On Consciousness

[quarky]

Zeuzzz, you pathetic hippy.

When will you give up this hopeless battle for our souls?

 

[AlBell]

I'm not aware of anyone here "pretend(ing) perception is reality."
What can be claimed is that our perceptions model reality. Over the millennia, humans we have developed numerous technologies and tools to confirm, fine tune and/or modify those models of reality (perceptions).

We agree so far.

Calling our perceptions shared hallucinations is -- at best -- an abuse of language and -- at worst -- absurd.

Does not follow. What do you want to call them?

Oh. I know. Shared Perceptions (which we agree are models rather than reality).

Back to, if Perceptions aren't reality, and they aren't, what are they if not hallucinations?

 

[quarky]

Hullabalooshins?

 

[Dancing David]

If you were to personify earth as a sentient entity what gender would you choose?

There is a good reason why people call her mother nature, not father nature. The essence of the DMT experience is a very female one is all I can say, Strasssman has collected voluminous numerous data on these recurring themes between disparate test subjects, that recounted strikingly similar experiences and themes yet never met each other.

More unsubstantiated claims from an uncontrolled source and just you making stuff up again.

A wise person would create a pantheon to represent nature, both genders and non gendered deities. Only someone fixated on a monotheistic culture steeped in dualism and false hierarchies would want any gender over the other to personify nature. I see a pluralistic nature that transcends gender and such blatant monotheism.

So exactly how many people did Strasman interview and what controls were there on gender assignment of the experiences?

 

[Zeuzzz]

More unsubstantiated claims from an uncontrolled source and just you making stuff up again.

A wise person would create a pantheon to represent nature, both genders and non gendered deities. Only someone fixated on a monotheistic culture steeped in dualism and false hierarchies would want any gender over the other to personify nature. I see a pluralistic nature that transcends gender and such blatant monotheism.

Pretty far out duuuuuuuude Knew there was a bit of hippy left in you, you've obviously given this some thought I'm just talking from personal experience, other peoples may differ.

So exactly how many people did Strasman interview and what controls were there on gender assignment of the experiences?

Crikey. It's not hard to use scholar to find the published papers. He's a fairly well known and well respected scientist and has had all his work published in eminent journals.

A Doctor’s Revolutionary Research into the Biology of
Near-Death and Mystical Experiences

Clinical psychiatrist Rick Strassman explores the effects
of DMT, one of the most powerful psychedelics known.
From 1990 to 1995, Dr. Rick Strassman conducted U.S.
government–approved and funded clinical research at
the University of New Mexico in which he injected sixty
volunteers with DMT, one of the most powerful psychedelics
known. His detailed account of those sessions is an
extraordinarily riveting inquiry into the nature of the human
mind and the therapeutic potential of psychedelics. DMT,
a plant-derived chemical found in the psychedelic Amazon
brew ayahuasca, is also manufactured by the human brain.
In Strassman’s volunteers, it consistently produced near-
death and mystical experiences. Many reported convincing
encounters with intelligent nonhuman presences, aliens,
angels, and spirits. Nearly all felt that the sessions were
among the most profound experiences of their lives.
Strassman’s research connects DMT with the pineal gland,
considered by Hindus to be the site of the seventh chakra
and by René Descartes to be the seat of the soul.

Srassman makes the bold case that DMT, naturally
released by the pineal gland, facilitates the soul’s movement
in and out of the body and is an integral part of the birth and
death experiences, as well as the highest states of meditation
and even sexual transcendence. Strassman also believes
that so-called alien abduction experiences are brought on
by accidental releases of DMT. If used wisely, DMT could
trigger a period of remarkable progress in the scientific
exploration of the most mystical regions of the human mind
and soul.


M.D., is clinical associate professor of
Psychiatry at the University of New Mexico School of
Medicine. He has published nearly thirty peer-reviewed
scientific papers and has served as a reviewer for several
research journals and as a consultant to the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration, the National Institute on Drug
Abuse, the Social Security Administration, and other
state and local agencies. His research centers around the
role of the naturally occurring compound DMT and its
role in out-of-body and near-death experiences.
Arthur Morey has performed in theaters and cabarets
in New York, Chicago, and Milan. He has been awarded
a number of AudioFile Earphones Awards

 

[Zeuzzz]

Zeuzzz, you pathetic hippy.

When will you give up this hopeless battle for our souls?

When I've reached a page in this thread where i'm convinced everyone that's posted has one.

 

[quarky]

I think I may have two.

 

[Perpetual Student]

We agree so far.


Does not follow. What do you want to call them?

Oh. I know. Shared Perceptions (which we agree are models rather than reality).

Back to, if Perceptions aren't reality, and they aren't, what are they if not hallucinations?

hal·lu·ci·na·tion
[huh-loo-suh-ney-shuhn] Show IPA

noun
1.
a sensory experience of something that does not exist outside the mind, caused by various physical and mental disorders, or by reaction to certain toxic substances, and usually manifested as visual or auditory images.

2.
the sensation caused by a hallucinatory condition or the object or scene visualized.

3.
a false notion, belief, or impression; illusion; delusion.

Synonyms
1. phantasm, aberration. See illusion.

I hate semantic quibbling, so this will be my last effort regarding this point. Clearly, a key aspect of hallucination (as defined above) is that it does not accurately reflect (or model) reality; i.e.: it is an erroneous perception in one way or another. You are grossly misusing this word, which you are certainly free to continue. But do recognize that it does not lead to any substantive insight and is inevitably a source of confusion. If there is a real point you are attempting to make, try using a different word.
Consider this:
If I see a fan rotating in front of me, I experience an internal visualization of a model of that fan. If I also feel the breeze from the fan, it corroborates, my visualization. If I stick my finger in it and feel the pain of the blade striking it, it is a further corroboration. My knowledge of electricity generation and transmission, electric motors, metals and fluid dynamics gives further credence to that visualization. So, all my internal visualizations are invariably corroborated in a similar fashion. None of those experiences would be properly called hallucinations. If, however, when I placed my finger in the fan, I felt nothing and the fan metamorphosed into a banana, I would be tempted to use the term hallucination.

 

[Perpetual Student]

When I've reached a page in this thread where i'm convinced everyone that's posted has one.

Count me out!

 

[quarky]

I like Huxley's angle on this:
That the brain is mostly a filtering system; that there is too much data; that we need to hone in on the small amount of it that concerns us. This doesn't imply that there isn't a whole lot more information available to our sensory systems.

We share this globe with other perceiving creatures, and according to their relevant perceptions, they may as well be living in a different universe.

So, we pick and choose our way through the onslaught of available incoming data, and this, by consensus, eventually describes the human experience.
Yet, it remains largely subjective.

I squirm a bit when I hear people get too specific about the alternate perceptual realities, if they exist. Maybe we shouldn't talk about it. It is usually cheapened by talk.
It's not that "it" is cheap...it's talk that is cheap.

The specifics of the possibility of alternate perceptual potentials becomes like talking about a dream one had. Few want to listen. The dreamer unconsciously edits the report, to make more sense relative to normal rules, and it all gets polluted.

 

[Dancing David]

Pretty far out duuuuuuuude Knew there was a bit of hippy left in you, you've obviously given this some thought I'm just talking from personal experience, other peoples may differ.

Now you contradict your self and make you past statement an exaggeration or false hood.

I am too young to be a hippie, I have stated repeatedly on these forums I am a pagan buddhist nihilist.

Crikey. It's not hard to use scholar to find the published papers. He's a fairly well known and well respected scientist and has had all his work published in eminent journals.

Funny that as usual the citation you give does nothing to support your premise that people take DMT and hallucinate have an experience that they categorize as 'female'.

Really Zeuzzz, it seems that you ability to read and comprehend has decreased. If that is due to the ingestion of DMT, it certainly does not ease your ability to discuss well.

 

[tsig]

Now you contradict your self and make you past statement an exaggeration or false hood.

I am too young to be a hippie, I have stated repeatedly on these forums I am a pagan buddhist nihilist.


Funny that as usual the citation you give does nothing to support your premise that people take DMT and hallucinate have an experience that they categorize as 'female'.

Really Zeuzzz, it seems that you ability to read and comprehend has decreased. If that is due to the ingestion of DMT, it certainly does not ease your ability to discuss well.

Z seems to be a latter day O'Leary preaching the enlightenment of mankind thru expansion of the mind or "Better living thru chemistry".

 

[Mr. Scott]

I was reviewing the beginning of this thread, and found this. Do you still feel this way, quarky, that quarks are conscious, or that consciousness might be carried by the Higgs Boson or the graviton? Why? What evidence is there that quarks are conscious?

Consciousness might be a background energy field that we tap into, like radio receivers. Perhaps it is carried by the Higgs Boson or the graviton.
Maybe it precedes matter altogether.

I suspect that we know almost nothing on the subject.
It wasn't all that long ago that various ruling classes considered darker skinned people to be lacking in consciousness and other traits of being a human being.

When i was circumcised, it was widely believed that babies didn't feel pain.
My college biology professor tried to convince me that frogs couldn't feel pain.

There still exists an amazing propensity for humans to assume that consciousness resides in their realm only. I doubt we'll ever see straight until we overcome our anthropomorphic chauvinism. Having the crown of creation title is heady stuff, and it pumps up some serious confirmation bias.

Fortunately, other animals have been getting smarter over the years. I've heard that even crows have been solving some problems. They didn't use to solve problems, back in the days when we were focused solely on how to kill them.

Imho, quarks are conscious. The whole shebang is. Philosophy, yes.

How would we go about proving that atoms are not conscious?

 

[Zeuzzz]

Count me out!

It's ok don't panic, quarky has a spare one. If you ask him nicely he may lend you it.

 

[Zeuzzz]

He might even give you a choice over the gender you get.

 

[!Kaggen]

Watch this 'banned' ted talk by Hancock. Really interesting information.

So have you read Prof Lewis-Williams books yet?

 

[quarky]

I was reviewing the beginning of this thread, and found this. Do you still feel this way, quarky, that quarks are conscious, or that consciousness might be carried by the Higgs Boson or the graviton? Why? What evidence is there that quarks are conscious?

What evidence is there that they are not?

I had forgotten writing that post, but I think it was reasonable.
I did mention, in the conjecture, that it was philosophy.

Have you ever read my spewage on the single quark hypothesis?
It surmises that the pre-big bang singularity remains, and it moves around, in major violation of C, assembling the appearance of everything.

In that view, consciousness resides in the singularity.
It's not a real popular hypothesis around here, but it isn't necessarily wrong.

 

[Mr. Scott]

What evidence is there that they are not?

Well, the idea that quarks are conscious makes no sense at all (how would consciousness benefit a quark?), so the burden to explain this possibility is on you, sir.

 

[quarky]

Well, the idea that quarks are conscious makes no sense at all (how would consciousness benefit a quark?), so the burden to explain this possibility is on you, sir.

I was afraid of this.

So many burdens; so little time.

For starters, imho, you have a predilection towards benefit.
Why would consciousness need to benefit anything?

What if it just 'is'?

I'll come back later, with a more detailed argument.
It won't be easy; people will pick on me; and the idea could be bonkers...

hence, not going to get me any dates with hot babes.

But I owe it to myself, to try once more.

I'm not selling anything, btw...except perhaps a fondness for intellectual discourse.

(Gotta run; bigfoot is at the door, selling girl scout cookies.)

 

[Zeuzzz]

So have you read Prof Lewis-Williams books yet?

I haven't read his work directly, but I've just finished 'food of the gods' by Terrence Mckenna and I noticed that he references him once or twice, which has piqued my interest.

I've actually been to the Drakensburg Mountains in South Africa when I visited to see my grandad, they are fascinating features. Table mountain I seem to recall? Like a giant had stomped on the top of every mountain in the region, each mountain had a definite ridge and flat top. Was very odd, but I'm sure there is adequate geographical causes.

The nature and biology in that mountain range was stunning. Never seen a more diverse spread of species and flora.

Since Mckenna published his book in 1992 he hasn't obviously included his further research, can you explain it in more detail? His wikipedia page looks quite fascinating