Could god be dimensionless point of consciousness AND-----------

[zapatos]

So should I assume that this thing 'I' in you is a monkey because you have posted picture of a monkey on my site. I feel extremely sorry for you to have conceived the idea that this thing 'I' in you is a monkey.

As regards the first sentence of your post I would say:- Think very very hard as to why that picture represents that thing in you who refuses to debate and endlessly repeats himself. That thing is chasing you wherever you go. You must try to escape that thing. It is very ugly.

As regards the second sentence of your post I would say: - You are welcome to your feelings.

[chandragupta]

This thing 'I' in you is your true self & not your material body which is made of matter.

[Ringer]

This thing 'I' in you is your true self & not your material body which is made of matter.

 

This thing 'I' in you is neuronal activity made of matter and not your mysticism.

[iNow]

Chandra - Out of curiosity, from what part of India are you posting?

[chandragupta]

1353037240[/url]' post='713542']

This thing 'I' in you is neuronal activity made of matter and not your mysticism.

 

You are welcome to your opinion.

[LimbicLoser]

To those whom it may concern: Is the allowance of such, surely obviously insincere as to explaining in any at least understandably-so degree of scientific thinking posting allowed to continue for some particular purpose?

 

To the OPP. You are mistaken because--as the evidence most clearly demonstrates--you have failed to keep up with what is known, as opposed to what had been imagined in the Bhramic, Vedic, and Yogic traditions of the Arians. Additionally, you have never worked in clinical situations, nor have been exposed to them, where the brain processing which amounts to the 'self' is disrupted so as to allow a 'run-away-brain.'

 

No, there is no non-physical substrate activity at all. When the individual organ of each separate and distinct individual produces the effect of an emergent self, it is exactly due to the processing centers of that organ which does so. This is not mere opinion, this is fact. When you, chandragupta (kay app bharat men rahte hein?), write that off, it is because you are not informed. (ji, eyh tik-tak bhat hai) Please do more carefully consider it. (bahoot shukriya ji)

 

LL

[chandragupta]

This thing 'I' in you is this thing 'Consciousness' in you. And this thing 'I' in you or this thing 'Consciousness' in you is the only entity who is 'self aware' as well as 'other aware'. It is this thing 'I'' in you or this thing 'Consciousness' in you who says:- 'I exist' & 'matter' exists. Matter is neither 'self aware' nor 'other aware'. Matter needs existence of this thing 'I' in you or the existence of this thing 'Consciousness' in you for the affirmation it's existence. Remember this.

[Sergeant Bilko]

This thing 'I' in you is this thing 'Consciousness' in you. And this thing 'I' in you or this thing 'Consciousness' in you is the only entity who is 'self aware' as well as 'other aware'. It is this thing 'I'' in you or this thing 'Consciousness' in you who says:- 'I exist' & 'matter' exists. Matter is neither 'self aware' nor 'other aware'. Matter needs existence of this thing 'I' in you or the existence of this thing 'Consciousness' in you for the affirmation it's existence. Remember this.

 

 

Yup, there's another crackpot posting on sfn, making no sense, offering no science and generally wasting everyones time

 

 

 

Oh Chandra, before you say it, "I am welcome to my opinion"

[chandragupta]

You don't get it, do you?

[Sergeant Bilko]

You don't get it, do you?

 

O yes I do, you are trying to "impose" for want of a better word your belief of what or how you are on me. You have no grounds to refute, or any evidence to back up your assertions. This dreamy "I" that you keep going on about exists in your head, and your head alone. I think that it is you that "dont get it" This is a science site, we examine evidence to determine if it is factual or not.

 

Simply stating vague, misleading or dreamy opinions does not give us anything to examine or discuss, therefore you sir should go back think again.

[chandragupta]

Be happy.

[zapatos]

Be gone.

[chandragupta]

Wishful thinking.

 

Fundamentalism of 'matter worshipers ' has made them totally rigid & impervious to the existence of this self evident thing 'I' or 'Consciousness' which permeates the material body of each & every of them. I have tried to show them the way as to how to take notice of this 'I' but they only throw insults.

[Moontanman]

Wishful thinking.

 

Fundamentalism of 'matter worshipers ' has made them totally rigid & impervious to the existence of this self evident thing 'I' or 'Consciousness' which permeates the material body of each & every of them. I have tried to show them the way as to how to take notice of this 'I' but they only throw insults.

 

 

This is demonstrably not so, chop off your arm, your "I" remains undiminished, take out an equally massive amount of your brain and your "I" vanishes while your body continues... Your "I" is how your brain makes sense of it's sensory input, it has no independent existence...

[chandragupta]

This material fundamentalism would take you only so far & not beyond. Material fundamentalism is as dangerous as religious fundamentalism. You are falling into the same trap of closed minded ness as religious fundamentalism.Sooner you realize this safer it will be for this world & for us all.

[Ben Banana]

So... is the consensus on sandwich god ready?

[chandragupta]

One could only feel pity for such low level of discource.

 

1353104167[/url]' post='713711']

This is demonstrably not so, chop off your arm, your "I" remains undiminished, take out an equally massive amount of your brain and your "I" vanishes while your body continues... Your "I" is how your brain makes sense of it's sensory input, it has no independent existence...

 

How many times I have to tell you all that this 'I' or this 'Consciousness' in each & every of you is not the individual property of an individual human being. It is the inheritance of the whole humanity. It will exist till the last human being exists. It does not die with the death of an individual like you or me.Develop some ability of contemplation instead of throwing abuse.

 

1353134357[/url]' post='713758']

So... is the consensus on sandwich god ready?

 

One could only feel pity for such low level of discourse.

[LimbicLoser]

Anyway, just for the purpose of sharing, here:

 

This thing 'I' in you is this thing 'Consciousness' in you.

This is not going to cut it at all. First of all the usage of the word 'thing,' is misleading. The sentiment of 'self' is deeper than the processing which amounts to the condition of having a state of consciousness. ⁽¹⁾

 

And this thing 'I' in you or this thing 'Consciousness' in you is the only entity who is 'self aware' as well as 'other aware'

The state of having consciousness does not always mean that 'self' is identified. Sometimes what is normally registered as 'self' (that is, one's own body, or mental processing results) is registered as 'not self.' In these cases, self is broken because brain processing has gone astray.⁽²⁾

 

It is this thing 'I'' in you or this thing 'Consciousness' in you who says:- 'I exist' & 'matter' exists.

This is incorrect in a number of ways. The better of the aggregate evidence (I'll leave the citation aside due to time limits; but trust my research, please.) gives the greater vote to 'self-related' cognitive processes as being more right hemisphere, than not. Inner speech is most usually left hemisphere and is quite disconnected (so to speak) from the right's 'self realizing.' Again, this is largely pre-conscious cognitive activity for the more thinkable part. (Consider: Eagleman, David (2011) Incognitio--The Secret Lives of the Brain. Pantheon Books: New York; Damasio, Antonio (2010) Self Comes to Mind--Constructing the Conscious Brain. Pantheon Books: New York.)

 

As for the understanding that we can only know of things which we classify as 'physical,' I know for a fact that you, chandragupta, cannot go out and secure anything at all which does not at least supervene on physical substrate, and put it here on the barrel head for all of us to see. Words empty of any value at all, are words of worth nothing.

 

Matter is neither 'self aware' nor 'other aware'. Matter needs existence of this thing 'I' in you or the existence of this thing 'Consciousness' in you for the affirmation it's existence. Remember this.

At least I am glad to see that you do not subscribe to panpsychism. I am sad to see, nevertheless, that you are so entrenched in your categorical error, and are yet so impoverished by that error's power to hide itself, that you have no idea at all what is wrong with what you have typed out here. However, I do understand. (Compare: Shermer, Michael (2011) The Believing Brain--From GHOSTS AND GODS TO POLITICS AND CONSPIRACIES--How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths. Times Books, Henry Holt and Company: New York)

 

And, as a side note... So what's the problem? You like to use an Indian sounding name, but cannot understand Hindi? Interesting role play, there.

 

 

 

 

1. Baer, Ruth A., et al. (2012)Emotion-related cognitive processes in borderline personality disorder: A review of the empirical literature. Clinical Psychology Review 32(5), pp. 359-369.

Blanke, Olaf, et al. (2005) Linking Out-of-Body Experience and Self Processing to Mental Own-Body Imagery at the Temporoparietal Junction. Jour Neuro Sci 25(3), pp. 550-557.

Wei, Min, and Angelaki, Dora E. (2006) Foveal Visual Strategy during Self-Motion Is Independent of Spatial Attention. Jour Neuro Sci 26(2) pp. 564-572.

Thirioux, Berangere, et al. (2010) Mental Imagery of Self-Location during Spontaneous and Active Self-Other Interactions: An Electrical Neuroimaging Study. Jour Neuro Sci 30(21), pp. 7202-7214.

Longo, Matthew R., Azanon, Elena, and Haggard, Patrick (2010) More than skin deep: Body representation beyond primary somatosensory cortex. Neuropsychologia 48(3), pp. 655-668.

 

2. Bradley, Walter, G. (2009) Treating the Brain - What the Best Doctor's Know. DANA Press.

Giumarra, Melita, J., et al. (2011) The third hand: Ownership of a rubber hand in addition to the existing (phantom) hand. Cortex 47(8), pp. 998-1000.

Sacks, Oliver (2012) Hallucinations. Alfred A. Knopf: New York.

Edited November 17, 2012 by LimbicLoser

[chandragupta]

This is a message for all " matter worshipers" or should I call them "mammon worshipers" or better still "stone worshipers"( because stone is a solid example of matter & thus will be best candidate to develop an 'I' like you or a 'consciousness' like you one day as per your views & evidence) that your extreme material fundamentalism is more dangerous than religious fundamentalism because your views have dragged down humanity to the level of matter only. This is shameful even if it is disguised as Scientific fact.

[Phi for All]

This is a message for all " matter worshipers" or should I call them "mammon worshipers" or better still "stone worshipers"( because stone is a solid example of matter & thus will be best candidate to develop an 'I' like you or a 'consciousness' like you one day as per your views & evidence) that your extreme material fundamentalism is more dangerous than religious fundamentalism because your views have dragged down humanity to the level of matter only. This is shameful even if it is disguised as Scientific fact.

!

Moderator Note

chandragupta, you are failing to address the individual points in the replies of others, choosing instead to simply repeat what you have asserted before, which you've also failed to adequately support. This is evident from all the replies you've gotten and simply brushed aside.

 

This is known as preaching or soapboxing, and is against the rules you agreed to when you joined. It's a very frustrating style of discourse and fails to be actual discussion since you are clearly ignoring anything others are discussing. Please address the issues others have included in this discussion so as to make it more productive for all.

 

As always, if you have a problem with this modnote, please report it or PM another moderator. Do NOT further derail the thread by discussing the modnote here.

[Ringer]

You are welcome to your opinion.

 

You are not welcome to your own evidence, evidence is not a matter of opinion.

[chandragupta]

This dragging down of humanity to the level of matter only is creating desperation & feeling of void or emptiness in many of us that 'I, a thinking , feeling ,loving, empathising human being, am no better than a piece of stone, because science tells me so, because science has evidence for this, without followers & doers of science realizing that " evidences are many but absolute evidence is uncertain even for them.

[John Cuthber]

Nobody is "dragging humanity down to the level of matter".

We were never above it.

Matter is all we ever were.

Nobody said "I, a thinking , feeling ,loving, empathising human being, am no better than a piece of stone"

Science certainly never said it.

 

Also, once you accept that people's feelings are related to matter rather than some mythical "mind stuff" you can do useful things, you can explain why alcohol and other drugs affect the mind.

You can even make antidepressants to try to treat those who have "desperation & feeling of void or emptiness "

 

So, while you misrepresent science as the cause of those problems it is actually a solution (an imperfect one but science is working on that).

 

Why do you act this way?

[Moontanman]

This is a message for all " matter worshipers" or should I call them "mammon worshipers" or better still "stone worshipers"( because stone is a solid example of matter & thus will be best candidate to develop an 'I' like you or a 'consciousness' like you one day as per your views & evidence) that your extreme material fundamentalism is more dangerous than religious fundamentalism because your views have dragged down humanity to the level of matter only. This is shameful even if it is disguised as Scientific fact.

 

 

I am more than a bit insulted by that, I worship stone because i don't agree with your opinion? I do not worship anything, I think the very concept of worship is degrading, I do not believe in the supernatural, I see no evidence to support your stance, you have given none what so ever.

 

[chandragupta]

Absolute evidence is uncertain for both I.e. both for science as well as theists. Therefore who amongst these two will have the last laugh in years to come is still unknown.