• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Consciousness question

Mercutio said:
I doubt that very much. Certainly, there is no evidence of it either in your interaction with people here or in your book. If you indeed did once devour that sort of information, you must have followed it with a strong emetic.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I do realize that this is a skeptic site.
 
Iacchus said:
If you don't love working with people, the worst thing you could do is "try" to help. That to me, is what comes accross as being "selfish." There is nothing but "misgivings" all over the place.
Click to expand...

So by your reasoning, trying to help other people qualifies as selfish? How so?
 
Dark Jaguar said:
In what way? Scientifically, sure. In the sense of wonder and awe at such a place? Again, the answer is yes.

However, would that really make any difference in making our conciousness somehow "more grand" or "more important"? I see no reason to think so, no matter HOW "beyond" this new realm might be. What happens in that new place? What if yet another said "oh maybe you CLAIM all our conciousness is is a spirit wave form of 20 dimensions, but no way! There has to be more to conciousness than that, because that doesn't explain why we are "Aware"! There must be some higher plane!"

What aspect of this plane would prevent someone in that higher plane from considering that to just be "the physical" and thinking there had to be some higher mystical place where conciousness was?
Click to expand...
You asked me whatever gave me the idea and I said it's in the book. Isn't this after all what you really wanted to know? If you don't wish to look it up, then there's really no point in discussing it is there?
 
:eek:
Iacchus said:
You asked me whatever gave me the idea and I said it's in the book. Isn't this after all what you really wanted to know? If you don't wish to look it up, then there's really no point in discussing it is there?
Click to expand...
I'll save you some time, Dark Jaguar; the answer is "dreams and numerology".
 
Frinkiak7 said:
So by your reasoning, trying to help other people qualifies as selfish? How so?
Click to expand...
There are in fact different ways to help people. If you help them to where they become dependent upon you, what kind of help is there in that? And of course if they were fully capable of helping themselves, does that make them selfish? Indeed, I think it would be best if we did things for the sake of what we love to do.
 
Iacchus said:
There are in fact different ways to help people. If you help them to where they become dependent upon you, what kind of help is there in that? And of course if they were fully capable of helping themselves, does that make them selfish? Indeed, I think it would be best if we did things for the sake of what we love to do.
Click to expand...

And again, my point is that doing "things for the sake of what we love to do" to the exclusion of all other considerations, as intimated by Campbell, is destructive and selfish.
 
Frinkiak7 said:
And again, my point is that doing "things for the sake of what we love to do" to the exclusion of all other considerations, as intimated by Campbell, is destructive and selfish.
Click to expand...
There is the love of evil and there is the love of good. Take your pick.
 
Indeed. I would read that book, except reading the explanation of the cover alone brought back horrible memories of the time I tried reading all the way through a book on "color therapy" in an attempt to critically analyze it. I got halfway through before realizing that all the scientific claims had already been made in the forward and the rest of the book was just going to be feel good quips and empty noise symbolizing nothing. It's hard to criticize the majority of what the book says when the majority of it is just poetry.

As for the specific chapters, I only read a little of the first chapter so far, though it is interesting in that it reveals how you interpret dreams and the fact that you did not have the most fortunate life. However, to be cold and analytical about this, I'm afraid it doesn't reveal anything as to why this spirit world somehow manages to explain conciousness or make it "better" than if it was just in the brain. We still feel what we feel, and what you describe is just a different set of unknown physics that generates the experience. Again, what if we actually were in this spirit realm? Is this realm "purpose incarnate", the physical manifestation of meaning? And if it is, so what? In the end, you have to justify your own existance for yourself. I can see no way for that realm to somehow justify our existance or make our conciousness "more real" than if it was just our minds.

If you want meaning and purpose, you can find it yourself. There is no need to go this convoluted route which, even if true, would need it's own justification for being what it is.

Edit: What does love of good and love of evil have to do with their argument? They are saying it seems selfish to do things only for yourself, which by the way is the very definition of selfish. I will add that if one really wants to help themself it is in their best interest to aid others when they need it. I will also add that I too think it is important that someone enjoy their work.

However, you go as far as to say that if someone aids others even if they would rather not, that is evil because they are not working to feed their desires.
 
Last edited:
What does synchronicity have to do with anything? You seem to be trying to explain HOW it might work without even providing evidence that it DOES work. Further, you also fail to explain how this gives our lives meaning. Why would it even matter if our conciousness was broadcast into our heads? Does that make our lives somehow more worth living?
 
Frinkiak7 said:
And again, my point is that doing "things for the sake of what we love to do" to the exclusion of all other considerations, as intimated by Campbell, is destructive and selfish.
Click to expand...
This is not exactly what he said. Try reading it again ...

Yet it is important to note that following one's bliss, as Campbell saw it, isn't merely a matter of doing whatever you like, and certainly not doing simply as you are told. It is a matter of identifying that pursuit which you are truly passionate about and attempting to give yourself absolutely to it. In so doing, you will find your fullest potential and serve your community to the greatest possible extent.
Click to expand...
Oh, and I find that people who enjoy what they doing the most, tend to share the most.
 
Dark Jaguar said:
What does synchronicity have to do with anything? You seem to be trying to explain HOW it might work without even providing evidence that it DOES work. Further, you also fail to explain how this gives our lives meaning. Why would it even matter if our conciousness was broadcast into our heads? Does that make our lives somehow more worth living?
Click to expand...
The Age of Aquarius? :confused:
 
Seriously. Why are we answering in the first place? He is a "torero", someone who just walks in circles without really wanting to go anywhere. I bet he even enjoys his acting, dreaming that he is, in a very strange way, "educating" us with his out of nowhere replies.

Im bored here. I feel there is honestly nothing to do for this Iacchus.
 
Iacchus said:
Not even if I swear on a stack of Bibles and say that it's true? ;)
Click to expand...
And risk your immortal soul? I would not have you do that. If you are known by your good works, you should be able to amply demonstrate your learning by posting evidence here. No need to swear; just demonstrate. It is so much easier...
 
Mercutio said:
And risk your immortal soul? I would not have you do that. If you are known by your good works, you should be able to amply demonstrate your learning by posting evidence here. No need to swear; just demonstrate. It is so much easier...
Click to expand...
Yes, but if I were to do so it would be a first (at least in your mind) now wouldn't it?
 
Iacchus said:
Yes, but if I were to do so it would be a first (at least in your mind) now wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

Yes, it would be a first, and the thing is, whether it was the first time you offered evidence or not it wouldn't matter so long as you actually decide to provide us with some evidence instead of just more ideas.

Science is observing and coming up with explanations for those observations. So, what observations led you to this odd series of explanations?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom