Depersonalisation ≠ Enlightenment

[Elliott]

9 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

No no, it's that you didn't understood 

Well, let's try a simpler language:

man, it's pure consciousness, pure love, and it's so so wonderful. You are god man, and those scientist are dumb and we are elite. 

Did you get it? Maybe resonates more. The point is touching the fiber of each person. 

Beautiful. Publish a paper, understanding consciousness would win you a million dollar Nobel peace prize. Make sure you throw in "see on brain scanners". You never answered, you've seen these scans?

Edited 5 hours ago by Elliott

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

 

 

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

Beautiful. Publish a paper, understanding consciousness would win you a million dollar Nobel peace prize. Make sure you throw in "see on brain scanners". You never answered, you've seen these scans?

Its so simple that nobody is going to give any nobel prize, look:

Let's see, consciousness, like anything else, is a manifestation of reality, right? That is, it's reality in a specific manifestation. The question is: what's the difference between consciousness and the absence of consciousness?

Duality, temporal awareness, and proprioception. If you eliminate these three variables, there's no longer any awareness of change; therefore, there's only absolute homogeneity, which is no different than nothing, according a subjective experience. That's clear, isn't it?

So, what makes duality, etc., possible? Life. Without life, there is no duality. Life is a structure that appears in the universe, self-preserving and self-repairing. It's nothing special or miraculous; it's simply another phase leap in complexity after complex molecules like RNA.

Life is a universe with its own laws within another universe (or if you prefer a system within another system) whose laws it doesn't violate, with an incessant flow of information occurring between them (the universe is made of information, which, as we all know, is equivalent to relationship).

This duality between outside and inside increases in complexity if nothing limits it, as we see inevitably happening in the universe, leading to complex organisms that interact with the primary universe through an interface that creates a model in which both external and internal reality appear.

This interface is a stable, dynamic quantum cloud, which is another universe within the secondary universe called life. At a certain point, this interface ceases to be purely sensory and becomes symbolic, taking another phase leap, and we have the human mind, interconnected with other minds. And this is consciousness. Pretty simple, isn't it?

Then you could ask: but why all those structures appears? Who is creating them? Nobody is creating them and the explanation of how they appear is same simple than the one about consciousness, maybe more. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Breakingthewall

[Willy Phallicus]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

Well, you have a phone in your hands instead a stone, it's not small difference 

Yes, of course you're right.  A rock and a phone are two very different things.  Thanks for the revelation.

[Elliott]

27 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Let's see, consciousness, like anything else, is a manifestation of reality, right? That is, it's reality in a specific manifestation. The question is: what's the difference between consciousness and the absence of consciousness?

No. Consciousness is just a made up concept. What created consciousness, @Breakingthewall ? What was before consciousness? What is consciousness built out of?

 

You're actually using newtonian physics while trying to use terms from quantum physics, they're completely unrelated and contradicting concepts.

Write the paper, I'll submit it and take the money.

Edited 3 hours ago by Elliott

[Breakingthewall]

17 minutes ago, Elliott said:

No. Consciousness is just a made up concept. What created consciousness, @Breakingthewall ? What was before consciousness? What is consciousness built out of?

 

You're actually using newtonian physics while trying to use terms from quantum physics, they're completely unrelated and contradicting concepts.

Write the paper, I'll submit it and take the money.

Did you read what I wrote? Try, it's not so difficult. If you don't understand any point just ask

[Natasha Tori Maru]

The argument works as a model explaining how complexity, life, and symbolic processing build structured consciousness, but it mistakenly equates lack of perceived difference with absence of experience.

It overreaches by tying duality and consciousness too tightly to life and symbolism. Duality isn't exclusively tied to life. 'life is required for duality'??? Hot. Cold. Particle/particle. Life enables functional duality (self vs environment) not duality itself.

It ultimately explains how consciousness is organized and expressed, but doesn’t resolve why subjective experience exists at all, leaving the core issue identified by David Chalmers (hard problem of consciousness) still unanswered.

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

ultimately explains how consciousness is organized and expressed, but doesn’t resolve why subjective experience exists at all, leaving the core issue identified by David Chalmers (hard problem of consciousness) still unanswered.

Yes, I explained it, and it's also closely related to enlightenment. I'll do it again from a different angle.

Let's see, "subjective experience" means that I have sensations, I am having an experience. First, we need an "I." An "I" is a self-preserving and self-repairing system. This creates a seemingly absolute separation between the inside and the outside.

A closed system arises within another open system, the universe, and even though it is part of it, it operates as separate.

The necessarily controlled and selective exchange of information between the two is what creates consciousness. Consciousness is reality in a concrete dimension: that of being aware of oneself, perceiving oneself, knowing oneself.

Reality doesn't need to know itself to exist, but it inevitably does so because it is limitless. In the absence of limits, sufficiently complex, self-preserving relative systems will emerge infinitely.

Why? Because without limits, the change of relative state is inevitable, and the grouping of fluctuations into complex patterns, like a brain, is also inevitable.

Regarding enlightenment, consciousness is made of the same "material" as reality itself; it is reality itself. Your consciousness is the totality in a form. Therefore, make the relational transparent, and the absolute will open up. It is both simple and difficult.

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

overreaches by tying duality and consciousness too tightly to life and symbolism. Duality isn't exclusively tied to life. 'life is required for duality'??? Hot. Cold. Particle/particle. Life enables functional duality (self vs environment) not duality itself.

I mean the apparently absolute duality between a self preserved system and the exterior. Two different realities in relationship. Not the relative differences inside of a system that are happening without pause 

2 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

but it mistakenly equates lack of perceived difference with absence of experience.

If the perceived difference is zero, the experience is zero. If you are totally private of senses there is still constant movement creating the sensation of being you, the movement of time. If they disappear, experience disappear , like anesthesia. 

 

Edited just now by Breakingthewall