New Scientist's paper about OBE

[Lysear]

For myself, the most fundemental issue in approaching an explanation of consciousness (apart from spelling it,) is accepting that the physical brain and the physical processes within it, are a universe away from the mind and thinking processes. You cannot follow a percept, such as tree, through the eyes, into the brain and into the firing of neurons. There is no point where, as a scientist, you can make a leap from thought to physical process.
   I prefer to think of it this way; The activity within the brain is just a reflection of what is happening in the mind (soul,) we could not function on the earth without the brain, because it is our doorway to the physical universe, just as we could not function without a heart or lungs. Through the brain, the human spirit makes its connection with the physical universe.

                                                            Joe.

[Sharpe]

Hi Sharpe

Well this is just a wild speculation.  Eliminative materialism is not widely accepted, as you suggest.  It seems however that all of your reasoning is based on materialism (universe=physical) and monism (mind=brain) of one form or another.  Hence all the talk of neurons and brains etc etc...

Please follow this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_mind

You should consider dualism and idealism.  Dualism asserts that the mind and brain are separate and idealism asserts that our minds create our own reality, ie there is no physical reality, ideas which you do not appear to have considered.

The assumptions of monism and materialism, on which you base all of your conclusions are not safe at all.  They have been fiercely contested for thousands of years, and still, we don't know what the truth is.  Another unsafe assumption of yours is Darwinism, a theory which is not completely accepted.

So if your assumptions are unsafe, which they are, then so too are your conclusions.

I would ask you to stop using brains and neurons as a starting position for all of your arguments.  Many of us simply don't buy into these ideas so we will not agree with your conclusions.  Don't assume that the brain oozes thought like the liver oozes bile.  This has absolutely not been demonstrated, and therefore it's really hard to buy into your conclusions.  Sorry, I'm not trying to be rude, but you can not assume that we all start from the same position of materialism that you do.

Don't forget that the biggest paranormal event of all time is creation itself. Creation is one of the most absurd and unlikely events imagineable, and yet it is something which we all take for granted.  Compared to "creation", ESP is small potatos.

Oh for crying out loud, look at least I believe in things that fit together, if I would believe in dualism or idealism, nothing would be logical, you know why?
Because anything that involves "non-programmable" entities, are gods, and if gods can manifest their desires, there would be no need for evolution.
Also, isn't it obvious our whole society is build on evolution?
Now I'm not talking about some birds on Galapagos island.
I'm talking about psychology, why is it that we always want the hottest girl / intelligent girl?
It's impossible to ignore evolution in any theory about the mind.

The whole universe is programmed.
And if you can't see it, open your bloody eyes.

It's much easier to believe in this then to mess your brain up with wrong information that could jeopardize clarity, now THAT is dangerous.

And I seriously don't get this part:  "I would ask you to stop using brains and neurons as a starting position for all of your arguments.  Many of us simply don't buy into these ideas so we will not agree with your conclusions.  Don't assume that the brain oozes thought like the liver oozes bile."

Hell yeah! Let's do it!
Let's reject reality!
Then we come up with OUR theories, and we MAKE OUR OWN REALITY!!!
YIPPIE!!!

[Sharpe]

For myself, the most fundemental issue in approaching an explanation of consciousness (apart from spelling it,) is accepting that the physical brain and the physical processes within it, are a universe away from the mind and thinking processes. You cannot follow a percept, such as tree, through the eyes, into the brain and into the firing of neurons. There is no point where, as a scientist, you can make a leap from thought to physical process.
   I prefer to think of it this way; The activity within the brain is just a reflection of what is happening in the mind (soul,) we could not function on the earth without the brain, because it is our doorway to the physical universe, just as we could not function without a heart or lungs. Through the brain, the human spirit makes its connection with the physical universe.

                                                            Joe.

Awww, that's cute!

[Hisoka]

Now... Wikipedia is hardly a trustworthy source, now is it?

I've not followed the entire convo here, but I'll just jump in and be a prat and just react, if you don't all mind.
Now, Joe, how can the activity in the brain be ''just a reflection'' of what is in the mind or ''soul''? Where would this soul be then? In your belly? Or wait... perhaps where your brain is? Isn't it obvious? The brain IS your mind/soul... You can call it whatever you wish, but it remains the same. I see no reason as to why someone would believe that a brain is merely a physical representation of the human mind, to act and work its way through the physical realm. Well, the only reason I can think of is that one would wish to feel special, to believe that there is this little light in yourself that's basically you. And that when your physical self perishes, you (the little light) float out of your body and just fly away for all eternity with your immortal babe, or dude.
Anyway, i'd still like an answer as to where you believe this spirit is. Belly, head, butt, feet or perhaps the tip of my fingers. When I write this, are my fingers illuminating the light of life? Of course not... because there is no such thing as a spirit. Unless proven otherwise of course, which, as so many things, is about as likely as me growing pubic hair on my lips.
  There are however loads of folks who say they have the answer, that we have a soul etc... but that's said by theologians, scripture, simple minded people and many more groups or individuals. But as time has passed throughout the centuries, it's becoming more and more obvious that the brain is YOU. And you're simply living the ''dream'' as you go. The brain lets you see the world, and you react to it. However way you react to it is decided by people around you who either consciously or subconsciously indoctrinate you with their beliefs. For example, catholic families have done so throughout the ages, and many others as well.
Now, of course, there are people who ''break'' free of their grip and believe they have found the truth, that they know the right answer now. They can convert to Islam, to Hinduism, to all sorts of ''isms'' and whatever the mind can come up with in its deluded fantasy. Yeah, they can convert to any specialist! A specialist of the unknowable, or they decide they, themselves, are a real specialist and they form a little group specializing in another form of the unknowable... on how to summon a spaghetti monster.
But on a more serious note, I've once lived by this rubbish as well. I sat on my bed, I concentrated and after some time I could feel myself slipping away... 'My God!' I said later, when I ''recovered''. 'I've just had an OBE! This is stellar! I feel divine! I can do everything now! I can shoot fire from my eyes and lightning from my butt! Hey, wait, let's do it again! I LIKE FEELING SPECIAL!' But, as tempting as it was to do so again, I came to my senses and realised it was just a form of dreaming. Fe... you have daydreams, hallucinations, fata morgana's etc etc, the list goes on.
There are so many ways one can wake up and just realise ''wow that was so real, just what happened?!'', but in the end it is just THAT; a very real looking fantasy which left you in either awe or fascination, and you feel special and decide that you are either blessed by destiny or some other all-deciding factor which has blessed your life. But, let's face it, it's ALL a DREAM. And I'm saying this with something that virtually every being on this godforsaken planet lacks: COMMON SENSE.

[malganis]

I think it was Dr. Lommel who did research on how transplanted organs affected the personality of the person who received the organ. Personal characteristics of the donor were caried over to the other person. For example a guy got one organ (i dont remember exactly which) from a person who died in early twenties in motorcycle incident and who liked eating chicken and led unhealthy lifestyle. Then that guy started eating chicken although he never ate it before and started to act differently. Some people also gor memories from other person.

[Lysear]

let's face it, it's ALL a DREAM. And I'm saying this with something that virtually every being on this godforsaken planet lacks: COMMON SENSE.

I see no reason as to why someone would believe that a brain is merely a physical representation of the human mind, to act and work its way through the physical realm. Well, the only reason I can think of is that one would wish to feel special

[malganis]

here is an interesting article about brain

10 Unsolved Mysteries Of The Brain

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/aug/unsolved-brain-mysteries/article_view?b_start:int=0&-C=

[Aquarious]

Because anything that involves "non-programmable" entities, are gods, and if gods can manifest their desires, there would be no need for evolution.
Also, isn't it obvious our whole society is build on evolution?
Now I'm not talking about some birds on Galapagos island.
I'm talking about psychology, why is it that we always want the hottest girl / intelligent girl?
It's impossible to ignore evolution in any theory about the mind.

Yeah... I think this is where Sharpe's argument falls a little juvenile. What about the Wife that marries a rich man and runs off with the Gardener and lives happily ever after? What about Childhood sweethearts that stay in love, Marry, have many grand children and die together? e.g. based when they were kids, when materlism wasn't so important... The Love (sorry to be gooy) kept them together and they didn't desire anyone else. There are many examples of when people don't desire the one at the top of your status tree but I won't ramble through them.

It's funny but it's the people that aren't bothered about reaching the top in their society, are happy as they are. For example, I have neighbours that married when they were 21 the guy works in a factory and the woman works in Admin, they've been together over twenty years, still have the same job (probably always will) and are happy to save for their one holiday a year, watch their local football team each week and spend time with their friends. I asked the guy one day if he wanted to try for management or something as he's been their so long but he said he was happy as he was. And I believe him.

Your Materlistic Psychology is based on aspects of Western culture. I'm not saying it doesn't exsist but the majority of the world wasn't built on this type of evolution. A big chunk of the planet have no choice in who they marry whether they desire them or not.

As for physical evolution, it hasn't been scientifically proven after all, why haven't monkeys evolved?

I'm undecided about OBE's but some of Sharpe's assumptions are just that. Assumptions.

[jason]

Excuse me while I suddenly interject on page 6

I don't really buy the materialistic psychology belief system (that's exactly what it is-just like every other one-different as they may be).I don't buy into social status-it may be the driving force of a lot of people, but it does NOT make you happier.Eg-I work part time & rent a room.I don't own a house, a car, a boat.I'm not at thew top rank in the company I work for by any means, yet I'm content & happy.If MP: were true, every wealthy rich & famous person on earth would be very very happy.Of course, they aren't: they kill themselves,they may be stupid as doornails, or belligerent, or greedy.

If materialistic psychology were true, there wouldn't be millions of people sorta like myself who are happy the way we are.I'm living proof that it's just wrong.
There's more than one way to view "the world".NOTHING is absolute.Not even the holy grails of science & religion.It's all just belief systems based on root assumptions.

[Aquarious]

eh Jason, I just said all of that in the post above yours! But thanks for backing it up.. I'm happy your happy

[Stillwater]

Hisoka:

I've not followed the entire convo here, but I'll just jump in and be a prat and just react, if you don't all mind.
Now, Joe, how can the activity in the brain be ''just a reflection'' of what is in the mind or ''soul''? Where would this soul be then?

Hi Hisoka,

To butt in again, and offer solutions to problems posed to other people.....

As this thread has demonstrated before, Materialism, that doctine that states that mind is a product of brain (matter), has numerous strong qualities, since it seems to perfectly describe our apparently mechanical universe, and the fact that things which happen to our brain, such as a concussion, directly affect our consciousness; that would make sense, if the brain were producing our consciousness, no?

But, as I have shown in other posts, and in another parellel thread, though a theory, like Newtonian physics, can describe the real world in most cases, if there are exceptions and loopholes to this explanation, such as Relativisitic physics introduces and explains, then the theory is either incomplete, a mere approximation of what is actually occuring, or, looked at another way, and entirely invalid model of reality.

Now I am not saying Materialism is wrong, as no one has the authority to say so, but

1)It cannot explain instances, like project PEAR at princeton, when mind can apparently affect physical universe, or instances when it can gather information about it outside of senses, such as experiments like Charles Tart performed with Miss Z.

2)It does not address the "Hard problem of Consciousness", namely why a brain, a thing composed of matter, which is composed of dead things called atoms, can manifest awareness if organized in the proper fashion- it has been demonstated that if Materialism is true, and brains really can produce every aspect of a mind, including awareness, then machines such as computers could also be aware if built with enough complexity.

Now number one is strong, as it is built on a massive amount of anecdotal evidence, but if you choose to say that all of those individuals, many of them disciplined experts of their field in a labratory setting, all produced erroneous data, then I think number 2 is still enough to put a major roadblock in declaring Materialism fact, as Materialism can address how our brains produce cognition, and store memories, but not why we have an experience of thinking, or feeling. The brain, on the level we understand it, is a machine for gathering, storing, and transducing data in the form of chemical bonds and electrochemical signals, and neither data, nor the machines that handle data, should in any way experience that data.

On the location of a "soul":

No one said we had such a thing, or why if we did, it must have a spatial location; for example:

Imagine you are experiencing a virtual reality setting; you could ask yourself, "Where in this world am 'I' ?"
Now you can see the location of your representative body, but that doesn't really tell you where 'you' are, as you know this to only be an illusion to be in keeping with the virtual environment. 'You' actually do have a location, but it is one that transcends the virtual environment, so it is useless to describe that location in any refrence to the virtual environment.

Perhaps our awareness, which some call "soul" (I try to avoid the word as it is associated primarily with dualism) has the same relationship to our body that the person experiencing the virtual world has to their virual representation. Since our awareness may in fact transcend what our senses tell us is a physical world, what is the sense in looking for our mind "here or there"? Yes, our brains seem to account for most of our mental functions, but cannot account for all of them (such as awareness of experinece), so why is the mind necessarily there?

Don't make me cut and paste Chalmers again, lol.....

[Lysear]

   Stillwater, I really appreciated your post, it conveys so well what I couldn't manage to put into words!

     

     I must disagree with you on one point though, you dislike the word soul because it is ascociated too readily with dualism. It is also possible to use the word comfortably in a monoistic model. If you consider the soul as our awareness, the percepts we recieve from the so called "real world," approach our soul from one side, while the concept is formed when we imbue the percept with thoughts. The concept and the percept are not exclusive, they are two parts of a whole. We wouldn't know an object without the concept of it, it would meet our senses, and the experience would end there. When we as concious beings contemplate an object, the percept and the concept reunite into the whole. Now, I hope I didn't massacre Rudolf Steiner's Philosophy of freedom too badly!

                                                     Joe.

[catmeow]

Oh for crying out loud, look at least I believe in things that fit together,

Exactly, you believe in things rather than proving them. You're all opinion and no fact.  Personally I don't believe in anything.

if I would believe in dualism or idealism, nothing would be logical, you know why? Because anything that involves "non-programmable" entities, are gods

Weird, free will = deity.  That's a new one.

and if gods can manifest their desires, there would be no need for evolution

You're hung up on an unproven theory

Also, isn't it obvious our whole society is build on evolution?

Nope.

It's impossible to ignore evolution in any theory about the mind.

There's that unproven theory again

The whole universe is programmed.  And if you can't see it, open your bloody eyes.

Wow you're a God.  You can see 14 billion years into the past and into the farthest reaches of the universe.  You can see every single sub-atomic particle, the reasons for everything and even the meaning of life itself.  Or is this just your own personal opinion again?

It's much easier to believe in this then to mess your brain up with wrong information that could jeopardize clarity, now THAT is dangerous.

Funny because that's exactly what you've done with your own brain, messed it up with wrong information.

And I seriously don't get this part:  "I would ask you to stop using brains and neurons as a starting position for all of your arguments.  Many of us simply don't buy into these ideas so we will not agree with your conclusions.  Don't assume that the brain oozes thought like the liver oozes bile."

I'm not surprised.  Let me explain it for you.  You start from an unproven materialistic standpoint, which others don't agree with.  From this shaky standpoint you use sweeping arguments which are actually just your own opinions rather than any rational thought processes.  The result is an incomprehensible and unsupportable personal belief system which you call "logic" or "reality" or "obvious" or "things which fit together".  Your mind is so messed up with your own belief system you're incapabable of taking account of any opinions other than your own.  You are in fact guilty of the complete lack of clarity you accuse others of.

Hell yeah! Let's do it!
Let's reject reality!
Then we come up with OUR theories, and we MAKE OUR OWN REALITY!!!
YIPPIE!!!

Erm, I think it's you who rejects reality.  Open your mind.

[Sharpe]

And about being happy with posessions.
I guess none of you has read status anxiety by Alain de Botton.
It's not about what you have, it's what your friends have (your equals).
If they don't have a car / boat, you don't feel happy if you get one, but you surely will feel happier because you are "higher" then your equals.

And catmeow, I understand you're angry because you can't win the discussion fair 'n square, but lying doesn't prove anything and your credibility has sunk to 0.
You see people, this is what humans do when their map feels threatened.
They say: "Nope" or "an unproven theory", that's called living in denial.
Now I feel sorry for catmeow but let's leave it alone, it needs to cool off. 
We're on a discussion board for heavens sake, come back to reality and stop flying around in your dreams!

[malganis]

You see people, this is what humans do when their map feels threatened.
They say: "Nope" or "an unproven theory", that's called living in denial.

You do exactly the same thing...haha..

[Sharpe]

Yes, but my beliefs are reality, so I have authority to do so. Ha-ha.

[catmeow]

And catmeow, I understand you're angry because you can't win the discussion fair 'n square, but lying doesn't prove
anything and your credibility has sunk to 0.
You see people, this is what humans do when their map feels threatened.
They say: "Nope" or "an unproven theory", that's called living in denial.
Now I feel sorry for catmeow but let's leave it alone, it needs to cool off. 
We're on a discussion board for heavens sake, come back to reality and stop flying around in your dreams!

Don't flatter yourself.  I'm not in the slightest bit angry, and I think I won the argument easily. You're just too closed minded to see it.

You missed the point when I said "Personally I don't believe in anything".  By this I mean my mental map is agnostic.  Therefore it can not be threatened.  A point you clearly missed. 

If I deny you your fundamental assumptions (materialism, evolution), which as I keep saying are flawed, you have absolutely no answer.  "Nope" obviously hit a raw nerve with you.  Well that's good because it was intended to do just that. You think Nope is a lie?  Well "Nope" happens to be what I think, I disagree with your asumptions and because your belief system doesn't permit this I must therefore be lying.  Crazy...

You have no answer when challenged and resort to insults such as "your credibility has sunk to 0".  In fact I bet you don't even understand that you are being challenged to discuss your fundamental assumptions?  Do you?  So another point you missed. Your reply indicates lack of understanding.

Discussion board?  You haven't discussed anything yet, you just use this thread as a soap box for your own point of view whilst ignoring anything anyone else has to say.

Yes, but my beliefs are reality, so I have authority to do so. Ha-ha.

Just proven my point....

[Sharpe]

Don't flatter yourself.  I'm not in the slightest bit angry, and I think I won the argument easily. You're just too closed minded to see it.

You missed the point when I said "Personally I don't believe in anything".  By this I mean my mental map is agnostic.  Therefore it can not be threatened.  A point you clearly missed. 

If I deny you your fundamental assumptions (materialism, evolution), which as I keep saying are flawed, you have absolutely no answer.  "Nope" obviously hit a raw nerve with you.  Well that's good because it was intended to do just that. You think Nope is a lie?  Well "Nope" happens to be what I think, I disagree with your asumptions and because your belief system doesn't permit this I must therefore be lying.  Crazy...

You have no answer when challenged and resort to insults such as "your credibility has sunk to 0".  In fact I bet you don't even understand that you are being challenged to discuss your fundamental assumptions?  Do you?  So another point you missed. Your reply indicates lack of understanding.

Discussion board?  You haven't discussed anything yet, you just use this thread as a soap box for your own point of view whilst ignoring anything anyone else has to say.

Just proven my point....

Aww that's cute, it thinks it won.

[Mustardseed]

For a while I was wondering what was going on here with our dear young flamer. I thought for a while he was actually interested in a serious discussion about said subjects.  I soon realized that this was not the case. Now I have another problem........I have to categorize him. I think I lean toward ..........the last one .........Troller. What do you all think? 

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/acne.htm

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/enfantprovocateur.htm

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/troller.htm

And still..........maybe more Acne. Yea definitely Acne

[catmeow]

Awww, that's cute!

Yes, but my beliefs are reality, so I have authority to do so. Ha-ha.

Aww that's cute, it thinks it won

Please just keep digging yourself deeper... I love it...

Mustardseed, tough call, but don't forget  bong

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/bong.htm

with a bit of acne of course...

[jax4]

Proof is in the experience and validating your own concrete claims.

Well said.

[Aquarious]

And about being happy with posessions.
I guess none of you has read status anxiety by Alain de Botton.
It's not about what you have, it's what your friends have (your equals).
If they don't have a car / boat, you don't feel happy if you get one, but you surely will feel happier because you are "higher" then your equals.

I don't think you've read the book yourself!
1st: It mainly applies to western culture
2nd: Read what he says about the people that don't experience status anxiety and why

Looks like your universal "obvious" theories are falling apart. Never mind son.   

[Sharpe]

You mean you guys actually stereotype people on the internet.
That means putting people in boxes, so you wouldn't need to discuss with them because you allready think you're better then them.

I know exactly what you guys are doing, so don't waste time on primitive discussion tactics.

Why is it that you guys want to know who I am and what I do, and attack me for that?
Isn't that irrelevant on the subject we're discussing.
It is true that you can not find a way to defend your beliefs.
Instead, you find a way to attack the person giving the opposite beliefs which is the desperate defend of your map, highly programmed and logical.

I did notice a great personality shift in most of you, however I do not want to go as far as to attack you all personally, some of us are better then that.

If I am attacked again towards my personality, it will only prove my point.

PS: I read status-anxiety twice.

[Hisoka]

Now, all I see here are a bunch of people suddenly using internet stereotypes on others. When it comes to a discussion, using such stamps = instant lose = a waste of time. To be frank... when one resorts to such childish antics, one is really diverting the issues at hand and trying to escape by looking smarter and better than the other one, by uniting under the flag of Insanity. And, to be frank again, I believe that anyone trying to categorize another person is mentally ill, and you really do need psychiatric help, or perhaps a local indian herb doctor... whatever is your cup of tea. Because, let's face it, Mustardseed: what you said makes you nothing less than a pussy, and I think you're afraid.

P.S I'm not attacking or flaming or w/e... just pointing out that I found it weak how some people apparently can't reply other than basically saying: 'Yeah, you said it! Now what to categorize him? Hmm... maybe a troll! How nice, yea!'

[Sharpe]

Why thank you "troll" haha, don't mind me I'm an acne guy!