Man is just a lump of MEAT?

What do you see as the essential essence of a human being? Do you regard men and women as simply another member of the plethora of animate beings on planet earth? Do you regard yourself and others as having the same value as other creatures, or does it vary? Are we on a par with the magnificent dolphin in terms of intrinsic value, or infinitely above? Do human flaws lead you to conclude some animals are better than humans — or does it vary from individual to individual?

What on earth are we? (I assume all contributors to be human, even on ATS.)

So are people just lumps of meat? (Some may be more lumps of fat, given.)

If so, why not cook your neighbour? After all you are hungry.

What difference does it make that it's your grandma? Just a lump of meat...

When we introspect, or look inside ourselves it is not as if we are turning our eyeballs inside our meat boxes to view our the inside of them, we are "looking" into a deeper place, as we instinctively understand that we are more than simply a meat box, and that we inhabit these meat boxes, or temples, depending upon your view. The biological construct does make certain demands of us, but we in turn will make demands of it. It is a struggle from the moment we take our first breath, a battle between spirituality and flesh. As spiritual beings, we are infinite, and timeless, but as biological constructs we are limited to our bodies, and mortal. How strange then, that we agree as immortal spirits to inhabit bodies that demand we survive, only to someday die. Herein lies the struggle, and that struggle is to harmonize our spiritual awareness with our biological construct. That is the game.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


The rabbit hole deepens.

Some would say that 'biological construct', that which is tangible, is just fooling you into thinking there's more to you than the physical. So maybe the physical has got one over on the metaphysical. (?!)

The battle you speak of: why is it so profound? If you're just a lump, the spiritual isn't there. Why the struggle?

How about we flip this on it's head? The spiritual is what you know is there. It's you. You thought, therefore you typed.

Maybe the spiritual is just fooling you into thinking the sensory input it's receiving and turning into a construct of reality is more than just the metaphysical. Maybe the only entrapment is in your mind?

Originally posted by pause4thought
So are people just lumps of meat? (Some may be more lumps of fat, given.)

Yup, hewmons are meat. Without a doubt. Meat!

reply to post by pause4thought


I would say that man's mind is actually attuned to the spiritual plane in such a way that gives him free will and reign over his or her life. I believe that everything from animals to even plants have this gift, although possibly on varying levels.

However, the Soviets did do experiments with plants that suggested that they might be more in tune with the spiritual aspect of things than animals are. They used lie detectors in order to measure the electromagnetic field of the plants, and watched the lie detectors spike when they did things like dump a jug of prawns into a tank full of boiling water in the next room over.

reply to post by pause4thought


Some would say our thoughts are nothing more than neurons popping off in our brain, but if this is so, did those neurons cause scientists to come to know of neurons?

Is the biological construct what created our belief that we are spiritual, or did our spirit create these biological constructs? Create matter? The space between matter is quantifiable. Perhaps our bodies are nothing more than what our minds make of them, as is this entire universe. Perhaps it is all just here by our agreement, which would really be odd, since few of us here in this site can agree on much, and perhaps this is why the world seems to be falling apart, because we have ceased to go along with agreement.

reply to post by darkbake


By the way, at some point, try assuming that you are just a lump of meat and you will begin to see why this doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It is called proof by contradiction.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


For some reason, your words seem much more wise with your avatar's picture staring at me. I like it.

Originally posted by TeddiRevolution
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

For some reason, your words seem much more wise with your avatar's picture staring at me. I like it.

Jean Paul Zodeaux often strikes me as a wiser man than who I really am, but then again, who am I if not the creator of JPZ? A wise fool, constantly in a battle with myself, and some days I win, some days I loose, and vice-versa.

If we were more than a current sustained by meat we could do awesome things like turn off sound, vision or smell and turn it back on whenever we feel like it. Wouldn't it be great to exist in your fantasy like being in a movie and going back to this meat world at will?

If I was more than just meat I would be happy just by willpower, like the flick of a switch I would be genuinely happy and not because of some sensory input that created these effects in my conditioned meaty brain.

After watching Divinorumus' video I was tempted to retire and meditate for the rest of the day.

Then darkbake has to go and spoil my day with empirical evidence that plants are more spiritual than sentient beings.

Now I just need a bucket of ice on my head.

Jean-Paul: I was with you till you made the leap to 'by our agreement'. Were we ever asked?

'Agreement' also seems to imply purpose, not to mention non-behaviourist volition. Especially as it would have been obtained pre-conscious experience. Maybe a dead end? Or just too subtle?

Yet where do the agreed human values arise from? Surely they indicate something above flesh and blood?

Or ought we to go empirical and insist that as there is no quantifiable basis for spiritual values/human rights all concepts of right and wrong are not evidence-based, and therefore intangible and void?

Is there perhaps an objective basis for morality in a world of meat? If not, why do universal principles hold sway?

Maybe Hitler was consistent. Within his own world-view for sure, but had he perhaps tapped into a universal truth: meat?

Or did he perhaps miss something?

reply to post by pause4thought


I think we are the result, or the product of the same force that is responsible for everything.

Consciousness, pure consciousness.

In my opinion, there is nothing but consciousness, everything else exists within that consciousness.

Let me go ahead and apologize, it will be in order when I get to my next line.

My only reaction to the headline of this post

Man is just a lump of MEAT

can be:

That is what she said.

I know, I said I'm sorry.

[edit on 26-6-2010 by space cadet]

reply to post by Dragonfly79

If we were more than a current sustained by meat we could do awesome things like turn off sound, vision or smell and turn it back on whenever we feel like it. Wouldn't it be great to exist in your fantasy like being in a movie and going back to this meat world at will?

Even science at this point knows that it is not a current sustained by meat, but the other way around, and the moment that current exits the meat box, that is the end for the meat as a living creature, but where has the current gone?

reply to post by Dragonfly79


You might be surprised how much your mind can impact your body:

Biofeedback

Biofeedback is the process of becoming aware of various physiological functions using instruments that provide information on the activity of those same systems, with a goal of being able to manipulate them at will. Processes that can be controlled include brainwaves, muscle tone, skin conductance, heart rate and pain perception. Biofeedback may be used to improve health or performance, and the physiological changes often occur in conjunction with changes to thoughts, emotions, and behavior. Eventually, these changes can be maintained without the use of extra equipment...

Check it out, it's fascinating.



reply to post by space cadet


Does the fact you just lowered the tone indicate you are aware only of the physical, or does it indicate spiritual decadence?


reply to post by Point of No Return


How did you reach your conclusion?

reply to post by pause4thought


Well I didn't just reach it, but it makes perfect sense to me.

It would explain reincarnation, life after death, a lot of the supernatural, it would explain the wierd observations of the Quantum world(many will disagree, I'm willing to debate that)

A lot of Eastern and ancient philosophy supports this, and in the end, I just know.

Once you have experienced detachment from your body and ego, it becomes obviously clear.

It is all within.

All IMO, off course.

reply to post by pause4thought


What makes you so certain that plants are not sentient? Is it because they have no neurons? Plants most certainly have complex responses to external stimuli. Intelligence, scientifically speaking, is complexity with the ability to adapt and solve problems. According to Anthony Trewavas:

Plants actively forage for food resources by actively changing their architecture, physiology and phenotype. When patches rich in resources are located by growing roots or shoots and occupation of resource receptors reaches crucial levels, decisions are made to proliferate enormous proliferation, which greatly increases the surface area for absorption of energy, minerals and water. In this way, decisions are made continuously as plants grow, placing roots, shoots, and leaves in optimal positions according to the abundance of perceived resources.

Leaves are placed and positioned by petioles to minimize self shading; the pulvinus then rotates the lamina to face the optimal direction of light. If light is newly blocked on one side, the plant resiliently turns to another. If branches are overgrown, decisions are made based on the threshold of carbohydrate return, to seal the connecting vascular system and beneficially redirect the use of scarce root resources to the rest of the plant.

Trewavas goes on to show how plants effectively predict the future and make decisions based upon those predictions, offers a measurement in order to gauge plants intelligence, hypothesizing that plants have internal assessment capabilities, or simple reasoning patterns. Of course, if he is wrong, and all this complexity is simply chemical reactions than we are forced to redefine what intelligence is, which science often finds itself doing when discovering the complexity of simple structures, or if Trewavas is correct, then we are forced to reconsider the importance of neurons as actually being the source of thought.

Regardless of where thought comes from, clearly thought outlives the flesh which contains it, otherwise we would not be able to quote Shakespeare today. As to leaps of faith, science often makes them as well. In finding a cure for scurvy, it was discovered that it was caused by a lack of vitamin C. Wait a minute! A lack of vitamin C? Whence the lack? Was it the lack that was discovered, or was this simply a leap that allowed for the discovery that vitamin C will cure scurvy?

reply to post by Point of No Return


Nice eclectic approach. That opens several new cans of worms.

Detachment from the body? That would seal it, if proven. (Reminds me of another discussion: Near-death experiences are real, and we have the proof, say scientists).

Is information on OBEs/NDEs rejected by some as it defies their preconceptions, or because the evidence is too scant? Would you like to say a little about your own experiences, perhaps?

'Quantum' is also very welcome. That should expand our minds. (I mean our meat.)

You can have a lump of coal, a lump of sugar, even a lump in your throat. You can have a lump of ice or even a lump on your head. what you cannot have is a lump of meat. As for what i have written, you can like that or lump it. But Meat has specific names, none are named lump. If your basic premise is wrong than your conclusions are suspect too.

[edit on 053030p://am3053 by debris765nju]

If you were served up your neighbour, and told it was pork, you wouldn't know the difference and tuck right in.

Chop it up, lay it on the table and yes, it's meat!

And an anorexic would be a 'bag of bones'.

MM