Cosmin_Visan

From what I see, spirituality kinda promotes a "world without reason" dogma. One of the most dangerous idea is that everything are just ideas in my consciousness. If such an idea is accepted, then what would stop spiritual people killing other people and bring to their defense: "what other people ? they were just ideas in my consciousness!" ?

I don't know of such a case. But for example, what is stopping you from killing ?

I'm idealist. But only because consciousness is all there is, we cannot just ignore everything else. This is not an honest attitude. Is just intellectual laziness. Once we realize that consciousness is all there is, we still have to recover what we know from science, we need to recover the laws of physics, we need to recover biology and evolution, we need to integrate psi phenomena. There is so much work to do.

You can check my papers to see how things should be done: https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan Let's just take the problem of time. On psychedelics you might experience timelessness and then say that time doesn't exist. Ok, so far so good. But what more can you say about this ? And at this point you have nothing more to say. That piece of information is quite disconnected from other things that you can learn about consciousness. But if you read my paper "The Quale of Time", you will see that through reason you can learn so much more. You can see in a rational way why time is just a quale in consciousness, you can then describe it, mention its properties, explain its properties, learn about the Self, and so much more. You then connect this with other phenomena, like evoution, and you develop yourself a much broader view of what is going on. This is what awakening looks like. Not just feeling fluffy stuff.

Yes, sure, the contents of the dream might not be interesting. I'm also not interested in the contents of the dream. But those contents are generated by rules outside of the dreams. And in those rules I AM interested. Because those are the principles on which consciousness functions. And if you pretend to know what consciousness is, then please tell us, how does consciousness generates the contents of the dream ?

OMG... more dogma regurgitations. Hahaha. If it's all knowing, then please, tell us how to unify general relativity with quantum mechanics. Omg... you loose yourselves in those hallucinations produces by psychedelics and then you consider yourselves geniuses. =)))))))))))))))))

No. There are multiple consciousnesses. What is unique is the Self (with capital S). But all individual consciousnesses are real and have individual wills. And they interact between themselves based on rules. Just sitting on a flower field and singing "All is One, All is One, All is One" to infinity is kinda boring. Is just a very limited understanding for how reality works. Until you understand how individual consciousnesses are created and interact you cannot pretend to know what consciousness is.

That's a dangerous thought to have. With such a thought you can start killing people and justify to yourself that they were all just concepts in your imagination. Be careful entertaining such ideas!

This dogma that is just a dream doesn't work. And the reason is that even nighttime dreams are not just dreams. Usually telepathies mostly happen in nighttime dreams. So even those dreams are not just imagined by your own consciousness, but are created jointly by multiple consciousnesses. So, no, is not just a dream. There are rules for how reality is constructed. And if you are not interested to understand these rules, then you are not awakened as you like yourself to consider. You are faaaar from it.

Can you recommend a philosophy of language book that addresses these issues ?

Of course consciousness is all there is. But beyond this, do you have anything else of value to bring to the table ? For example, can you deduce the laws of physics from the laws of consciousness ? This is where the real value of these attempts lie. Not in just repeating some trivial ideas all the time.

Check-out Donald Hoffman's ideas:

I like this one:

Like anything in life, you shouldn't force yourself to do anything. Just do what you like. If you like playing computer games, then do that. Don't force yourself into things that don't actually interest you only because they might sound profound or having social status.

For a deep analysis of the problem, check-out my paper "The Quale of Time": https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan

Seeing someone that sees people as mean, feeding their ego, and only trying to feel good about themselves, as mean, feeding his ego and only trying to feel good about himself, is mean, feeding the ego, and only trying to feel good about yourself.

Today philosophical idealists argue a lot about the evil of materialism that took over the institution of science, and how science should be cleansed and start to research consciousness and other psi phenomena. But even if such a thing were to happen, wouldn't this mean just the replacement of a dogma with another dogma ? Wouldn't those idealist (in the philosophical sense, believing that consciousness is all there is) scientists of the future be as dogmatic as the current materialist scientists, rejecting purely on dogma anyone who will not agree with them ? Will they not even start spiritual wars in which people that will not be considered "spiritual" will be subjected to genocide ? Can science ever be kept undogmatic ?

I'm not sure he does it. You are not being honest here. There is only the sensation that you will know what he will do, but actually what you feel is going to happen doesn't actually happen. Is just an illusion.

Clearly, all words can be questioned. But if we do this, don't we end up in madness ? Where do we draw the line so that we can have a healthy understanding of the world ? For example, if you question even "experience", which to me is so basic, what are you left out with ? What are your basic concepts on which you build your understanding of the world ?

I've been following Leo for quite some time on youtube, but I didn't thought before to also check this website. It's a nice surprise that it also has a forum, so that I can make my ideas known and thus contribute to the advancement of science in the study of consciousness. Therefore... My work on consciousness can be found here: https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan There is also a video there that I presented at the Science & Nonduality conference, though I highly recommend reading the papers. We can discuss here various topics that you find interesting from my work, or you can open individual topics. The main ideas that I think I bring new is the idea that consciousness is structured on a holarchy of emergent levels and the idea that this is done by an entity that I call self-reference. For example, in the visual domain this would be the qualia of: black-and-white -> shades-of-gray -> colors -> shapes -> objects -> full visual scene. The characteristic of the emergent structure of consciousness being that each level includes and transcends the previous level. This can be explored in "The Emergent Structure of Consciousness" paper. Then, in "The Self-Referential Aspect of Consciousness" I show how this structure is obtained by self-reference, which is an entity with the property of looking-back-at-itself. By looking-back-at-itself, self-reference includes and transcends its previous self. Because of this property, self-reference is unformalizable. Also, this means that it is no-thing and every-thing, both at the same time. And this also leads to what Leo is teaching that I am God. Because of its unformalizable nature, self-reference is not a thing, but at the same time, it also generates and is all the things, all qualia, so all consciousnesses are forms of manifestation of self-reference, self-reference which can be taken to be God. In the other papers, I apply these ideas to all sorts of cases, like in "The Quale of Time" I show how time is also a quale part of the emergent structure of consciousness, and in "On the Phenomenon of Unification" I show how the dynamics of self-reference is responsible for the unification of consciousnesses (like what happens with the 2 "brain" hemispheres) and for telepathy (which I postulate to be a case of consciousnesses unification). You can also buy my book, to help me financially, though the book is formed from my papers put together, so you can just read the papers. I will gladly like to know what you think about my ideas and it would be nice if together we can help push forward the advancement of science such as to make consciousness its primary field of study.

God is everything. We are God. The world that we explore in our consciousness is basically God exploring itself.

I think that if we were able to somehow experience an animal consciousness we would find it strangely familiar. Even the thinking process would seem familiar to us. There are people that have no inner voice or no inner imagery, yet they still function normally. So they still think, just not like the majority of people. I think is the same with animals. They still have thoughts, and from their perspective their thoughts might even seem profound.

Exactly. I talk in my paper "On the Phenemenon of Unification" about how the unformal realm is full of contradictions, and the dynamics of those contradictions is what generates the formal realm, qualia. But using forms to capture the unformal contradictions that generated them, is then impossible.

I've been following Leo for quite some time on youtube, but I didn't thought before to also check this website. It's a nice surprise that it also has a forum, so that I can make my ideas known and thus contribute to the advancement of science in the study of consciousness. Therefore... My work on consciousness can be found here: https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan There is also a video there that I presented at the Science & Nonduality conference, though I highly recommend reading the papers. We can discuss here various topics that you find interesting from my work, or you can open individual topics. The main ideas that I think I bring new is the idea that consciousness is structured on a holarchy of emergent levels and the idea that this is done by an entity that I call self-reference. For example, in the visual domain this would be the qualia of: black-and-white -> shades-of-gray -> colors -> shapes -> objects -> full visual scene. The characteristic of the emergent structure of consciousness being that each level includes and transcends the previous level. This can be explored in "The Emergent Structure of Consciousness" paper. Then, in "The Self-Referential Aspect of Consciousness" I show how this structure is obtained by self-reference, which is an entity with the property of looking-back-at-itself. By looking-back-at-itself, self-reference includes and transcends its previous self. Because of this property, self-reference is unformalizable. Also, this means that it is no-thing and every-thing, both at the same time. And this also leads to what Leo is teaching that I am God. Because of its unformalizable nature, self-reference is not a thing, but at the same time, it also generates and is all the things, all qualia, so all consciousnesses are forms of manifestation of self-reference, self-reference which can be taken to be God. In the other papers, I apply these ideas to all sorts of cases, like in "The Quale of Time" I show how time is also a quale part of the emergent structure of consciousness, and in "On the Phenomenon of Unification" I show how the dynamics of self-reference is responsible for the unification of consciousnesses (like what happens with the 2 "brain" hemispheres) and for telepathy (which I postulate to be a case of consciousnesses unification). You can also buy my book, to help me financially, though the book is formed from my papers put together, so you can just read the papers. I will gladly like to know what you think about my ideas and it would be nice if together we can help push forward the advancement of science such as to make consciousness its primary field of study.