I think these are the current practicalities. Not sure they will stay that way.
On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 3:43:22 AM UTC, RP Singh wrote: > > Consciousness is an attribute of life and vanishes on death. > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 9:04 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thousands of experiments confirm the hypothesis that neurochemical >> processes produce subjective experiences. The fact that neuroscientists are >> not in agreement over which physicalist theory best accounts for mind does >> not mean that the hypothesis that consciousness creates matter holds equal >> standing. In defense, Chopra sent me a 2008 paper published in Mind and >> Matter by University of California, Irvine, cognitive scientist Donald D. >> Hoffman: Conscious Realism and the Mind-Body Problem. Conscious realism >> asserts that the objective world, i.e., the world whose existence does not >> depend on the perceptions of a particular observer, consists entirely of >> conscious agents. Consciousness is fundamental to the cosmos and gives rise >> to particles and fields. It is not a latecomer in the evolutionary history >> of the universe, arising from complex interactions of unconscious matter >> and fields, Hoffman writes. Consciousness is first; matter and fields >> depend on it for their very existence. >> >> Where is the evidence for consciousness being fundamental to the cosmos? >> Here Hoffman turns to how human observers construct the visual shapes, >> colors, textures and motions of objects. Our senses do not construct an >> approximation of physical reality in our brain, he argues, but instead >> operate more like a graphical user interface system that bears little to no >> resemblance to what actually goes on inside the computer. In Hoffman's >> view, our senses operate to construct reality, not to reconstruct it. >> Further, it does not require the hypothesis of independently existing >> physical objects. >> >> Of course, there's lots missing in Hoffman's view and the standard view >> is RP's. No one denies that consciousness is a hard problem. But before we >> reify consciousness to the level of an independent agency capable of >> creating its own reality, let's give the hypotheses we do have for how >> brains create mind more time. Because we know for a fact that measurable >> consciousness dies when the brain dies, until proved otherwise, the default >> hypothesis must be that brains cause consciousness. I am, therefore I >> think. Humans can seem so trivial to me I can think real consciousness >> doesn't bother with us! >> >> On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 3:21:44 AM UTC, archytas wrote: >>> >>> We can ask whether this brain creates or receives RP. I'm on the brain >>> mechanism end of consciousness, but everything can be seen as an address in >>> space-time and in relation to the rest of the 'map'. There's an attempt at >>> this here: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~ejchaisson/reprints/rise_ >>> of_info.pdf >>> >>> Consciousness can be removed by a non-fatal blow to the head as well as >>> death - though it may return in the former. One wonders, in conservation >>> law terms, what it changes to, where it goes ... the hard drive comes back >>> when you switch it on again and address it unless fried. If we could >>> transfer brains like hearts and livers ... or mind to non-brain substrate >>> and discover 'Fred' was still 'Fred' - would we consider consciousness >>> different then? >>> >>> On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 1:56:20 AM UTC, RP Singh wrote: >>>> >>>> For consciousness a sense is necessary and that can be called an >>>> elementary sort of brain. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 5:50 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> There are organising processes long before brains in evolution RP - >>>>> these might be conscious. I'm 90% sure brains produce mind and the >>>>> process >>>>> is mechanistic and copyable. Hard to say at the moment how close >>>>> scientists are to substrate independent mind and uploading human mind to >>>>> such. One can imagine a society in which life builds itself - I suspect >>>>> reflecting back from this much we regard as human would look very >>>>> mechanistic rather than mystic. Imagine a society with no childbirth - >>>>> what would gender be, sex, family, economics, politics and other prize >>>>> elements of libidinal literature? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, December 22, 2014 2:44:44 AM UTC, RP Singh wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Consciousness is in the brain , which is an integral part of the >>>>>> body. When we are brain- dead there is no consciousness. AS for the >>>>>> universal Consciousness there is no such thing , rather there is the >>>>>> universal unconsciousness , a state from which everything evolves >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> "In the field of consciousness research—and also in physics and >>>>>>> astronomy—we are breaking past the cause-and-effect, mechanistic way of >>>>>>> interpreting things. In the biological sciences, there is a vitalism >>>>>>> coming >>>>>>> in that goes much further toward positing a common universal >>>>>>> consciousness >>>>>>> of which our brain is simply an organ. Consciousness does not come from >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> brain. The brain is an organ of consciousness. It focuses consciousness >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> pulls it in and directs it through a time and space field. But the >>>>>>> antecedent of that is the universal consciousness of which we are all >>>>>>> just >>>>>>> a part." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Joseph Campbell in Mythic World's, Modern Words, p. 286 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, December 21, 2014 12:46:21 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I should say that my relationship with Hautes Etudes Commericiales >>>>>>>> was not good. The place was founded by Napoleon. Key learning on the >>>>>>>> short course is: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Who is the individual >>>>>>>> How to engage? >>>>>>>> How to resist? >>>>>>>> How to rearrange? >>>>>>>> Why management matters >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One wonders how our smartest need to be taught this as adults, >>>>>>>> often 24 plus at HEC, and how schools produce us in the mystical state >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> not knowing our arses from our elbows. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sunday, December 21, 2014 5:33:19 PM UTC, archytas wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Agreed Molly - I can only critique your model out of respect for >>>>>>>>> it not demanding gullible followership. This film - a rather >>>>>>>>> juvenile one >>>>>>>>> - inspired by Chris Hedge's 'Death of the Liberal Class' does hint at >>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>> of the structural problems - https://www.youtube.com/watc >>>>>>>>> h?v=hH6UynI5m7Y - it is Facilitaresque in some ways. Tony might >>>>>>>>> inject more humour in the bleakness and maybe more striking images. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There remains the issue of mass forgetting and propaganda in the >>>>>>>>> current moment. The CEO of Apple has found it easy enough to come >>>>>>>>> out as >>>>>>>>> gay, but seems to have no conception of his oppression of others in >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> black heart pursuit of profit. How has he come to that point? How >>>>>>>>> is the >>>>>>>>> dirty-hands claque applauding current vile CEO behaviour created and >>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>> role does this play in scrutiny of the moment? Does the construction >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> the moment bear any relation of the construction of other moments? >>>>>>>>> Does >>>>>>>>> self matter at all if it is so malleable by 'outside structuration' - >>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>> often seems the case, say, in the prevention and destruction of >>>>>>>>> worker >>>>>>>>> solidarity by sensitivity-trained CEOs. Hitler granted German unions >>>>>>>>> a May >>>>>>>>> Day holiday and parade, then closed them down forever the day after. >>>>>>>>> The >>>>>>>>> 'great self' working by beggaring all neighbours to weakness is >>>>>>>>> surely not >>>>>>>>> our quest. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://www.coursera.org/course/orgology = We are in constant >>>>>>>>> relationship with many organizations. Our world is submitted to >>>>>>>>> regular >>>>>>>>> changes as organizations evolve, come and go. Understanding your >>>>>>>>> memberships and attachments to organizations will help you act on >>>>>>>>> your >>>>>>>>> world. You'll learn how to evaluate the influence of organizations >>>>>>>>> around >>>>>>>>> you and how to transform your relationships to reach a stronger >>>>>>>>> coherence. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I know I would feel better in a course Molly was organising - but >>>>>>>>> this is partly because I would not be the same person in such a group >>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>> the one with an itchy trigger finger in respect of politicians and >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> overseers of Chinese labour making i-Phones. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, December 21, 2014 4:10:54 PM UTC, Molly wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am not sure that we need to rely so much on our historical >>>>>>>>>> autobiography as current noetic make-up. In as much as everything we >>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>> ever experienced leads us to this moment, maybe, but it is >>>>>>>>>> recognition in >>>>>>>>>> this moment that lends our view. I also see no need to exclude other >>>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>>> self, as it is through relatedness comes understanding of both in an >>>>>>>>>> inclusive, not exclusive model. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, December 20, 2014 8:31:23 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> As humans, we are intrigued by who we are and how we differ from >>>>>>>>>>> other creatures of evolution. Among the capacities thought to be >>>>>>>>>>> uniquely >>>>>>>>>>> human are autonoetic consciousness, >>>>>>>>>>> the aspect of self-awareness that allows us to imagine our own >>>>>>>>>>> experiences in different places at other times, and theory of mind >>>>>>>>>>> (ToM), >>>>>>>>>>> which allows us to infer other people’s current >>>>>>>>>>> mental states. The idea that ToM is closely related to, and that >>>>>>>>>>> it may depend on, episodic memory and autonoetic consciousness >>>>>>>>>>> seems >>>>>>>>>>> perfectly natural: that in order to imagine and make sense of other >>>>>>>>>>> people’s thoughts, feelings, intentions, and actions, we must rely >>>>>>>>>>> on our >>>>>>>>>>> autobiographical recollections. The ability to consciously >>>>>>>>>>> recollect past >>>>>>>>>>> personal happenings has been shown to be necessary for imagining >>>>>>>>>>> coherent >>>>>>>>>>> and detailed personal happenings in the future. Both episodic >>>>>>>>>>> memory and >>>>>>>>>>> ToM emerge close in time in ontogenetic development. The neural >>>>>>>>>>> substrate >>>>>>>>>>> on which the two abilities rely is in many ways strikingly similar. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This might just accord with Molly's notions of self-development >>>>>>>>>>> - that one needs to get self right before making sense of or >>>>>>>>>>> enjoying the >>>>>>>>>>> world and understanding others and how we might choose to live. >>>>>>>>>>> Idealism >>>>>>>>>>> can turn in on itself, with the world seen as cynical and >>>>>>>>>>> frustrating the >>>>>>>>>>> ideals - mysticism looking like thousands of years of flowery >>>>>>>>>>> failure by >>>>>>>>>>> people with time to think it up in personal situations of >>>>>>>>>>> exploitation of >>>>>>>>>>> sweat off others' backs. The grim Mike Leigh film 'Naked' makes >>>>>>>>>>> such >>>>>>>>>>> points. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> One might say that actually living and working alongside others >>>>>>>>>>> is better than making it all up mystically from self could be a >>>>>>>>>>> better >>>>>>>>>>> start than introspection amongst other chattering class types. In >>>>>>>>>>> respect >>>>>>>>>>> of the first paragraph above, I found a dire shortage of people who >>>>>>>>>>> did >>>>>>>>>>> have accurate autobiography to work from. My own is particularly >>>>>>>>>>> suspect. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, December 21, 2014 12:33:27 AM UTC, archytas wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Amsterdam politicians have been apt to talk of levelling the >>>>>>>>>>>> red lights and replacing them with a red carpet to the museums and >>>>>>>>>>>> theatre. I liked the piano barge. In another form of mysticism >>>>>>>>>>>> one can >>>>>>>>>>>> see what lies beneath. Der Wallen is a place to see trafficking >>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>> exploitation, then throw up. I did a coffee shop instead - >>>>>>>>>>>> walking red >>>>>>>>>>>> light districts is like unpaid overtime to me. Took the >>>>>>>>>>>> technicolour >>>>>>>>>>>> yawner on a tram to see some flower fields. Beauty is fine until >>>>>>>>>>>> you think >>>>>>>>>>>> of it as 'not ugly', thus making ugliness and disability some kind >>>>>>>>>>>> of sin. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I love mindful mindlessness as the basis of being >>>>>>>>>>>> able to do nothing. Tried it on this laptop the other day before >>>>>>>>>>>> effecting >>>>>>>>>>>> a cure with the soldering iron. Mysticism can be good, but also >>>>>>>>>>>> mystification. Angels and devils again. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, December 20, 2014 10:27:49 PM UTC, Allan Heretic >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The museums of Amsterdam are great, somethings are good with >>>>>>>>>>>>> much that is os question. I do not like wandering around their >>>>>>>>>>>>> either. You >>>>>>>>>>>>> are right it is in the eye if the beholder. Greatfully it is out >>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>> bicycling range Leiden is 10 km one way Den Haag (Den Hague) 10 >>>>>>>>>>>>> km a >>>>>>>>>>>>> different direction the difference between the two is Lieden is a >>>>>>>>>>>>> city >>>>>>>>>>>>> where as Den Haag is i oversize town and does not qualify as a >>>>>>>>>>>>> city by >>>>>>>>>>>>> dutch law. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Everything is a matter of perspective. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ~~ >>>>>>>>>>>>> لا القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد أو إيذاء الآخرين >>>>>>>>>>>>> Do not murder, rape, enslave or harm others >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: archytas <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 23:03 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Mind's Eye Re: Mysticism >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> A guy I didn't like walked through Amsterdam's red light >>>>>>>>>>>>> district with me years ago. He threw up over the nearest canal >>>>>>>>>>>>> bridge. I >>>>>>>>>>>>> rather liked his mystic summary of the place. Reality, one >>>>>>>>>>>>> suspects, is >>>>>>>>>>>>> not in the eye of the beholder. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, December 20, 2014 9:10:24 PM UTC, Allan Heretic >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To quote >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "mysticism is the art of union with Reality." >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The old story of Eyes and No-Eyes is really the story of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mystical and unmystical types. "No-Eyes" has fixed his attention >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fact that he is obliged to take a walk. For him the chief factor >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> existence is his own movement along the road; a movement which >>>>>>>>>>>>>> he intends >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to accomplish as efficiently and comfortably as he can. He asks >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not to know >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what may >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be on either side of the hedges. He ignores the caress of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wind until it threatens to remove his hat. He trudges along, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steadily, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> diligently; avoiding the muddy pools, but oblivious of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> light which they reflect. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Eyes" takes the walk too: and for him it is a perpetual >>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelation of beauty and wonder. The sunlight inebriates him, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the winds >>>>>>>>>>>>>> delight him, the very effort of the journey is a joy. Magic >>>>>>>>>>>>>> presences >>>>>>>>>>>>>> throng the roadside, or cry salutations to him >>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the hidden fields. The rich world through which he moves >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lies in the fore-ground of his consciousness; and it gives up >>>>>>>>>>>>>> new secrets >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to him at every step. "No-Eyes," when told of his adventures >>>>>>>>>>>>>> adventures, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually refuses to believe that both have gone by the same road. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> He fancies >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that his companion has been floating about in the air, or beset >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> agreeable hallucinations. We shall never >>>>>>>>>>>>>> persuade him to the contrary unless we persuade him to look >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for himself." >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~~ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> لا القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد أو إيذاء الآخرين >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do not murder, rape, enslave or harm others >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> ""Minds Eye"" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
