Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 23:39:41 GMT -5
I agree. But the question is, is there a way to demonstrate this to Gopal, and E and L? I know it's true, I've proven it to myself, verified it, you could say objectively subjective, but it's a process, and one has to have a reason to submit to the process, and that reason is also objectively subjective (IOW, personal). The problem is, we have never seen such a world so far. That's just born out of our own speculation We both are experiencing the commong thing but interpreting in different way We are experiencing the perceiving act, we are simply perceiving, then we start to speculate that it's coming from some mysterious place called outer world. This assumption just remain in speculation, but my conclusion is direct and simple. Where does your mysterious inner world come from? |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 18, 2016 23:42:57 GMT -5
You just said Consciousness doesn't do anything (if not precisely what you said, close), I don't get that. But anyway, I've studied and pondered these questions from many angles. Physics says the universe had a beginning. Now science can't say too much about what was, before the beginning, so you have to move to another arena. I say SOCI did not have a beginning, always was (always IS), but originated the manifest universe. What about the multiverse theory and multiple big bangs. No beginning is required. Stephen Hawking said there was no God because before the big bang there was no time and therefore no entity to create because creation required time. But that sidesteps the requirement for something to initiate the starting of time which leads to the big bang. But if there is infinite time in both directions then nothing is needed to start anything. So God is outside of space and time. No, they are morons to say this. They say this because they say that ~stuff~ can arise spontaneously out of the quantum vacuum. But then the quantum vacuum has an origin, one has to explain the origin of the quantum vacuum. "It's turtles all the way down" is not a scientific answer. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 18, 2016 23:47:34 GMT -5
Yes, you are reading from your appearance, don't you? Let's assume there is a outer world, even if you assume such a case, you are still reading from the image(image inside your bran) of actual(outer), aren't you? No it is not my experience that I am reading an image from my brain. You can consider'ponder/contemplate this for five minutes (already spoken to), and you will see that it's true. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 18, 2016 23:50:38 GMT -5
That's what I am saying you are reading from your inner world,right? Let's assume there is a outer world, ok? Where are you seeing the moon? In your inner world or outer world? That's just a concept you are creating. It is my experience and yours that I read from a screen and that the moon appears to be in the sky. It appears that's what's happening, but it's not. What you are seeing is a re-creation-copy-representation of what's exterior. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 18, 2016 23:53:00 GMT -5
I am not creating the concepts, you are creating the concepts, Just pay closer attention and answer my question. Where are you looking at the moon? Inner or Outer ? Where? It's in the sky. How many times do i have to say it. The moon is in the sky, yes, but the moon you are seeing is inside your own brain-consciousness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 23:53:22 GMT -5
What about the multiverse theory and multiple big bangs. No beginning is required. Stephen Hawking said there was no God because before the big bang there was no time and therefore no entity to create because creation required time. But that sidesteps the requirement for something to initiate the starting of time which leads to the big bang. But if there is infinite time in both directions then nothing is needed to start anything. So God is outside of space and time. No, they are morons to say this. They say this because they say that ~stuff~ can arise spontaneously out of the quantum vacuum. But then the quantum vacuum has an origin, one has to explain the origin of the quantum vacuum. "It's turtles all the way down" is not a scientific answer. Maybe that's because the answer isn't scientific. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 23:55:57 GMT -5
No it is not my experience that I am reading an image from my brain. You can consider'ponder/contemplate this for five minutes (already spoken to), and you will see that it's true. What if I had never heard of brains. I've been confined to a room all my life with no learning and knowledge of the world and it's discoveries. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 23:57:25 GMT -5
It's in the sky. How many times do i have to say it. The moon is in the sky, yes, but the moon you are seeing is inside your own brain-consciousness. What's a brain. Never heard of such a thing. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2016 0:11:07 GMT -5
That image is what you continued to look ever since you born,right? I don't look for the image of the moon in my brain, if I want to see the moon I look to the sky. But you know that already. The brain seems to work in such way that we don't have to think about how images are formed if we want to see something. This is actually not true. A baby has to learn to see. Perception is very complicated. We don't see with the eyes, eyes are not like a camera. The eyes send data to certain visual centers in the brain, this is bottom-up information. A baby has to collect a certain amount of data before it can see. This data becomes stored in a top-down data center. Here what's happens once a baby ~learns to see~, say a tree. The eyes collects tree-information (baby visually senses a tree), this again is bottom-up data. This information is compared to the already-stored-tree-data (top-down data) which sends its data to another visual center, and this center, combining top-down and bottom-up data says, yea, that's a tree. This is why people who have been blind since birth and then have an operation to give sight, can't automatically see. Some of these people have so much trouble adapting to sight (in the beginning seeing is very disorienting), they decide to go back to not-seeing. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2016 0:16:27 GMT -5
You start to raise foolish questions to me because you know you can't answer and If you answer you know what kind of trap you would fall on, Did I understand you correctly Satch? Yes I can answer and I will and I'm not going to accept for one microsecond your strategy of saying I am dodging. There is absolutely no dodging on my part. You mentioned brains did you not. Is that an appearance brain. You have some knowledge that brains process images. Were you born with this knowledge? No you learnt it. Now that knowledge is part of that theory. So brains process images how do you know that the image is not from a real moon? Bingo! He can't know there is not an external moon. Gopal is making an assumption he cannot verify. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 0:29:13 GMT -5
But for them the trees are not physical, for them there is no external universe. For them the universe is like a holographic 3-D projection ( is a holographic projection). You go see a movie, it's projected on-to a screen, but you are seeing moving pictures on a flat surface. For them this universe is the same, merely a kind of 3-D projection by the Oneness. Don't you understand their position? No I don't understand their position because I don't believe them if that is what they are saying. I believe they all react to a tree as if it is real. It's pretty simple. We are speculating anything beyond our perception. But you are doing it. You are bringing some kind of mysterious outer world which is resemble to what you are perceiving, but in truth, you are perceiving and speculating. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 0:30:01 GMT -5
No I don't understand their position because I don't believe them if that is what they are saying. I believe they all react to a tree as if it is real. OK, but I'm quite surprised by what you say. I'll have E explain context to you some time.   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 0:32:16 GMT -5
And the image of the moon is created in your brain is what you are also saying. Yes, everything you see, everything you think you see, is merely in your own head (in your mind-brain-consciousness). You see only a copy of what's exterior, only a representation, a re-creation. Yes even if you believe outer world exist. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 0:33:19 GMT -5
The problem is, we have never seen such a world so far. That's just born out of our own speculation We both are experiencing the commong thing but interpreting in different way We are experiencing the perceiving act, we are simply perceiving, then we start to speculate that it's coming from some mysterious place called outer world. This assumption just remain in speculation, but my conclusion is direct and simple. Where does your mysterious inner world come from? Where does your mysterious dream world come from? Who creates your nightly dream world? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 0:35:24 GMT -5
What about the multiverse theory and multiple big bangs. No beginning is required. Stephen Hawking said there was no God because before the big bang there was no time and therefore no entity to create because creation required time. But that sidesteps the requirement for something to initiate the starting of time which leads to the big bang. But if there is infinite time in both directions then nothing is needed to start anything. So God is outside of space and time. No, they are morons to say this. They say this because they say that ~stuff~ can arise spontaneously out of the quantum vacuum. But then the quantum vacuum has an origin, one has to explain the origin of the quantum vacuum. "It's turtles all the way down" is not a scientific answer. If other individuals are figments, then I am ever existence and I don't have any beginning and I will not have any end either. I will ever present. I am eternal. Each life I will fall into my dream and I will wake up and I continue to enjoy the creation. If other individuals are real, then Predetermination is true, If predetermination is true , then it's longing for the determiner, so determiner is eternal, we are not and that Determiner created everything to fulfill his purpose. |
|
