Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality

[dxoutkast]

I am raising this OP is this section to support my point, the idea of God is actually a transcendental-hallucination out of this set of empirical-hallucination proposed by Anil Seth.


Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality
Anil Seth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyu7v7nWzfo



Long ago, V. S. Ramachandran had made the same claim,



Views?

So the brain is a hallucination?
[quote="Veritas Aequitas" post_id=381848
If conscious all there is

What on absolute cuckoo you mean by conscious is "all" ? All what? What do you mean by all? Your consciousness is all YOU have, your memories, etc...my consciousness is ALL I have, my brain is what allows my consciousness to exist, not at ALL part of it. The phone Im typing absolutely not connectef to me or my consciousness, so what on earth are you on about?

[quote="Veritas Aequitas" post_id=381848
yes, the brain itself

Freaking Jesus dude, have you actually understood what these "neuroscientists" were talking about?You just distorted everything they said, THEY SAID ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THE BRAAAAIN is hallucinating most of what we perceive, NOT THE FREAKING BRAIN ITSELF. Jesus Christ, how freaking cuckoo can you be?

[quote="Veritas Aequitas" post_id=381848
part of all there is
[/quote]
Please define what on the drivel you mean by "all there is", please. Because that doesnt make a freaking bit of sense.


No, not even what we see is 9% hallucination. Let alone outside us. ANIL IS entirely wrong in his video, but he clearly knows the brain has to be real, for hallucinations to happen, youre the one mishing mashing things here

[Eodnhoj7]

I am raising this OP is this section to support my point, the idea of God is actually a transcendental-hallucination out of this set of empirical-hallucination proposed by Anil Seth.


Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality
Anil Seth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyu7v7nWzfo



Long ago, V. S. Ramachandran had made the same claim,



Views?

So the brain is a hallucination?

When did you read anything even claiming the brain being a hallucination? These "neuroscientists" are not claiming such thing. They claim MOST of what we see COULD BE seen as hallucination. Anil Seth is a new ager wooist. Most of what he says in his presentation is wrong. He doesnt understand direct realism vs hallucination. And no, we do not hallucinate most of reality. And we CONSCIOUSLY PERCEIVE reality, there is a gap between conscious and reality. They are not in the same phrase as he states.

It is a rhetorical question.

[Veritas Aequitas]

So the brain is a hallucination?

What on absolute cuckoo you mean by conscious is "all" ? All what? What do you mean by all? Your consciousness is all YOU have, your memories, etc...my consciousness is ALL I have, my brain is what allows my consciousness to exist, not at ALL part of it. The phone Im typing absolutely not connectef to me or my consciousness, so what on earth are you on about?

Freaking Jesus dude, have you actually understood what these "neuroscientists" were talking about? You just distorted everything they said, THEY SAID ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THE BRAAAAIN is hallucinating most of what we perceive, NOT THE FREAKING BRAIN ITSELF. Jesus Christ, how freaking cuckoo can you be?

Yes, Anil Seth stated the brain hallucinated most of what we perceive, not the brain itself.

When I subsequent responded the "the brain itself" that is in another perspective [e.g. in Buddhism, Hinduism, Kant], not Anil Seth's.

Please define what on the drivel you mean by "all there is", please. Because that doesnt make a freaking bit of sense.

"All-there-is" is whatever there is within reality.
That would include humans, human brains and whatever "is".

No, not even what we see is 9% hallucination. Let alone outside us. ANIL IS entirely wrong in his video, but he clearly knows the brain has to be real, for hallucinations to happen, youre the one mishing mashing things here

Yes, ANIL is likely to believe the brain is real.

Note the Eastern Philosophies accept empirical realism of the external world but from another meta-perspective .. all [including the self] is an illusion.

Maya (/ˈmɑːjə/; Devanagari: माया, IAST: māyā), literally "illusion" or "magic",[1][2] has multiple meanings in Indian philosophies depending on the context.
In later Vedic texts and modern literature dedicated to Indian traditions, Māyā connotes a "magic show, an illusion where things appear to be present but are not what they seem"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(religion)

She symbolizes, states Miranda Shaw, that "self is an illusion" and "all beings and phenomenal appearances lack an abiding self or essence" in Vajrayana Buddhism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta

[dxoutkast]

Sounds a LOT like a belief system!

In a way, it is a set of belief but based on possible empirical reality and inferred from various sources of real evidences. You have to read the books of both neuroscientists to gather more information that support their hypothesis.
It is a matter of time this belief [empirically based] can be turned into a theory when there is sufficient evidence and consensus.

But the idea of God, Brahman, Absolute Oneness and the likes is merely an opinion [arising from an illusion] without any degree of empirical possibility to be proven at all. God is an impossibility to be real.

I utterly agree with you. And we shall expose it all the time.

There is a woman called "Dawn Willians" who has been trolling forums since 2005 promoting these rubbish ideas. She's a neurotic troll, has many sockpuppets over the internet. Dontaskme, nowishere, placid, azania, relinquish, etc, etc.. and more...are all her sockpuppets.

For example, in this post, you see her own scheme: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=22571&start=225

Her sockpuppet (in this case *relinquish*) create the post and she invents a discussion so she can constantly promote her rubbish without being interrupted.

Also, notice the member *Ken* promoting a bunch of utter nonsensical rubbish cosmology of "One" (must be that Ra nonsense) without being questioned. The "hallucination" theory applies to this troll too.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Sounds a LOT like a belief system!

In a way, it is a set of belief but based on possible empirical reality and inferred from various sources of real evidences. You have to read the books of both neuroscientists to gather more information that support their hypothesis.
It is a matter of time this belief [empirically based] can be turned into a theory when there is sufficient evidence and consensus.

But the idea of God, Brahman, Absolute Oneness and the likes is merely an opinion [arising from an illusion] without any degree of empirical possibility to be proven at all. God is an impossibility to be real.

I utterly agree with you. And we shall expose it all the time.

There is a woman called "Dawn Willians" who has been trolling forums since 2005 promoting these rubbish ideas. She's a neurotic troll, has many sockpuppets over the internet. Dontaskme, nowishere, placid, azania, relinquish, etc, etc.. and more...are all her sockpuppets.

For example, in this post, you see her own scheme: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=22571&start=225

Her sockpuppet (in this case *relinquish*) create the post and she invents a discussion so she can constantly promote her rubbish without being interrupted.

Also, notice the member *Ken* promoting a bunch of utter nonsensical rubbish cosmology of "One" (must be that Ra nonsense) without being questioned. The "hallucination" theory applies to this troll too.

Noted, "Dontaskme" is put out off my radar screen except in rare occassion where I intercepted her.

Whatever, what count and I will participate with what are sound rational arguments regardless of from who.

[dxoutkast]

"All there is" is whatever there is within reality.

It doesn't apply.

Stick with me for a second.

If there was "all there is", it would mean an static Universe which already contained everything since the beginning

think of it this way...

You have LEGO to make a mini Universe, and you build this mini universe with All LEGO pieces, now, thos mini universe is static, cannot change, cannot transform, the LEGO UNIVERSE is ALL there is, because these pieces will always be the same, there won't be more pieces added, ALL pieces were added, no pieces will be removed and nothing will happen, until they decompose and the mini Universe ends, or some wind destroys it.

Now, THAT would be an example of "all-LEGO static pieces that doesn't move or change or nothing and nothing is added" there is nothing else"

[Veritas Aequitas]

"All there is" is whatever there is within reality.

It doesn't apply.

Stick with me for a second.

If there was "all there is", it would mean an static Universe which already contained everything since the beginning

think of it this way...

You have LEGO to make a mini Universe, and you build this mini universe with All LEGO pieces, now, those mini universe is static, cannot change, cannot transform, the LEGO UNIVERSE is ALL there is, because these pieces will always be the same, there won't be more pieces added, ALL pieces were added, no pieces will be removed and nothing will happen, until they decompose and the mini Universe ends, or some wind destroys it.

Now, THAT would be an example of "all-LEGO static pieces that doesn't move or change or nothing and nothing is added" there is nothing else"

"ALL there is" is not confined to 'everything since the beginning.'
Rather 'all there is' refer to what is at present, i.e. the NOW.
What was in the beginning was the past which is gone forever, i.e. not real at present, and what is in the future is yet unknown.

The LEGO analogy is a disanalogy and not applicable because all-there-is encompasses everything and essentially the living person and all other living things.
The LEGO example is only a specific 'all-there-is' within the all encompassing 'all-there-is'.
That specific 'all-there-is' is no different from the specific 'all-there-is' in your pocket, in the cupboard, drawer, a container, the likes.

So, "All there is" is whatever there-is within reality.

[attofishpi]

Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality.

..and yet you appear to be desperately attempting to use this statement as some sort of explanation that theists are deluded. U don't quite grasp the contradiction.

Indeed, as someone that NOSE God exists (sniffed out a lot of stuff) I could state quite emphatically from such a statement of yours that I know God exists to the same degree that you know the Earth exists.

What is your point?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality.

..and yet you appear to be desperately attempting to use this statement as some sort of explanation that theists are deluded. U don't quite grasp the contradiction.

Indeed, as someone that NOSE God exists (sniffed out a lot of stuff) I could state quite emphatically from such a statement of yours that I know God exists to the same degree that you know the Earth exists.

What is your point?

That the Earth exists can be verified and justified empirical from our own experiences of the physical Earth in one's present, observed from a drone and airplane and from space as the 'blue marble'.

However where is the empirical and philosophical justification that God exists as real like that of the Earth?

Note my argument;
God is an Impossibility to be Real
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

Re OP, there is no really-real reality and there is no real God that is existing anywhere.

That God exists is merely an 'invention' of the brain/mind that is very necessary for humans [the majority] to soothe the inherent existential crisis.

Theism Driven by Desperate Psychology
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=29316

Whoever is able to deal with and manage the above inherent desperate psychology will naturally give up the belief in a God which ultimately is illusory and upon insistence is delusional.

My point is,
I have no general issues with theism at present because there are no effective alternative to replace theism which is critical for the majority to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

However I have a specific issue with theism when theists are led to believe in a God that commands them to kill non-believers as in the case of Islam.
It is so obvious a large % of theists as many as 100s of million who insist they believe in a God as real as Earth exists and will not hesitate to kill those who rationally critique their beliefs [argued God is not real, illusory, draw cartoons, etc.] Such killings by theists in the name of God-as-real is so evident an happening all over the world.

Since theism is the ground of such terrible evil and violence, there is a critical need to condemn belief of theism in general which is grounded on an illusion, with the hope that humanity can wean off theism in the future [next 50, 100 >100 years] and replace theism with effective FOOL PROOF alternatives to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.

[attofishpi]

Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality.

..and yet you appear to be desperately attempting to use this statement as some sort of explanation that theists are deluded. U don't quite grasp the contradiction.

Indeed, as someone that NOSE God exists (sniffed out a lot of stuff) I could state quite emphatically from such a statement of yours that I know God exists to the same degree that you know the Earth exists.

What is your point?

That the Earth exists can be verified and justified empirical from our own experiences of the physical Earth in one's present, observed from a drone and airplane and from space as the 'blue marble'.

Can it? Prove that our reality is not a hallucination created since last Thursday.

[dxoutkast]

Re OP, there is no really-real reality

But there is ;s

[dxoutkast]

"All there is" is whatever there is within reality.

It doesn't apply.

Stick with me for a second.

If there was "all there is", it would mean an static Universe which already contained everything since the beginning

think of it this way...

You have LEGO to make a mini Universe, and you build this mini universe with All LEGO pieces, now, those mini universe is static, cannot change, cannot transform, the LEGO UNIVERSE is ALL there is, because these pieces will always be the same, there won't be more pieces added, ALL pieces were added, no pieces will be removed and nothing will happen, until they decompose and the mini Universe ends, or some wind destroys it.

Now, THAT would be an example of "all-LEGO static pieces that doesn't move or change or nothing and nothing is added" there is nothing else"

"" is not confined'
Rather 'all there is' refer to what is at present, i.e. the
What was in the beginning was the past which is gone forever, i.e. not real at present, and what is in the future is yet unknown.

The LEGO analogy is a disanalogy and not applicable because all-there-is encompasses everything and essentially the living person and all other living things.
The LEGO example is only a specific .


That specific---- is no different from the specific 'there is' in your pocket, in the cupboard, drawer, a container, the likes.

" is whatever there-is within reality.

The whole point is that there is no such thing. Everything changes.. so what is "all things" at this moment at some place, can be 'less' later... you don't really get it.

There is no "all encompassing" anything. Or "confined within". Things are CONFINED in space. Empty space is nothing but what separates things. There is nothing else to it.. space time. What makes locations possible. It's also finite and changes. relative. There is no absolute. The world and life drive towards its own "absolutes".

[Veritas Aequitas]

..and yet you appear to be desperately attempting to use this statement as some sort of explanation that theists are deluded. U don't quite grasp the contradiction.

Indeed, as someone that NOSE God exists (sniffed out a lot of stuff) I could state quite emphatically from such a statement of yours that I know God exists to the same degree that you know the Earth exists.

What is your point?

That the Earth exists can be verified and justified empirical from our own experiences of the physical Earth in one's present, observed from a drone and airplane and from space as the 'blue marble'.

Can it? Prove that our reality is not a hallucination created since last Thursday.

According to the OP, what is conscious reality is 'hallucinated' by the brain - this I agree.
So I am not sure why you ask me to prove our reality is not a hallucination at present, not merely since last Thursday.
Yet this hallucination of reality from the brain is verifiable and justifiable empirically and philosophically by the brain.

The idea of God is not a hallucination of empirical nature but merely is an idea from thought which has no substance nor empirical possibility. As such, the idea of God cannot be empirically and philosophically verified and justified to be real empirically.

[Veritas Aequitas]

It doesn't apply.

Stick with me for a second.

If there was "all there is", it would mean an static Universe which already contained everything since the beginning

think of it this way...

You have LEGO to make a mini Universe, and you build this mini universe with All LEGO pieces, now, those mini universe is static, cannot change, cannot transform, the LEGO UNIVERSE is ALL there is, because these pieces will always be the same, there won't be more pieces added, ALL pieces were added, no pieces will be removed and nothing will happen, until they decompose and the mini Universe ends, or some wind destroys it.

Now, THAT would be an example of "all-LEGO static pieces that doesn't move or change or nothing and nothing is added" there is nothing else"

"" is not confined'
Rather 'all there is' refer to what is at present, i.e. the
What was in the beginning was the past which is gone forever, i.e. not real at present, and what is in the future is yet unknown.

The LEGO analogy is a disanalogy and not applicable because all-there-is encompasses everything and essentially the living person and all other living things.
The LEGO example is only a specific .


That specific---- is no different from the specific 'there is' in your pocket, in the cupboard, drawer, a container, the likes.

" is whatever there-is within reality.

The whole point is that there is no such thing. Everything changes.. so what is "all things" at this moment at some place, can be 'less' later... you don't really get it.

There is no "all encompassing" anything. Or "confined within". Things are CONFINED in space. Empty space is nothing but what separates things. There is nothing else to it.. space time. What makes locations possible. It's also finite and changes. relative. There is no absolute. The world and life drive towards its own "absolutes".

I understand and have always asserted there are no things-in-themselves i.e. absolute and unconditional things.

As such reality as all-there-is encompasses all things that are conditional upon the human factors and others and these are things that change.

[attofishpi]

That the Earth exists can be verified and justified empirical from our own experiences of the physical Earth in one's present, observed from a drone and airplane and from space as the 'blue marble'.

Can it? Prove that our reality is not a hallucination created since last Thursday.

According to the OP, what is conscious reality is 'hallucinated' by the brain - this I agree.

To have a 'conscious reality' requires external stimulus, thus the OP is bollocks.

A hallucination is a perception in the absence of external stimulus that has qualities of real perception.

So I am not sure why you ask me to prove our reality is not a hallucination at present, not merely since last Thursday.

I am pointing out, that since you insist our brain 'hallucinates reality', then any proof of anything empirical is flawed since minds can ONLY base their empirical evidence on their observations. Since this is the case, one cannot prove that the reality we perceive and indeed ourselves existed before last Thursday.

Yet this hallucination of reality from the brain is verifiable and justifiable empirically and philosophically by the brain.

What brain? Are you talking about the construct within this hallucinated reality that we perceive IS an actual BRAIN?

The idea of God is not a hallucination of empirical nature but merely is an idea from thought which has no substance nor empirical possibility. As such, the idea of God cannot be empirically and philosophically verified and justified to be real empirically.

Oh. Shit. That means I am bat shit crazy if U R insisting on empiricism as a collective consensus of opinion, rather than an individual being given empirical evidence at the 'hand' of God?