Three regimes

[bahman]

There are three regimes when it comes to a process, namely discrete, continuous, and simultaneous. A discrete process refers to a set of events in which they occur in discrete intervals with the interval being a constant. A continuous process refers to a set of events in which they occur in intervals where the intervals are arbitrarily small. A simultaneous process refers to a set of events that occur by no interval.

[Walker]

Got it. Therefore?

[bahman]

Got it. Therefore?

Therefore, there is a mind since there is a change. The proof is given here.

[Walker]

Got it. Therefore?

Therefore, there is a mind since there is a change. The proof is given here.

I don’t know if the proof is correct, but I don’t need convincing. Empirical observation in the wake of meditation shows that mind and change are linked because thoughts, which are detected by mind, are only detected when changing from one to another, and this can even be described as movement. When one thought is constant without interruption of another thought, then mind is not, because change of thought is not. When no thought is present then mind is not, because there is no thought to change. When mind is not, the human portal to mind is closed and one still is, as Am rather than the self-conceptual thought of, I Am.

If the linked proof is logically sound, then you found an intellectual, conceptual correlation that orders mind workings (which are not conceptual when mind is not*). The soundness of the proof can be rationally evaluated without the witnessing I described.

* Resulting in inevitable paradoxes, such as this one.

[Harbal]

What a fascinating conversation.

[bahman]

Got it. Therefore?

Therefore, there is a mind since there is a change. The proof is given here.

I don’t know if the proof is correct, but I don’t need convincing. Empirical observation in the wake of meditation shows that mind and change are linked because thoughts, which are detected by mind, are only detected when changing from one to another, and this can even be described as movement. When one thought is constant without interruption of another thought, then mind is not, because change of thought is not. When no thought is present then mind is not, because there is no thought to change.

The fact that there is no change in thought does not imply that there is no mind. The mind cannot be non-existence if there is no change in thought. Once we agree that there is the mind since there is a change then one can argue that the mind should exist even if there is no change afterward. The reason is that the mind is changeless since otherwise, if there is a change in the mind namely existence to non-existence, there should exist another mind that causes this change. The second mind is either changeless or not. If it is changeless then the mind is the second mind and we can ignore the first mind otherwise assuming changeable minds leads to regress that is not acceptable.

When mind is not, the human portal to mind is closed and one still is, as Am rather than the self-conceptual thought of, I Am.

What do you mean here?

[bahman]

What a fascinating conversation.

I am glad that you like this.

[Walker]

What do you mean here?

There is no mind in the sense that ... if the one mind is not accessed, then effectively it does not exist. This is understandable with the sun as an example. If one is shut off from the sun, then the sun effectively does not exist if the experience and memory of the sun are not accessible.

Every human brain is a portal to mind. Other portals exist that aren't human. Dogs, for example.

[bahman]

What do you mean here?

There is no mind in the sense that ... if the one mind is not accessed, then effectively it does not exist.

No, this does not follow.