maybe. But, what would that mean? It would basically fall under what i am trying to present with my idea.

I think that has already happened on a spiritual level. So, anything you tell me about reality and consciousness i will not dispute bc i think the vessel is what it is to have a human experience. It is logical, and not without reason, to think if intelligence was the other way around (soul) it could preserve itself, or transfer itself into a vessel. Why would it do that? To continue experience. You can correlate the idea to a movie. Why watch one movie when there are more to enjoy? It would make sense to me that an immortal intelligence, not bound by material, could have the ability to do this. It can do this just by thinking, making a platform of an experience. Of course with its own caveats. For example, if my previous life was a person shaped like a monster, i wouldn't want to know that has a human. Therefore, i have a brain that can hold my soul where it needs to be to have a human experience. This move, seems to me, would be a logical creation by an immortal intelligence wanting to live more than one experience. This is just one example. I believe there are many truths to this, and i believe not every soul has the same options or capacity.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:40:51 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/6/2016 5:23:15 PM, dhardage wrote:
If consciousness survives death, how would it sense and interact with the world or anything else bereft of the sensory system of the body?

If my hypothesis is correct, what you just asked was figured out in your "source" (soul) state. You were already sentient before choosing a human vessel. Your human vessel gives you the experience, however, that experience was prepared by your source self. Your interaction and sensory system is a byproduct of the vessel you are inhabiting... like a trap, to not remember your source self... or, to not remember your immortal.

What i am saying in my premise is that consciousness has been evolving way before us... it has reached a point, or has been at this point, where it can live in a mortal vessel to experience a specific world. So you have to look at what i am saying as an outside observer looking in... as an artist looking at a blank page. Whatever the artist decides to paint, will be what the painting is. Funny a painting can have so many meanings depending on who is observing it.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:40:57 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/6/2016 3:32:59 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/6/2016 2:43:33 AM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/5/2016 3:50:02 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness is defined as the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings, the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world, then it would appear consciousness is a characteristic of the brain, hence consciousness will no longer exist if the brain dies.

It would therefore stand to reason that consciousness could not possibly be a "first source in existence", which would be a direct contradiction based on the definition.

What i am saying is beyond reason, and i admit that. I am not looking at consciousness the way you are, but i do define it similar: State of being awake and aware of oneself - sentience, imagination, intelligence, so on. Then i take a leap and say who you are is a vessel to your true self... your massless self. Why? how else would you live an experience? If there is a source self... then, it would be logical to think it would want to have experiences. I am correlating this massless self exactly to humans; just backwards. Why do we have a brain? Again that would be a logical creation from a massless intelligence to one: Have a vessel to live "said" experience; and two: to have contingencies in place for many reasons: To die, to not remember, to be able to alter, etc. If there is an intelligence that first evolved massless - our intelligence would be unimaginably behind. A caveat however, i am presenting these ideas with my bias and subjective... i think characters (humans if you will) is infinite (but finite)... Not everyone agrees with me... that is why they are their own world. I think we all come from our own worlds to play out our character here... then, to the next. See... i think that is exactly what a immortal intelligence would do.

I must say you have some very interesting ideas, but one thing about you is that you should be highly respected as you are one of the few here who offer a caveat, who will admit that what you're claiming is not a hard fact about reality, that you know well enough your claims are bias and subjective, and that deserves a lot of respect. Kudos to you, sir, for being honest.

Thank you. I really try to stay conscious that i am "making up" what i call a "spiritual platform." It, however, doesn't take away that i may be close to a truth, but it also shouldn't be so iron clad that it can't change; respect criticism; respect that others have great ideas too. Those that do not give another respect in their opinion shouldn't be preaching in the first place. How can one think they know the truth for everyone when they aren't willing to admit they're [(or could be) at the very least] wrong? I even wonder if i just used that grammar properly - i would need another to help explain if i did... Beautiful analogy: Without someone to correct me, without being willing to accept another's opinion; i stay ignorant.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 12:17:37 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
If consciousness is quantum it should be saved somewhere/rebootable.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:34:51 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/7/2016 11:40:51 PM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/6/2016 5:23:15 PM, dhardage wrote:
If consciousness survives death, how would it sense and interact with the world or anything else bereft of the sensory system of the body?

If my hypothesis is correct, what you just asked was figured out in your "source" (soul) state. You were already sentient before choosing a human vessel. Your human vessel gives you the experience, however, that experience was prepared by your source self. Your interaction and sensory system is a byproduct of the vessel you are inhabiting... like a trap, to not remember your source self... or, to not remember your immortal.

What i am saying in my premise is that consciousness has been evolving way before us... it has reached a point, or has been at this point, where it can live in a mortal vessel to experience a specific world. So you have to look at what i am saying as an outside observer looking in... as an artist looking at a blank page. Whatever the artist decides to paint, will be what the painting is. Funny a painting can have so many meanings depending on who is observing it.

Intriguing story line, but not much else. There is a) no evidence to support this hypothesis and b) no way to test it for validity since no one has successfully detected consciousness outside of a living biological entity. It still doesn't answer the basic question of how does a disembodied consciousness even sense the physical world.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:35:05 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

Simple, it can't survive death as the Bible makes very clear.

Therefore any questions about it are moot.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:59:02 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/7/2016 11:40:57 PM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/6/2016 3:32:59 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/6/2016 2:43:33 AM, Outplayz wrote:
At 2/5/2016 3:50:02 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:43:14 AM, Outplayz wrote:
What are the true implications? Implications of a mass-less consciousness? I understand this is a leap in logic, but i am taking it bc it makes sense (so far, at least to me). I only hope you can put your biases aside and think about what this could entail.

If you want me to define words, please ask me so we can have some sort of flow regarding the topic and not get lost in semantics.

My belief, known to some members, is that consciousness is the first source in existence: Before space, before matter, before energy (although i have questions here too). I believe everything is in reverse. Immortality choosing mortality to live worlds/experiences. Why? Why not. You can get a lot done in an eternity. We also seem like an "entertainment" based sentience (funny how we come into this world with a child's aspiration of a Solipsistic fantasy playground). We want what feels good. Whatever the definition you give to "good," that is what most want. So... how can we have heaven? The thought of paradise is like a 1940's classic conditioning course in sociology 101; forever, it'd be hell... What is paradise without entertainment; without opposition, without a story line that will enhance and inflict the emotions that truly make us who we are? A beautiful chaos.

If consciousness is defined as the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings, the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world, then it would appear consciousness is a characteristic of the brain, hence consciousness will no longer exist if the brain dies.

It would therefore stand to reason that consciousness could not possibly be a "first source in existence", which would be a direct contradiction based on the definition.

What i am saying is beyond reason, and i admit that. I am not looking at consciousness the way you are, but i do define it similar: State of being awake and aware of oneself - sentience, imagination, intelligence, so on. Then i take a leap and say who you are is a vessel to your true self... your massless self. Why? how else would you live an experience? If there is a source self... then, it would be logical to think it would want to have experiences. I am correlating this massless self exactly to humans; just backwards. Why do we have a brain? Again that would be a logical creation from a massless intelligence to one: Have a vessel to live "said" experience; and two: to have contingencies in place for many reasons: To die, to not remember, to be able to alter, etc. If there is an intelligence that first evolved massless - our intelligence would be unimaginably behind. A caveat however, i am presenting these ideas with my bias and subjective... i think characters (humans if you will) is infinite (but finite)... Not everyone agrees with me... that is why they are their own world. I think we all come from our own worlds to play out our character here... then, to the next. See... i think that is exactly what a immortal intelligence would do.

I must say you have some very interesting ideas, but one thing about you is that you should be highly respected as you are one of the few here who offer a caveat, who will admit that what you're claiming is not a hard fact about reality, that you know well enough your claims are bias and subjective, and that deserves a lot of respect. Kudos to you, sir, for being honest.

Thank you. I really try to stay conscious that i am "making up" what i call a "spiritual platform." It, however, doesn't take away that i may be close to a truth, but it also shouldn't be so iron clad that it can't change; respect criticism; respect that others have great ideas too. Those that do not give another respect in their opinion shouldn't be preaching in the first place. How can one think they know the truth for everyone when they aren't willing to admit they're [(or could be) at the very least] wrong? I even wonder if i just used that grammar properly - i would need another to help explain if i did... Beautiful analogy: Without someone to correct me, without being willing to accept another's opinion; i stay ignorant.

Certainly, the one trap you will fall into is using the word 'Spirit/Spiritual' to define or describe your your beliefs as it is a word that defines and describes nothing at all, it is a meaningless word. If you can avoid using this word or any connotation similar, you'll have far more success creating and presenting your platform. Good luck.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Gentorev
Posts: 2,874
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 9:31:39 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
With the particle accelerator in Switzerland, do we now have the technology to open the door to the inner dimension?

Of all the poets throughout all time, Robert Service to who I bow the knee, placed Omar Khayyam above all others. Omar with his wine and rose and nightingale, voiced Roberts own pet philosophy of wine and song.

Myself, when young, before being introduced to the word of Robert Service, experienced the most exhilarating sensation on first reading the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. It was as though there was an awakening within me, a whirling Dervish dancing within, as I read.

Ah! With the grape my fading life provide__
And wash my body whence the life has died
And lay me, shrouded in the living leaf
By some not unfrequented garden-side
That ev"n my buried ashes such a snare
Of vintage shall fling up into the air
As not a true believer passing by
But shall be overtaken unaware""Omar Khayyam.

Who would dare to descend to the garden of Omar and bring him up?

In the introduction to Fitzgerald"s translation of Omar"s work. It is written that Omar Khayyam died in the year of 1123 AD, and yet in the Glossary of the self-same book, it is said that he died in 1132 AD. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, there is some debate as to whether he died in the year 1123, or 1132. It seems strange that the controversy should be between these two date, because from, (The Perfect Way, P. 247) we read, "As the number of the lunar months, "thirteen," is the number of the woman and denotes the soul and her reflection of God---The solar number "Twelve," being that of the spirit.

The two numbers in combination form the perfect year of that duel humanity, which above, is made in the image of God"the true "Christian Year," wherein the two"the inner and outer, Spirit and Matter"are as one. Thirteen then represents that full union of man with God wherein Christ becomes Christ.

Thirteen, represents the physical person, who reflects perfectly the spiritual being within, (The Father and the Son are one) and is represented as the solar number 12 in combination within the thirteen, as shown here, (1123), the spiritual (12) within the material (13).

But the true "Christian year" should be where the physical being is translated to a spiritual being, which would be represented by the number combination (1132), the physical number 13, within the spiritual number 12, the old tabernacle, (The body of Man) stored within the inner most sanctuary of the new and glorious Temple of light. A good translation, loses none of the essence of the original from which it is translated.

So, when did the Great King of the Wise, Omar Khayyam die?

Omar was, among other professions, an Alchemist. The search for the Philosopher"s stone was driven, not by the desire to gain great wealth by turning base metals into gold, but the desire to gain eternal life.

E, Underhill, mysteries. P. 170, The stone swallowed by Cronus/Time, is none other than the "Philosopher"s Stone," the concealed stone of "Many Colours," (Golden Theatise) "The Mystic Seed" of transcendental life, which should invade, tinge, and wholly transmute the imperfect self into spiritual gold."

The stone will be a crystal of the same shape as the molecule from which it is formed, Zechariah 3: the prophet speaks of his vision of the high priest Joshua, who is stripped of his old filthy garment (Physical body) and given a new clean turban etc, and a Stone/crystal with seven facets is placed before Joshua with his new clean outer garment. (Spiritual body)

Is it possible do you suppose, to form a molecule from atoms of matter and atoms of anti-matter, which can be held in equilibrium, a state in which they cannot annihilate each other? And would such a body be able to pass in and out of both dimensions?

Does evolution cease with the creation of the three dimensional body of mankind?
Can the doorway between the two dimensions be opened?

Omar, MY FATHER:

When we were young I merged with thee
The blood of youth still flowing free
The bread the wine the poetry
Beneath the old forbidden tree

How sweet the fruit that we have shared
Across the gulf of time we dared
To stand before each other bared
And free of guilt embraced and paired

Our love beyond earth's great desire
A love that burns more fierce than fire
I lay me down on broken briar
Your son upon the funeral pyre

Like rings of onions you have peeled
The mysteries that the atom sealed
God's heavenly tablets once concealed
To me, through you the Lord revealed

May he in me with love's desires
Wash your body ere it dies
With fragrance sweet that ne'er expires
To snare the righteous passer-byes

The spark of life leaps ever higher
Spiralling up from fire to fire
To He, with who we did conspire
To grasp this scheme of things entire.

The crystal there beside your seat
The written formula incomplete
My brothers now lay at your feet
Their offerings that you might eat

Awake my Lord, for now's the time
To offer to the world your wine
Reveal on every written line
Your secrets, through these words of mine.

May you, when for your morning sup
Of heavenly vintage from the soil look up
Through wine that drips down drop by drop
Know he who holds the inverted cup..........By Gentorev.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.