What do you mean "where your consciousness goes"? Things like this don't make sense to me. The aggregate neuronal connections in your brain aren't going anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by arson519
Printable View
What do you mean "where your consciousness goes"? Things like this don't make sense to me. The aggregate neuronal connections in your brain aren't going anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by arson519
He didn't say "where your aggregate neuronal connections go," he said "where your consciousness goes." These are two different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
Has it been proven that consciousness is born from and confined to the brain?
They're really not different things. We have no reason to believe that consciousness isn't tied to the brain and every reason to believe it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceField
Still not conclusive. And even if consciousness is tied to the brain it doesn't have to mean that it is glued to it.
There are many reasons to believe that consciousness is not born from and confined to the brain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
Near death experiences. Out of body experiences. Remote viewing. Psychic abilities. Past life memories. Paranormal activity.
The idea that something that is (according to science) not conscious (brain matter) can give rise to consciousness is a bit absurd, and again, is nothing more than a scientific belief.
There is reason to believe that there is a correlation between consciousness and the brain. Nothing more.
YesQuote:
Originally Posted by IHadADreamWhere
The light at the end of the tunnel is not seen at death that we know of. It is reported by those who did not die in the final sense. They see the light just before coming back to the physical world. The light is only experienced by the mind, the mind forms in the brain. They are perhaps floating outside of physical reality and then get pulled back here. Then they see that light. It is because they did not die. We will never get first hand reports of true death (for obvious reasons).
Well there you have it. This world is a simulation (wait, IMO) and that makes pretty much everything imaginable with in the realms of science. What? You say neither seems to happen, at least on Earth, well based on what? There is no physical plane in reality, so all physical worlds are simulations. This one is not a simulation of a 'real' one. How could you possibly tell if it is not what is happening on Earth? Luckly gab moved this in the religion section, so I feel ok talking about my belief system here. Hinduism is the primary source where you find reincarnation (Buddhism is branched off of this) and it is probably not a coincidence that we believe both in reincarnation AND that the world is composed of dream matter. Seriously, seeing this as a simulation truly opens up one's mind as far as what makes sense and what is possible. In fact all experience realms will be simulations where the closest metaphor would be "a dream some powerful entity is having in which we are DCs." This includes Heavenly realms and our own dreams. Reincarnation is not the only option, remembering that all realms are simulations, then any religion's expectations for after life are possible. Christians can experience the Heaven they expect and atheists may be given the choice of non-existence (but when they realize it is a choice, I bet they pick something else most of the time).Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
So there you have it. The culture that believes in reincarnation also believes in every other option and that this world does not exist in the traditional sense to begin with.
You've listed all things that can be debunked or at the very least placed in the "unreliable testimony" bin.Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceField
Observe patients with brain damage and tell me their consciousness isn't affected.
If you throw your radio on the ground ,you will no longer be able to hear the show but that doesn't mean the radio host is dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
I've already agreed that there is a connection between consciousness and the brain. Any sensible person knows this. Again, I'm speaking specifically about the idea that the brain gives birth to consciousness. Scientists agree that the matter that the brain consists of is not conscious, and yet they believe that it somehow magically creates consciousness. This is as much of a belief as the ideas that you are combating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
If you encode music on to a CD and break the CD and the player, the music is gone. Consciousness is not analogous to free floating radio waves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaitakaro
Well no, they believe it somehow physically creates consciousness. The New Age woo-woo types accept the magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceField
Why is calling it a belief some kind of pejorative?
The belief that the brain somehow physically creates consciousness is just as magical as any other "woo-woo" New Age idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
It's not. Simply establishing that the scientific stance on this issue is just as grounded in belief as any other.Quote:
Why is calling it a belief some kind of pejorative?
I just saw a show in which a noted astrophysicist state we should not try to apply scientific law to that which can not be proven either to exist or not. While fun for debating the process takes away from science.
Either accept certain claims for your own involvent or do not, I have endless info on how such things and the cosmo works, BUT, it is all going to start with my claim that life is like a dream, or even more so like a video game. Think video game: When we agree to play we know we will get killed in the end, but we keep doing it. You do not keep the power-ups, but maybe you remember who you get them. You do not keep the increased attributes you have earned, but you now remember how to best manage such traits and where to get them.
In this ghost of the city of pyramids one will find everything in the real city of pyramids, except in this so called city, one realizes that their world is temporal unlike the real city where those who inhabit there do not realize that there is no city of pyramids.Quote:
Originally Posted by sivason
It's not magical, by definition.Quote:
Originally Posted by VinceField
Still searching for a point here.Quote:
It's not. Simply establishing that the scientific stance on this issue is just as grounded in belief as any other.
Yes, this is how you believe brain-consciousness interaction worksQuote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
but as long nobody of us can present evidence that holds true to the scientific method both our models will remain believes/theories.
You failed to understand me there. In this model the radio waves where not the Consciousness, they where the method of interaction between the radio(brain) and the radio show(Consciousness)Quote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
(of course it would have to be some form of point-to-point communication like tcp and not something as unrefined as radio-signals but this is not rly important here)
It is just as magical as any other "woo-woo" belief, as it is an unproven assumption. Give it some deep thought and you'll likely realize just how magical the idea that matter lacking any degree of consciousness can give birth to consciousness is. It's David Blaine status.Quote:
Originally Posted by Descensus
It's pretty clear. This is essentially a matter of science vs mystical experience/belief, and in this case, not only is science unable to disprove the mystical side of the argument, but it cannot prove many of it's own ideas either. The point is that believing that consciousness is born from the brain is no more valid a belief than believing that consciousness exists independent of the brain. The fact is that consciousness and the brain are intimately related. That's about all that science has proven. This says nothing about the origin of consciousness, nor it's ability to exist independently of the brain. There are a handful of different areas of experience and study which indicate that it is possible that consciousness is fundamental and physical matter is secondary. I find it best to keep an open mind and not jump to any conclusions.Quote:
Still searching for a point here.
The Catch22 in this whole discussion is that reincarnation may or may not exist but, if the Buddhists are right, all one's past life and humanity is stripped away and the slate seems to be wiped clean ready for the next incarnation so (except for a few unproven claims of past-life) what exists to provide proof one way or the other? So it's really only down to personal beliefs...and Snoop is right...the question was do we believe or not, so IMO is really superfluous to this debate I suppose.
P.S. Strassman's recorded venous DMT trips also talk about the "stripping away" of one's humanity, a layer at a time.
P.P.S. If Strassman is right about the importance of the pineal gland's DMT role at the point of death, the gland first appears in the developing fetus at around 49 days...the ancient Tibetan Book of the Dead records that the period between death and reincarnation is around 49 days...
As I said before, I'll stick with that line of research for a while...
...
I think that in order to answer this question we will first need to know exactly where consciousness comes from.
The way I see it, there is no real reason for a brain to make someone feel alive and conscious, it could have easily been a working organ without causing consciousness to an individual.
So where did this consciousness originally come from?
Why does an active brain result in someone feeling aware of the environment?
Also, one pretty interesting point is this:
what is it that says that our current life is a "first and last time" we became alive?
What were we doing until our birth?
The natural answer would be "nothing, since we weren't alive".
But couldn't this happen again at some point in the future, so that after we have died, we might enter another body and be born the same way again?
I see no problems in that, but it would be cool to learn more about this.
Reincarnation? Well, I don't believe in it.
You can talk all the "consciousness is something transcendental that would stay the same after death and go live again in another body" like you've actually got any clue, but this seems like shooting in the dark. It's especially funny that not understanding consciousness means the proposed transcendental suggestion would be true. Even if it can't be physical, and must be transcendental, what then? We don't know what that means. We can't just say it means spirits or god or realms or what not. We can't even be sure we can logic it anyways. Forget about this being speculations, you don't even know if you can use common sense on something that doesn't work using physical laws that our logic only understands. Yeah, c'mon, say "prove that logic only works in the real world" like you've tried it in transcendental matters then tested it and got similar results. Untested logic barely even work with science and the real world! Put a scientists in a volt for years and he'll come up with nothing. He needs to test to even confirm his steps are right. And speculations like these come along with people flying banners of gap arguments and speculative hypothesis shouting as if they're talking proven stuff. At most, this should just be "what would you imagine the ToE might be?"
I hope I'm not coming out as rude. I just want to point out this, that's all.
I feel like some of it may be directed at me. Which I would find unpleasurable. Considering I want to make a new thread of my thoughts on Reincarnation and would appreciate not to be ridiculed for my ideas.
Wait, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have been so disrespectful. I'm sure you only meant to share and receive regarding reincarnation, and not be putting it as a scientific statement or something to receive scientific criticism. (I think you're not proposing it as fact)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dthoughts
But if I got it wrong, and you are proposing it as a fact, then my statement still stands but o/c I don't mean any ridiculing or anything like that. I'm just criticizing the idea of reincarnation's plausibility given the evidence for it.
Again though, I'm sorry if I was rude, please forgive me.
I'm probably being oversensitive ^^
You say that about a scientist that needs to do tests to confirm his steps. As if his logic is bound to be flawed and need to be tested but Einstein did his work solely in his messy office and only got verified years after he died. And a lot of it got verified. You see, logic works here if you can apply it. In the same way we can apply logic to the transcendental. It woulden't be a fact without testing it but the possibility is there.Quote:
Forget about this being speculations, you don't even know if you can use common sense on something that doesn't work using physical laws that our logic only understands. Yeah, c'mon, say "prove that logic only works in the real world" like you've tried it in transcendental matters then tested it and got similar results. Untested logic barely even work with science and the real world! Put a scientists in a volt for years and he'll come up with nothing. He needs to test to even confirm his steps are right.
Simply put. Admitting that consciousness is an unsolved problem is required to admit that the possibility of a spiritual solution is an open book. When discussing consciousness this seems at the least fair. :P
Well in most cases experiments show a step is wrong, then the scientist needs to work it out again until he gets to the right step. Experimenting is very important.
Well o/c us being able to logic the trancendental is a possibility, if we ever find it exists. And since there are still gaps when it comes to the science of human consciousness, we can't claim for sure that it's surely materialistic. Though even if it turns out to be the first time we actually conclude that there must be more than material to it, if such transcendence occurs, then that would open a whole new world of possibilities. I would imagine that it would bring facts we never even imagined before. I mean, forget about spirits or souls or whatever, much more amazing things might be discovered, things we couldn't even imagine.
O/c IF such thing happened, but I would bet it'll turn out materialistic. I'm just weary of saying it would be transcendental since we only hear about that in religious stories or philosophy.
O/c I'm open to it, but I wouldn't put much hope on it. Don't get me wrong, the idea of transcendence and afterlife appeals to me. I really wish there would be much more to our existence. I mean I love my life, but more is better. But I can only hope. These things seriously only lead to disappointments, they never turn out to be more than stories :(
It's not helped by the fact so little research seems to be done. Rick Strassman's DMT experiment ended in 1995 and I can't currently find anyone who seems to be really pushing it forward. Mind you, I get the same feeling about Stephen LaBerge and dream research.Quote:
Originally Posted by LouaiB
Anyone here ever read Dr. Ian Stevenson reincarnation research? It's really stunning and surprised not many people know about it.
Ian Stevenson, MD Child Reincarnation Stories, Walter Semkiw, MD Reincarnation Expert & Ian Stevenson Advocate