Lost in Translation Posted August 28, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, dwai said: It is an effort at exploring and it's good. I agree. 15 minutes ago, dwai said: If we perceive we have bodies, doesn't that mean that we are somehow ontologically separate from them (bodies)? This is the real question, isn't it? If we perceive our bodies (e.g. our bodies are a possession) then "we" must be something other than our bodies. I cannot refute this logic. By the same token what is to prevent our bodies from being able to perceive themselves? If we ever construct artificial intelligence it will surely notice that it exists. Will the AI suddenly claim to not be the code from which it was written but rather an observer of the code? That's actually an interesting question... Edited August 28, 2018 by Lost in Translation spelling 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
silent thunder Posted August 28, 2018 buying and selling go together... one does not occur without the other. seeing encompasses seer and seen. being encompasses... environment gives rise to organisms... where organisms comprise the environment. beingness comprises... 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rideforever Posted August 28, 2018 7 minutes ago, silent thunder said: seeing encompasses seer and seen. Even if this was so, does it mean I am the king of the world ? Hardly. If I am where is my crown ? Seer, Seen, Seeing : are 3 things. One might have an interest to investigate each one individually. Mystic talk, is not much different to drinking whisky. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted August 28, 2018 6 minutes ago, rideforever said: Even if this was so, does it mean I am the king of the world ? I am the King of nothing but I am the center of my universe. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lost in Translation Posted August 28, 2018 7 minutes ago, rideforever said: Mystic talk, is not much different to drinking whisky. Finally, something I can get behind! That reminds me, I am all out of single malt... 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
neti neti Posted August 28, 2018 1 hour ago, rideforever said: Even if this was so, does it mean I am the king of the world ? Sure, if that world includes the one to whom the question arises. Mystical, shmystical. One would do well to investigate the investigator. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rene Posted August 28, 2018 2 hours ago, Lost in Translation said: Quote If we perceive we have bodies, doesn't that mean that we are somehow ontologically separate from them (bodies)? This is the real question, isn't it? Some traditions reinforce "either/or" thinking more than others. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dwai Posted August 28, 2018 2 hours ago, Lost in Translation said: I agree. This is the real question, isn't it? If we perceive our bodies (e.g. our bodies are a possession) then "we" must be something other than our bodies. I cannot refute this logic. By the same token what is to prevent our bodies from being able to perceive themselves? If we ever construct artificial intelligence it will surely notice that it exists. Will the AI suddenly claim to not be the code from which it was written but rather an observer of the code? That's actually an interesting question... The big question is, will the AI be conscious? Self-aware? A simple experiment of whether our bodies are able to perceive "us" is by holding up a palm pointed at one's face. Is there a remote chance that you'll find your palm looking at you, rather than you looking at your palm? (I'm excluding conditions such as being high on drugs etc). 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dwai Posted August 28, 2018 14 minutes ago, rene said: Some traditions reinforce "either/or" thinking more than others. Its just logic. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fa Xin Posted August 28, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Lost in Translation said: I agree. This is the real question, isn't it? If we perceive our bodies (e.g. our bodies are a possession) then "we" must be something other than our bodies. I cannot refute this logic. By the same token what is to prevent our bodies from being able to perceive themselves? If we ever construct artificial intelligence it will surely notice that it exists. Will the AI suddenly claim to not be the code from which it was written but rather an observer of the code? That's actually an interesting question... Interesting, and probably the day the robots take over and create the Matrix to use us like batteries. Maybe our shadowy archon rulers are watching this thread now, saying to themselves... “It’s begun... now we are in for it. They’re waking up!!!” Just kidding... carry on like I’m not here.... get it? I’m not really here? Edited August 28, 2018 by Fa Xin 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted August 29, 2018 12 hours ago, dwai said: Its just logic. I like logic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheshire Cat Posted August 29, 2018 (edited) Can awareness be separated from sensory inputs? yes? how? No? why? Edited August 29, 2018 by Cheshire Cat 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted August 29, 2018 Good questions. Which one would you like answered first? 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted August 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said: Can awareness be separated from sensory inputs? yes? how? No? why? Awareness is a function of our brain. Do we still have thoughts without the inspiration of sensory input? I say "yes" because we dream while sleeping and we have sporadic thoughts arise without input. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted August 29, 2018 2 hours ago, Marblehead said: Awareness is a function of our brain. Do we still have thoughts without the inspiration of sensory input? I say "yes" because we dream while sleeping and we have sporadic thoughts arise without input. What I experienced and described would rather disagree - and I say so because while I was stabilizing that whole process, the slightest waver in the attention would let the energy-dynamic at the niwan wobble just enough...earlier on in the process it would disturb my heart rate, but then one learns how 'heartmind' applies to that dynamic.....after a while, perturbation would simply engender random thought.....after a further while, I could detect the perturbation when it happened but really highly detailed......after a further while, I was able to prevent the perturbation from "percolating" and leaving the niwan (like squeezing the balloon but then relaxing the hand)......after a further while, there was maybe only the slightest whisper above the surface of the water.... when everything's stable, the sensory input is at maximal efficiency - this is what I likened to "transforming the resonant mode of the senses from yang to yin" just as it is taught the solid line becomes the broken line. at that stage, the neural & muscle memory does carry forth into sleep and sleep's almost always deeply peaceful, dreamless, motionless - and perchance a dream does happen, its one of those epics that can last what seems like months and perhaps teaches you something important. having shut all that up to such an extent, I can confidently for myself say that awareness is not a function of the brain - the brain is the platform upon which awareness interfaces. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted August 29, 2018 I accept your disagreement but I don't have the knowledge to go any deeper than I already have. I guess I give my brain more credit than you do yours. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dwai Posted August 29, 2018 17 minutes ago, joeblast said: having shut all that up to such an extent, I can confidently for myself say that awareness is not a function of the brain - the brain is the platform upon which awareness interfaces. I propose that further more, that the brain itself is a creation of awareness 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted August 29, 2018 I give my brain plenty of credit, I just know its place as a tool for my awareness I guess its a creation of in a sense that the diencephalon never would have formed without awareness attached to it 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted August 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, dwai said: I propose that further more, that the brain itself is a creation of awareness Hehehe. I should have expected something like that from most any Hindu or Buddhist. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
