Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6122
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:56 am

1 Is the Absolute
2 is Consciousness
3 is Space.

By Association:

1 Is Dreamless sleep,
2 is the waking state,
3 is the dream state.


Seeing, hearing, etc, may be seen as the faculties of Consciousness, but the ears and eyes that participate in it are as much Consciousness as what is perceived via them. It's doubtful if sight would appear without eyes. It's doubtful if sensation would appear without bodyparts.


As seen from here Consciousness apparently breaks up through the sense organs in the same way that light appears different when it is projected through a crystal. The rainbows that appear are not of the crystal, yet light would not express as these rainbows if there was no crystal.

All there is is Consciousness- it's both the sense organs and the hearing seeing etc. It is the crystal and the light. Or perhaps... All there is and is not is the Absolute.

No WORDS to read without a blank screen behind them...NO 'THOUGHT' to know, without a consciousness in which a 'thought' appears and is known instantly...there is no space without an object, there is no object without space. ALL IS EVER ONE.


The only certainty is Consciousness here now. This needs no proof… it is 'self evident'.

Both 'waking experience' and nightly dreams appear in this same Consciousness.

It is 'self evident' that the nature of 'waking experience' and nightly dreams is the same: composed solely of sensations and meaning.

As the 'things/people' perceived in a nightly dream are inseparable from Consciousness (yet not it), so all 'perceived things' (being of the same nature as those in a 'nightly dream' are inseparable from Consciousness (yet not it). The images change – Consciousness does not.

It is 'self evident' that there is no 'perceiver inside the perceived' of a nightly dream. To believe any different for all experience is simply a belief… a concept.

As these words are read (from whichever perspective they are read) there are no other Consciousnesses perceiving anything else, any where, any time, any how.

So who am I talking to?

The short answer is (my) Self.

SteveKlinko
Posts: 331
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by SteveKlinko » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:06 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:56 am
1 Is the Absolute
2 is Consciousness
3 is Space.

By Association:

1 Is Dreamless sleep,
2 is the waking state,
3 is the dream state.


Seeing, hearing, etc, may be seen as the faculties of Consciousness, but the ears and eyes that participate in it are as much Consciousness as what is perceived via them. It's doubtful if sight would appear without eyes. It's doubtful if sensation would appear without bodyparts.


As seen from here Consciousness apparently breaks up through the sense organs in the same way that light appears different when it is projected through a crystal. The rainbows that appear are not of the crystal, yet light would not express as these rainbows if there was no crystal.

All there is is Consciousness- it's both the sense organs and the hearing seeing etc. It is the crystal and the light. Or perhaps... All there is and is not is the Absolute.

No WORDS to read without a blank screen behind them...NO 'THOUGHT' to know, without a consciousness in which a 'thought' appears and is known instantly...there is no space without an object, there is no object without space. ALL IS EVER ONE.


The only certainty is Consciousness here now. This needs no proof… it is 'self evident'.

Both 'waking experience' and nightly dreams appear in this same Consciousness.

It is 'self evident' that the nature of 'waking experience' and nightly dreams is the same: composed solely of sensations and meaning.

As the 'things/people' perceived in a nightly dream are inseparable from Consciousness (yet not it), so all 'perceived things' (being of the same nature as those in a 'nightly dream' are inseparable from Consciousness (yet not it). The images change – Consciousness does not.

It is 'self evident' that there is no 'perceiver inside the perceived' of a nightly dream. To believe any different for all experience is simply a belief… a concept.

As these words are read (from whichever perspective they are read) there are no other Consciousnesses perceiving anything else, any where, any time, any how.

So who am I talking to?

The short answer is (my) Self.
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say. It's essentially a true statement but there is a huge Explanatory Gap in making a statement like that. If you say the Universe is Consciousness and that is all you need to know or say, then even if it is a true statement, it does not Explain anything and leaves open a huge Explanatory Gap.

Skepdick
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by Skepdick » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:24 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:06 pm
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say.
I think you've said more than needs to be said. It simply begs the question: What is physics?

For I can sure say this: The Universe is.

On the other hand, that sure begs the question: Why do you need to know or say anything about The Universe?

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6122
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by Dontaskme » Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:10 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:06 pm
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say. It's essentially a true statement but there is a huge Explanatory Gap in making a statement like that. If you say the Universe is Consciousness and that is all you need to know or say, then even if it is a true statement, it does not Explain anything and leaves open a huge Explanatory Gap.
Who or what is going to explain this Gap ?

Objects can't explain anything...since they have no conscious awareness of themsleves.

Objects are known subjectively by the only knowing there is. There is no knowledge of the knowing subject.
How could the subject be known..it would have to split itself in two..into the knower and the known.

Knowns cannot explain anything,because parts of the whole don't have any concept of themselves, they are already being known subjectively.. therefore knower and known is only ever ONE with itself ..there is no split, there is no divide or gap there?

A 'Gap' can only be defined as empty space anyway. So even the concept 'space' is known only by association in relation to an object, there is no divide between the subject and object...both are one and the same in each other as this indivisible awareness. There is no divide between a cloud and the sky, both are needed to define the other, both one and the other do not exist independantly...no thing can exist independant of it's knower which is not-a-thing in relation by association.

The only experience is the object ONE knows as a conceptual imagined thing within the subjective not-knowing not-a-thing subject.

In other words there is not-a-thing experiencing itself infinitely for eternity subjectively. There is no thing outside of subjectivity except subjectivity objectifying itself subjectively...albeit illusory since objects have no awareness.

So the only thing that needs to be explained here is ..What Gap? And that can only be done through the conceptual framework no one has, because concepts do not have consciousness. Knowledge informs the illusory nature of reality.

.


.

SteveKlinko
Posts: 331
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by SteveKlinko » Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:59 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:24 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:06 pm
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say.
I think you've said more than needs to be said. It simply begs the question: What is physics?

For I can sure say this: The Universe is.

On the other hand, that sure begs the question: Why do you need to know or say anything about The Universe?
Because that is what the Inquiring Human Mind does.

SteveKlinko
Posts: 331
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by SteveKlinko » Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:05 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:10 am
SteveKlinko wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:06 pm
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say. It's essentially a true statement but there is a huge Explanatory Gap in making a statement like that. If you say the Universe is Consciousness and that is all you need to know or say, then even if it is a true statement, it does not Explain anything and leaves open a huge Explanatory Gap.
Who or what is going to explain this Gap ?

Objects can't explain anything...since they have no conscious awareness of themsleves.

Objects are known subjectively by the only knowing there is. There is no knowledge of the knowing subject.
How could the subject be known..it would have to split itself in two..into the knower and the known.

Knowns cannot explain anything,because parts of the whole don't have any concept of themselves, they are already being known subjectively.. therefore knower and known is only ever ONE with itself ..there is no split, there is no divide or gap there?

A 'Gap' can only be defined as empty space anyway. So even the concept 'space' is known only by association in relation to an object, there is no divide between the subject and object...both are one and the same in each other as this indivisible awareness. There is no divide between a cloud and the sky, both are needed to define the other, both one and the other do not exist independantly...no thing can exist independant of it's knower which is not-a-thing in relation by association.

The only experience is the object ONE knows as a conceptual imagined thing within the subjective not-knowing not-a-thing subject.

In other words there is not-a-thing experiencing itself infinitely for eternity subjectively. There is no thing outside of subjectivity except subjectivity objectifying itself subjectively...albeit illusory since objects have no awareness.

So the only thing that needs to be explained here is ..What Gap? And that can only be done through the conceptual framework no one has, because concepts do not have consciousness. Knowledge informs the illusory nature of reality.

.


.
You are taking Gap as a Spatial Gap but it is an Explanatory Gap. Also, I think I can be the thing, Redness, but still not know what Redness is. We clearly do not know what we are. So we must ask questions until we discover what we are.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6122
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by Dontaskme » Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:10 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:05 pm
You are taking Gap as a Spatial Gap but it is an Explanatory Gap. Also, I think I can be the thing, Redness, but still not know what Redness is. We clearly do not know what we are. So we must ask questions until we discover what we are.
That which can explain it's own existence has to come from conscious mind itself. So that which is attempting to explain itself can only be the contents of consciousness trying to explain where the contents of consciousness comes from. Can you see how ridiculous that is?

This is still like a light trying to shine on itself Steve.
Can the contents of consciousness be conscious ? ..No, consciousness and the contents of consciousness aka it's own known concepts only to itself alone are ONE UNITARY KNOWING

The mind itself is creating the gap via the thought ''there is a gap'' and believing in it's own mentally constructed thought ''there is a gap''
The mind is emptiness, so the thought ''there is a gap'' will always be a spacial concept anyway - known by the emptiness that is the mind.

Can you think of anything else that is creating this explanatory gap thought?

A thought is the thing that is artificially creating an ''explanatory gap'' IDEA in what is only ever this immediate natural constant flow of life living itself that makes no claim or demand to ever explain itself because there is no separate SELF in that which is infinitely ONE CONSCIOUSNESS.

'Thoughts' about 'explanatory gaps' serve only to 'freeze-frame' what is in essence this immediate causeless flux of consciousness that ultimately cannot be stopped and put in a frame to be looked upon by another agent outside of it's own constant flow... because a ''thought'' is imageless. Only the concept is known, and as it is known it is seen as an image of the imageless, as imagined, as an impression put there by the mind itself.

YET there is nothing behind any formed image except the emptiness in which it is appearing and is known by the blank screen of consciousness on which is it known conceptually as it appears to itself.

.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3082
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by surreptitious57 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:50 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say . Its essentially a true statement but there is a huge Explanatory Gap in making a statement like that . If you say the Universe is Consciousness and that is all you need to know or say then even if it is
a true statement it does not Explain anything and leaves open a huge Explanatory Gap
Explanatory gaps are merely limitations in knowledge and are not in and of themselves a problem unless you are seeking absolute truth
Human minds are physical and so are finite in scope so expecting them to have omniscient capability is beyond what is actually possible

commonsense
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by commonsense » Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:51 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:56 am
1 Is the Absolute
2 is Consciousness
3 is Space.

By Association:

1 Is Dreamless sleep,
2 is the waking state,
3 is the dream state.
If consciousness is everything, as you argue later, then it is both dreamless and dreamful. This seems contradictory.
Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:56 am
All there is is Consciousness... All there is and is not is the Absolute.
Which one is all there is? One can be everything; two cannot.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6122
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by Dontaskme » Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:42 am

All there is is Consciousness... All there is and is not is the Absolute.
commonsense wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:51 pm
Which one is all there is? One can be everything; two cannot.
Question: Which One?

Answer: There's only One One - - One is everything including the conceptually known knowledge (''two cannot'')

Knowledge of ( that which is known) is Relative to the un-known Absolute, all inclusive.

The knower of knowledge is a concept known by no knower, that which is conceptually known knows nothing.

.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6122
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by Dontaskme » Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:15 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:50 pm
Human minds are physical and so are finite in scope so expecting them to have omniscient capability is beyond what is actually possible
The mind is the primary organ of experience, not the brain. The concept ''physical'' is known by consciousness not by any thing physical like a brain. Consciousness is fundamental and that the brain (a local reflection of a local personality in consciousness) is an experience in consciousness.Consciousness is not mine or yours - Consciousness is the nature of reality, just as consciousness is the nature of dream.

What is a ''physical thing'' ? Fundamentally, this is where consciousness fills out the picture.Notice ''physical things'' cannot speak about themselves, nor do they know anything...If you believe you have a physical mind,then you must be able to point to it like you can point to your head.

Physical 'things' are concepts known, and that which is ''KNOWN'' knows nothing.

All things are objects of our perception. Even our own bodies and minds are objects of our perception. Consciousness is that which modifies itself as both the observing consciousness and the object observed. The localised individual you and these words you are reading is a perception in consciousness only. And not in someone's brain inside a scull.

.

I Like Sushu
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:03 am

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by I Like Sushu » Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:11 am

Such open, obstinate stupidity saddens me :(

Skepdick
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by Skepdick » Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:58 am

SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:59 pm
Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:24 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:06 pm
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say.
I think you've said more than needs to be said. It simply begs the question: What is physics?

For I can sure say this: The Universe is.

On the other hand, that sure begs the question: Why do you need to know or say anything about The Universe?
Because that is what the Inquiring Human Mind does.
This fallacy has a name. Appeal to purity. A.k.a No True Scotsman

Why does an Inquiring Human Mind do that?

SteveKlinko
Posts: 331
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by SteveKlinko » Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:40 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:50 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
As an analogy we could say that the Universe is Physics and that is all you need to know or say . Its essentially a true statement but there is a huge Explanatory Gap in making a statement like that . If you say the Universe is Consciousness and that is all you need to know or say then even if it is
a true statement it does not Explain anything and leaves open a huge Explanatory Gap
Explanatory gaps are merely limitations in knowledge and are not in and of themselves a problem unless you are seeking absolute truth
Human minds are physical and so are finite in scope so expecting them to have omniscient capability is beyond what is actually possible
But when the Explanatory Gap is huge an Explanation is demanded.

SteveKlinko
Posts: 331
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Consciousness IS - but it's NOT a ''Conscious Experience''

Post by SteveKlinko » Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:46 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:10 pm
SteveKlinko wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:05 pm
You are taking Gap as a Spatial Gap but it is an Explanatory Gap. Also, I think I can be the thing, Redness, but still not know what Redness is. We clearly do not know what we are. So we must ask questions until we discover what we are.
That which can explain it's own existence has to come from conscious mind itself. So that which is attempting to explain itself can only be the contents of consciousness trying to explain where the contents of consciousness comes from. Can you see how ridiculous that is?

This is still like a light trying to shine on itself Steve.
Can the contents of consciousness be conscious ? ..No, consciousness and the contents of consciousness aka it's own known concepts only to itself alone are ONE UNITARY KNOWING

The mind itself is creating the gap via the thought ''there is a gap'' and believing in it's own mentally constructed thought ''there is a gap''
The mind is emptiness, so the thought ''there is a gap'' will always be a spacial concept anyway - known by the emptiness that is the mind.

Can you think of anything else that is creating this explanatory gap thought?

A thought is the thing that is artificially creating an ''explanatory gap'' IDEA in what is only ever this immediate natural constant flow of life living itself that makes no claim or demand to ever explain itself because there is no separate SELF in that which is infinitely ONE CONSCIOUSNESS.

'Thoughts' about 'explanatory gaps' serve only to 'freeze-frame' what is in essence this immediate causeless flux of consciousness that ultimately cannot be stopped and put in a frame to be looked upon by another agent outside of it's own constant flow... because a ''thought'' is imageless. Only the concept is known, and as it is known it is seen as an image of the imageless, as imagined, as an impression put there by the mind itself.

YET there is nothing behind any formed image except the emptiness in which it is appearing and is known by the blank screen of consciousness on which is it known conceptually as it appears to itself.

.
It's that Oneness thing again. Light shining on itself ... must be an analogy for understanding the Oneness. Still doesn't help me. I try but cannot get there. I'll keep trying ...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest