Author Topic: We need to talk about the meaning of existence  (Read 9888 times)

Stranger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8236
  • Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #25 on: May 23, 2020, 09:23:26 AM »
Neural explanations of Consciousness are just not happening!
Of course, the brain has a role in connecting the Unconscious mind with the Conscious mind and with perception, senses etc.  But trying to explain consciousness entirely through neuroscience is not possible.   

Assertions.

Check up on David Chalmers, Donald Hoffman and others...

The conjectures of a few philosophers and scientists do not become the unquestionable truth just because you like them. Also, you keep on citing different people whose views contradict each other, all you seem to care about is that they don't agree with the view that consciousness emerges from brain activity alone.
x(∅ ∈ x ∧ ∀y(yxy ∪ {y} ∈ x))

Sriram

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8253
    • Spirituality & Science
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #26 on: May 23, 2020, 10:45:19 AM »


When we have a microscopic view, everything will seem a contradiction.   The nose will seem a contradiction to the mouth and the mouth will seem a contradiction to the ear.....and so on. Nothing will fit in. 

When we have a broader perspective...everything will fit in.

Cheers guys.

Sriram

Stranger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8236
  • Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #27 on: May 23, 2020, 10:54:19 AM »
When we have a microscopic view, everything will seem a contradiction.

What is a "microscopic view" in this context and why would it make anything contradictory?

The nose will seem a contradiction to the mouth and the mouth will seem a contradiction to the ear.....and so on. Nothing will fit in. 

Why would any sort of view lead to these things being contradictory?

When we have a broader perspective...everything will fit in.

By "broader perspective" you appear to mean not actually thinking about it.

Don't look too closely or you'll see that it's nonsense!
x(∅ ∈ x ∧ ∀y(yxy ∪ {y} ∈ x))

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17582
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #28 on: May 23, 2020, 10:54:48 AM »

When we have a microscopic view, everything will seem a contradiction.   The nose will seem a contradiction to the mouth and the mouth will seem a contradiction to the ear.....and so on. Nothing will fit in. 

When we have a broader perspective...everything will fit in.

Cheers guys.

Sriram
No Sriram - when we ignore evidence we will learn nothing. When we refuse to let go of our prejudged views in the face of evidence we will remain ignorant.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64313
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #29 on: May 23, 2020, 11:06:26 AM »

When we have a microscopic view, everything will seem a contradiction.   The nose will seem a contradiction to the mouth and the mouth will seem a contradiction to the ear.....and so on. Nothing will fit in. 

When we have a broader perspective...everything will fit in.

Cheers guys.

Sriram


http://www.wisdomofchopra.com

Sriram

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8253
    • Spirituality & Science

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17582
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #31 on: May 23, 2020, 02:24:44 PM »

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2016/04/28/zoom-in-zoom-out/
Have you ever actual met any scientists Sriram?

You do seem to have a peculiarly blinkered view on people in that profession. It is of course true that scientists will necessarily study a small part of something, as you might see it, in great detail. But that certainly does not mean they do not care about, nor understand the bigger picture. Usually it is because the bigger picture makes no sense until you understand the details.

And of course you also need to understand the details to be able to use knowledge to improve the world - you cannot build a bridge unless you understand the details of the materials you might use, the design and the requirement of that design (such as weight it is required to carry) - if you try to build that bridge without that knowledge it will collapse. You cannot develop cures for diseases without understanding the details of the disease process.

So you can post all you like your patronising tropes on scientists:

This is why, scientists, generally speaking, cannot be relied upon to contribute effectively to a Big Picture view of the world taking into account all its experiential and spiritual aspects. They will automatically limit themselves only to a microscopic view. This is an important conclusion we can draw.

I'd say that scientists have devoted themselves to addressing the biggest pictures of them all - the nature of the universe; the development of life and its evolution, the complex ecosystems of our planet, the incredible neurobiology of the human brain; the remarkable and complex behaviours of animal and plant species etc etc.

I am afraid that it is people whose world view is tunnel vision limited by the blinkers of a man made god who are really failing to get the big picture. To get the big picture you need to recognise that the universe does not revolve around people and that the notion of 'purpose' and 'meaning' are peculiarly human-centric concerns and have no 'big picture' value in universal terms.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 09:23:08 PM by ProfessorDavey »

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #32 on: May 23, 2020, 02:37:34 PM »
Humm... OK maybe I should have mentioned a swap. You started this thread about whether "self" was an illusion. I'm trying to get at what you think it is that isn't an illusion.

I will put aside my suspicion that your question is just a ruse to shift the burden of proof from those saying it is an illusion.

It may or may not be an illusion but the evidence for it not being so is.
The self is the thing we can be most sure of

If it is an emergent property of matter then it isn't an illusion

It is an emergent property of processes but the processes offered do not necessarily result in the emergence itself.

If it is an illusion then there is an unavoidable question namely what is it that is being Illuded? If one can't say then concluding illusion is misplaced.

Finally for now. The idea that it is an illusion mainly protects materialism and reductionist.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 02:49:45 PM by Your friendly illusion of self. »

Stranger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8236
  • Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #33 on: May 23, 2020, 03:15:00 PM »
I will put aside my suspicion that your question is just a ruse to shift the burden of proof from those saying it is an illusion.

It may or may not be an illusion but the evidence for it not being so is.
The self is the thing we can be most sure of

I haven't made the claim that the self is an illusion. We can't decide whether it's an illusion or not unless we can define what it is we're talking about. If it's the thing we can be most sure of, why do you and Sriram seem to be having so much trouble defining it?

Since you ignored the rest of my post, I'll try again:

If you take away memory, skills, experience, personality, and so on, what is left? What is a pure "self"? Perhaps think about if you are a "self" when you are born? When you are conceived? At what point does a "self" start to exist?
x(∅ ∈ x ∧ ∀y(yxy ∪ {y} ∈ x))

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #34 on: May 23, 2020, 05:56:56 PM »
I haven't made the claim that the self is an illusion. We can't decide whether it's an illusion or not unless we can define what it is we're talking about. If it's the thing we can be most sure of, why do you and Sriram seem to be having so much trouble defining it?

Since you ignored the rest of my post, I'll try again:

If you take away memory, skills, experience, personality, and so on, what is left? What is a pure "self"? Perhaps think about if you are a "self" when you are born? When you are conceived? At what point does a "self" start to exist?
An answer of course if you take those things away you are skinning the onion, taking it apart layer by layer. Of course, in doing so you have done away with the onion or anything else you subtract from bit by bit.

I would say the self starts with awareness of the qualia.

Now I've answered your q's will you break the habit of a lifetime and answer one. Is the self real.....or an illusion?

Stranger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8236
  • Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #35 on: May 23, 2020, 06:42:34 PM »
An answer of course if you take those things away you are skinning the onion, taking it apart layer by layer. Of course, in doing so you have done away with the onion or anything else you subtract from bit by bit.

So you seem to be saying that the "self" is just the sum total of experience, memories, skills, plans, and so on that go on in the mind, rather than a distinct thing?

I would say the self starts with awareness of the qualia.

Which again blurs the boundaries. How aware? I'm fairly certain that a rock is not at all "aware of qualia" and that normal adult humans are, but what about and infant, a cat, a fish, a mosquito, or an amoeba? Do some things have more of a self than others? Is there a continuum from self to no self?

Is the self real.....or an illusion?

No.

To clarify, I think your question is a false dilemma, real and an illusion aren't the only options. Is the centre of an onion (to use your analogy) real or an illusion? I wouldn't use the word illusion with regard to the self for very much the same reason I wouldn't call the centre of an onion an illusion, it's just not a concrete thing in its own right.
x(∅ ∈ x ∧ ∀y(yxy ∪ {y} ∈ x))

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #36 on: May 23, 2020, 10:13:00 PM »
So you seem to be saying that the "self" is just the sum total of experience, memories, skills, plans, and so on that go on in the mind, rather than a distinct thing?
Something intelligent could have memory and skills. intelligence does not mean awareness or consciousness or selfhood though and I am not sure whether an intelligence without selfhood can be said to have 'experience'
So there is the 'awareness' aspect of the self. That is probably the core of the self. The emergent thing that is irreducible in that the structures and processes from which the self emerges do not possess this 'self'

Quote
How aware? I'm fairly certain that a rock is not at all "aware of qualia" and that normal adult humans are, but what about and infant, a cat, a fish, a mosquito, or an amoeba? Do some things have more of a self than others? Is there a continuum from self to no self?

If Self is the emergent entity then there is a sheer divide between self and no self. How aware and any measurement of awareness is irrelevant then.

Quote
To clarify, I think your question is a false dilemma,
I disagree for the reason I've given.

Quote
real and an illusion aren't the only options
Then are you suggesting other ways of being?
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 10:16:43 PM by Your friendly illusion of self. »

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #37 on: May 23, 2020, 10:28:04 PM »
An electron is an excitation of a quantum field that has a defined set of characteristics. You don't seem to be able to tell me anything at all about the what a "self" actually is.
That sounds like it's in the same league as saying ''I can add 1 and 1 but you can't explain quantum mechanics.''
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 10:31:23 PM by Your friendly illusion of self. »

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64313
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #38 on: May 23, 2020, 10:30:30 PM »
What a ridiculous thing to say. That's in the same league as saying ''I can add 1 and 1 but you can't explain quantum mechanics.''
Idiotic non sequitur

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #39 on: May 23, 2020, 10:33:51 PM »
Idiotic non sequitur
Oh goody, another nearly sane post to ignore.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64313
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #40 on: May 23, 2020, 10:41:05 PM »
Oh goody, another nearly sane post to ignore.
Ignore, yet another word you don't understand

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #41 on: May 23, 2020, 10:46:01 PM »
Ignore, yet another word you don't understand
Have you got anything to say about the meaning of existence? If not why are you on this thread?

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64313
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #42 on: May 23, 2020, 10:47:39 PM »
Have you got anything to say about the meaning of existence? If not why are you on this thread?
Shiny Shiny Mirror.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #43 on: May 23, 2020, 10:49:46 PM »
Shiny Shiny Mirror.
Could one of the moderators eliminate this derail?

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64313
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #44 on: May 23, 2020, 10:52:49 PM »
Could one of the moderators eliminate this derail?
in what way is pointing out that you are using terms you appear not to understand a derail?

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #45 on: May 23, 2020, 11:17:25 PM »
in what way is pointing out that you are using terms you appear not to understand a derail?
That, whatever it means, probably is a lot more significant to you than me since you are acting like a chap deserted on a desert island who has come to think of himself as King Neptune and for whom every shell on the beach is part of his crown jewels.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64313
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #46 on: May 23, 2020, 11:19:46 PM »
That, whatever it means, probably is a lot more significant to you than me since you are acting like a chap deserted on a desert island who has come to think of himself as King Neptune and for whom every shell on the beach is part of his crown jewels.
Take care

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #47 on: May 23, 2020, 11:21:21 PM »

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64313
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #48 on: May 23, 2020, 11:29:17 PM »

torridon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10209
Re: We need to talk about the meaning of existence
« Reply #49 on: May 24, 2020, 09:00:01 AM »
I will put aside my suspicion that your question is just a ruse to shift the burden of proof from those saying it is an illusion.

It may or may not be an illusion but the evidence for it not being so is.
The self is the thing we can be most sure of

If it is an emergent property of matter then it isn't an illusion

It is an emergent property of processes but the processes offered do not necessarily result in the emergence itself.

If it is an illusion then there is an unavoidable question namely what is it that is being Illuded? If one can't say then concluding illusion is misplaced.

Finally for now. The idea that it is an illusion mainly protects materialism and reductionist.

The illusory quality is evidenced by the fact that it leads people to indulge false intuitions like after-life despite the fact there is no hard evidence or rationale for such things. The illusion consists in the intuition that the self is a fundamental independent entity rather than an emergent phenomenon of mind.