• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Metaphysical Consciousness

tsig said:
Doing you a favor.
Click to expand...
Why, exactly (please use what was said in these links, in order to demonstrate it, and also clearly address your point of view of the quoted parts)?
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
It is incoherent as long as you get the invariant and the variant only in terms of dichotomy.

Why are you completely ignore http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10225913&postcount=956 ?
Click to expand...
No, I fully understand the gradient, and we don't need that post to talk about a concussion.

Diversifying a solid state system like a raid drive does not make a primary curcuit disconnect impossible, nor does it mean that such is a lack of coordination which would otherwise solve a disparate network.

Our brains are already highly invariant in their DMN cycles which syncronize traffic flow of neurotransmission.
 
Last edited:
Doroshadmi, please understand once and for all that rejecting your ideas is not ignoring them. If someone does not accept youtube nonsense and incoherent statements about a magical world that cannot exist, it is not from ignorance. It is disagreement.

So now, it appears that you are suggesting that human endeavor, in the form of elevated consciousness, can actually prevent inanimate objects from behaving as they usually do.

If you are actually suggesting that the principle of understanding the invariant, and whatnot, would prevent a brick from falling on your head, then you are suggesting that your technique is not simply a path to wisdom but is psychokinetic. You've not succeeded very well so far in convincing anyone that you possess wisdom of any kind, and you'll have to go a whole lot further to convince anyone that you possess a secret for changing the way the inanimate world behaves.
 
I did not ignore it.
I am saying what I am saying regardless of it.

You still have not addressed the point I am making, and none of your responses, including videos, address my point.

Do you know what the DMN is?
Do you know what frequency syncronizations the brain uses?
Do you know what happens during a concussion?
Do you know what the RAS is?
Do you know that the disconnect from consciousness is not because of literal disconnects but impulses from the RAS eradically stimulating the thalamocortical radiations and thus causes synamptic attenuation between the thalamus and cerebral cortex?
Do you know this primarily happens from rotational force?
Do you know this is because of the cerebrospinal fluid?
Do you know we have the fluid state because it is safer and more protected than a solid adhesion to the skull?

Are you going to answer my posts ever?
 
Last edited:
JaysonR said:
I did not ignore it.
I am saying what I am saying regardless of it.

You still have not addressed the point I am making, and none of your responses, including videos, address my point.
Click to expand...
Yes they are addressing your point, but you simply ignore it, exactly because your view of reality exclude its absolute aspect.

JaysonR said:
Do you know what the DMN is?
Do you know what frequency syncronizations the brain uses?
Do you know what happens during a concussion?
Do you know what the RAS is?
Do you know that the disconnect from consciousness is not because of literal disconnects but impulses from the RAS eradically stimulating the thalamocortical radiations and thus causes synamptic attenuation between the thalamus and cerebral cortex?
Do you know this primarily happens from rotational force?
Do you know this is because of the cerebrospinal fluid?
Do you know we have the fluid state because it is safer and more protected than a solid adhesion to the skull?
Click to expand...
Do you understand that what you wrote above is the relative aspect of reality, also known as the easy problem of consciousness (the hard problem of consciousness is how unity is expressed as multiplicity and still stays unity)?

JaysonR said:
Are you going to answer my posts ever?
Click to expand...
Are you going to continue your ignorance of the absolute aspect of reality?
 
Last edited:
bruto said:
So now, it appears that you are suggesting that human endeavor, in the form of elevated consciousness, can actually prevent inanimate objects from behaving as they usually do.
Click to expand...
It appears that you still do not grasp that reality is consciousness, and through its linkage among its subjective and objective aspects, harmony is developed, where one of the possible results is that a given person simply and naturally does not stand under a falling brick, because in an harmonious reality things naturally do not harm each other.
 
Last edited:
You're trying to flip an incorrect comment about a concussion into a conversation about the tandem function of singularity?

You did not answer.
I did watch your videos. I am not ignoring them.
Answer me.

Are you a Deepak Chopra follower?

Do I understand what I wrote is a relative aspect of reality?
Let me attempt your language.
The relative aspect of reality is invariant to the absolute aspect of reality.

Do you have any idea what the DMN is, since you want to talk about 'hard consciousness'?
 
Last edited:
JaysonR said:
I did not ignore it.
I am saying what I am saying regardless of it.

You still have not addressed the point I am making, and none of your responses, including videos, address my point.
Click to expand...
You still do not understand that reality is consciousness and as a result the easy problem and the hard problem of consciousness are not in your scope.
 
JaysonR said:
You're trying to flip an incorrect comment about a concussion into a conversation about the tandem function of singularity?
Click to expand...
Are you trying to flip an incorrect comment about a concussion by limiting it to brains, instead of understand it as contradictory result of different aspects of reality, that are not in harmony with each other because of the lack of smooth linkage among the objective and the subjective?

JaysonR said:
You did not answer.
I did watch your videos. I am not ignoring them.
Answer me.
Click to expand...
As long as you do not get that reality is consciousness no answer is known to you.

JaysonR said:
Are you a Deepak Chopra follower?
Click to expand...
I am a follower of the knowledge that reality is consciousness.

JaysonR said:
Do I understand what I wrote is a relative aspect of reality?
Let me attempt your language.
The relative aspect of reality is invariant to the absolute aspect of reality.
Click to expand...
Exactly as 0 is 1, or in other words, you still do not get that relative is actually the variant aspect of consciousness.

JaysonR said:
Do you have any idea what the DMN is, since you want to talk about 'hard consciousness'?
Click to expand...
Talking about consciousness by using names is still only done at the relative (and therefore variant) aspect of reality.
 
Last edited:
JaysonR said:
Yep...Deepak.
Oh well.
Click to expand...
This is another example of how you take the knowledge that reality is consciousness, and try to localize it into some person, culture, religion, etc.

By doing it you simply block yourself to the knowledge that reality is consciousness, and a result you actually prevent from yourself the answer to your question, which is:

What is consciousness?

As for DMN please look at http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-03/muom-tma030410.php.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
Why, exactly (please use what was said in these links, in order to demonstrate it, and also clearly address your point of view of the quoted parts)?
Click to expand...

Shall I also type it out using double spaced lines with headers and footers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom