MIke,

No trespassing! My ancestor Owens were the original Princes of North Wales and 
Snowdon is rightfully mine!
:-)

Edgar



On May 26, 2012, at 6:13 AM, mike brown wrote:

> I'm going to climb Mt. Snowden in Wales next week. I hope it's still there - 
> there's not much credit climbing a mountain that doesn't exist.
> 
> Mike
> 
> --- On Sat, 26/5/12, Merle Lester <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> From: Merle Lester <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Zen] The Self Illusion
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Date: Saturday, 26 May, 2012, 8:56
> 
>  
> edgar
>  then where is the real world?????????
> 
> and where is reality?
> 
>  what amazes me is how adults have such pre-concieved minds states.
> ..that once they have made their minds up..it is set in concrete and very 
> hard to shift.
> .you need a jack hammer to get through.
> .and in many cases the concrete is rotten with "cancerous" growth  of 
> bullshit, half truths, prejudices, and lack of insight.
> 
> .. going zen opens the mind..so one is fresh alert and prepared for the 
> unexpected...
> just as a young child is before they are fed "how to think and feel"..through 
> the education system
>  happy "zenning"!
>  and long live zanism
>  cheers merle
> 
> >and don't actually exist out there in reality...
> 
> Then again, Zen is very pragmatic and would say you'd best duck when an 
> 'object' comes hurtling your way. This is why, after all, mountains really 
> are mountains...
> 
> Mike
> 
> --- On Sat, 26/5/12, Edgar Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Zen] The Self Illusion
> To: [email protected], [email protected], 
> [email protected], [email protected]
> Date: Saturday, 26 May, 2012, 2:38
> 
>  
> ED,
> 
> The self we are all familiar with is as you say a mental construct in our 
> mind's simulation of reality. Actual sensory input comes into organisms in 
> fragmented bits such as color, motion, shapes, etc. As the mind develops in 
> infancy these sensory bits are gradually organized by the mind into larger 
> more persistent constructs such as objects, one of which is the self. There 
> is a lot of research by cognitive scientists on how and when this occurs in 
> childhood but cognitive scientists assume mind just begins recognizing the 
> objects that actually exist out there in reality. Buddhist on the other hand 
> claims that the objects are all mental constructs and organizations of raw 
> input from external reality and don't actually exist out there in reality...
> 
> There is also a lot of information about how the concept of objects arises 
> from developments in robotics. It turns out it is very very difficult to 
> construct (robotics calls it identify) objects from raw sensory input.... For 
> example most objects produce very very different sensory input depending on 
> their orientation and distance from the eyes so it takes very sophisticated 
> mental software to identify all those different perceptual views as the same 
> object, especially against all sorts of different backgrounds...
> 
> So direct experience consists solely of sensory input momentary in the 
> present moment. The whole idea of persistent objects including the self is a 
> mental construct and as Zen would say an illusion not actually present in the 
> external (real) world.
> 
> Edgar
> 
> 
> 
> On May 25, 2012, at 10:29 AM, ED wrote:
> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> Excerpt:
>> "In what sense is the self an illusion?
>> For me, an illusion is a subjective experience that is not what it seems. 
>> Illusions are experiences in the mind, but they are not out there in nature. 
>> Rather, they are events generated by the brain. Most of us have an 
>> experience of a self. I certainly have one, and I do not doubt that others 
>> do as well – an autonomous individual with a coherent identity and sense of 
>> free will. But that experience is an illusion – it does not exist 
>> independently of the person having the experience, and it is certainly not 
>> what it seems. That's not to say that the illusion is pointless. 
>> Experiencing a self illusion may have tangible functional benefits in the 
>> way we think and act, but that does not mean that it exists as an entity.
>> If the self is not what it seems, then what is it?
>> For most of us, the sense of our self is as an integrated individual 
>> inhabiting a body. I think it is helpful to distinguish between the two ways 
>> of thinking about the self that William James talked about. There is 
>> conscious awareness of the present moment that he called the "I," but there 
>> is also a self that reflects upon who we are in terms of our history, our 
>> current activities and our future plans. James called this aspect of the 
>> self, "me" which most of us would recognize as our personal identity—who we 
>> think we are. However, I think that both the "I" and the "me" are actually 
>> ever-changing narratives generated by our brain to provide a coherent 
>> framework to organize the output of all the factors that contribute to our 
>> thoughts and behaviors.
>> I think it helps to compare the experience of self to subjective contours – 
>> illusions such as the Kanizsa pattern where you see an invisible shape that 
>> is really defined entirely by the surrounding context. People understand 
>> that it is a trick of the mind but what they may not appreciate is that the 
>> brain is actually generating the neural activation as if the illusory shape 
>> was really there. In other words, the brain is hallucinating the experience. 
>> There are now many studies revealing that illusions generate brain activity 
>> as if they existed. They are not real but the brain treats them as if they 
>> were.
>> Now that line of reasoning could be applied to all perception except that 
>> not all perception is an illusion. There are real shapes out there in the 
>> world and other physical regularities that generate reliable states in the 
>> minds of others. The reason that the status of reality cannot be applied to 
>> the self, is that it does not exist independently of my brain alone that is 
>> having the experience. It may appear to have a consistency of regularity and 
>> stability that makes it seem real, but those properties alone do not make it 
>> so.
>> Similar ideas about the self can be found in Buddhism and the writings of 
>> Hume and Spinoza. The difference is that there is now good psychological and 
>> physiological evidence to support these ideas that I cover in the book in a 
>> way that I hope is accessible for the general reader."
>> Source: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-illusion-of-the-self2
>>  
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to