There ain't nobody in a body

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 479
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck » Tue Aug 22, 2017 7:48 am

I always thought that racism is so incredibly dumb because it's often conceived, at least partially, from this false idea that we genetically differ so much. In reality, we would barely, if at all, tell the genome of Barrack Obama apart from a white skinhead in kentucky. Almost every single difference we see between general nationalities can be chalked up to culture, but I can't say the same thing for men and women. To me, its a spectacle of science that we don't typically see as much conflict between men and women as we do with race. Or at least the same arguments aren't being raised. I don't know, maybe I'm largely incorrect on this assessment.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Dontaskme » Tue Aug 22, 2017 7:49 am

thedoc wrote:
Tue Aug 22, 2017 2:29 am
Dontaskme wrote:
Mon Aug 21, 2017 9:06 pm
No one ever gave the wild beasts or the little cute bunny rabbits a funeral. 🐇🦍🐅⚰️
We used to raise rabbits for meat, does it count if you clean them and sell the carcass for meat?
Yes, that counts, that's okay...when Elvis decides to leave the building, there's nothing no one can do about that, but wave goodbye to itself.

Elvis has probably just popped out to go and find and live in a better hotel, maybe a 5* one this time.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Dontaskme » Tue Aug 22, 2017 7:59 am

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote:
Tue Aug 22, 2017 7:48 am
I always thought that racism is so incredibly dumb
That's because thought thinking it is something when it's not is incredibly dumb, because thoughts can't think. There is only thought. But thought does not like being alone in the universe, it's boring, so it likes to invent lots of imaginary friends to keep it company in it's imaginary party.

Why was the skeleton always unhappy?
Because he had no body to hang out with. :lol:

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 10545
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Arising_uk » Tue Aug 22, 2017 9:48 am

Dontaskme wrote:Well true enough, there is no body here. ...
They are skeletons not bodies. The musculoskeletal system system is a subsystem of a body.
... intelligent energy ...
Make-believe.
... who we are here ...
Given what you say how are you allowed to use all these words?

Dontaskme
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Dontaskme » Tue Aug 22, 2017 10:27 am

Arising_uk wrote:
Tue Aug 22, 2017 9:48 am
Dontaskme wrote:Well true enough, there is no body here. ...
They are skeletons not bodies. The musculoskeletal system system is a subsystem of a body.
... intelligent energy ...
Make-believe.
... who we are here ...
Given what you say how are you allowed to use all these words?
Thanks for the knowledge.

Without information about my self...I could not have existed.

.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 10545
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Arising_uk » Tue Aug 22, 2017 11:05 am

:lol:

Dontaskme
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Dontaskme » Wed Aug 23, 2017 3:10 pm

Greta wrote:
Tue Aug 22, 2017 1:53 am

DAM, it seems that every day you start a new thread to say the same thing - nothing is here, nothing exists, nothing is real, etc. Why repeat yourself so much when it's clear that mere repetition in lieu of strong explanations are a turn-off?

What is the point of continually asserting that nothing is real? It seems to me that you are comforting yourself because regular life sucks - just that your grapes are not sour but illusory, with the implication being that they are worthless. No offence, that's just how it looks to me.

Many of us, however, consider this life is FAR from illusory or worthless. The distance between noumena and perception may be enormous, but the intrinsic reality of things we observe simply cannot be questioned, only considered with caution due to the amount of things we can't perceive. Even if, as the boffins say, the total sum of the universe's energy is zero (with positive and negative energy balancing each other out), this notion does not apply locally because (thankfully) it's not completely homogeneous.

If you want to excite your mind with skeletons, may I suggest comparing the skeletal frameworks of different species. The subtle and marked variances are fascinating and speak volumes about the species' lifestyles. It definitely gives and impression that we chordates are very much cut from the same cloth, so to speak - variants of one thing. Each has a skull, spine and, aside from snakes, four major limbs with incredible variations yet each major structure is recognisable in others.
Also...Just so you know, because I think you maybe forgetting what is real and unreal here....the I AM is real.

It's all the illusory stuff such as comments like ''comforting yourself because regular life sucks'' and ''If you want to excite your mind'' and ''worthless'' it is comments like this that are not real. The I Am in which they appear IS

DAM, likes to talk about consciousness and the contents of consciousness. Sorry if you find that distasteful. We don't always get what we want, and we hate it when we don't get what we want.

Don't tell Dam how to think, or what to think, I can watch my own thoughts and decide for myself what's real and what isn't thank you very much.

.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 2653
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Greta » Thu Aug 24, 2017 12:28 am

DAM, I did not respond to your previous reply because I could see you had not taken my post in the spirit in which it was intended and felt that getting you to understand was too large a hill to climb. For that reason I have nothing to say to your last post except that you have taken offence when none was intended.

I'd apologise except I don't think I did anything wrong aside from extreme bluntness (which is usual for this forum anyway). My question was a reasonable one and obviously not due to distaste of the subject matter.

I just figured that, if you are going to keep saying the same thing every day, why start new threads? Why not start a single mega thread - 50+ pages - "Nothing is real" or whatever floats your boat, and keep bumping it like Nick does? Many piecemeal threads looks to me like a strategy less likely to make a splash because it's so scattered rather than focused.


osgart
Posts: 431
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:38 am

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by osgart » Wed Sep 13, 2017 5:31 am

simple enough, I see the body as a concept formed. that don't leave much room for mindlessly coming about.

everything about the body is for to do something, and then it does it.

I'm amazed how many people avoid this evidential reasoning.

they use physical gradualism, and chaos as instruments of creation, and take conceptualization right out of the way.

I think a child realizes they are made by someone and than by futility of ever knowing that intelligence, they concoct other possibilities and complicate the matter.

instead of reasoning that this intelligent mind has no way of communicating to us, or that it must defend itself against us, or the intelligence could be completely alien to our intelligence and have fierce, covert motivations, they reason away it's existence as child's play.

but the simple and obvious could just be evidence that we are created.

I read ervin laszlo, 'The Immortal Mind', and in it he talks about a non physical field called the akashic field. he says that the universe is simultaneously connected by a field that lies outside of spacetime.

I'm thinking that this field is a vast jungle of spirituality; wild, primitive, and fierce, and extremely intelligent, in an alien way.

what created us, may not be benevolent whatsoever.

Dubious
Posts: 1387
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Dubious » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:32 am

...especially when the brain is missing or somebody kicked it into a coma.

Dalek Prime
Posts: 4191
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:48 am

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Dalek Prime » Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:27 am

Yeah, well, if it's all just a fabrication, you won't have any objection to me hypothetically torturing you then.

Didn't think so.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3040
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: There ain't nobody in a body

Post by Dontaskme » Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:04 am

Dalek Prime wrote:
Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:27 am
Yeah, well, if it's all just a fabrication, you won't have any objection to me hypothetically torturing you then.

Didn't think so.
Well there is no 'you' to think. Thoughts appear in 'you' inseparable from the thinking. There is no thinker, only the thought there is a thinker. When no thoughts are present, neither is the thinker. Thought and thinker are one without a second...



There is no such thing as a you torturing someone or you being tortured... ''I am being tortured'' is a mental construct.

The I AM doesn't make the claim it's being tortured, the mentation does via a mental re-action after the event.. Any pain is temporal ..while that in which pain arises and subsides is always eternally present, unscathed by any sensation.

Metaphorically speaking no one can torture what they are, one cannot torture the empty awareness that is aware of all sensation, sensation comes and goes ..but what you are, is the empty eternal awareness of all sensation.

There's just responses and reactions to the causes of bodily pain. The cause in this instant is not a person, but a heavy rock colliding with soft body tissue.

Let me try and explain...

If a landslide containing many large heavy rocks fall on top of a human body standing in it's way...the body feels pain, but the body does not say ouch'! ...the ouch'! comes from a mentation triggered by the sensation of pain....this mentation is in the exact same moment the collision takes place....the ouch'! triggers a re-active response, after the event has already taken place...the ouch'! appears in the form of sound, heard as a word with attached meaning as if belonging to a ''you''...but the ''you'' is only the awareness of the whole event, NOT the mental activities re-cognition of the event which is only a response to a memory past appearing as if it happened NOW

..... heavy rocks are not responsible for 'torture', rocks do not torture, neither does the body know it is being tortured...such ideas are purely fictional.

When a human being, an assumed ''someone or other'' hits you on the head very hard with a large rock....same applies as in the above explanation..but in this context...the body feels pain from a rock being planted on the head very hard...there is no 'someone' present in the immediate action of the rock colliding with the head, except the idea within the re-action after the event...as felt by the sensation of pain...pain doesn't belong to a ''someone'' ..the 'you' is the experiencing of pain, the empty awareness of pain, not the pain itself.

...rocks hurt when they hit the body, but a rock cannot torture the body, the body reacts with pain, but it does not say or think it is being tortured....'torture' is a 'mental construct'... 'pain' is not a mental construct, pain is a real sensation known only by awareness as it arises and fades in it....

That pain appears to be happening to a ''me'' is an artificially constructed ''add on'' that doesn't exist in reality except as conceived in this conception through language which artificially imposes upon what's already happening, creating the illusion of the pain belonging to a 'me' or the idea of 'other'...but there is no ''other'' outside of that mentation. Language is the only thing that appears to be alive here. Language is the only thing that appears to be responsible...but language is a fiction. The awareness of language is not an illusion, awareness is real, the real is this immediate unchanging awareness aware of all apparent change.



.

Sorry for the long post, it sometimes takes a lot of explaining, to de-construct the illusion of ''other''

.

marjoram_blues
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:50 pm

Response to Greta re single mega thread

Post by marjoram_blues » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:18 am

Greta wrote:
Thu Aug 24, 2017 12:28 am
DAM, I did not respond to your previous reply because I could see you had not taken my post in the spirit in which it was intended and felt that getting you to understand was too large a hill to climb. For that reason I have nothing to say to your last post except that you have taken offence when none was intended.

I'd apologise except I don't think I did anything wrong aside from extreme bluntness (which is usual for this forum anyway). My question was a reasonable one and obviously not due to distaste of the subject matter.

I just figured that, if you are going to keep saying the same thing every day, why start new threads? Why not start a single mega thread - 50+ pages - "Nothing is real" or whatever floats your boat, and keep bumping it like Nick does? Many piecemeal threads looks to me like a strategy less likely to make a splash because it's so scattered rather than focused.
I agree with the mega thread idea and suggested earlier that Rick gives the poster known as Dontaskme her own slot. However that would not prevent the 'nothing masturbating itself' flashing in other threads. There is a clear need for attention; the deliberate misinterpretation and misrepresentation of others ties in with this. If not deliberate, then there is an incapacity.

In addition, her tossing of terms ( e.g. Projection) are automatically employed like chaff from a warship. Often misapplied with no thinking involved or understanding attempted.
No analytical thinking because that's how she likes it. Or perhaps there is an incapacity.

There is a continuing dishonesty in not citing external sources for terminology she has internalized as her own intuition. Not giving credit where credit is due.
And her recent self-confessed lies. Unbelievable.

There is no denying there is a strong point of view which deserves exploration and challenging, in a philosophical manner. That is the usual in any debate.
However, her responses to what she perceives as a personal offence are pretty predictable. So many times we hear the same old, same old. There will be more. Inevitably. The tolerance levels of the mods and owner are high.

I fully expect another outrageous rant as a result of this post. I still wish her well as a person, even if I did swear at her the other day..a little F.O.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 2653
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Response to Greta re single mega thread

Post by Greta » Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:08 am

marjoram_blues wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:18 am
Greta wrote:
Thu Aug 24, 2017 12:28 am
DAM, I did not respond to your previous reply because I could see you had not taken my post in the spirit in which it was intended and felt that getting you to understand was too large a hill to climb. For that reason I have nothing to say to your last post except that you have taken offence when none was intended.

I'd apologise except I don't think I did anything wrong aside from extreme bluntness (which is usual for this forum anyway). My question was a reasonable one and obviously not due to distaste of the subject matter.

I just figured that, if you are going to keep saying the same thing every day, why start new threads? Why not start a single mega thread - 50+ pages - "Nothing is real" or whatever floats your boat, and keep bumping it like Nick does? Many piecemeal threads looks to me like a strategy less likely to make a splash because it's so scattered rather than focused.
There is a clear need for attention ...
Yes, and for company.
marjoram_blues wrote:There is no denying there is a strong point of view which deserves exploration and challenging, in a philosophical manner. That is the usual in any debate.
An interesting thing is that those who deny that the self is real, and there seem to be plenty, often won't provide satisfying explanations.

They seem to come to this conclusion because, when we observe own own mind we all we see is ourselves observing our own minds in a little mental hall of mirrors that seems to lead nowhere. However, that is simply inevitable - what else could you find?

People apparently get odd effects if they stare at their reflection for a long time. Then again, those same effects also apparently occur if one stares into another's face for long enough.

I see the self as the internal observation that this part of the Earth/universe responds in certain ways.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests