On Consciousness

Is consciousness physical or metaphysical?


  • Total voters
    94
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
The ability to use abstract information from our environments to predict outcomes is a recent occurrence in animal biological history
Excuse me, is this just your pondering? On what do you base this broad statement, where are your sources. Or is this just anthrocentrism of some sort?
and has yet to prove as successful as the survival skills of animals who lack this ability. All human physical skills fall into this category as they do not require this ability.
Evidently you have no idea of how to define the future. One microsecond ahead is the future.
No matter how much maths you do on the subject or tennis you watch on tv you won't be a champion tennis player without actually playing tennis. We are far from understanding and predicting how to produce a champion tennis player out of a computer.
I guess since so many poor analogies and false dichotomies have been presented, you would just add some more.

:D

Point if fact, tennis players predict the future trajectory of the ball and the behavior of the other player all the time.
 
Last edited:
The ability to use abstract information from our environments to predict outcomes is a recent occurrence in animal biological history and has yet to prove as successful as the survival skills of animals who lack this ability.
Birds do it. Bees do it. Perhaps not so recent as you'd like to think.

Or perhaps just another of your ill-considered and uninformed attempts to shore up your hapless quote-argument-unquote.
 
I had a dream last night, re-occurring wakening's where I spent half the day acting pretty much normal (got ready for work, brushed my teeth, was quite happy I managed to throw my notes across the room straight into the bin (even if the bin moved to catch it), etc) then suddenly reality dissolved and I was in bed, just woken up. Happened 4-5 times. Once I even got to the point of finishing work and driving home.

I'm so glad its happening again now, and I'll wake up again soon, so what I post now doesn't matter as this is still a dream.

I've also woken up on the floor in my room before, only to get up and climb back into bed to find I'm already in it. I touched my leg, it felt warm and moved, startled, I looked at myself sleeping for a bit before getting majorly freaked out and ran down the stairs, before eventually calming down and deciding I should probably go back and investigate what on earth was happening. Cautiously, and reluctantly (so as not to wake myself up), I slowly eased back into bed, at which point everything went kinda fuzzy, and I woke up again.

I smoked 75mg nn-DMT freebase once, and reality dissolved. I could feel my consciousness expanding, leaving my material body behind. Within seconds it was the size of the earth, I was totally aware of everything inside the earth, not what was physically there, but the (what I would describe as) living energy connections that permeated from its core to its surface, which gave the impression of the earth as a whole, a sort of consciously created entity in its own right.

My mind kept expanding. Soon my mind was the universe. Time stopped. I felt like I had been there for eternity, and would be for ever. Pure self awareness, a sort of self introspection that revealed not an external universe I was viewing as an outsider, but the same universe, but as an internal self reflection of existence, that precluded the material one I had long ago left behind. I spoke to people. I looked at clusters. I could access information seemingly at will. Move about. I saw a buddha type entity at one point, not physical but metaphysical, as if made of brilliant energy spectra crystals. Then, it started to subside. Slowly reality came back. And I was left with no more than typical non 'breakthrough' type hallucinatory effects of my real physical surroundings.

When I had a cardiac arrest at 13 years old I had a very similar experience, different in effects to an extent, but detachment to physical reality and perception of time also stopped. Things seemed bright, relaxing and very surreal. Then it was as if gravity was pulling me, but not in a specific direction, it was pulling me inwards in all directions; that's the only way I can explain the feeling. Until slowly I became more and more aware of myself, of the bleeps in the hospital and eventually I was back.

Of course this is the science section, so probably just totally made all of that up as it cant be scientifically proven, and the striking similarity innumerable people subjectively experience in similar situations are likely too just co-incidence. The very existence of dreaming states, hypnotic states, OBE states, transcendental states, psychedelic states, meditative states, indicates that there appears to be a fair degree of commonality among a fair number of individuals who attain these states, of which their veracity cannot be precisely evaluated at the present stage of our knowledge.

We just don't have a clue about consciousness, how it exactly effects the brain in such states, where is is and by what mechanisms it works, and why such striking similarities that seem to defy current explanation occur. Yes, some ideas have been put forward, and as interesting as noble as they are, most of the ones currently considered the best by the 'mainstream' scientists and journals that are proliferating such theories, are (to me) laughable on their face, and based on the typical materialist brain > mind can explain all conscious states misnomer, as types of 'random firing' 'malfunctions' 'warped memories recall', all sorts.

The states I described before (DMT, NDE) felt way more real to me than everyday reality. Ok. So how do we define reality? We can't, the only way we can is to cross reference with each others personal experiences of how subjectively real it feels to them. It comes down to the person.

Was it all an illusion? Yes.

Reality, or my experience. :p Pick.

Its one of the greatest illusions in history, that science has not even begun to comprehend yet, and following down the path many people are, its gonna take a hell of a lot of time to people to even start to.

Someone pinch me now, need to wake up.
 
Last edited:
Of course this is the science section, so probably just totally made all of that up as it cant be scientifically proven, and the striking similarity innumerable people subjectively experience in similar situations are likely too just co-incidence. The very existence of dreaming states, hypnotic states, OBE states, transcendental states, psychedelic states, meditative states, indicates that there appears to be a fair degree of commonality among a fair number of individuals who attain these states, of which their veracity cannot be precisely evaluated at the present stage of our knowledge.
Not surprising. We're all human, with human brains, and when you mess those brains up you get human cognitive failures and psychoses.

We just don't have a clue about consciousness, how it exactly effects the brain in such states, where is is and by what mechanisms it works, and why such sticking similarities that seem to defy current ideas occur.
Wrong.

The states I described before (DMT, NDE) felt way more real to me than everyday reality.
So? They weren't real.
 
Last edited:
No surprising. We're all human

That, is correct. Though some more than others.

with human brains, and when you mess those brains up you get human cognitive failures and psychoses.

I did not mention psychoses. Why did you? Explain, in depth, how these 'cognitive failures' as you call them, brought about by totally different events in scope, tend to verge towards such common subjective experiences, such as I described above.

Is taking a psychedelic drug to explore the extremely profound effects a simple molecule can have on a persons consciousness and entire perception of reality just "messing those brains up", or a perfectly reasonable scientific method to help us understand the nature of consciousness and how it relates to molecular neurochemistry?


Wrong.

So? They weren't real.

Neither are you. Well, the entity I am engaging with now, your conscious mind, is certainly not real. Unless you can prove it is. Can you?

Define real too, while you at it :p

PS: Thanks for waking me up.
 
Last edited:
I did not mention psychoses. Why did you?
Because that is precisely what you are describing.

PsychosisWP:
Wikipedia said:
Psychosis (from the Ancient Greek ψυχή "psyche", for mind/soul, and -ωσις "-osis", for abnormal condition or derangement) means abnormal condition of the mind, and is a generic psychiatric term for a mental state often described as involving a "loss of contact with reality". ... Psychosis is given to the more severe forms of psychiatric disorder, during which hallucinations and delusions and impaired insight may occur.
Yours are temporary and known to be specifically drug-induced, rather than by neurological or neurochemical deficit or defect.

Explain, in depth, how these 'cognitive failures' as you call them, brought about by totally different events in scope, tend to verge towards such common subjective experiences, such as I described above.
Because mind is brain function, and when you mess up the brain, you mess up the mind. And there's a finite number of ways in which you can mess up your brain.

What are you expecting, exactly?

Is taking a psychedelic drug to explore the extremely profound effects a simple molecule can have on a persons consciousness and entire perception of reality just "messing those brains up"
Yes.
 
Because that is precisely what you are describing.

PsychosisWP:


Did you read my post? :eye-poppi

Yours are temporary and known to be specifically drug-induced, rather than by neurological or neurochemical deficit or defect.


Wrong. They are temporary, but they are still neurological and neurologically scientifically testable.

Because mind is brain function, and when you mess up the brain, you mess up the mind. And there's a finite number of ways in which you can mess up your brain.

Wrong on both counts. There's an infinite number of ways to mess up a brain.

From a bad haircut resulting in severe psychological problems of the mind resulting in biochemical changes, from arguing with people on jref too much who are averse to engaging in open minded debate without reconsidering their preconceived world view, which can drive you to insanity, if your the sort of person that can't understand that different people have different views that sometimes you should just respect; especially if your a decent scientifically minded person that appreciates science is not truth, but an extremely powerful method of internally self consistent logic that is often totally wrong, and constantly evolving.

That was not aimed at you in particular, just at a few users here that seem to have replaced the role of religion with science as their religion to trump all others, failing to realize the fundamentally disparate nature of both.

What are you expecting, exactly?


You to answer my questions and not cherry pick the odd sentence.



Well, I'm sure a lot of doctors, professors, pharmacologists, biologists and people that take psychotropic medications would strongly disagree taking mind altering substances is just "messing those brains up".

If your going to reply to this like the last few posts I can't see much more point in continuing this conversation...
 
Did you read my post?
Yep.

Wrong. They are temporary, but they are still neurological and neurologically scientifically testable.
Yes. So how, exactly, am I wrong?

Wrong on both counts. There's an infinite number of ways to mess up a brain.
Wrong. Brains are finite. There's a finite number of chemical compounds that can act on them.

From a bad haircut resulting in severe psychological problems of the mind resulting in biochemical changes, from arguing with people on jref too much who are averse to engaging in open minded debate without blah blah blah constantly evolving.
Still finite.

That was not aimed at you in particular, just at a few users here that seem to have replaced the role of religion with science as their religion to trump all others, failing to realize the fundamentally disparate nature of both.
Nobody here does that, but the accusations never end. It is completely dishonest.

You to answer my questions and not cherry pick the odd sentence.
I answered your questions. That you don't like the answers is not my problem.

Well, I'm sure a lot of doctors, professors, pharmacologists, biologists and people that take psychotropic medications would strongly disagree taking mind altering substances is just "messing those brains up".
Taking psychoactive medication when the brain is functioning normally is by definition messing those brains up. Taking psychoactive medication when the brain is functioning abnormally - that's different.
 
My mind kept expanding. Soon my mind was the universe. Time stopped. I felt like I had been there for eternity, and would be for ever. Pure self awareness, a sort of self introspection that revealed not an external universe I was viewing as an outsider, but the same universe, but as an internal self reflection of existence, that precluded the material one I had long ago left behind. I spoke to people. I looked at clusters. I could access information seemingly at will. Move about. I saw a buddha type entity at one point, not physical but metaphysical, as if made of brilliant energy spectra crystals. Then, it started to subside. Slowly reality came back. And I was left with no more than typical non 'breakthrough' type hallucinatory effects of my real physical surroundings.
Have you seen neurologist Jill Bolte Taylor's talk "A Stroke of Insight"? Here she describes what happened to her when she got a stroke that switched off her left brain hemisphere. You are describing much the same experience, and it is tempting to think that drugs of this kind can selectively switch off parts of the brain in the same way. In short, such are the experiences when the brain is damaged, either through physical forces, like a stroke, or through chemical forces.

For Jill Bolte Taylor, the experience was so strong that she is actually longing to experience it again, and wish for everybody to experience it.

You will note that the feeling of being one with the universe is not actually reflecting something real, but is an artefact of our consciousness, and humanity would face a quick demise if everybody had a stroke in the left hemisphere at the same time.
 
Yes. So how, exactly, am I wrong?

Semantics, to a point. You said "rather than by neurological or neurochemical deficit or defect", the drugs cause a neurological and neurochemical deficit or defect, temporary or not.

Wrong. Brains are finite. There's a finite number of chemical compounds that can act on them.


Agreed, even though, from a hypothetical chemical standpoint, the number of potential chemicals that could be made could be argued to approach a near infinite number. But nothing measurable in the universe is infinite, apart from time, which more a fabric of reality rather than a directly measurable quantity, even if we can assign subjective definitions and units to it.

I think you misunderstood my point. There is an infinite number of external effects that can effect its chemistry, not an infinite number of biochemical derived changes from molecular ingestion.

Nobody here does that, but the accusations never end. It is completely dishonest.

I was unfair to bring this up, here, with you, sorry.

But to say no body does that here, is a lie. I've seen people get more emotional here over their pet theories being refuted than a religious person arguing about the existence of god.

I answered your questions. That you don't like the answers is not my problem.

I must have missed these answers. If you mean where you said "wrong" or "yes" without further explanation for your statements, that's not an answer, that's a proclamation with no supporting evidence.

Taking psychoactive medication when the brain is functioning normally is by definition messing those brains up.

Firstly, define "messing up".

And secondly, normal brain function is actually to a certain extent (the extent of which we are not quite sure yet, but new research is looking very interesting) due to endogenous psychoactive drugs and neurochemicals in the first place, whether we take medication to increase or decrease the levels.

Taking psychoactive medication when the brain is functioning abnormally - that's different.


How is that different? :boggled:
 


No I haven't ta, I'll check it out. I'm currently waiting on Sam Parneirs (spelling probably totally wrong) meta analysis of NDE accounts in the coming months, the very first scientifically rigorous study on such phenomenon.

You will note that the feeling of being one with the universe is not actually reflecting something real


So, you are saying we are not connected to the universe? I find this hard to believe.

I'm pretty sure when I touch something, or look at something, there is some sort of scientific connection there.

but is an artefact of our consciousness


And why would this be an artifact of our consciousness, as oppsed to the artifact being a feeling of heat from hell, or love from music?

and humanity would face a quick demise if everybody had a stroke in the left hemisphere at the same time.


I'm not so sure, I was reading a young earth creationist forum the other day, I'm pretty sure there's nothing between their ears to have an effect. So we'd be left with just them, which is even scarier :eek:
 
Agreed, even though, from a hypothetical chemical standpoint, the number of potential chemicals that could be made could be argued to approach a near infinite number.
A what?

I think you misunderstood my point. There is an infinite number of external effects that can effect its chemistry, not an infinite number of biochemical derived changes from molecular ingestion.
I didn't misunderstand, you're just wrong.

But to say no body does that here, is a lie. I've seen people get more emotional here over their pet theories being refuted than a religious person arguing about the existence of god.
No you haven't.


And secondly, normal brain function is actually to a certain extent (the extent of which we are not quite sure yet, but new research is looking very interesting) due to endogenous psychoactive drugs
Yes. And applying external psychoactive drugs causes abnormal function by definition.

How is that different? :boggled:
Ab.
 
Last edited:
Pixy. Maybe go get a cuppa tea or something, rethink your last posts and what I said about proclamations with no supporting evidence, and re-write those replies. Else I really don't know what else to say to you without just repying with similar one liners "you are also wrong" "thats not right" "this is meaningless".

Else this conversations going no where. I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to have a discussion.
 
Pixy. Maybe go get a cuppa tea or something, rethink your last posts and what I said about proclamations with no supporting evidence, and re-write those replies. Else I really don't know what else to say to you without just repying with similar one liners "you are also wrong" "thats not right" "this is meaningless".
If you don't want to be told you are wrong, that your posts are meaningless, then try not being wrong, try not writing meaningless posts.

Else this conversations going no where. I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to have a discussion.
You want a conversation where people ignore what you say? Because everything you say is wrong.
 
I think anyone that actually reads the above conversation we had will agree its you that are being unreasonable. You either explain why i am wrong or there is nothing more to say! Its quite simple. Can someone back me up here?!
 
So, you are saying we are not connected to the universe? I find this hard to believe.

I'm pretty sure when I touch something, or look at something, there is some sort of scientific connection there.
What do you mean by 'connected'? I agree with PixyMisa that as it stands, these statements are meaningless.

And why would this be an artifact of our consciousness, as oppsed to the artifact being a feeling of heat from hell, or love from music?
They are all artefacts; they are feelings, not sensations of something that is real.

I'm not so sure, I was reading a young earth creationist forum the other day, I'm pretty sure there's nothing between their ears to have an effect. So we'd be left with just them, which is even scarier :eek:
The YEC's and other fundamentalists may ruin our culture and plunge us back into the bronze age society that they think was more ideal, but humanity survived the stones ages, and even if we will be greatly reduced in numbers, I am confident that humanity can survive a new bronze age.
 
What do you mean by 'connected'? I agree with PixyMisa that as it stands, these statements are meaningless.


Photons that took billions of years to reach my eyes connect me to distant stars. The EM field at large plays a role, the particles that comprise my room play a role, the electrostatic repulsion of my chair countering my gravity is what connects me to that, and everything else from that connects to the universe at large

I am not in my own universe totally disconnected from everything.

We are all part of this universe. We are in this universe, but, perhaps more importantly than both of those facts, is that the universe is in us. Yes the universe is big. I look up at it, and some people feel small, but I don't. I feel big. Because my atoms came from those stars. There's a level of connectivity between everything. I fail how you can say otherwise.

They are all artefacts; they are feelings, not sensations of something that is real.


Feelings are not real? Thoughts are not real?

I'm not sure what universe you live in, but I'm not sure we are in the same one.

I'll ask you, like I asked pixy, to define real, in this regard.

I've not got high hopes.
 
Photons that took billions of years to reach my eyes connect me to distant stars. The EM field at large plays a role, the particles that comprise my room play a role, the electrostatic repulsion of my chair countering my gravity is what connects me to that, and everything else from that connects to the universe at large
If a term can be applied to everything, it doesn't mean anything.

Feelings are not real? Thoughts are not real?
They're informational processes. They are not distinct objects.
 
Photons that took billions of years to reach my eyes connect me to distant stars.
I asked you to describe what you mean by "connected", not give more example of "connections" that are meaningless. OK, so a photon from a distant galaxy reached you after a travel taking billions of years as seen from your point, and correspondingly a photon of yours will be able to reach that galaxy after even more billions of years. Is that really a connection? And particularly, a connection that is so meaningful that people should get an epiphany out of thinking about it?

We are all part of this universe. We are in this universe, but, perhaps more importantly than both of those facts, is that the universe is in us. Yes the universe is big. I look up at it, and some people feel small, but I don't. I feel big. Because my atoms came from those stars. There's a level of connectivity between everything. I fail how you can say otherwise.
I do not say it is not true. I say it is meaningless, in the sense that it has no impact whatsoever, apart from that it makes you feel good.

Feelings are not real? Thoughts are not real?
Thoughts and feelings are real, but not all thoughts and feelings are connected to reality. You can believe that you fly without actually flying.

I'll ask you, like I asked pixy, to define real, in this regard.
That which is still there when we are not.

I've not got high hopes.
I am also scared at the prospect, but mostly of the influence these fools can have on my world and those I love.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom