Whats your solution to the hard problem of consciousness?

[Carl-Richard]

13 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

Why would you privilege one state („the realization of the formless while still being immersed in form“) over the other („formlessness without the contents of the dream“)? 

One could make a case either way, as far as I’m concerned.

Pure formlessness usually doesn't last very long. Eventually, you return to human form, either the one you were originally, or a different incarnation (). So unless you want to keep returning to the formlessness like a spiritual tourist, you would probably want to keep it with you regardless of what form is appearing (or not appearing). Besides, it's in human form you can help others to awaken, and they would surely benefit from being hooked up directly to the source through their guru without the guru having to go on vacation every once in a while.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Nilsi]

3 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Pure formlessness usually doesn't last very long. Eventually, you return to human form, either the one you were originally, or a different incarnation. So unless you want to keep returning to the formlessness like a spiritual tourist, you would probably want to keep it with you regardless of what form is appearing (or not appearing). Besides, it's in human form you can help others to awaken, and they would surely benefit from being hooked up directly to the source through their guru without the guru having to go on vacation every once in a while.

So it’s a utilitarian argument?

[Carl-Richard]

Just now, Nilsi said:

So it’s a utilitarian argument?

It's a human argument  It's also a "why not?" argument. What else is there to do? A bored sattva is a bodhisattva.

[Nilsi]

11 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's a human argument  It's also a "why not?" argument. What else is there to do? A bored sattva is a bodhisattva.

What’s the problem with admitting that there is no good reason why one should be privileged over the other, but still choosing one over the other? Wouldn‘t that be the real human argument?

[Carl-Richard]

1 minute ago, Nilsi said:

What’s the problem with admitting that there is no good reason why one should be privileged over the other, but still choosing one over the other? Wouldn‘t that be the real human argument?

You would feel inclined to privilege the one over the other because you're human. That is a reason. To deny that reason would be to deny your humanity.

[Nilsi]

14 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

You would feel inclined to privilege the one over the other because you're human. That is a reason. To deny that reason would be to deny your humanity.

As long as you don’t actually belief that one is privileged over the other, we agree.

[Carl-Richard]

15 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

As long as you don’t actually belief that one is privileged over the other, we agree.

I guess. I said it was a human argument after all 

To be clear, it's not only about helping other humans. A realization that doesn't stick doesn't feel like a complete realization. You feel naturally drawn to making it stick, maybe not just as a human but as a being. The fact that the formlessness fades and you feel lost in the illusion again is evidence of the incompleteness.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Nilsi]

15 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

I guess. I said it was a human argument after all 

It's also not only about helping other humans. A realization that doesn't stick doesn't feel like a complete realization. You feel naturally drawn to making it stick, maybe not just as a human but as a being. The fact that the formlessness fades and you feel lost in the illusion again is evidence of the incompleteness.

What do you mean by „making it stick?“ 

To me it’s like being in love. I could be so engrossed in doing an ordinary task, that I totally forget about my loved one. Does that mean I’m not still in love with her the next time she crosses my mind?

[Carl-Richard]

11 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

What do you mean by „making it stick?“ 

Making the realization of formlessness not fade with the appearance of forms.

 

11 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

To me it’s like being in love. I could be so engrossed in doing an ordinary task, that I totally forget about my loved one. Does that mean I’m not still in love with her the next time she crosses my mind?

No, you're of course completely in love with her, but there is still a natural driving force that wants you to be with your loved one all the time  Of course, human relationships are complex, and there are competing forces, but so it is with spirituality (definitely for me, as well as others who struggle with some of the ramifications of awakening). I ultimately want to be with the realization all the time, but when I get too close to it, I get scared. So the analogy is actually pretty spot on (maybe because we're dealing with human drives in both cases).

Edited December 21, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Nilsi]

10 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Making the realization of formlessness not fade with the appearance of forms.

 

No, you're of course completely in love with her, but there is still a natural driving force that wants you to be with your loved one all the time  Of course, human relationships are complex, and there are competing forces, but so it is with spirituality (definitely for me, as well as others who struggle with some of the ramifications of awakening). I ultimately want to be with the realization all the time, but when I get too close to it, I get scared. So the analogy is actually pretty spot on (maybe because we're dealing with human drives in both cases).

Again, why privilege one drive over the others?

I wouldn’t want to be with my loved one all the time. Sometimes I want to make some money, other times I want to spend some time with the boys, other times yet I want to be alone in nature, etc. 

I wouldn’t want to subordinate any one of those to another. They coexist in an infinitely complex and dynamic relationship — that’s what makes life meaningful (and that’s what makes her want you even more ).

Edited December 21, 2023 by Nilsi

[Carl-Richard]

42 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

Again, why privilege one drive over the others?

I wouldn’t want to be with my loved one all the time. Sometimes I want to make some money, other times I want to spend some time with the boys, other times yet I want to be alone in nature, etc. 

I wouldn’t want to subordinate any one of those to another. They coexist in an infinitely complex and dynamic relationship — that’s what makes life meaningful (and that’s what makes her want you even more ).

Well, in the case of your loved one, being with her all the time is practically impossible. You have to tend to the other drives, and they're somewhat conflicting (and it's necessary to do so for survival). But with enlightenment, it's not impossible. If the drive is there and it's possible to fullfil it to the greatest extent, you'll be inclined to do that. To use a different example: just because it might be practically impossible for your girl to have an orgasm, that doesn't mean she wouldn't want that 🤣

[Nilsi]

7 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

But with enlightenment, it's not impossible. If the drive is there and it's possible to fullfil it to the greatest extent, you'll be inclined to do that. To use a different example: just because it might be practically impossible for your girl to have an orgasm, that doesn't mean she wouldn't want that 🤣

It’s very possible for her to have an orgasm, but she wouldn’t and couldn’t have one all the time. 

Where even did you get the idea about something like „permanent enlightenment?“

 

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, Nilsi said:

It’s very possible for her to have an orgasm, but she wouldn’t and couldn’t have one all the time. 

I think we're starting to take the analogies a bit too literally.

All organisms have an innate desire to express their innate capacities, in line with survival challenges and competition in natural evolution. For example, if you have the capacity to run say 10 m/ph, you will most likely run 10 m/ph when the appropriate situation arises. It doesn't make sense that you would run slower than what you're capable of. Likewise, if you're capable of "permanent" (stabilized) non-dual awareness (which you are), and if non-dual awareness is something desireable (which it is), and if it does not impede with functioning (in fact it highly improves functioning), you will be drawn to that.

 

3 hours ago, Nilsi said:

Where even did you get the idea about something like „permanent enlightenment?“

First, it was contemporary mystics, then religious traditions, then scientific research. I subscribe to the idea that you can make it your new "default state", meaning it's your go-to way of operating, but it's not necessarily "permanent". Some enlightened people report that things like low blood sugar levels can kickstart the self-referential machinery, which makes sense, as that would be what this part of your psyche evolved to do (telling you to alter your current behavior, and more generally giving you insights and disrupting current processing). The self-referential machinery has in most people become overactive beyond what is functional (mostly due to the mismatch between modern society and our evolutionary adaptations), and this is proven by the fact that it's possible to exist in a state where it's minimally active and where that actually massively improves functioning.

[Nilsi]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

I think we're starting to take the analogies a bit too literally.

All organisms have an innate desire to express their innate capacities, in line with survival challenges and competition in natural evolution. For example, if you have the capacity to run say 10 m/ph, you will most likely run 10 m/ph when the appropriate situation arises. It doesn't make sense that you would run slower than what you're capable of. Likewise, if you're capable of "permanent" (stabilized) non-dual awareness (which you are), and if non-dual awareness is something desireable (which it is), and if it does not impede with functioning (in fact it highly improves functioning), you will be drawn to that.

I’m capable of many things. I don’t see why this is different from, or more desirable than fulfilling any other drive. 

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

.First, it was contemporary mystics, then religious traditions, then scientific research. I subscribe to the idea that you can make it your new "default state", meaning it's your go-to way of operating, but it's not necessarily "permanent". Some enlightened people report that things like low blood sugar levels can kickstart the self-referential machinery, which makes sense, as that would be what this part of your psyche evolved to do (telling you to alter your current behavior, and more generally giving you insights and disrupting current processing). The self-referential machinery has in most people become overactive beyond what is functional (mostly due to the mismatch between modern society and our evolutionary adaptations), and this is proven by the fact that it's possible to exist in a state where it's minimally active and where that actually massively improves functioning.

Why assume that there is some „final realization“ to be attained? 

As far as I’m concerned, there is no limit to the depth of realization one can attain — the same way mastering an instrument is completely open-ended.

[Yimpa]

If your joy and zest for life is sourced from somewhere else, run away; towards yourself.

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Nilsi said:

I’m capable of many things. I don’t see why this is different from, or more desirable than fulfilling any other drive.

I would argue that the drive to awakening is not different from the drive to enlightenment, and that awakening is a partial version of enlightenment. It's like running 5 mph instead of 10 mph. If you're already pursuing awakening, it makes little sense to not pursue enlightenment.

 

2 hours ago, Nilsi said:

As far as I’m concerned, there is no limit to the depth of realization one can attain — the same way mastering an instrument is completely open-ended.

All I'm assuming is that there is a difference between short temporary states and stable baselines. Both are attainable.

 

2 hours ago, Nilsi said:

As far as I’m concerned, there is no limit to the depth of realization one can attain — the same way mastering an instrument is completely open-ended.

There is certainly possible refinement going on after making non-dual awareness your baseline state. Again, the fact that it's a baseline state doesn't mean there aren't deviations from that baseline or that there is no room for improvement. There are enlightened people that do report that there is a refinement going on.

[Danioover9000]

@KoryKat

On 2023-12-18 at 4:35 PM, KoryKat said:

I am on the subreddit Singularity, Consciousness , NonDuality... And I see this question coming up from time to time...

 

Now I vaguely remember Mark Solms satisfying this answer for me by reframing it, but I've forgotten the answer...

 

Maybe y'all can help me , does Leo have a definitive answer on this , or do y'all have a pretty good one?   

 

I found the answer here before : https://youtu.be/vaEhAS6P7AA?si=PE2Nsc15GMWBXShY having to rewatch it though 

 

 

   What is my solution to the hard problem of consciousness? This question has the loaded assumptions which are faulty premises:

That you are assuming that I have a solution.

That you are assuming a problem with consciousness.

That you are assuming the word 'hard' and 'problem' onto consciousness.

Please elaborate on your question much clearly.

   Another problem is your source, and how you found your source and the context you've described so little of. You said you're searching through reddit in the singularity, non duality, consciousness threads and some more about spirituality, and found this question repeatedly asked. The issue here is lack of detail to this prior context and explaining how this question is framed and rephrased in each of those subjects in reddit and why you're browsing through those reddit threads.

   'Now I vaguely remember Mark Solms satisfying this answer for me by reframing it, but I've forgotten the answer...' This one is a good point to raise a question. Maybe instead of asking me my solution to the hard problem of consciousness, why not instead ask me or any user here what is memory? Or the solutions to your hard problem of memory, memory lose, and forgetfulness? Seems like a good path to go down on.

   And onto the question I hate the most: 'Maybe y'all can help me , does Leo have a definitive answer on this , or do y'all have a pretty good one?' Firstly, why assume all of us can help in a casual forum setting? Also, obviously @Leo Gura has made videos on consciousness, so it seems silly 'does Leo have a definitive answer to this?' then switch and address us all as having 'pretty good answers.'? Can you explain why you framed this question like this?   

 

[Nilsi]

21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

If you're already pursuing awakening, it makes little sense to not pursue enlightenment.

I guess what I want to find out is whether you take any one drive as fundamentally superior to any other. 

21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

All I'm assuming is that there is a difference between short temporary states and stable baselines. Both are attainable.

Name one thing that is not constantly in flux. 

21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

There are enlightened people that do report that there is a refinement going on.

I wouldn’t want to rely on that kind of evidence.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Nilsi

[Carl-Richard]

4 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

I guess what I want to find out is whether you take any one drive as fundamentally superior to any other. 

I don't actually know what you mean or what kind of answer you're looking for. What do you mean by "superior"?

 

8 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

Name one thing that is not constantly in flux.

Everything is constantly in flux, but there is a difference between for example an emotionally stable person and a bipolar person.

 

10 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

I wouldn’t want to rely on that kind of evidence.

Ok. Getting over puberty doesn't mean your beard growth has reached its full potential. I think the idea that you can experience a level of refinement after hitting a new baseline of functioning is trivial.

[Nilsi]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

I don't actually know what you mean or what kind of answer you're looking for. What do you mean by "superior"?

In our little metaphor you said you’d want to be with your loved one all the time and that it’s the same with the realization we’ve been talking about. I said I wouldn’t want to be with my one all the time.

So in my mind there is no static hierarchy of values, but you seem to imply one. That’s what I want to get at.

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Everything is constantly in flux, but there is a difference between for example an emotionally stable person and a bipolar person.

A difference in degree not in kind.