Ronan: Where does it gain the knowledge to.....project them, though? Must it not know them before it does so? There is no perception of the second. What is perceiving? If I walked passed you and heard your innre voice musing over what to eat, I could answer internally and still not lose myself. Only were I restricted to your thoughts would I lose my mind.
Observed on actual bumper stickers - Reality is a crutch for people who can't handle drugs. OK, who stopped payment on my reality check. Consciousness: That annoying time between naps.
knowledge and perceptions are simultaneous, I would even say they are the same, a knowledge is a perception There is perception of yourself like there is perception of a chair. If you hear just my inner voice as something separate than your inner voice then you are not perceiving what I perceive because I perceive not what you perceive. My inner voice: I want to eat a banana Your inner voice: My inner voice + yours They are different Experiences are whole. That is why every experience are different.
Ronan: This still does not explain how this conscious reality manifests that which it doesn't know. Whose? Yes, the experience would be slightly different.
It does know everything because it perceives everything it is perception of consciousness( there is only one consciousness) and the point was that because it is slightly different, you are not perceiving what I am perceiving because if it was the case you would be me.
Ronan: But how can it perceive that which would not exist before it is perceived? Without the appearance of red to it, it could not envision red, therefore it could not create that which is red to make it have its thought. So the disembodied consciousness would be perceiver the perceiver perceive?
why do you say it was not existing before being perceived? existence/creation inside consciousness is perception consciousness contains already all perception (past present and future). Time is a perception, consciousness knows everything, perceive everything in no time perceiver is a misleading word. there is only one consciousness and all what you believe are perceiver are in fact only content of consciousness, namely perceptions.
You seem to say the consciousness, as some sort of universal 'entity', perceives stuff for us. What I get from what you said is that the brain taps into this consciousness and gets perception of its environment that way. Or maybe this consciousness feeds it into our brain. If this is the case, how do you explain personal perspective ?
consciousness is the only entity, entity being a misleading word because of it being alone. brain is a perception, perspective is a perception as well indeed when you look at your perspective, you are seeing a human being maybe typing on a computer or more acurately a bunddle of percpetion that give you the experience of this perspective. Perspective is an experience, a perception. It is a bundle of perceptions This perspective is the I that you identify as yourself but it is not finaly the perceiver because else who would be the perceiver of this perspective as a perspective. The real 'I' is consciousness
No, I mean literal perspective. As in: when you are on the other side of the road from me and a car accident happens, we both see the same accident but from different perspectives. Also, from you last post I gather that this entity called consciousness is delusional and imagines to be all of us conscious beings.. Talk about split personality lol
It is what I am talking as well, as soon as you are conscious of this perspective you are not this perspective but another one, you are always consciousness. Because consciousness contains every perceptions and experiences, it contains one with you on one side of the road (it constitutes a perspective, a particular bundle of perception) and it also contains my perspective. there is only one consciousness, only different perception of different perspective. consciousness contains all perceptions so it contains perception of all, perception an apple, perception of split personality, not a problem.
So how come different people witnessing the same event recall it differently, or reach different conclusions ?
Look, this consciousness knows all, right ? So it knows the truth, the ultimate truth. How come people interpret things differently ? Please just admit you are talking about God and have it over with.
Of course I am talking about god, consciousness is god, I tell you that since the beginning. but keep in mind that I am talking about consciousness, I think it is better for you, else you will probably not be able to digest what I am saying. god has for you other meaning that for me, for me god is just consciousness, nothing more nothing less. what I describe here is consciousness, so if you want to deny it use arguments. Do not just deny it by saying that because it is god so it is fantasy or belief. (in fact it would mean that for you consciousness is a fantasy, in this case please give arguments) consciousness we know it exist, matter we do not know, the hard problem is impossible so consciousness alone has a role in the existence of perceptions What do you mean by ultimate truth? What I said is that consciousness perceive everything so it perceive all people perceptions (it is included in everything). That is why there has to be all this different perceptions. There are your perceptions, mine, others.... everything
I don't even digest your concept of consciousness.. Consciousness is a simulation, a result of bio-chemical and bio-electrical processes of the brain. What you have done here is take God and stick another name to it. It's all fine with me, but I like to know what exactly we are talking about.
The most important problem is here: you did not prove that consciousness is "a result of bio-chemical and bio-electrical processes of the brain." as you say. you just assume that! and if you look a little bit at what does it means, you ll see that it is impossible that brain give rise to consciousness, but I am still accepting any argument you want to put forward even if in a later thread you told me that you did not have time Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! also please remember that brain is a perception, we can perceive it as gray and composed of neurons. the question is then how this PERCEPTION can give rise to consciousness? And because this is impossible, the only option that is valid is that consciousness alone give rise to perceptions. It is indeed what we experience every moment No, first of all there is many kind of god, some that live in another dimension, some on the top of a big mountain.... Their existence is another debate What I did is that I said that for me and many other (Advaita philosophy in particular) god=consciousness so god is not a guy on the mountain. then I said as above: consciousness alone gives rise to perceptions. From that it follows that it give rise to your perceptions, to mine, to all perceptions that are possible... Consciousness is all perceiving! and indeed, the interesting thing is that it looks like some descriptions common to many gods. That is one of the reason that to say that god=consciousness is not just a matter of new definition but the usage of a word that have been used so long ago to express this same idea that now we call consciousness
All of the above are direct quotes from you, From here and here. So as I understand it we don't exist. We are simply a perception of God, So as you're a perception how do you know there true. Or is it simply SPAG(self perception as god). which is the theist disease, they all think they know what god is and does.
