The materialist argument on consciousness seems convincing

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, SriSriJustinBieber said:

One could argue that it most probably wouldn't in substantial ways because you would see the relevancy of what you imagined in the first place

This is all still concept.

You're not actually infinitely conscious, so you haven't achieved what is being pointed to.

All your ideas about awakening are NOT awakening.

What changes your life is awakening. NOT your ideas.

[SriSriJustinBieber]

31 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

This is all still concept.

You're not actually infinitely conscious, so you haven't achieved what is being pointed to.

All your ideas about awakening are NOT awakening.

What changes your life is awakening. NOT your ideas.

My point is that things at this point are not being imagined randomly: you are not suddenly morphing into some 8-legged alien then into a cat, then into a tree, etc, because what "adds" to infinity so to speak is for it/you to be Leo. This doesn't mean there is no room in that for waking up from the person and becoming the creator, far from that, but this too is just a (necessary) step.

Here is a quote from Nisargadatta that will perhaps make things clearer: "Donating the self you get brahma, donating brahma you get parabrahman" (Brahma in Hinduism is the creator god, or the creative principle, parabrahman is a term used to point to the absolute)

Edited August 28, 2021 by SriSriJustinBieber

[Leo Gura]

55 minutes ago, SriSriJustinBieber said:

Here is a quote from Nisargadatta that will perhaps make things clearer: "Donating the self you get brahma, donating brahma you get parabrahman" (Brahma in Hinduism is the creator god, or the creative principle, parabrahman is a term used to point to the absolute)

It's ALL absolute.

[kamwalker]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You imagine you are conscious of the illusion, but you are not. Therefore you feel no impact.

If you actually became conscious of what I am talking about, it would change your whole life.

How did it really change your life though? 

[Leo Gura]

5 hours ago, kamwalker said:

How did it really change your life though? 

It is too profound to speak.

[Jodistrict]

I just finished a Bufo Alvarius ceremony, and what I experienced was an alive beingness beyond the mind and concepts.  Arguments don’t capture this.  It must be experienced.

 

[Superfluo]

On 25/8/2021 at 10:52 AM, Leo Gura said:

Although I would not praise Kant so much. In my opinion Kant is overrated, as all the Western philosophers tend to be.

Which Western philosophers are worth studying in your opinion? Hegel and who else?

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Superfluo said:

Which Western philosophers are worth studying in your opinion? Hegel and who else?

Plotinus, Anaximander, Anaxagoras, Berkeley, Sextus Empiricus, Heraclitus, Einstein, Spinoza

[Thought Art]

@Jodistrict Namaste

[DocWatts]

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Plotinus, Anaximander, Anaxagoras, Berkeley, Sextus Empiricus, Heraclitus, Einstein, Spinoza

Have you ever considered as a video topic the use (and misuse) of the Western philosophical tradition?

Hegel would make an interesting topic for the blog or as a short form video.

Edited August 31, 2021 by DocWatts

[Danioover9000]

@kamwalker

On 28/08/2021 at 2:57 PM, kamwalker said:

How did it really change your life though? 

   One of the few best ways it might change your life, is when you come down from it,  start studying and applying NLP, address your self image, how you represent  your time, do positive affirmations/visualizations, start becoming more positive. Before, it might've been a grind as you haven't used your mind like this, but after awakening, it gives you the biggest picture possible to feel inspired enough to be ok in designing who you want to be, and what you want to do, for the renainder of your time in earth, no matter how grindy it gets.

[tlowedajuicemayne]

These kinds of questions, while interesting to think about and discuss never really get you closer to the Truth (in my experience). You could spend years debating and discussing models and frameworks, philosophies, ideologies, etc. about consciousness and never take a single step in the right direction. There is something about the human mind which makes it prone to lusting after the complex and ignoring the simplistic and I find that this is the main reason why these types of questions only lead to  further confusion.

Consciousness is actually quite simple. It is only when we try to understand it that it appears complex and paradoxical. If you turn to your direct experience of this moment, you will find no confusion in your sight, your hearing, your feelings, you will only find confusion in your mind. When your mind is quiet, there is no further confusion, no further questions to ponder. It becomes quite obvious. There is a popular zen quote-

'It is like a mosquito trying to pierce an iron bull.'

All Conceptual models and frameworks (while helpful) merely bounce off of the surface of Dharmas leaving no trace, returning to the mind with empty hands. 

I think if you're serious about discovering the Truth of consciousness and you aren't merely looking for an idea, or belief system. You might consider putting an end to your intellectual pursuit and instead, listen with your entire body. 

[Leo Gura]

4 hours ago, DocWatts said:

Have you ever considered as a video topic the use (and misuse) of the Western philosophical tradition?

Hegel would make an interesting topic for the blog or as a short form video.

I've been planning a philosophy vid for a long time.

[Shambhu]

Some Western philosophers worth investigating:

Heraclitus               550 BC
Parmenides            500 BC
Socrates                  450 BC
Plato                        400 BC
Aristotle                  300 BC
Pyrrho                     200 BC
Marcus Aurelius    100 CE
Sextus Empiricus   200 CE
Rene Descartes      1596-1650 CE
Baruch Spinoza      1632-1677 CE
Gottfried Leibniz    1646-1716 CE
George Berkeley    1685-1753 CE
David Hume            1711-1776 CE
Immanuel Kant      1724-1804 CE
G.W.F. Hegel           1770-1831 CE
Edmund Husserl    1859-1938 CE

My personal favorites are Husserl and Spinoza, followed by Berkeley.

 

[Adodd]

On 8/24/2021 at 1:51 PM, undeather said:

There is better material for a novice. 

If you want a logical, easy to understand argument on why the materialist paradigm is wrong, there is noone better than Bernardo Kastrup in my opinion. All you just asked is explained by his model - he also goes into detail on why materialistm doesnt make sense at all.

Watch this 

 

I am unfamiliar with Bernardo Kastrup. Does anyone else second that this would be very helpful easier to grasp material for the novice/not God realized?

@Leo Gura thoughts? Are you familiar with his teachings? 

[Bernardo Carleial]

On 23/8/2021 at 8:27 PM, SaWaSaurus said:

By materialist argument, I mean the idea that consciousness is a product of the brain/body. When I refer to consciousness here, I'm talking about the colloquial meaning which is synonymous with awareness, or the ability of perception.

As the argument goes, consciousness arises within you at some point after your conception, and continues to exist until you die or when you temporarily lose consciousness during sleep or some disruption to the brain. The reason I find this argument so convincing is because it seems to be true in my own experience. When in deep sleep, I seem to lose awareness entirely. If I were to get hit hard enough in the head, I'd seem to lose awareness entirely. If I were to be put into a chemically induced coma, or put under anesthesia, I assume I'd lose awareness entirely. Also, my awareness seems to be emanating from my body, particularly around my eyes and face. All of this would suggest that consciousness is obviously a product of the brain, right?

I don't necessarily believe of disbelieve this argument, and I've heard some teachers say things like 'deep sleep is just consciousness without content', but to me it seems more like a total ceasing of awareness, and even if it is technically consciousness without content, I still wouldn't see any difference. On the other hand, consciousness is a fundamental requirement for experience, so without it there would be no difference between things existing and not existing, since there would be no one there to experience. Not sure if that made sense, but I think it suggests that consciousness must be prior to everything, since nothing would exist without consciousness being there to perceive it. Anyway I'm interested to hear people's thoughts on all this.

Read this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Why-Materialism-Baloney-Skeptics-Everything/dp/1782793623

And watch these videos:

 

 

Materialism seems very consistent because our current model of reality is very biased towards appearences(sensory based and/or changing of properties), and they replicate that by running experiments that validates with the data already agreed upon. And that sense of consistency creates an ad hoc problem, because materialism tries to look at the world from a third person objective perspective, without taking in consideration their own biases, which is largely influenced by the cultural meme of the time, and projects it out to the world, which creates a "corruption" from within the scientific method between the scientist and his experiment.

 

Edited October 30, 2021 by Bernardo Carleial

[Bernardo Carleial]

On 29/10/2021 at 11:53 AM, Shambhu said:

Some Western philosophers worth investigating:

Heraclitus               550 BC
Parmenides            500 BC
Socrates                  450 BC
Plato                        400 BC
Aristotle                  300 BC
Pyrrho                     200 BC
Marcus Aurelius    100 CE
Sextus Empiricus   200 CE
Rene Descartes      1596-1650 CE
Baruch Spinoza      1632-1677 CE
Gottfried Leibniz    1646-1716 CE
George Berkeley    1685-1753 CE
David Hume            1711-1776 CE
Immanuel Kant      1724-1804 CE
G.W.F. Hegel           1770-1831 CE
Edmund Husserl    1859-1938 CE

My personal favorites are Husserl and Spinoza, followed by Berkeley.

 

Husserl is great, I love his work.

I would also put Martin Heidegger on that list as well.