Page 3 of 4

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 8:39 am
by Dontaskme
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 8:29 am


First person subjective experience is very unreliable as a means of determining any truth never mind a profound one
Without independent and rigorous examination there is no way to know the truth value of absolutely any experience
First person subjective experience simply means there is a phenomena known as being conscious of being conscious, and that there is no person being conscious of itself because it is realised that consciousness is all there is that can be known, and that you are that direct knowing. There is no knowing of what or why consciousness is only that it is.

The terminology ''First person subjective experience'' is a pointing back to the source of all experience, it's one pointing one back to the actual source of itself to the one and only source from which all else springs. From self to self an endless spring.

There is no direct answer to why there is consciousness except to say probably ''Why not''

.

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 10:49 am
by Dontaskme
Lacewing wrote:
Fri Aug 09, 2019 3:56 pm

Why do you NOT think the concept of SELF and I AM are beliefs? Are those not the biggest beliefs of all?
Consciousness and awareness...and how we define/imagine them...are STILL ideas based on our understanding/perception/imagination.
Yes, that's right, all that we ARE is an idea believed. What is an idea? I have no idea...over to you Lacewing? what do you think? are you the thinker, or are you the thought?

To know a thought, you first have to BE prior to the thought...else how would a thought be known?

And while a 'thought' can be known, it is not known how 'thought' is known without using more 'thought' and that is the infinite nature of imagination. 'Thought' can never catch up with the thinker without turning the thinker into another 'thought' ..when this is seen, it is seen that there is no known 'thinker', there is only the known 'thought' about the thinker.

And that's basically who you are...The 'you' is only ever a concept known by the only knowing there is, you are that knowing.
Lacewing wrote:
Fri Aug 09, 2019 3:56 pm
Do we seek to play gods (on this stage) by "knowing the infinite" which we define/create to suit/entertain us?
Yes, that's basically what's happening, all that's happening is the infinite knowing itself infinitely meaning there is no one knowing, or experiencing, or entertaining itself infinitely..but SELF alone, all one. In other words, no thing is happening.

.

There is only here the infinite expressing itself. Infinity is in no relationship with any thing, for all things are the expression of the infinite. All relative conceptions of the infinite are absurd simply because infinity has no concept of itself because it can only exist as an imagined concept in this immaculate conception of itself as this ONE

There is NO ONE because there is no OTHER than ONE

.

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:20 pm
by surreptitious57
Dontaskme wrote:
There is no direct answer to why there is consciousness except to say probably Why not ?
All phenomena exist within Nature so there is a direct answer / rational explanation for them even if it is not known
Minds cannot know everything of course but the very fact something actually exists means it is rational by definition
Nothing can exist and be truly irrational as that is simply impossible - irrationality cannot explain anything in Nature
Minds may claim something is irrational but this is merely displaying ignorance in absence of any genuine explanation

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:30 pm
by surreptitious57
Dontaskme wrote:
Infinity is in no relationship with any thing for all things are the expression of the infinite
Existence is infinite because there must always be something and everything within Existence is connected to everything else
Connections between phenomena can be direct or indirect but nothing can exist in complete isolation for that is not possible

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 1:50 pm
by Dontaskme
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:30 pm
nothing can exist in complete isolation for that is not possible
There is no such thing as nothing. There is such a thing as not-a-thing because not-a-thing cannot not be a not-a-thing. Not-a-thing cannot be known without turning the not-a-thing into a thing known. Not-a-thing is doing this.Things are known concepts, and the known know not-a-thing.

No thing can live in isolation because things have no existence apart from their concept known in this immaculate conception aka not-knowing existence.

.

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 2:07 pm
by Ramu
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 8:29 am
Ramu wrote:
it is not a belief system because it isbased on first person subjective experience
First person subjective experience is very unreliable as a means of determining any truth never mind a profound one
Without independent and rigorous examination there is no way to know the truth value of absolutely any experience
Baloney. 3rd person subjective is rooted in 1st person subjective. Anecdotal evidence is the most reliable. Your materialist paradigm is so limiting that science becomes just as dogmatic as religion!

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 2:20 pm
by Dontaskme
Lacewing wrote:
Fri Aug 09, 2019 4:15 pm
Ramu wrote:
Fri Aug 09, 2019 4:13 pm
Lacewing: it's not a belief system because it's based on first person subjective experience.
:lol:

Experience of what?
Right now there is nothing and everything - this ineffable singularity which pervades all things. This realisation is 'experiential' not intellectual - this direct experience is a felt-sense, a living truth. It's herenow - nowhere, one without a second. It's a direct experience that no one is experiencing. The mind overlooks or over analyses it, but can be felt by being out of ones mind/intellect and to come into the crystal clear clarity of here it is - it's already the case and cannot be reduced to, or represented by symbols, concepts or ideas.

The only real identity is no identity - the actuality of what is - as it is prior to any limited interpretation of what the mind puts there.

.

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 3:30 pm
by surreptitious57
Ramu wrote:
3rd person subjective is rooted in Ist person subjective. Anecdotal evidence is the most reliable
Third person inter subjective rigorous examination is rooted in the first person subjective but it is still more reliable
Because it is assessing a truth claim from a more objective perspective so can therefore determine if it true or false

Anecdotes and evidence are not really compatible despite the conflation of these words with regard to current usage
An anecdote is an opinion taken to be true but has not actually had any rigorous examination to determine it as such

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:08 pm
by Ramu
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:20 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
There is no direct answer to why there is consciousness except to say probably Why not ?
All phenomena exist within Nature so there is a direct answer / rational explanation for them even if it is not known
Minds cannot know everything of course but the very fact something actually exists means it is rational by definition
Nothing can exist and be truly irrational as that is simply impossible - irrationality cannot explain anything in Nature
Minds may claim something is irrational but this is merely displaying ignorance in absence of any genuine explanation
We seem to be getting ahead of ourselves with this explanation of rationality. The universe exists so according to you the Universe would be rational. That's laughable and absurd. That would be a PROJECTION you are placing on the Universe. There is no reason why the Universe would HAVE to be rational.

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:11 pm
by Ramu
The universe doesn't by definition have to be rational nor irrational. It is Arational.

Re: Perception

Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 6:39 pm
by surreptitious57
That is a better description and one I had not considered but I would still say that it can be explained rationally
So the Universe is not intentionally rational but minds can explain it at least in part from a rational perspective

Re: Perception

Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:02 am
by Dontaskme
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 6:39 pm

So the Universe is not intentionally rational but minds can explain it at least in part from a rational perspective
Explain the mind that minds?

You cannot do it, there is no direct access to the mind.

Where's the mind in deep dreamless sleep? and yet it comes back online on awakening.

Explain the inextinguishable Source of this mind?


No mind can know it's source. And is why no rational explanation is possible.

Everything is nought but dreamscape...irrational to the rational mind.


.

Re: Perception

Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:36 am
by surreptitious57
We may disagree about whether or not minds actually exist but I was thinking more about how knowledge is acquired
We learn through observation and experimention and the application of logic and reason how to understand the world

You may say that knowledge is an illusion just like everything else is an illusion but I would say it cannot be an illusion if it is empirical
Reality is treated as if it were real but even if it is not it is still to all intents and purposes real as it is easier to think of it in that way

Re: Perception

Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:33 am
by Walker
Lacewing wrote:
Fri Aug 09, 2019 1:36 am
Walker wrote:
Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:39 pm
I Am is true, all else is inference.

"All else" includes the mind's interpretation of sensory perception.
The concept of "I Am" is belief. The concept of "All else" is belief too. What is the purpose of believing such division?
Your being is not a belief. You confuse words with reality. To be, requires no words. Words are merely the means of communicating concepts.

Re: Perception

Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 9:33 am
by Dontaskme
surreptitious57 wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:36 am
We may disagree about whether or not minds actually exist but I was thinking more about how knowledge is acquired
We learn through observation and experimention and the application of logic and reason how to understand the world
Yes, but no one is doing this. And no one is denying what is being pointed out.

No 'thing' learns to BE..all learning is the story of being in the dream of separation, that's the illusion, an illusion of a separate character learning knowledge of how to understand it's reality is a fictional overlay upon what is already being.
No one learns how to be born, to die, to walk,to see, to smell, to touch, to hear, to cry, or laugh, or eat etc...all these are automatic functions of life living itself all alone without beginning nor end.
So in a sense, there is a mind and at the same time there isn't.

That's the definition of illusion here, that's all.

.


.