Mark,
The radio show, 'To the Best of our Knowledge', ran a program called 'Meet Your
Mind' on the topic of consciousness which included the six segments listed
below. The six items were not book titles. I thought it was an interesting
show, but if it didn't interest you that's okay too.
You state that you are more interested in what makes a consciousness yours.
Well, what makes a consciousness yours? _To possess?_ What makes a heart
yours? What makes a motorcycle yours? What makes knowledge yours? What makes
righteousness yours? What makes an experience yours? Possibly patterns of
thought? It's _yours_ because you think it??? It's mine. It's mine. It's
mine. It's mine. It's mine. It's mine. Or it's not mine. It's not mine.
It's not mine. It's not mine. It's not mine. It's not mine.
The Buddhists have perception divided into six senses: eyes, ears, nose,
tongue, body(touch) and mind (awareness of mental phenomenon.) I didn't think
anyone could yet explain seeing, let alone consciousness. But isn't it better
to consider such things then to take them for granted? Within the MoQ aren't
the sensual experiences considered biological in what they value?
RMP: "Consciousness can be described as a process of defining Dynamic Quality.
But once the definitions emerge, they are static patterns and no longer apply
to Dynamic Quality."
(LILA's Child).
Marsha
On Nov 4, 2012, at 7:47 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Marsha,
> Good for them neuroscientists. Consciousness under a microscope.
>
> The nature of consciousness is not that important to me. What is
> important, is what makes this consciousness mine.
>
> That is one question which will never be cracked by science, at least for
> the time being. Perhaps in time they will discover the planet which is
> broadcasting the avatar. A little spirit chucker somewhere out there.
>
> Since the Self cannot be found through science, or any form of logic, that
> puts it outside of the realm of those researchers. I guess we will just
> have to guess on that one.
>
> By the way, have you come across any good hypothesis in your research on
> this one? I have lost interest, and am not sure what the flavor of
> consciousness is these days. Maybe I should pick up one of those books.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 10:49 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> To the best of our knowledge...
>>
>> Neuroscientists have made remarkable discoveries about the brain, but
>> we're not close to cracking the mystery of consciousness. How does a
>> tangle of neurons inside your skull produce...you?
>>
>>
>> http://ttbook.org/book/mind-and-brain
>>
>>
>> 1. David Chalmers, the Hard Problem of Consciousness
>>
>> 2. David Eagleman on Brain's Secret Life
>>
>> 3. Steve Paulson on Why Consciousness
>>
>> 4. Sy Montgomery on Octopus
>>
>> 5. Alva Noe on Embodied Consciousness
>>
>> 6. Vijay Iyer on Music & Science
>>
>>
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
