You are not the body. (Materialists welcome to debate)

I don't really have to do much to show you how material the mind is...

A neurotoxin should do the trick...provided there is an antidote.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

Again, your consciousness has nothing to do with the running of the bio-mechanical suit it wears.

Consciousness is a result of the complex system which is a brain. Science has not shown that consciousness can exist outside of a brain, yet you state your opinion as if it were fact.

You move the suit and you choose.

Your decisions are largely a result of your brain chemistry at the time. This is why emotions have such a large influence on our decisions.

This is the soul learning.

The soul does not learn, the brain does. Take away the brain and the information is lost. Or are you claiming information is stored in both the brain and some non-physical archive? What is the point of the brain if we do not need it to experience, make decisions or store information?

The soul is the connecting point of the spirit and the body. It's like a modem by comparison. Information is the key to changing the soul (Self). When we bring the soul and the mind (consciousness) into unity with the law (love God and love others), our future actions create the image of our past as equal reflections. Our actions produce an agreement with our past. Sin and unrighteousness reflect future and past unequally by duplicity. This creates a dissonance between the two. We correct this by changing our past by moving new choices into the future. This is called mastery. If we cannot show mastery over the law, it masters us. This is the extent of what we can do as humans.

This word has been used before in this thread, but here it is again - gobbledygook.

You completely avoided all the points I made (why?) and presented wild abstract speculation with zero facts.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

Good example. These types of cases prove that personality is a function of the brain, that personality is not independent of the brain and a function of a non-physical "soul" or "spirit."

reply to post by filosophia

Spirit is different from body, just because a limb can be deformed does not mean the spirit can be deformed. The spirit creates through karma which brings in an imperfection. Body is the deformed spirit.

Body and spirit must share some kind of quantifiable link for one to influence the other. Just as your physical body cannot act upon an object without somehow interacting with it (usually through some kind of force), the spirit could not act upon the body without somehow interacting with it. Therefore, if, as you indicate, the body is the physical reflection of the spirit, than any deformities or short-comings a body possesses, must be inherited from a broken, or deformed spirit prior to being adopted by the physical vessel.

Concerning the Law of Return/Karma, I think that you have mistaken the western idea of "instant karma", sometimes called "pop karma" with the legitimate Karmic laws of Hindu and Buddhist teachings. One's Karma does not cause deformities in the physical vessel. One's Karma causes one to reincarnate in a specific body (mineral, plant, animal, human, energy); or a specific caste (royalty, noblemen, commoner, poor, or untouchable); or it dictates obstacles to be overcome during life (poor health, poor wealth, unlucky in fortune, being widowed, etc). It does not cause you to have a maimed foot, be paraplegic, or suffer from Congenital Analgesia.

Your question about not having any sentience because of some type of disease, drugs can do this but only for a short time, if this disease was permanent how does it differ from death? The spirit can ignore the body on its own without drugs or disease through meditation and it obtains the inner consciousness which is beyond sentience.

For starters, just because a body cannot respond does not mean that it should be qualified as dead. A comatose patient is certainly different then a dead body. Take Stephen Hawking, as an example. He has no mobility in 90% of his body. But his mind is so dynamically alive and well. Would you qualify Stephen Hawking as "dead"? Would you state that his spirit has crippled his physical body because of bad Karma? Such ideas strike me as blind and idiotic. Bad things happen because of genetics, stupidity, or accidents. Not because of the spirit.

Meditation. So, another person who believes the meditation removes them from their consciousness and allows them to travel the limitless space of the astral dimension. You've confused terminology. Astral Projection removes one from their current body and allows them to experience the Christ Consciousness. What meditation does is strengthens the body, increases the current sentience, and helps the human mind to hone in on, and solve dilemmas. Meditation is not a ticket to escaping the body. Quite the opposite, it is a ticket to further connectivity, understanding, and exploration of the current self (ego, personality, sentience, what have you).

A camera and the spirit are very similar. A camera captures a present landscape and sound, the spirit captures the present moment. Does a camera capture smell? Or touch? Or love and hate? No, obviously then a camera is inferior to spirit, because it lacks these, it does not contain everything life can offer. Even if it did, the spirit is still superior because it does not require a computer to play back the message or video, the spirit is one part, whereas a camera needs a television to play back (as well as a memory card, electricity, an audience, etc).

Let me start this with a few simple questions:

• Do you remember being born?
• Do you remember speaking your first words?
• Do you remember what you did yesterday at precisely 7:43 p.m.?

Memory is a wonderful thing. It can help us retain sensations, experiences, and emotional stimulants. Do you know what other things memory is very good at doing? Tricking us into accepting things, and being manipulated by others.

Memory, as testimony, does not hold up in a court of law as well as DNA evidence, video evidence, photographic evidence, and crime-seen photography. This is because memory is inherently faulty. Your memory (synapses in the brain) works by a series of electrical charges in the brain. Let me demonstrate how a memory is built:

First, timing. Your brain recalls approximately when something happened. Daytime. It fabricates a sunny day outside. Second, location. Outdoors. Your brain grabs hints of wildlife, landscapes, city skylines, and other relevant associations which will help fill in the tiny details. Then, it populates the area with objects and people which should be there: you, family, friends, backyard furniture, whatever. And, finally, it recreates what you believe was said/experienced.

None of the memory is actually exactly what happened. Colors are not exact. Timing is not exact. The population is not always 100% correct. None of the dialogue is accurate beyond any doubt. Memory is faulty. It can show you things which were not there. Or, leave out things which were there. And, worst of all, it can be influenced when under stress, hypnosis, or very clever wordsmiths.

Perhaps if the spirit had a photograph, a video recorder, and a sound recorder attached to it, which could duplicate a memory in physical reality then it would be more reliable...

Vines are an example of vegetative growth. They have vegetative life in that they grow (vegetate) and expand due to outside influence (sun, rain, earth, wind, also pollination). Vegetation is the lowest living life, it has no consciousness (like animals) and no intellect like humans. The order is

Vegetation - no consciousness
Animals - consciousness
Humans - the highest intellectually (but not necessarily vegetatively).

A plant can regrow limbs, a tree can live hundreds of years, a human's body is brittle, but they have intellect. This means everything in nature has a positive and negative to it. A fly is quick and defies gravity, but can be easily crushed, an elephant is strong but moves slowly. A human has a mind but can use it for self-torment.

This is so because everything has spirit, although in different modes. So a vine growing on a tree has a powerful instinct for survival but not for doing math problems.

First, where does this order of living species come from? Vegetation does have consciousness, of a kind. Study a flower: it turns itself toward sunlight (needed to survive). It opens its buds during only fruitful times, closing them in times of harsher conditions. Vines climb to ensure their survival. Roots grow where flora and fauna do, to steal vital nutrients. Vegetation has consciousness, it just lacks mobility. It makes up for this lack through pollination.

Animals, while have consciousness and mobility, also possess intellect. Gorillas, Parrots, Dolphins, and various other creatures can be taught to solve problems, sign desires, and more. Associative responses are intelligence. Animals, like humans, can learn to adapt to their environment, form communities, hunt in packs, and Elephants (among others) even honor their dead and have graveyards. To say an animal is lower than a human is pure garbage. Most animals, and plants, can survive conditions humans cannot even fathom living in: desert terrain, high in the mountains, in deep sea pressure, etc).

While I have no problem believing in a Chi, or Brahma, or Tao flowing through all things, I do not think that any one thing is any more evolved than any other thing. Even single-celled organisms have intense abilities of mobility, and endurance which the most well-trained athletes could not compete with if put under comparable strains.

As a quick aside, humans are not the only masochistic inhabitants of the planet. Caged birds engage in "feather plucking", canines can have what has been termed "lick granuloma" in which they obsessively lick their lower paws causing skin, muscle, and tissue damage. Isolation and loneliness in mammals can lead to self-mutilation, etc. Animal self-harm, just like human self-harm is a recognized and documented observance. It is not a human-only trait, like you state.



Not that I don't believe in a spiritual existence. I am a very spiritual person. I have my own practice (Astro-Qabalism), my own beliefs on what shapes the spirit/energy which run through us (biological memory, blood memory, and more); and what practices can help us to balance our spirit and physical vessels (Troth, Seiðr, theurgia, goetia, qabala, and more). I just do not accept the definition and proofs of spirit that have been put forth in this thread.

~ Wandering Scribe

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
I'm just gonna go ahead and mention Phineas Gage. Gage lived during the 19th century and was the foreman for a railroad construction company. One day an accident occurred and a large iron rod was sent through Gage's head. Amazingly, Gage survived his accident, but suffered extensive damage to his left frontal lobe. After spending some time recuperating Gage seemed to be physically normal, but his entire personality had changed. Where there was once a well-respected even-tempered man there was now a loud, rash, quick to anger man who was prone to indulge "in the grossest profanity." This demonstrates that an entire person's Self can be changed due to brain damage. The logical conclusion then is that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. If the Mind is separate from the Brain it would be subservient to the Brain making any differentiation between a Materialistic and Dualistic universe pointless.

Uhm, I think having a large iron rod through my head would change my personality extensively. I'd be p&*(*d at the world too. That's a bad example, that's more like a life changing event that changes your personality. It'd be better if it was a loud obnoxious guy before, then a perfect gentleman after. Life changing events tend to create a negative spin on people, and they become bitter by nature.

reply to post by filosophia


I'm sorry (i'll finish reading) but saying

A rock is a rock,

that is NOT a good argument, because a rock is inanimate...

reply to post by Druid42

I'd be p&*(*d at the world too.

Why? As if the world conspired to insert a rod into your instead rather than it being a series of unfortunate events or a costly mistake on your part?

That's a bad example, that's more like a life changing event that changes your personality.

Its a good example because it demonstrates that personality is a function of the physical make-up of a brain. It was not just an "event" in that it was a negative experience which caused psychological changes, it was a physical change in the neural-circuitry which controls a persons behaviour.

It'd be better if it was a loud obnoxious guy before, then a perfect gentleman after.

"Better" how? A more amazing anecdote to tell? Or better in that the world would be more fun if brain damage fixed personality disorders rather than created them?

Life changing events tend to create a negative spin on people, and they become bitter by nature.

By nature or from their negative experiences?

I've had several positive life changing events.

reply to post by Wandering Scribe


The link between the body and soul is the mind, the thoughts, emotions, intellections, etc.

Since a lot of people are asking about how disease and deformity fit into the scheme, here is my understanding of it.

Body is corruptible, it can be deformed or broken apart.

Soul is the true essence of reality which is beyond body and form. It can not be cut or deformed, or even changed in any way, it is the 'changeless'.

The link between the two is mind, mind is body and soul. Part matter, part spirit. So the mind can be deformed, while another part is not deformed. If something happens to the body, like a poison, the mind is affected because it is part of the body (just as if you eat spoiled food you feel sick because that poison is now in your body). The mind is also affected in how it thinks; when you feel sick, it is harder to do complicated mental problems. The spirit however, is separate and isolated from matter, it is the transcendent. It is not affected by what happens to body, since it is the light of the soul that created matter in the first place. Nature creates body in the very best way possible, however circumstances can arise where the bodies become spoiled (like plants during a drought and their leaves dry up), however nature itself is unaffected, just as the soul is unaffected by the body.

So people are asking if someone gets a rod through their head how that would affect the soul. The body would certainly be affected, as with the mind attached to the body, but the mind attached to the soul will still have that connection to the higher spirit, and so it is still possible to be a vegetable but be aware of the Self. Not physical awareness, but spiritual awareness in that you simply are the Self. Even if you are not aware of the Self, you are still the Self. What would that be like? I'd imagine quite surreal, however the Self will eventually depart from the body so it shouldn't be viewed as a fearful thing, all misfortune can be overcome by the transcendence of the Self. If there is a modicum of intelligence left in the brain-injured individual that is still life and so life will go on even if it can not fully reach an ideal human being. It's unfortunate, but karma always plays into things, so there will always be an explanation even if you do not understand it. The divine plan works in ways that human beings have a hard time comprehending. In the end, we are all the same, in the beginning we are the same, so the middle is just an intermediate moment where we experience different things.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


SuperiorEd hi,
You claim we don't do anything except think and move well that's rubbish because we also feel with all our 5 senses, we use them to interpret the external world. Our bodies also feel. If we didn't feel anything we would have nothing to think about or any reason to move. We would look at something and it would hold no meaning or interest if we could not feel something about what we are looking at.

Anything that you can perceive is not you, everything that you are is what you are not, what you are is your ability to perceive, and it is impossible to perceive your ability to perceive, although you can look back into your skull 180 degrees and see your own "eye" you will still be the perceiver that is perceiving your eye, and thus still unable to perceive yourself.

the brain is inside the body.... the mind is only capable because of the brain = thought.

everything within the body is part of the body... that seems logical

You are your body but your field of perception is not limited to the constituents of your own being as what's happening inside the body of others can be concretely felt and their emotions, thoughts, energetic field and all their other layers can be directly perceived. In other words, the purusha (detached witness) can become the perfect mirror of others.

Originally posted by SyntaxConspiracy
DNA is merely the blueprint of the interface to house a 4th dimensional consciousness or soul in the physical mass based 3rd dimension.

...and for those who have breached the 3rd dimension to make this realisation, it is a self-evident truth...for those who have not - the insane idea that mere chemicals and an edifice made of atomic slime can arrange itself to discuss whether it 'IS' aware of anything!
Akushla

reply to post by SuperiorEd



You wrote:

["Can the universe be tricked?"]

To some extent, yes. That's what 'self-organizing complexity' is about.

Quote: [" Again, God is the governor of the laws."]

And up pops the mythological assumption once more. The real answer is ofcourse "42".

Originally posted by SystemResistor
Anything that you can perceive is not you, everything that you are is what you are not, what you are is your ability to perceive, and it is impossible to perceive your ability to perceive, although you can look back into your skull 180 degrees and see your own "eye" you will still be the perceiver that is perceiving your eye, and thus still unable to perceive yourself.

This knower must be outside of the field of sense, which is why it is considered on "another level."

The only type of perception that perceives itself is pure self-intellection meaning there is no otherness only Selfness.

Originally posted by Thurisaz
the brain is inside the body.... the mind is only capable because of the brain = thought.

everything within the body is part of the body... that seems logical

You can't point to thoughts in the body, and pointing to electrical synapses in the brain does not illustrate the complexity of thought which is perceived within a person's mind. The mind is attached to both brain and self, being as it receives information from the brain and also makes choices from its stored memory which captures things that have been perceived in the past. The memory is the computer of the brain and it can recall moments from the past. The only way it can do this is by ignoring the construct of time and viewing it as if it is in the present. The witness to this is outside of even memory, so that is the proof of the eternal essence.

Self-organizing suggests choice. Complexity suggests going against entropy. Both of these can only be demonstrated with existing biological materials. Apart from existing biology and chemicals only found as byproducts of living matter, there is no reaction found in nature that will provide living matter with consciousness.

The proof is found in the Bible. The Bible makes no apology for telling us that proof for a designer is evident by the information within nature itself. It further gives us a way to visualize how the design process takes place. We are 'in' an image created by God. Just as my words are here in the image of me in this post, we are 'in' God's image. God further goes on to outline how this process took place. In the beginning (TIME), God created the heavens (SPACE) and the earth (MATTER). Let there be light (ENERGY). Genesis 1:27 27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

He states that He has an image and He goes on to state that we are in that image and the image of Him. Notice that it is stated two ways.

The trinity is the process. Father is God (LIGHT/Prima Materia), Son is Word (Wave/Force/Logos/Programming) and Holy Spirit is consciousness. Matter (light) is both particle (Father) and wave (Son). Science stops here and blasphemes against the Holy Spirit when it tries to get man to believe that consciousness is not part of the process in creation. Since matter is living, then it contains all three members of the image of God. The Son of God, Jesus, was also in this image. He is different because his spirit is Holy in every way. He has a new blood that is offered to us in exchange for our soulish nature of animal spirit. When we are translated by this blood, we too will be restored to our former nature.

This is just the first few verses of Genesis. I can confidently match science to what I already know from the Bible. Since it claims to know the answer to origin, and then backs this by scientific fact, I can then deduce that it is the best source available. When if conflicts with scientific theory, then we may have an argument against biblical truth. As for now, it stands solid. I have two references that agree.

Now, let me hear your two references. If all you stand on is science, then you are standing on faith form theory only. I stand on science as well, but I include the missing part about preexistence consciousness. Not only do I have the theory, I have the most plausible explanation to back the theory up as a fact by evidence. I also have a third verification in the fact that nature is the mirror to both science and biblical truth. Cover to cover, it tells it like it is. Science backs it up 100%.

Misplaced concreteness cannot stand as fact apart from verification. Without verification, you rely on mythological assumption from science and bias against God.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

You wrote:

["Can the universe be tricked?"]

To some extent, yes. That's what 'self-organizing complexity' is about.

Quote: [" Again, God is the governor of the laws."]

And up pops the mythological assumption once more. The real answer is ofcourse "42".

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You wrote:

["Self-organizing suggests choice. Complexity suggests going against entropy. Both of these can only be demonstrated with existing biological materials. Apart from existing biology and chemicals only found as byproducts of living matter, there is no reaction found in nature that will provide living matter with consciousness."]

That's why it's called self-organizing COMPLEXITY, and so.....?

Quote: ["The proof is found in the Bible."]

Disregarding our considerable disagreement on how to define 'proof', your main-argument is......that because you and the bible declare yourselves 'authority', it must be so.

"Is, isn't, is, isn't" endlessly; with the preacher's hope of passive acceptance, when rationality is lulled to sleep from repetitive slogans.

Quote: ["The Bible makes no apology for telling us that proof for a designer is evident by the information within nature itself."]

Pity then, that no-one yet has produced a rational 'intelligent design' model, but only mixes of pseudo-science/logic and preaching.

Quote: ["It further gives us a way to visualize how the design process takes place. We are 'in' an image created by God."]

Who are the "us" and "we" you refer to?

Quote: ["In the beginning (TIME), God created the heavens (SPACE) and the earth (MATTER). Let there be light (ENERGY)."]

And taking copyright on platitude-observations on the existence of time, places, matter, energy (which exist in the man in street as well as northern mytholody etc), you have demonstrated what .....?

Quote: ["Genesis 1:27 27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them"]

Preaching, done just as well (and often better) from any religious position.

Quote: ["The trinity is the process. Father is God (LIGHT/Prima Materia), "]

Except that 'light' isn't the primary materia in rational models.

Quote: ["Son is Word (Wave/Force/Logos/Programming)"]

It takes quite a stretch of religious free-association symbolism to equal wave/force to logos and then to programming.

Quote: ["Holy Spirit is consciousness."]

Won't make it more 'true' to be repeated again.

Quote: ["Science stops here and blasphemes against the Holy Spirit when it tries to get man to believe that consciousness is not part of the process in creation."]

So you surf on your pseudo-science until it doesn't carry any longer, and then introduce your mythology into the fake-equations.

Quote: ["This is just the first few verses of Genesis. I can confidently match science to what I already know from the Bible."]

No, you can't. You just claim it, and everytime it gets to close, you start from square one again elsewhere.

Quote: ["Since it claims to know the answer to origin, and then backs this by scientific fact, I can then deduce that it is the best source available."]

You appear to be ignorant about what deduction means. It has nothing to do with the mess of pseudo-science/logic and mythology you present.

Quote: ["When if conflicts with scientific theory, then we may have an argument against biblical truth."]

That's true, and the biblical 'truths' never have a chance, and only barely survive because a small group of preachers repeat them steamroller-wise.

Quote: ["Now, let me hear your two references. If all you stand on is science, then you are standing on faith form theory only."]

Sorry, I don't ascribe to YOUR kind of epistemology. I prefer the rational version, where science/logic is clearly outlined and self-defined (not looking anything like your version of it). This rational version is avaible for study practically everywhere, and I have no intention of starting an evening-class in basic science/logic here.

Quote: ["I stand on science as well,....."]

Nothing even slightly resembling real science. You have a private homecooked version.

Quote continued: [".....but I include the missing part about preexistence consciousness."]

Yes. Adding mythology to the knowledge-gaps.

Quote: ["Not only do I have the theory, I have the most plausible explanation to back the theory up as a fact by evidence."]

You are without question defining 'theory', 'fact' and 'evidence' in your private way. I refer to and rely upon the standard definitions and systematic methodologies..

Quote: ["I also have a third verification in the fact that nature is the mirror to both science and biblical truth."]

Like most theists you constantly refer to 'intelligent design', without ever presenting a model standing scrutiny from real science/logic.

Quote: ["Cover to cover, it tells it like it is. Science backs it up 100%."]

Nope. Genesis 1 is pure bosh from the perspective of real science.

Quote: ["Misplaced concreteness cannot stand as fact apart from verification. Without verification, you rely on mythological assumption from science and bias against God."]

What on earth is "misplaced concreteness"...not sharing your fantasies?