I would refer you to the Buddhistic notion of the negation of any ultimate
monadic consciousness whatsoever.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM, B Soroud <bsor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Stars are a body..... our first-person experience is dependent on a body...
> since first there was stars... second there was body, allowing for
> first-person experience of stars.
>
> There could be no first-person experience of stars prior to a human
> form.... There could be no first-person experience prior to form..... unless
> you believe in some spiritual gnosticism.
>
> If you abstract all feeling and sensation and phenomena and forces from a
> "monadic consciousness"..... what you have is what can only be called
> "unconsciousness" and no technical first-person experience whatsoever...
> especially not in the self-conscious self-identifying rationally
> self-realized sense.
>
> Form is necessary for first-person experience. Form is necessary for
> first-person moments. We know no other.
>
> Do you not believe in evolution in some sense?
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On 7/6/2011 4:44 AM, Russell Standish wrote:
>>
>>> Constantine, this is a rather trollish comment coming from an ignorant
>>> position.
>>>
>>> Let me put the following gedanken experiment - consider the
>>> possibility that T. Rex might be either green or blue creatures, and
>>> that either possibility is physically consistent with everything we
>>> know about them. In a Multiverse (such as we consider here), we are in
>>> a superposition of histories, which include both green and blue
>>> T. Rexes.
>>>
>>> Then one day, someone discovers an exquisitely fossilised T. Rex
>>> feather, from which it is possible to determine the T. Rex's colour by
>>> means of photonics. Let us say, that the colour was determined to be
>>> green to everybody's satisfaction. But there is an alternate universe,
>>> where the colour was determined to be blue. This universe has now
>>> differentiated from our own, on the single fact of T. Rex colour.
>>>
>>> The question is, when was the colour of the dinosaur established as a
>>> fact? Many of us many worlders would argue it wasn't established
>>> until the photonics measurement was made - there was no 'matter of
>>> fact' about the dinosaur colour prior to that.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> If the decoherence theory of how the classical arises from QM, the color
>> became a classical fact in our branch of the universe a very long time ago.
>>
>>  Generalising from this, it is quite plausible that suns and stars did
>>> not exist prior to there being minds to perceive them. It is somewhat
>>> disorienting to realise this possibility, ingrained as we are from
>>> birth to believing in a directly perecived external reality. Yet the
>>> reality we perceive is very definitely a construction of our minds - a
>>> confabulation as it were, and there is not one scrap of evidence that
>>> that reality exists independently of our minds.
>>>
>>> BTW Bruno is not assuming that consciousnes preceded matter, he is
>>> instead assuming that consciousness is the result of the running of
>>> some computer program, as I'm sure he would tell you. The consequence
>>> of that latter assumption is that perceived reality is just that - a
>>> perception.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> But it does seem a little presumptuous to suppose that the stars did not
>> exist before I (who's this "we"?) perceived them and yet claim that
>> arithmetic existed before anybody could count.
>>
>> Brent
>>
>>  On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 08:14:23PM -0700, Constantine Pseudonymous wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Bruno assumes that consciousness preceded matter....
>>>>
>>>> then why do we only find consciousness as a terrestrial phenomena
>>>> (suns and stars aren't conscious).. and as a later stage terrestrial
>>>> phenomena for that matter.... i.e. water, plants, minerals etc. are
>>>> not conscious..... and intellect and understanding in any real sense
>>>> are found in even later stage terrestrial forms, and we have physical
>>>> explanations for this.......
>>>>
>>>> Bruno sins against naturalism and all that we know and intuit.
>>>>
>>>> He will do anything to resurrect from the dead some rudimentary and
>>>> vague Mysticism.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Everything List" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to 
>>>> everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com>
>>>> .
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
>>>> .
>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>>>> group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to 
>> everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>> group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en>
>> .
>>
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to